Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2 with the Intel Core i5-9400 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 presents a stark contrast between a mature, six-core CPU from the Coffee Lake era and a flagship Blackwell GPU. The measured data shows this combination is capable of delivering exceptionally high frame rates across all tested settings, with the GPU clearly dominating the performance equation. While the i5-9400 holds a 50th percentile standing among all CPUs, the RTX 5080 sits at the 89th percentile among GPUs, creating a pairing where the graphics card is the primary driver of the impressive results observed in this title.

FAQ

Q: What is the overall rank of this CPU and GPU combination in Counter-Strike 2?

A: This specific combo ranks 294th out of 1632 tested combinations in the database for Counter-Strike 2.

Q: How does the Intel Core i5-9400 compare to its nearest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The i5-9400 has an average benchmark score of 2305, placing it 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core i3-10305 (score 2300) and 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core i3-1125G4 (score 2299). It trails the Intel Core i7-8809G (score 2319) by 0.6%.

Q: What are the best and worst average frame rates recorded for this combo?

A: The highest average frame rate is 413.4 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The lowest average frame rate is 130 FPS, recorded at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings.

Q: How much VRAM does the GeForce RTX 5080 have and what type is it?

A: The RTX 5080 is equipped with 16 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 960.0 GB/s.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080?

A: The launch MSRP of the RTX 5080 is 999 USD.

Q: What is the difference in average FPS between Low and Ultra settings at 2560x1440 resolution?

A: At 2560x1440, the average frame rate drops from 360 FPS on Low settings to 227.6 FPS on Ultra settings, a difference of 132.4 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranking of 294 out of 1632 tested combinations places this system in the top 18% of all pairings tested for Counter-Strike 2. This is a strong position, though not at the very top tier, which reflects a potential bottleneck introduced by the Intel Core i5-9400. The CPU’s percentile rank of 50 places it in the middle of all tested processors, while the GPU’s percentile rank of 89 indicates it is a top-tier performer. The data suggests that the i5-9400, with its 6 cores and 6 threads, is sufficient to feed the RTX 5080 in this specific game, but it may be the limiting factor preventing the combo from achieving a higher rank.

Benchmark results for the i5-9400 show a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 7969 and a single-core score of 1125. In contrast, the RTX 5080 achieves a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 8637 and a Passmark G3D score of 36565. The significant gap between the CPU’s mid-pack standing and the GPU’s high-end standing indicates that the overall system performance is heavily reliant on the graphics card. The combo’s rank of 294 suggests that while the RTX 5080 can produce very high frame rates, the CPU’s capabilities in this game are not holding it back to a severe degree, as many other combos with more powerful CPUs achieve higher scores.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 is the dominant component in this pairing, and its specifications clearly influence the measured results. The GPU features 16 GB of GDDR7 memory, which is substantial for Counter-Strike 2, a game that is not typically memory-demanding at lower resolutions. The 960.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth provides ample headroom for high-resolution textures and data streaming. The GPU’s boost clock of 2617 MHz and base clock of 2295 MHz are high, and with 10752 shading units, the card has immense raw compute power. Its FP32 performance is rated at 56.28 TFLOPS, which is a massive amount of processing capability for a competitive FPS title.

The GPU’s role is clear in the measured FPS data. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the average FPS is 413.4, which is likely near the upper limit of what the i5-9400 can request from the GPU. As resolution increases to 3840x2160, the load shifts more heavily onto the GPU, but the average FPS remains very high at 262.8 on Low settings and 163.2 on High settings. The data indicates that the RTX 5080 is not the bottleneck in this system until perhaps the Ultra preset at 4K, where the average FPS drops to 130. The GPU’s 89th percentile ranking among all GPUs underscores its ability to handle high frame rates, and the Passmark G3D score of 36565 is consistent with a top-tier card. The RTX 5080’s performance is so high that in most scenarios tested, it is likely the CPU that determines the final frame rate.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data shows a clear scaling pattern across resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the average frame rates are consistently above 300 FPS. The Low preset yields the highest average at 413.4 FPS, followed by Medium at 391.3 FPS and High at 351.1 FPS. The Ultra preset drops the average to 317.4 FPS, but it still remains exceptionally high. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 96 FPS, indicating that even the highest quality settings are well within the capability of this combo.

Moving to 2560x1440, the average frame rates remain extremely high. The Low preset achieves an average of 360 FPS, while Medium and High presets deliver 341.6 FPS and 291.5 FPS respectively. The Ultra preset at this resolution yields an average of 227.6 FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p shows a performance cost, but the system still maintains an average above 227 FPS even at the highest settings. At 3840x2160, the demands on the GPU increase significantly. The Low preset produces an average of 262.8 FPS, which is a substantial drop from the 360 FPS at 1440p. The Medium preset averages 217.6 FPS, and the High preset averages 163.2 FPS. The Ultra preset at 4K is the most demanding configuration tested, resulting in an average of 130 FPS.

The data reveals that the RTX 5080 provides a playable experience at all tested settings and resolutions. Even the lowest average frame rate of 130 FPS at 4K Ultra is well above the threshold for smooth competitive play. The performance gap between Low and Ultra settings is most pronounced at 4K, where the difference is 132.8 FPS, while at 1080p, the difference is only 96 FPS. This indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor at higher resolutions, whereas at 1080p, the CPU may start to cap performance.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend heavily on the user's display resolution and refresh rate. For users with a 1920x1080 display, the Ultra preset is the clear recommendation, as it delivers an average of 317.4 FPS. This frame rate is sufficient for any high-refresh-rate monitor and provides the best visual quality without sacrificing competitive performance. The High preset at 351.1 FPS offers a slight performance increase, but the visual fidelity reduction may not be worth the minor FPS gain.

At 2560x1440, the High preset offers an excellent balance, with an average of 291.5 FPS. This setting provides a strong combination of visual quality and high frame rates. The Ultra preset at this resolution still delivers a very respectable 227.6 FPS, which is also suitable for most high-refresh-rate displays. For users prioritizing maximum frame rates, the Medium preset at 341.6 FPS or the Low preset at 360 FPS are viable options, though they sacrifice visual details.

For 3840x2160 displays, the recommendations change due to the significant performance cost of 4K rendering. The High preset, with an average of 163.2 FPS, is the best choice for a balance of quality and performance. The Medium preset at 217.6 FPS is also a strong option for users who prefer higher frame rates. The Ultra preset at 130 FPS is only recommended for users with a 120Hz or lower refresh rate display who prioritize maximum visual fidelity. The Low preset at 262.8 FPS provides the highest frame rate at 4K but at a considerable visual quality cost. In all cases, the data shows that this combo can run Counter-Strike 2 at very high frame rates, and the choice of settings should be guided by the user's monitor capabilities and personal preference for visual quality versus raw FPS.