Counter-Strike 2

# How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i7-12700KF paired with the Intel Arc B390 lands at rank 2535 out of 2870 tested combos in Counter-Strike 2. That places this configuration in the bottom 12% of all tested systems, a striking result for a CPU that sits in the 85th percentile against all processors. The data suggests the GPU is the overwhelming bottleneck — the Arc B390 ranks in the 9th percentile among all GPUs, and its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, GeForce 800M, GT 625 OEM, and GT 710. Those are legacy-class parts, which contextualizes why this combo struggles to reach competitive frame rates even with a capable CPU.

The combo's rank is not a reflection of the i7-12700KF's compute potential. The CPU's average benchmark score of 35365 is nearly identical to its nearest rivals: the Intel Core i7-13700T (35403, -0.1% delta), the i5-13600T (35305, 0.2% delta), the Core 5 213PE (35428, -0.2% delta), and the i7-12700K (35287, 0.2% delta). In other words, the processor is performing exactly as expected for its class. The poor in-game ranking must therefore be attributed to the integrated-class GPU, which shares system memory and offers no dedicated VRAM. When a combo ranks this low, the implication is that the graphics solution cannot keep pace with the CPU's ability to feed frames, creating a lopsided pairing.

What is curious is that Counter-Strike 2 is not traditionally a GPU-heavy title; it is known for CPU-bound scenarios at lower resolutions. Yet this data shows the opposite dynamic, with the GPU limiting performance across every measured resolution. The combo rank of 2535 suggests that most other tested configurations — even those with weaker CPUs — outperform this pairing because they likely use discrete GPUs with dedicated memory.

# GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is built on the Xe3-LPG architecture, fabricated on a 3 nm process. Its base clock is 300 MHz, boosting to 2500 MHz. The GPU features 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster operation units, along with 12 ray tracing cores. Its pixel rate is 60.00 GPixel/s and texture rate is 120.0 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance of 7.680 TFLOPS and FP16 at 15.36 TFLOPS (2:1). The TDP is 80 W, and it operates as an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no power connectors and portable-device-dependent display outputs.

The memory configuration is the critical factor here. The Arc B390 uses "System Shared" memory — both size and type are system-dependent, with bandwidth listed as "System Dependent." This means the GPU borrows from the CPU's DDR4 or DDR5 pool, and the effective bandwidth is shared with the rest of the system. In Counter-Strike 2, this shared-memory arrangement appears to be a severe handicap. Compare the measured FPS at 1080p High (111 avg) versus the CPU's single-thread strength (3dmark single-thread score of 1043, Cinebench R23 single-core of 4071) — the CPU is clearly capable of pushing far more frames if the GPU could render them.

The GPU's synthetic benchmark result is a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482, which places it in the 9th percentile. Its nearest rivals in that test are the GT 520MX (1463, 1.3% faster), the GeForce 800M (1460, 1.5% faster), the GT 625 OEM (1446, 2.5% faster), and the GT 710 (1443, 2.7% faster). All of these are low-end or legacy parts, and the Arc B390 is only marginally faster than them. In a competitive FPS like Counter-Strike 2, where high frame rates are paramount, this GPU's performance class is a fundamental limitation.

The ray tracing cores (12) and DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) are present, but they do not translate into meaningful gains for this esports title, which does not rely on ray-traced effects in its standard presets. The Vulkan 1.4 and OpenGL 4.6 API support are also irrelevant to the measured results, since the data reflects the game's performance as tested.

# Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling across resolutions reveals a classic GPU-bound pattern. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 179 avg FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops that to 118 avg FPS, a 34% reduction. At 4K Low, it falls further to 66 avg FPS, a 44% drop from 1440p and a 63% drop from 1080p. This steep decline with resolution is the hallmark of a GPU-limited scenario — if the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS would remain relatively flat as resolution increases, since the CPU's work does not scale with pixel count.

The same pattern holds at High settings: 1080p High yields 111 avg FPS, 1440p High drops to 73 avg FPS (34% lower), and 4K High falls to 41 avg FPS (44% lower than 1440p and 63% lower than 1080p). The consistency of these percentage drops across settings underscores that the GPU's rendering throughput is the limiting factor at every resolution.

At Medium settings, the data includes min and max FPS values, which provide additional insight. At 1080p Medium, the average is 149 FPS, with a min of 126 and max of 171. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 98 FPS, with a min of 84 and max of 113. At 4K Medium, the average is 55 FPS, with a min of 47 and max of 63. The min-to-max spread narrows as resolution increases, suggesting that at 4K the GPU is consistently saturated, whereas at 1080p there is more headroom for frame time variation.

The implication of this scaling is that players seeking high refresh rates (144Hz or above) will need to stay at 1080p and likely use Low settings. The 179 FPS at 1080p Low barely exceeds the 144Hz threshold, but any increase in settings or resolution will push the frame rate below that mark. The data indicates that this combo cannot sustain competitive frame rates at 1440p or 4K, regardless of settings.

# Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS across settings is as follows: Low yields 179 avg, Medium yields 149 avg (min 126, max 171), High yields 111 avg, and Ultra yields 86 avg. The step from Low to Medium costs 30 FPS (17%), Medium to High costs 38 FPS (26%), and High to Ultra costs 25 FPS (23%). The scaling is not linear, with the largest relative drop occurring between Medium and High.

At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low at 118, Medium at 98 (min 84, max 113), High at 73, and Ultra at 57. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is consistent across settings: Low loses 61 FPS (34%), Medium loses 51 FPS (34%), High loses 38 FPS (34%), and Ultra loses 29 FPS (34%). This uniform percentage reduction reinforces the GPU-bound nature of the system.

At 3840x2160, the averages are: Low at 66, Medium at 55 (min 47, max 63), High at 41, and Ultra at 32. The 4K results are uniformly below playable levels for a competitive shooter. Even at Low settings, 66 FPS is marginal for a game where pro players often target 240Hz or higher. The Ultra preset at 4K drops to 32 FPS, which is below the 30 FPS threshold often considered the minimum for playability, though not below it in this case.

Notably, the Medium preset at each resolution includes both min and max FPS values, providing a frame time range. At 1080p, the range is 45 FPS (126 to 171); at 1440p, it is 29 FPS (84 to 113); and at 4K, it is 16 FPS (47 to 63). This narrowing range at higher resolutions indicates more consistent frame pacing, which is counterintuitive but suggests that at 4K the GPU is so saturated that frame times are more uniform, whereas at 1080p there is more variability as the GPU occasionally catches up to the CPU's frame generation.

# Settings Recommendations

The data supports a clear recommendation: for players prioritizing frame rate, the Low preset at 1080p is the only configuration that approaches competitive levels, delivering 179 avg FPS. This is 30 FPS higher than Medium at the same resolution (149 avg) and 68 FPS higher than High (111 avg). The jump from Low to Medium is a 20% performance penalty, which is substantial for a game where every frame matters.

For players with 144Hz monitors, 1080p Low is the only preset that consistently stays above the refresh threshold. The 1080p Medium average of 149 FPS does exceed 144Hz, but the minimum of 126 FPS means there will be dips below the refresh rate. At 1440p, even Low settings (118 avg) cannot sustain a 144Hz experience, so players with 1440p displays would need to accept frame rates in the 118-57 range depending on settings.

The Ultra preset is not recommended at any resolution. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 86 FPS, which is 93 FPS lower than Low. The visual uplift from Ultra to Low in a fast-paced esports title is often imperceptible during gameplay, while the performance cost is enormous. At 1440p Ultra (57 avg) and 4K Ultra (32 avg), the frame rates fall below the threshold for smooth competitive play.

The Medium preset offers a balanced compromise at 1080p, with 149 avg FPS and a min of 126, which is playable on 60Hz or 120Hz displays but not on 144Hz. For players who prioritize visual quality over frame rate, 1440p Medium (98 avg) is the highest resolution at which the average stays above 60 FPS. However, given the game's competitive nature, the data suggests that 1080p Low is the optimal choice for maximizing performance, with 1080p Medium as a secondary option if visual fidelity is preferred.

# FAQ

Q: Is this combo capable of running Counter-Strike 2 at 144Hz?

A: At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 179, which exceeds 144Hz. However, at 1080p Medium, the average is 149 FPS with a minimum of 126 FPS, meaning there will be dips below 144Hz. At 1440p, even Low settings only achieve 118 FPS, which is below 144Hz.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Counter-Strike 2?

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 yields the highest frame rates across all settings, with the Low preset achieving 179 avg FPS. At 2560x1440, the best result is 118 avg FPS at Low settings. At 3840x2160, the best result is 66 avg FPS at Low settings.

Q: How does the Arc B390 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the Arc B390 scores 1482, which is 1.3% faster than the GeForce GT 520MX (1463), 1.5% faster than the GeForce 800M (1460), 2.5% faster than the GT 625 OEM (1446), and 2.7% faster than the GT 710 (1443).

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this combo?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU ranks in the 85th percentile among all processors, while the GPU ranks in the 9th percentile. The FPS drops by roughly 34% from 1080p to 1440p and another 44% from 1440p to 4K, indicating GPU-bound scaling.

Q: What is the frame time range at Medium settings?

A: At 1080p Medium, the FPS ranges from 126 to 171 (avg 149). At 1440p Medium, it ranges from 84 to 113 (avg 98). At 4K Medium, it ranges from 47 to 63 (avg 55).

Q: Can this combo play Counter-Strike 2 at 4K?

A: Yes, but with limitations. At 4K Low, the average is 66 FPS; at 4K Medium, it is 55 FPS; at 4K High, it is 41 FPS; and at 4K Ultra, it is 32 FPS. None of these achieve the high frame rates expected for competitive play.

# CPU Role

The Intel Core i7-12700KF is a 12-core, 20-thread processor based on the Alder Lake architecture, fabricated on a 10 nm process. Its base clock is 3.60 GHz with a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, and it has a TDP of 125 W. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 25 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration, with 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes.

In synthetic benchmarks, this CPU demonstrates strong multi-threaded performance: Cinebench R23 multicore score is 28838, Geekbench multicore is 14367, and Passmark multithread is 34092. Single-thread performance is equally robust, with Cinebench R23 single-core at 4071 and Passmark single-thread at 3984. The 3dmark scores show scaling from 1043 (single-thread) to 9282 (16-threads) and 9983 (max-threads), indicating that the processor efficiently utilizes its core count.

The CPU's percentile ranking of 85th among all processors, combined with its average benchmark score of 35365, places it just below the i7-13700T (35403, -0.1% delta) and above the i5-13600T (35305, 0.2% delta). This means the CPU is performing at the expected level for its class, with no anomalies in the data.

In Counter-Strike 2, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and game logic. Given the CPU's strong single-thread performance (3dmark single-thread of 1043), it is more than capable of generating high frame rates. The bottleneck is clearly the GPU, as evidenced by the FPS scaling pattern. At 1080p Low, the 179 FPS average is likely close to the GPU's maximum throughput, not the CPU's. If the CPU were the limit, we would expect similar FPS at 1080p and 1440p, but the data shows a 34% drop, which is characteristic of GPU limitation.

The CPU's 20 threads and 12 cores are more than sufficient for Counter-Strike 2, which typically utilizes only a few cores. The 25 MB of L3 cache and 1.25 MB per-core L2 cache provide ample bandwidth for game data. The processor's release date of 2021-11-03 and launch MSRP of $384 indicate it is a mid-range enthusiast part from the 12th Gen lineup, but its performance in this combo is entirely overshadowed by the GPU's limitations.

For players considering this combo, the data implies that upgrading the GPU would yield dramatic FPS improvements, as the CPU has significant headroom. However, the Arc B390's integrated nature and shared memory architecture mean that its performance is also dependent on system memory bandwidth, which is "System Dependent" according to the specifications. The CPU's support for DDR4 and DDR5 means that memory choice could impact the GPU's effective bandwidth, but the measured FPS data does not differentiate between memory types.