Counter-Strike 2

The Intel Core i7-14700F paired with the Intel Arc B390 presents a stark contrast in Counter-Strike 2: a high-end 20-core processor shackled to an integrated GPU that ranks in the 9th percentile of all GPUs. The measured data shows this combo is capable of playable frame rates, but only if you make aggressive compromises on graphical settings and resolution. This analysis focuses strictly on the measured performance rows to determine the optimal configuration for this specific pairing.

Settings Recommendations

The data clearly indicates that settings selection is the single most important factor in achieving a smooth experience with this combo. The gap between Low and Ultra presets is enormous at every resolution, often more than doubling the average frame rate. For competitive play, where Counter-Strike 2 demands high and consistent frames, the Low preset is the only viable choice for most scenarios. At 1920x1080, Low yields an average of 179 FPS, which is the only measured configuration that approaches the high refresh rates competitive players seek. The Medium preset at 1080p produces 149 FPS on average, which remains playable, but the drop from Low is significant.

At 2560x1440, the situation tightens. Low produces 118 FPS on average, which is acceptable for many monitors, but Medium drops to 98 FPS. The data shows that High at 1440p (73 FPS) and Ultra (57 FPS) are too inconsistent for fast-paced action. The 3840x2160 resolution is largely impractical with this GPU. Even on Low settings, the average frame rate falls to 66 FPS, which is below the threshold most competitive players would accept. Medium at 4K drops to 55 FPS, and Ultra falls to 32 FPS, which is effectively unplayable.

The measured data suggests that if you prioritize frame rate above all else, which is the standard for Counter-Strike 2, the Low preset at 1920x1080 is the recommended configuration. It provides the highest average frame rate (179 FPS) and leaves the most headroom for demanding in-game moments. The Medium preset at 1080p is a reasonable alternative if you want slightly better visuals and can tolerate the 30 FPS average loss. However, given that the game is a competitive FPS, the marginal visual improvement from Medium over Low is rarely worth the performance hit. For any resolution above 1080p, sticking to Low is mandatory to maintain playable averages, and even then, 4K should be avoided entirely.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is the definitive bottleneck in this system. Its performance profile, based on the measured data, is that of an entry-level integrated solution. The GPU's specifications are modest: it features 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, with a boost clock of 2500 MHz. The memory configuration is "System Shared," meaning it relies on the system's main memory rather than dedicated VRAM. This architecture directly impacts performance, as the shared memory bandwidth is "System Dependent," which can lead to inconsistent frame pacing depending on the system's RAM configuration.

The GPU's benchmark scores reflect its low position in the hierarchy. Its average benchmark score of 1482 places it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs. The nearest rivals in the benchmark data are all older, low-end NVIDIA parts: the GeForce GT 520MX (1.3% faster), GeForce 800M (1.5% faster), GeForce GT 625 OEM (2.5% faster), and GeForce GT 710 (2.7% faster). This places the Arc B390 in a performance bracket where 1080p gaming at high frame rates is a challenge and 1440p is a stretch.

The data shows a clear pattern in Counter-Strike 2: the GPU's limited throughput is the primary limiter. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 179 FPS, but this is likely near the GPU's ceiling for this title. As settings increase, the average frame rate plummets: 149 FPS at Medium, 111 FPS at High, and 86 FPS at Ultra. This degradation is a direct result of the GPU's fixed compute resources (7.680 TFLOPS FP32) being overwhelmed by the increased graphical load. The GPU's pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s are simply insufficient for higher presets at resolutions above 1080p. Players should treat this GPU as a 1080p-class solution, and even then, only at the lowest settings for competitive play.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Core i7-14700F and the Arc B390 ranks near the bottom of all tested configurations in Counter-Strike 2. Specifically, it holds the 2535th position out of 2870 combos. This ranking, in the bottom 12% of tested systems, is a direct consequence of the GPU's severe performance limitations. The CPU is clearly not the culprit; the data shows a processor that is in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, with a high average benchmark score of 53620. The mismatch is stark: a top-tier CPU paired with a bottom-tier GPU.

This ranking underscores a fundamental imbalance in the system. While the CPU has the headroom to feed a much more powerful graphics card, the Arc B390 cannot translate that processor power into high frame rates. The benchmark results indicate that the combo's overall performance is capped by the GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1482, which is a minimal result. The nearest CPU rivals in the benchmark data—such as the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X (0.6% slower) and the AMD EPYC 7313P (0.8% slower)—show that the processor is performing as expected, but this does nothing to lift the game's frame rates.

For context, this ranking means that the vast majority of other tested CPU/GPU combinations will outperform this setup in Counter-Strike 2. The only combos ranked lower are likely those with even weaker integrated graphics or significantly older hardware. The data suggests that this configuration is only suitable for the most casual play at the lowest settings. Any expectation of high-refresh-rate competitive gaming will be disappointed, as the ranking clearly places this combo in a performance tier that is not designed for that purpose.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured data provides a comprehensive view of how the combo performs across three resolutions and four settings presets. The numbers are clear and consistent: performance scales inversely with resolution and settings, and the GPU is the limiting factor at every step.

3840x2160 (4K)

• Low: 66 FPS average
• Medium: 55 FPS average (min 47, max 63)
• High: 41 FPS average
• Ultra: 32 FPS average

At 4K, even the Low preset fails to reach the 60 FPS target that is generally considered the minimum for smooth gameplay. The Medium preset's measured range of 47 to 63 FPS shows significant instability, making it unsuitable for a competitive shooter. High and Ultra are simply unplayable, with averages below 41 FPS.

2560x1440 (1440p)

• Low: 118 FPS average
• Medium: 98 FPS average (min 84, max 113)
• High: 73 FPS average
• Ultra: 57 FPS average

1440p is a more viable resolution, but only with significant compromises. The Low preset delivers a solid 118 FPS average, which is playable on most 144Hz monitors. The Medium preset drops to 98 FPS, with a min of 84 FPS, which is still in the playable range but shows more variance. High at 73 FPS is borderline, and Ultra at 57 FPS is below the 60 FPS threshold.

1920x1080 (1080p)

• Low: 179 FPS average
• Medium: 149 FPS average (min 126, max 171)
• High: 111 FPS average
• Ultra: 86 FPS average

1080p is where this combo shows its only competitive potential. The Low preset delivers a strong 179 FPS average, which is sufficient for high-refresh-rate displays. The Medium preset's range of 126 to 171 FPS is still competitive, but the average is 30 FPS lower. High at 111 FPS is acceptable for 120Hz monitors, but the Ultra preset at 86 FPS, while playable, does not provide the high frame rates necessary for serious competitive play.

The data shows a clear pattern: for every resolution, the difference between Low and Ultra is roughly a 2.5x to 3x change in average frame rate. This indicates that the GPU's performance is highly sensitive to graphical settings, reinforcing the recommendation to prioritize Low settings.

FAQ

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

A: The measured data suggests 4K is not a viable option. The best average frame rate at 3840x2160 is 66 FPS on Low settings, which falls below the 60 FPS target. Higher settings at 4K produce averages of 55 FPS or lower, which is too slow for a competitive FPS.

Q: What is the best settings preset for competitive play?

A: The Low preset at 1920x1080 is the only configuration that provides a high average frame rate (179 FPS) suitable for competitive play. The Medium preset at 1080p (149 FPS) is a secondary option if you can tolerate the lower average and higher frame time variance.

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

A: The GPU's benchmark score of 1482 places it just below the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, which is 1.3% faster. It is also slower than the GeForce 800M (1.5%), the GeForce GT 625 OEM (2.5%), and the GeForce GT 710 (2.7%). This places it at the bottom of the discrete GPU hierarchy.

Q: Is the CPU or the GPU the bottleneck in this system?

A: The data is unambiguous: the GPU is the bottleneck. The CPU ranks in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU ranks in the 9th percentile. The CPU's high benchmark scores (e.g., 35122 in Cinebench R23 multi-core) indicate it has ample headroom, but the GPU cannot deliver the frames to utilize it.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset averages 179 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 86 FPS. This represents a drop of 93 FPS, or a performance reduction of roughly 52%, when moving from the lowest to the highest settings.

Q: Is the frame rate stable at Medium settings?

A: The data shows frame rate variance. At 1080p Medium, the range is 126 to 171 FPS (a 45 FPS spread). At 1440p Medium, the range is 84 to 113 FPS (a 29 FPS spread). This variance can cause noticeable hitches during intense firefights.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i7-14700F is a high-end desktop processor that plays a supporting role in this configuration. It features 20 cores and 28 threads, with a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. It is built on the Raptor Lake architecture using a 10 nm process. The processor has a 33 MB shared L3 cache and supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory. Its benchmark scores are strong: it achieves 35122 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 4958 in single-core, placing it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs.

In Counter-Strike 2, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and handle game logic. Given the high core count and boost clock, the 14700F is more than capable of this task. The data shows its average benchmark score of 53620 is nearly identical to its nearest rivals: the Intel Xeon 6505P (0.2% faster) and the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X (0.6% slower). This indicates the CPU is performing at its expected level. However, because the Arc B390 is so weak, the CPU's performance is largely irrelevant to the final frame rate.

The measured FPS data reflects this. At 1080p Low, the combo hits 179 FPS, but this is likely a GPU limit, not a CPU limit. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would see a smaller difference between settings presets. Instead, the massive drop from 179 FPS (Low) to 86 FPS (Ultra) at 1080p shows that the GPU is the sole constraint. The CPU's 20 cores and 28 threads provide no benefit in this scenario because the graphics workload is so light. In essence, the 14700F is a wasted resource in this pairing; its potential is entirely untapped. The data suggests that a much weaker CPU could achieve similar frame rates in this game with the same GPU, as the frame rate is dictated by the graphics solution.