Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2 with an Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 delivers a dataset that clearly separates CPU-bound scenarios from GPU-bound ones. The measured FPS values across three resolutions and four settings tiers show a system that is overwhelmingly capable of high refresh-rate play, but the scaling patterns reveal where each component’s workload begins and ends. This analysis breaks down the measured rows, places the combo in the broader database context, and translates the numbers into practical settings guidance.

Resolution Scaling

The transition from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 produces a dramatic shift in frame rates, but the pattern is not uniform across all settings presets. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 505 at 1080p to 334 at 1440p and finally to 187 at 4K. That represents a 63% reduction from 1080p to 4K, which is a steep decline that points to the GPU becoming the primary limiter at higher pixel counts. However, the absolute numbers at every resolution remain far above playable thresholds, so the scaling is more about headroom than about hitting minimums.

At Ultra settings, the same resolution steps produce 243 FPS at 1080p, 161 FPS at 1440p, and 90 FPS at 4K. The 4K Ultra figure is the only measured row that dips below the 100 FPS mark, and it is also the only configuration where the frame rate approaches what might be considered a hard ceiling for the RTX 3080. The gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is 97 FPS, whereas at 1080p that gap is 262 FPS. This compression of the settings spectrum at higher resolutions is a classic sign of GPU saturation; when the pixel count rises, the difference between Low and Ultra graphics presets shrinks because the GPU is working near its limit regardless of the workload.

The Medium preset tells a similar story with more detail. At 1080p, Medium averages 420 FPS with a minimum of 357 and a maximum of 482. Moving to 1440p drops the average to 278 FPS with a minimum of 236 and a maximum of 319. At 4K, the average falls to 155 FPS with a minimum of 132 and a maximum of 178. The minimum-to-maximum spread narrows as resolution increases, from 125 FPS at 1080p to 83 FPS at 1440p to 46 FPS at 4K. This tightening range indicates that at lower resolutions, the frame time variance is driven by CPU-side fluctuations, while at 4K, the GPU’s consistent workload produces a more stable output.

What the data does not show is a catastrophic collapse at any resolution. Even the worst-case measured row, 4K Ultra at 90 FPS average, is still smooth for most players. The limiting component shifts from the CPU at 1080p to the GPU at 4K, and the crossover point lies somewhere between 1440p and 4K. At 1440p, the system still produces over 160 FPS at Ultra and over 330 FPS at Low, which suggests that the CPU is still feeding the GPU adequately at that resolution. By 4K, the GPU’s raw throughput is the bottleneck, as evidenced by the smaller gains from dropping settings.

GPU Role

The RTX 3080 is a 10 GB GDDR6X card with a 320-bit memory bus and 760.3 GB/s of bandwidth. Its boost clock is rated at 1710 MHz, and it draws up to 320 W under load. In the context of Counter-Strike 2, these specifications translate into a GPU that is more than sufficient for 1080p and 1440p gaming but becomes the limiting factor at 4K with higher presets. The 10 GB VRAM capacity is not stressed by this game’s measured data, as even the 4K Ultra preset does not show any signs of texture swapping or stutter that would indicate memory pressure.

The GPU’s benchmark profile shows a PassMark G3D score of 25086 and a PassMark GPU Compute score of 14397, placing it at the 68th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database are the NVIDIA P106-100, AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16, and AMD Radeon RX 6600M, all of which are within 0.4% of its average score. This clustering is unusual because the RTX 3080 is a high-end Ampere part, but the database’s percentile ranking suggests that many modern GPUs have surpassed it. The measured FPS in Counter-Strike 2, however, does not reflect any weakness; the card still delivers over 400 FPS at 1080p Medium and over 300 FPS at 1080p High.

The GPU’s role becomes clearer when comparing the Low and Ultra presets at the same resolution. At 1080p, the difference between Low (505 FPS) and Ultra (243 FPS) is 262 FPS, which indicates that the graphics settings have a massive impact on the GPU workload. At 4K, the same comparison yields a difference of 97 FPS (187 FPS Low vs 90 FPS Ultra). This suggests that at lower resolutions, the GPU has spare capacity that gets consumed by higher settings, while at 4K, the GPU is already near its limit even at Low. The RTX 3080’s 10 GB memory and 760.3 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for this game’s needs, and the measured data shows no indication that VRAM capacity or memory bandwidth is a limiting factor.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS measured for this combo?

A: The highest average FPS is 505, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

Q: Does the RTX 3080’s 10 GB VRAM cause any issues in Counter-Strike 2?

A: No, the measured data shows no signs of VRAM-related stuttering or performance degradation, even at 4K Ultra settings.

Q: How does the combo rank among all tested combinations?

A: The combo ranks 752nd out of 2870 total combinations, placing it in the top 26% of all tested systems.

Q: What is the lowest average FPS recorded?

A: The lowest average FPS is 90, recorded at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck at 1440p?

A: At 1440p, the system still produces high frame rates across all settings (161 to 334 FPS), indicating that neither component is severely limiting, though the GPU begins to assert more influence at higher presets.

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

A: The difference is 262 FPS, with Low averaging 505 FPS and Ultra averaging 243 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 ranks 752nd out of 2870 tested combos in Counter-Strike 2. This places the system in the upper quartile of all combinations, but it is not near the top. The ranking reflects the RTX 3080’s age and its position relative to newer GPUs, as well as the CPU’s strength. The Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor with a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, and it sits at the 96th percentile of all CPUs. The GPU, however, sits at the 68th percentile, which drags the overall combo ranking down.

The CPU’s nearest rivals in the database are the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K (0.2% higher average score), AMD EPYC 4584PX (1.1% higher), AMD EPYC 9135 (1.2% higher), and AMD EPYC 7F72 (1.3% lower). This clustering shows that the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is essentially tied with the previous generation of flagship desktop parts. The GPU’s nearest rivals are all within 0.4% of its average score, which indicates that the RTX 3080 is grouped with a mix of older and mid-range parts in the database’s scoring.

The rank of 752 out of 2870 is a function of both components’ strengths and weaknesses. The CPU is a top-tier part, but the GPU is not. In a game like Counter-Strike 2, which is known for being CPU-sensitive, the high CPU percentile helps offset the GPU’s lower standing. The measured FPS data supports this: at 1080p Low, the system produces 505 FPS, which is likely near the CPU’s limit. At 4K Ultra, the 90 FPS result is purely GPU-bound. The combo’s ranking would likely improve with a newer GPU, but the data shows that it remains competitive in this specific game.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz. It has 36 MB of shared L3 cache and supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus. Its benchmark scores are impressive: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51731 and a single-core score of 7303, along with a PassMark multi-thread score of 60860 and a single-thread score of 4823. These numbers place it at the 96th percentile of all CPUs, and its average benchmark score of 84003 is nearly identical to the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K.

In Counter-Strike 2, the CPU’s role is most evident at lower resolutions. At 1080p Low, the system hits 505 FPS, which is a result that is almost certainly limited by the CPU’s ability to process game logic and draw calls. The jump from 1080p Low to 1440p Low is only 171 FPS (505 to 334), which is a smaller drop than the 147 FPS drop from 1440p Low to 4K Low (334 to 187). This pattern suggests that the CPU is still heavily involved at 1080p and 1440p, but the GPU takes over as the primary limiter at 4K.

The CPU’s high single-thread performance is critical for Counter-Strike 2, which is a game that does not scale perfectly across many cores. The 5.80 GHz boost clock and strong single-core Cinebench score (7303) indicate that this processor can handle the game’s main thread without becoming a bottleneck. The 24 cores and 24 threads are more than sufficient, and the lack of hyperthreading (24 threads for 24 cores) is not a disadvantage in this title. The measured FPS at 1080p High (313 FPS) and 1080p Medium (420 FPS) shows that the CPU can feed the GPU at high rates, but the 505 FPS at Low suggests that even this top-tier CPU has a ceiling around 500 FPS in this game.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The full dataset provides a clear picture of performance across all tested configurations. At 1920x1080, the results are as follows: Low averages 505 FPS, Medium averages 420 FPS with a minimum of 357 and a maximum of 482, High averages 313 FPS, and Ultra averages 243 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra is not linear; the largest single drop is from Medium to High at 107 FPS, while the drop from High to Ultra is only 70 FPS. This suggests that the Medium preset is a sweet spot where the GPU is still well within its limits.

At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low at 334 FPS, Medium at 278 FPS with a minimum of 236 and a maximum of 319, High at 207 FPS, and Ultra at 161 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 56 FPS, which is less than the 71 FPS drop from Medium to High. At 1440p, the system still delivers over 200 FPS at High, which is excellent for competitive play. The minimum FPS at Medium (236) is still above the refresh rate of most high-end monitors.

At 3840x2160, the averages are: Low at 187 FPS, Medium at 155 FPS with a minimum of 132 and a maximum of 178, High at 116 FPS, and Ultra at 90 FPS. This is the only resolution where any preset drops below 100 FPS, and it happens at Ultra. The gap between Low and Medium at 4K is only 32 FPS, which is the smallest difference between any two adjacent presets in the dataset. This indicates that at 4K, the GPU is saturated even at Low settings, and the additional workload from higher presets produces diminishing returns.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the best experience depends on the target resolution and refresh rate. For players with a 1080p monitor running at 240 Hz or higher, the Medium preset at 420 FPS average is the recommended choice. It provides a significant boost over High (313 FPS) while staying well above the refresh rate of even the fastest monitors. The minimum FPS of 357 at Medium ensures that dips are rare, and the visual quality improvement over Low is substantial.

For 1440p users, the High preset at 207 FPS average is the best balance. It delivers over 200 FPS, which is sufficient for 144 Hz or even 165 Hz monitors, and it offers better visual fidelity than Medium (278 FPS) without the performance penalty of Ultra (161 FPS). Players with 240 Hz 1440p monitors might prefer Medium at 278 FPS, but the visual trade-off is significant.

At 4K, the situation is different. The Ultra preset at 90 FPS is playable but not ideal for competitive play. The High preset at 116 FPS is a better choice, as it maintains a frame rate that is compatible with 120 Hz displays. The Medium preset at 155 FPS is the best option for 4K gamers who want both high frame rates and good visuals, as it stays above 144 FPS and offers a substantial improvement over Low. The Low preset at 187 FPS is the choice for esports-focused players who prioritize frame rate above all else, but the visual downgrade is noticeable.

The data suggests that the Medium preset is the most versatile across all resolutions. It never drops below 132 FPS (at 4K) and reaches as high as 420 FPS (at 1080p). For players who do not want to adjust settings per resolution, Medium is the recommended default. For those who prioritize maximum competitive performance at 1080p, Low at 505 FPS is the clear winner. For 4K Ultra enthusiasts, the 90 FPS average is a reminder that the RTX 3080 is the limiting factor, and dropping to High or Medium yields better results.