Counter-Strike 2

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 lands at rank 2266 out of 3719 tested combos in Counter-Strike 2. This places the pair in the 39th percentile of all tested configurations, meaning 60% of the combos in the database outperform it. For a flagship-class CPU and a high-end GPU, this mid-pack placement is surprising and points directly to Counter-Strike 2's unique engine demands. The data suggests that the sheer brute force of this hardware is not translating into top-tier rankings because the game's performance ceiling is likely governed by factors other than raw core count or GPU shading power.

The CPU itself is a 24-core, 24-thread part with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz. That boost figure is the key metric for this game. The CPU sits in the 96th percentile of all processors, and its average benchmark score of 84003 is nearly identical to the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, which scores 83807 with a delta of just 0.2%. The 290K Plus leads the AMD EPYC 4584PX by 1.1% (83090) and the EPYC 9135 by 1.2% (82980), but trails the AMD EPYC 7F72 by 1.3% (85072). These are marginal differences, indicating that the 290K Plus is a top-tier part in synthetic tests. The question is why that doesn't dominate in CS2.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 2266 out of 3719 is the headline number here, and it is a stark outlier compared to the individual component percentiles. The GPU is in the 86th percentile of all graphics cards, and the CPU is in the 96th percentile. Yet, the combined system lands in the 39th percentile for this specific title. This is a classic case of a game that is heavily optimized for lower-end hardware or that scales poorly with extreme core counts. The data shows a massive gap between the hardware's theoretical capability and its measured in-game performance.

Looking at the nearest rivals for the CPU, the performance differences are within 1.3%, so swapping the 290K Plus for a 285K would not change the ranking meaningfully. Similarly, the GPU rivals are extremely tight: the RTX 4080 SUPER scores 54209 (delta 0.1%), the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X scores 54828 (delta -1.1%), and the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB scores 55698 (delta -2.6%). The RTX 4080 is essentially tied with its immediate successor in synthetic benchmarks. This means the low combo rank is not due to a weak individual component but rather the specific interaction between this hardware and CS2's engine. The rank suggests that many other combos, likely with lower-clocked but higher-IPC CPUs or different GPU architectures, achieve higher frame rates in this specific esports title.

The measured FPS data reinforces this. At 1080p Low, the combo hits 356 FPS average. That is a high number, but it is not the top of the charts. The fact that the Ultra preset at 1080p drops to 174 FPS shows a huge swing based on settings, which is unusual for a game that is typically CPU-bound at lower resolutions. The rank of 2266 indicates that while this is a playable configuration, it is not the definitive best-in-class setup for competitive play. The data implies that users seeking the absolute highest frame rates in CS2 might find better results with different hardware combinations that are more aligned with the game's engine preferences.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 1080p with Low settings?

A: The measured average frame rate at 1920x1080 with Low settings is 356 FPS. This is the highest average FPS recorded across all tested configurations in the fact pack.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its closest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K?

A: The Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has an average benchmark score of 84003, which is 0.2% higher than the Core Ultra 9 285K's score of 83807. The performance difference is negligible in synthetic tests.

Q: What is the lowest average FPS recorded in the measured data?

A: The lowest average FPS is 61, recorded at 3840x2160 (4K) resolution with the Ultra preset. This is a significant drop from the 4K Low setting, which produces 124 FPS.

Q: Is the RTX 4080 faster or slower than the RTX 4080 SUPER?

A: Based on the average benchmark scores, the RTX 4080 scores 54247, while the RTX 4080 SUPER scores 54209. The RTX 4080 is 0.1% faster according to the deltaPct value, making them effectively identical in performance.

Q: What is the boost clock of the CPU?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has a boost clock of 5.80 GHz. This is the maximum single-core frequency the chip can achieve under load.

Q: Does the combo rank in the top half of all tested systems?

A: No. The combo ranks 2266 out of 3719 tested combos, which places it in the lower 40% of all configurations tested for Counter-Strike 2.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, with a TDP of 125 W. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The chip supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus with a bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. It also includes an integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU, though the discrete RTX 4080 makes that irrelevant for gaming. The CPU is unlocked, allowing for overclocking, and sits in the 96th percentile of all processors.

In Counter-Strike 2, the CPU's role is primarily about single-thread performance and latency. The game is known to be sensitive to clock speeds and IPC rather than raw core counts. The 5.80 GHz boost clock is exceptional, and the data shows this translates to high frame rates, but not the highest. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 7303 indicates strong per-core performance, while the multi-core score of 51731 shows the chip's massive parallel capability. However, CS2 does not effectively utilize 24 cores; it typically relies on a few high-frequency threads. The Passmark single-thread score of 4823 confirms the CPU is a top-tier single-thread performer, yet the combo rank suggests the game may be hitting a different bottleneck.

The data shows that at 1080p Low, the CPU is likely the limiting factor, as the frame rate of 356 FPS is high but not unlimited. The fact that the score of 84003 is only 0.2% above the 285K suggests that the CPU's additional cache or clock headroom is not translating to a significant advantage in CS2. The L3 cache of 36 MB is shared and large, but the game may not benefit from it as much as other titles. The 125 W TDP is modest for a 24-core chip, indicating efficient power delivery, but again, this does not directly impact FPS in this title. The CPU is clearly capable, but the game's engine appears to cap its effectiveness relative to other hardware.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the average frame rates are 356 FPS for Low, 273 FPS for Medium, 229 FPS for High, and 174 FPS for Ultra. The Medium preset has a minimum FPS of 232 and a maximum of 313, showing a variance of 81 FPS. This is the only preset at 1080p where min/max data is provided. The Low preset, at 356 FPS, is the peak performance for this combo, indicating that the CPU is still the primary driver at this resolution, pushing high frequencies without the GPU being taxed heavily.

Moving to 2560x1440, the average FPS drops to 230 for Low, 176 for Medium, 148 for High, and 112 for Ultra. The Medium preset at this resolution shows a minimum of 149 FPS and a maximum of 202 FPS, a variance of 53 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is substantial, suggesting that the GPU is starting to take on more load. The 1440p Low setting at 230 FPS is still very playable for competitive gaming, but the Ultra preset at 112 FPS is getting closer to the threshold where high-refresh-rate monitors would not be fully utilized.

At 3840x2160, the average FPS is 124 for Low, 95 for Medium, 79 for High, and 61 for Ultra. The Medium preset at 4K has a minimum of 80 FPS and a maximum of 109 FPS, a variance of 29 FPS. The 4K Low setting at 124 FPS is the only 4K configuration that reaches triple-digit averages. The Ultra preset at 4K, with 61 FPS, is the weakest result in the entire dataset. This shows that the RTX 4080, while powerful, is not sufficient to maintain high frame rates at 4K with maximum settings in CS2, a game that is not typically considered a graphical showcase but still demands GPU resources at higher resolutions.

Resolution Scaling

The scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals the bottleneck characteristics of this combo. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 356 at 1080p to 230 at 1440p, a reduction of 35.4%. From 1440p to 4K, it drops from 230 to 124, a reduction of 46.1%. The total drop from 1080p to 4K at Low settings is 65.2%. This steep decline indicates that the GPU is becoming the limiting factor as resolution increases. At 1080p Low, the CPU can feed the GPU enough frames to reach 356 FPS, but at 4K, the GPU's pixel throughput becomes the constraint.

For High settings, the drop is from 229 FPS at 1080p to 148 FPS at 1440p (35.4% reduction) and then to 79 FPS at 4K (46.6% reduction from 1440p). The total drop is 65.5%, nearly identical to Low settings. This suggests that the scaling is consistent regardless of the preset, pointing to a GPU-bound scenario at higher resolutions. The Ultra preset shows the most dramatic degradation, from 174 FPS at 1080p to 112 FPS at 1440p (35.6% reduction) and then to 61 FPS at 4K (45.5% reduction). The absolute FPS at 4K Ultra is 61, which is barely playable for a competitive title.

The data indicates that at 1080p, the CPU is the primary bottleneck, as the frame rates are high but not scaling with GPU load. At 4K, the GPU is clearly the limiting factor, as the frame rates drop significantly regardless of the CPU's capabilities. The RTX 4080's 16 GB of GDDR6X memory and 716.8 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for the game, but the pixel rate of 280.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 761.5 GTexel/s are taxed heavily at 4K. The resolution scaling suggests that for competitive play, 1080p or 1440p are the optimal choices to maintain high frame rates, while 4K is only viable with Low settings for a playable experience.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the target resolution and refresh rate. For 1080p, the Low preset delivers 356 FPS, which is ideal for a 360Hz monitor. The Medium preset at 273 FPS is still excellent for 240Hz displays, and the High preset at 229 FPS is suitable for 240Hz as well, though with less headroom. The Ultra preset at 174 FPS is only recommended for 144Hz monitors, as it provides a smooth experience but sacrifices the competitive advantage of higher frame rates. For pure performance, the Low preset at 1080p is the best choice, offering the highest average FPS and the lowest input latency.

At 1440p, the Low preset at 230 FPS is the best option for competitive play, matching well with 240Hz monitors. The Medium preset at 176 FPS is a good balance for 165Hz or 180Hz displays, providing better visuals without sacrificing too much frame rate. The High preset at 148 FPS is acceptable for 144Hz monitors, but the Ultra preset at 112 FPS is only recommended for 120Hz displays. Given that CS2 is a fast-paced esports title, the data suggests that prioritizing frame rate over visual fidelity is the better strategy. The Medium preset at 1440p offers a reasonable compromise, with 176 FPS and a minimum of 149 FPS ensuring consistent performance.

For 4K, the options are limited. The Low preset at 124 FPS is the only setting that provides a competitive frame rate, suitable for 120Hz monitors. The Medium preset at 95 FPS is playable but not ideal for high-refresh-rate gaming, and the High preset at 79 FPS is borderline. The Ultra preset at 61 FPS is not recommended for any competitive scenario, as it falls below the 144Hz threshold and introduces noticeable input lag. The data clearly indicates that this combo is best utilized at 1080p or 1440p with Low or Medium settings to maximize the FPS advantage. For users with 4K displays, the Low preset is the only viable option, and they should expect a significant performance trade-off compared to lower resolutions.