Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600G paired with the Intel Arc B370 produces a highly capable Counter-Strike: Global Offensive configuration, delivering playable frame rates even at 4K. The measured data shows a system that scales predictably with resolution and settings, though the performance ceiling varies significantly across the 12 tested scenarios. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS data, interprets the scaling trends, and contextualizes the combo’s standing within the broader benchmark database.

Resolution Scaling

The relationship between resolution and frame rate is linear and pronounced, indicating that the Intel Arc B370 is the primary limiting factor as pixel count increases. At the High preset, the average FPS drops from 202 at 1920x1080 to 139 at 2560x1440, a reduction of 63 FPS. Moving to 3840x2160 yields 82 FPS, which is 57 FPS lower than the 1440p result and 120 FPS lower than the 1080p baseline. This steep decline—roughly a 31% loss from 1080p to 1440p and another 41% loss from 1440p to 4K—points squarely at the GPU’s fill rate and memory bandwidth constraints.

The Low preset tells a similar story but with higher absolute numbers. At 1920x1080, the combo averages 273 FPS, which drops to 188 FPS at 2560x1440 and further to 111 FPS at 3840x2160. The delta between 1080p and 4K at Low settings is 162 FPS, a 59% reduction. This scaling pattern suggests that even when the workload is lightened, the GPU cannot maintain frame rates at higher resolutions, confirming that the system is not CPU-bound in these scenarios.

The Medium preset, which is the only one with min and max FPS data, shows a similar trend. The average FPS goes from 233 at 1080p to 160 at 1440p and 95 at 4K. The min FPS values follow suit: 198, 136, and 80 respectively. The consistency of the drop across all presets indicates that resolution scaling is the dominant variable. The Arc B370, with its 1280 shading units and 20 ROPs, appears to be the bottleneck, as the Ryzen 5 5600G’s six cores and 12 threads provide ample headroom for this game’s CPU demands.

Notably, the difference between 1080p and 1440p is smaller in percentage terms than the difference between 1440p and 4K. For example, at High settings, the drop from 1080p to 1440p is 31%, while the drop from 1440p to 4K is 41%. This accelerating decline is typical of a GPU that is reaching its memory bandwidth limit, as the system-shared memory architecture becomes a bottleneck at higher pixel counts. The data suggests that 1080p is the sweet spot for this combo, with 1440p being playable but requiring a settings reduction to maintain high refresh rates.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data offers clear guidance on the optimal settings for different resolutions. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers the highest average FPS at 273, followed by Medium at 233, High at 202, and Ultra at 172. For competitive play, the Low preset is the clear choice, as the 273 FPS average provides a significant margin above the 198 FPS minimum observed at Medium. The jump from Low to Medium costs 40 FPS on average, which is substantial for a game where frame rate directly impacts responsiveness.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset again leads with 188 FPS, but the Medium preset is close behind at 160 FPS. The High preset drops to 139 FPS, and Ultra falls to 118 FPS. For a balanced experience, Medium is the recommended setting here, as it maintains a 136 FPS minimum while offering better visual fidelity than Low. The difference between Low and Medium is 28 FPS, which is less impactful than at 1080p, but still noticeable.

At 3840x2160, the situation changes. The Low preset averages 111 FPS, which is the only setting that breaks the 100 FPS barrier. Medium averages 95 FPS, High drops to 82 FPS, and Ultra falls to 70 FPS. For 4K gaming, Low is the only viable option for smooth gameplay, as the 70 FPS minimum on Ultra would likely result in noticeable stutter. The data shows that the combo is not suited for high-fidelity 4K, but it can handle 4K at Low settings with playable frame rates.

The Ultra preset is consistently the worst performer across all resolutions, with scores of 172, 118, and 70 FPS at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K respectively. The gap between Ultra and High is 30 FPS at 1080p, 21 FPS at 1440p, and 12 FPS at 4K. This suggests that the additional graphical features in Ultra have a diminishing impact on visual quality while exacting a heavy performance toll. For most users, the High preset offers the best balance, providing a 202 FPS average at 1080p and 139 FPS at 1440p, which are both respectable numbers.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 yields the highest frame rates across all settings, with a peak average of 273 FPS at Low. While 2560x1440 is playable, the average FPS drops below 200 FPS even at Low, and 3840x2160 only breaks 100 FPS at the Low preset.

Q: How does the Ultra preset compare to High in terms of performance?

A: The Ultra preset consistently delivers lower average FPS than High. At 1080p, Ultra averages 172 FPS versus 202 FPS for High, a 30 FPS difference. At 1440p, the gap is 21 FPS (118 vs 139), and at 4K, it narrows to 12 FPS (70 vs 82).

Q: Is the system CPU-bound or GPU-bound at 1080p?

A: The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K suggests the GPU is the limiting factor. The average FPS drops by 120 FPS between 1080p and 4K at High settings, indicating that the Intel Arc B370 cannot keep up with the CPU’s output as pixel count increases.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The only preset with min FPS data is Medium. The minimum average FPS recorded is 80 at 3840x2160, 136 at 2560x1440, and 198 at 1920x1080. These values represent the lowest frame rates observed during the benchmark runs.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to other tested configurations?

A: The combo ranks 2615 out of 2848 tested combinations in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive. This places it in the lower percentile of all tested combos, indicating that while it is playable, many other configurations deliver higher average FPS.

Q: Can this combo handle 4K gaming?

A: At 3840x2160, the combo averages 111 FPS at Low settings and 82 FPS at High settings. While these are playable frame rates, the 70 FPS average at Ultra suggests that high-fidelity 4K gaming is not practical with this hardware.

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600G + Intel Arc B370 combination ranks 2615 out of 2848 tested combos in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive. This places it in the bottom 8% of all configurations in the database. The rank reflects the GPU’s modest performance ceiling, as the CPU is a mid-range part that outperforms its direct rivals. The Arc B370’s 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1184 places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, which aligns with the low ranking.

The combo’s position is not surprising given the GPU’s specifications. The Arc B370 is an integrated graphics solution with 1280 shading units and a 25 W TDP, which is far below dedicated graphics cards. Its nearest rivals in the GPU benchmark—the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, ATI Radeon HD 5770, and AMD Radeon HD 7650M—all score within 0.7% of the Arc B370, confirming that its performance class is comparable to decade-old discrete GPUs.

In the context of this game, the 2615th rank out of 2848 combos means that the majority of tested configurations deliver higher average FPS. However, the measured data shows that this combo is still capable of exceeding 200 FPS at 1080p Low, which is a competitive advantage. The rank is a relative measure, and the absolute performance is sufficient for casual play. The CPU’s percentile rank of 74th out of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 21088, indicates that the Ryzen 5 5600G is a stronger component than the GPU, but the combo’s overall ranking is dragged down by the Arc B370’s 5th percentile GPU score.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is the decisive factor in this combo’s performance, and its specifications explain the measured FPS patterns. The GPU has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz, which is a wide range that allows for significant dynamic scaling. However, the memory configuration is the critical limitation: the GPU uses System Shared memory, meaning it relies on the CPU’s DDR4 memory rather than dedicated VRAM. The memory bandwidth is listed as System Dependent, which means it varies based on the installed RAM.

This shared memory architecture is likely the reason for the steep FPS drops at higher resolutions. At 1080p, the GPU can access memory quickly enough to sustain high frame rates, but as the pixel count increases, the memory bandwidth becomes a bottleneck. The 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1184 confirms the GPU’s low performance tier, placing it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. The nearest rivals, such as the ATI Radeon HD 5770, score nearly identically, showing that the Arc B370 is not competitive with modern mid-range or high-end parts.

The GPU’s 1280 shading units and 20 ROPs are relatively low numbers, and the pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s further quantify its limited fill rate. The FP32 performance of 6.144 TFLOPS is modest, and the 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 rate (2:1) does not help in a game that primarily uses FP32. The GPU’s TDP of 25 W and IGP slot width indicate that it is designed for power efficiency rather than raw performance, which aligns with the measured FPS data. The DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4 API support are modern, but the hardware cannot fully leverage them in this title.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of the combo’s performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers the highest average FPS at 273, followed by Medium at 233, High at 202, and Ultra at 172. The Medium preset has recorded min and max values of 198 and 268 FPS, respectively, indicating a stable frame rate range. The Low and High presets lack min/max data, but the averages suggest a consistent experience.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 188 FPS, Medium averages 160 FPS, High averages 139 FPS, and Ultra averages 118 FPS. The Medium preset again has min and max values, with 136 and 184 FPS, respectively. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is consistent across all presets, with an average reduction of approximately 25-30%. The High preset at 1440p is still playable, but the 139 FPS average is significantly lower than the 202 FPS at 1080p.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 111 FPS, Medium averages 95 FPS, High averages 82 FPS, and Ultra averages 70 FPS. The Medium preset has a minimum of 80 FPS and a maximum of 109 FPS, showing a narrow range. The 4K results are the most variable, with the Low preset being the only one to exceed 100 FPS. The Ultra preset at 70 FPS is borderline, and the High preset at 82 FPS is the second-lowest. The data shows a clear hierarchy: Low > Medium > High > Ultra at every resolution, with the gaps between presets widening as resolution increases.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600G provides the computational foundation for this combo, and its specifications suggest that it is not the limiting factor in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive. The CPU has 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. The Zen 3 architecture on the 7 nm process node delivers strong single-thread performance, which is critical for this game. The 16 MB L3 cache and 64 KB L1 cache per core provide ample data storage for the game’s assets.

Benchmark results show the CPU’s capabilities: a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 10551 and a single-core score of 1409, as well as a Geekbench multicore score of 8428 and single-core score of 1801. The PassMark single-thread score of 3177 and multithread score of 19717 further quantify its performance. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 21088 places it in the 74th percentile of all CPUs, with nearest rivals like the Intel Core i3-1220P scoring 21066 (0.1% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 5 7530U scoring 21133 (-0.2% delta). This indicates that the 5600G is a solid mid-range processor.

In this game, the CPU’s role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and physics calculations. The high FPS at 1080p Low (273 FPS) suggests that the CPU is capable of delivering frame rates well above 200 FPS, but the GPU’s limitations prevent it from reaching even higher numbers. The 3DMark 2-thread score of 1705 and single-thread score of 872 indicate that the CPU can handle the game’s single-threaded nature, but the GPU’s 5th percentile performance holds the system back. The data shows that upgrading the GPU would yield significant FPS gains, while the CPU would remain sufficient for this title.