Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, a 2012 release, remains a benchmark staple due to its low system requirements and high frame-rate ceiling. The combination of the Intel Core i5-10400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 produces exceptionally high frame rates across all tested settings and resolutions, positioning this system in the 21st percentile of tested hardware combinations for this title, specifically ranking 2931 out of 3719 combos. This pairing demonstrates that even at 4K with Ultra settings, the game remains highly playable, with the primary bottleneck shifting from the GPU at higher resolutions to the CPU at lower ones.

FAQ

Q: What is the maximum average frame rate recorded for this combo in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive?

A: The highest average frame rate recorded is 497 FPS, which occurs at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This is followed closely by 423 FPS at Medium settings and 366 FPS at High settings for the same resolution.

Q: How does the frame rate scale between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the average frame rate drops from 342 FPS on Low settings to 215 FPS on Ultra settings. This represents a reduction of 127 FPS, or approximately 37%, when moving from the lowest to the highest quality preset.

Q: Does the RTX 2060 maintain playable frame rates at 4K resolution?

A: Yes, the data indicates all 4K settings produce average frame rates well above 60 FPS. The lowest average is 127 FPS at Ultra settings, while High settings yield 149 FPS, Medium provides 172 FPS, and Low reaches 202 FPS.

Q: What is the performance difference between the 1080p Low and 4K Ultra presets?

A: The difference is substantial. The average frame rate at 1080p Low is 497 FPS, while at 4K Ultra it drops to 127 FPS. This is a 370 FPS difference, indicating that the highest resolution and quality settings place significantly more demand on the system.

Q: Are there any recorded minimum frame rate values for this hardware configuration?

A: Yes, minimum frame rate data is only provided for the Medium settings preset. At 1920x1080, the minimum is 360 FPS; at 2560x1440, it is 248 FPS; and at 3840x2160, it is 146 FPS. No min or max FPS data is available for the Low, High, or Ultra presets.

Q: How does this combo rank against all other tested configurations in this game?

A: The combo ranks 2931 out of 3719 tested combinations. This places it in the lower portion of the ranking distribution, despite the high absolute frame rates, indicating that many other hardware pairings achieve even higher performance in this specific title.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-10400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Comet Lake architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process. Its base clock is 2.90 GHz with a boost clock of 4.30 GHz, and it features 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU's percentile ranking against all processors is 68, with an average benchmark score of 14185. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 6756E with a delta of 0.2%, and the AMD EPYC 7552 with a delta of 0.5%, showing the i5-10400F sits in a tight performance cluster around its score.

In Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, the CPU's role is critical for achieving the highest possible frame rates, particularly at lower resolutions. The game is known for being CPU-bound when the GPU is not taxed. The data supports this, as the frame rate at 1080p Low is 497 FPS, which is substantially higher than the 4K Low result of 202 FPS. This 295 FPS gap when the resolution is lowered indicates that the CPU is capable of pushing far more frames than the GPU can render at higher resolutions.

The 6-core, 12-thread configuration is more than sufficient for this game's engine, which typically utilizes fewer threads. The high boost clock of 4.30 GHz is beneficial for the single-threaded performance that CS:GO often relies upon. While the CPU's general benchmark scores, such as 10283 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 1451 in Cinebench R23 single-core, provide context for its overall capability, the game's performance is more directly tied to its ability to maintain high clock speeds and low latency on a few cores.

The benchmark results indicate that the CPU is not the limiting factor in most tested scenarios. For instance, at 1440p Medium, the average FPS is 291, with a minimum of 248 FPS. The relatively small difference between the average and minimum FPS suggests stable frame pacing, which points to a capable CPU that can feed the GPU consistently. The CPU's 65W TDP and Socket 1200 compatibility are characteristics of its design, but its performance in this game is what defines its value.

The processor's nearest rival comparison shows it performs within a fraction of a percent of other CPUs like the Intel Core 7 160UL, which has a delta of -0.3%. This proximity in synthetic benchmarks does not necessarily translate to identical gaming performance, but it does indicate that the i5-10400F is a mainstream part that is competitive with other mid-range options. In CS:GO, the data shows that the i5-10400F can deliver frame rates that are limited by the GPU at higher settings and resolutions, but are exceptionally high at lower ones.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 is built on the Turing architecture using a 12 nm process at TSMC. It features 1920 shading units, 120 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, with a base clock of 1365 MHz and a boost clock of 1680 MHz. The GPU is equipped with 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 336.0 GB/s. Its percentile ranking against all GPUs is 58, with an average benchmark score of 15290. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 with a delta of 0% and the AMD Radeon RX 7600 with a delta of 0.8%, indicating that the RTX 2060's raw compute performance is similar to these other cards.

In Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, the GPU's role becomes more prominent as resolution and settings increase. The 6 GB of VRAM is not a limiting factor for this game, as the textures and geometry are relatively modest. The GPU's performance is clearly demonstrated by the frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K. At 1080p High, the average FPS is 366, while at 4K High, it drops to 149 FPS. This 217 FPS decrease is a direct result of the increased pixel count that the GPU must process.

The RTX 2060's memory bandwidth of 336.0 GB/s is sufficient for the data throughput required by CS:GO at 4K, as evidenced by the playable frame rates. The GPU's boost clock of 1680 MHz allows for consistent performance, but the data shows that the card is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions. For example, the frame rate difference between 1080p Low (497 FPS) and 4K Low (202 FPS) is 295 FPS, which is a massive drop that highlights the GPU's limitations at 4K.

The GPU's compute capabilities, such as its 6.451 TFLOPS FP32 performance, are far beyond what CS:GO needs. The game is not graphically intensive, so the RTX 2060 excels, providing frame rates that are several times higher than a typical 60 Hz monitor's refresh rate. The performance at 1440p Medium, with an average of 291 FPS, demonstrates that the GPU is more than capable of handling high refresh rate gaming at this resolution. The data suggests that for competitive play, the GPU is rarely the limiting factor, and the system can maintain high frame rates even with enhanced settings.

The GPU's 160W TDP and dual-slot design are physical characteristics, but its performance is what matters. The benchmark results show that the RTX 2060 is a strong performer for this title, providing a smooth and responsive experience. The comparisons to rivals like the GTX 580 show that the RTX 2060 is in a specific performance tier, but in this game, its actual frame rates are far superior to older generations due to architectural efficiency and driver optimizations.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rate data provides a comprehensive view of the system's performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the average frame rates are 497 FPS for Low, 423 FPS for Medium, 366 FPS for High, and 313 FPS for Ultra. The Medium preset at this resolution has a recorded minimum of 360 FPS and a maximum of 487 FPS, showing a tight range that indicates consistent performance.

Moving to 2560x1440, the average frame rates decrease proportionally. Low settings yield 342 FPS, Medium provides 291 FPS with a minimum of 248 FPS and a maximum of 335 FPS, High produces 252 FPS, and Ultra drops to 215 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 127 FPS, which is a significant reduction but still leaves the system with a very high frame rate for competitive play.

At 3840x2160, the performance remains impressive. Low settings produce an average of 202 FPS, Medium offers 172 FPS with a minimum of 146 FPS and a maximum of 198 FPS, High yields 149 FPS, and Ultra results in 127 FPS. Even at the most demanding setting, the system maintains an average frame rate above 120 FPS, which is suitable for most high refresh rate displays.

The data reveals a consistent pattern: the frame rate scales almost linearly with the quality settings. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 184 FPS. At 1440p, it is 127 FPS. At 4K, it is 75 FPS. This diminishing absolute difference at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU becomes more of a limiting factor, as the absolute number of frames it can render is capped by its pixel throughput.

The Medium preset is the only one with complete min/max data. At all three resolutions, the minimum frame rate is significantly lower than the average. For example, at 4K Medium, the minimum of 146 FPS is 26 FPS lower than the average of 172 FPS. This could indicate occasional dips in performance, but the minimums are still high enough to ensure a smooth gameplay experience without noticeable stuttering.

Resolution Scaling

The transition from 1080p to 4K shows a clear trend in performance scaling. At Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 497 FPS at 1920x1080 to 342 FPS at 2560x1440 and finally to 202 FPS at 3840x2160. This represents a 59% decrease in frame rate from 1080p to 4K, which is substantial but not unexpected given the 4x increase in pixel count.

For High settings, the frame rates are 366 FPS at 1080p, 252 FPS at 1440p, and 149 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 4K is 217 FPS, or 59%. This consistent percentage decrease across different settings suggests that the GPU is the primary limiting factor when scaling resolution. The CPU's performance headroom is sufficient to maintain high frame rates at lower resolutions, but the GPU's workload increases linearly with pixel count.

The data indicates that the system is CPU-bound at 1080p and GPU-bound at 4K. This is evidenced by the fact that the frame rate at 1080p Low (497 FPS) is significantly higher than at 1080p Ultra (313 FPS), showing that the GPU is still a factor even at 1080p. However, the CPU is capable of producing frame rates that exceed the GPU's maximum output, so lowering the resolution does not yield a linear increase in FPS.

At 1440p, the system appears to be a more balanced combination. The frame rate at Low settings is 342 FPS, which is still very high. The drop from 1440p to 4K at Low settings is 140 FPS, while the drop from 1080p to 1440p is 155 FPS. This suggests that the GPU's performance scaling is relatively consistent across these resolutions.

The limiting component becomes clear when analyzing the 4K results. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 127, which is a high number for most games but is limited by the GPU's pixel fill rate. The RTX 2060's 80.64 GPixel/s pixel rate is a key specification here, as it directly impacts how many pixels can be processed per second. The benchmark results confirm that the GPU is the bottleneck at 4K, as the frame rates are much lower than at lower resolutions.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured frame rates, the optimal settings preset depends on the user's display and performance goals. For a 240 Hz monitor at 1920x1080, the Low settings preset, with an average of 497 FPS, is the only option that can consistently exceed the monitor's refresh rate. However, even the Ultra preset at 1080p, with an average of 313 FPS, is more than sufficient for a 240 Hz display, as it provides a substantial margin above the refresh rate.

For users with a 144 Hz display, the Medium or High settings at 1080p are excellent choices. The Medium preset offers 423 FPS with a minimum of 360 FPS, ensuring that frame rates never drop below the refresh rate. High settings provide 366 FPS, which is still well above 144 Hz. These presets offer a balance between visual quality and performance, with the system having significant headroom to maintain smooth gameplay.

At 1440p, the High settings preset, with an average of 252 FPS, is recommended for a 240 Hz display. This provides high visual fidelity while maintaining frame rates that are above the refresh rate. For a 144 Hz monitor, the Ultra preset at 215 FPS is also a viable option, as it offers the highest visual quality while still exceeding the refresh rate. The Medium preset at 291 FPS would also be a good choice for users who prioritize performance over visual fidelity.

For 4K gaming, the Low settings preset, with an average of 202 FPS, is recommended for a 144 Hz display. This ensures that the frame rate is consistently above the refresh rate. The Medium preset, with a minimum of 146 FPS, is also suitable for a 144 Hz monitor, as its minimum frame rate is just above 144 FPS. The High and Ultra presets, at 149 FPS and 127 FPS respectively, are better suited for a 120 Hz display, as their average frame rates are above 120 FPS.

The data shows that the system is over-powered for this game at most settings and resolutions. The best experience per the measured rows is likely the High settings preset at 1440p, as it provides a high level of visual detail and maintains an average frame rate of 252 FPS, which is suitable for the most common high refresh rate monitors. For maximum competitive advantage, the Low settings preset at 1080p offers the highest frame rate, but the visual quality is significantly reduced.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-10400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 ranks 2931 out of 3719 tested combos in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive. This puts the system in the 78.8th percentile of performance, meaning that roughly 21% of tested configurations perform better. Despite this ranking, the actual frame rates recorded are exceptionally high, indicating that the ranking is influenced by the fact that many other combos in the database are likely paired with more powerful CPUs or GPUs.

The CPU's percentile ranking of 68 and the GPU's percentile ranking of 58 are both below the 80th percentile, which explains the combo's lower overall rank in this game. The i5-10400F's nearest rivals, such as the Intel Xeon 6756E and AMD EPYC 7552, are server-class processors with different performance characteristics. The GPU's nearest rivals, including the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 and AMD Radeon 680M, are also in a similar performance tier, but the RTX 2060's modern architecture gives it an edge in this game.

The rank of 2931 indicates that while this system is capable of delivering high frame rates, it is not at the top of the performance hierarchy for CS:GO. Many other combos, likely with higher-end CPUs like the Core i9 series or more powerful GPUs like the RTX 3080 or above, can achieve even higher frame rates, particularly at 1080p. This is a reflection of the game's high frame rate ceiling and the fact that any modern mid-range hardware can produce playable results.

However, the rank should not be interpreted as a poor performance indicator. The data shows that this combo provides an excellent gaming experience in CS:GO, with all tested settings and resolutions yielding frame rates that are suitable for competitive play. The rank is more a measure of how the system compares to the absolute best hardware, not an indication of its suitability for the game. The high absolute frame rates, such as 497 FPS at 1080p Low, demonstrate that this system is more than capable for the vast majority of players.