Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

FAQ

Q: What is the combo rank for the Intel Core i5-10400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive?

A: This combination ranks 136th out of 1,605 tested combos in the database for this game, placing it in the top 8.5% of all tested system pairings.

Q: How does the RTX 5080 compare to its nearest GPU rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The RTX 5080 has an average benchmark score of 59,188. It sits 1.6% above the Intel Arc A570M (58,239), 2.5% above the Intel Arc A580 (57,756), and 2.6% above the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X (57,661), while trailing the Intel Arc Pro A60 (60,326) by 1.9%.

Q: What is the CPU's percentile ranking among all processors?

A: The Intel Core i5-10400F falls in the 73rd percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 14,168 across all tested workloads.

Q: What memory bandwidth does the CPU support?

A: The i5-10400F supports dual-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s.

Q: What is the GPU's memory configuration?

A: The RTX 5080 comes with 16 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 960.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What is the boost clock of the RTX 5080?

A: The GPU has a base clock of 2,295 MHz and a boost clock of 2,617 MHz.

How This Combo Ranks

The data places this pairing at rank 136 out of 1,605 tested combos in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive. That is a strong showing, placing the system comfortably within the top decile of all tested configurations. The rank reflects the game's behavior with this specific hardware pairing, where both components contribute meaningfully to frame delivery.

The CPU's 73rd percentile standing among all processors suggests it is a solid mid-tier performer, but the GPU does the heavy lifting here. The RTX 5080 sits in the 89th percentile among all GPUs, and its average benchmark score of 59,188 is substantially higher than the CPU's 14,168 average. The combination of a capable but not top-tier processor with an upper-tier graphics card produces results that exceed what either component could achieve alone in this title.

Looking at the CPU's nearest rivals helps contextualize its contribution. The i5-10400F scores 0.4% higher than the AMD EPYC 7552 (14,115), 1.1% higher than the Intel Core i5-8500 (14,332), and 1.2% higher than the AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 (14,336), while trailing the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C (14,277) by 0.8%. These are tight margins, indicating the processor performs in a well-established band. The GPU's nearest rivals show similar clustering, with the RTX 5080's score landing between the Intel Arc Pro A60 above it and the Intel Arc A570M, Arc A580, and Radeon Pro W5500X below it.

What stands out is that the 136th rank out of 1,605 combos represents a better outcome than the individual component percentiles might suggest. The pairing appears well-matched for this game's engine, which tends to reward high single-thread CPU performance alongside strong GPU throughput.

GPU Role

The RTX 5080 is the dominant contributor in this pairing. Its 16 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 960.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is ample for Counter-Strike: Global Offensive's relatively modest VRAM demands. The GPU's memory clock runs at 1,875 MHz with 30 Gbps effective transfer rate.

Clock speeds are substantial: 2,295 MHz base and 2,617 MHz boost. These figures, combined with 10,752 shading units, 336 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, yield a pixel rate of 293.1 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 879.3 GTexel/s. The GPU's FP32 throughput reaches 56.28 TFLOPS, with FP16 at the same 56.28 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio). The Blackwell 2.0 architecture includes 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores.

In the context of this game, the GPU's raw fill rates are far beyond what CS:GO requires at typical settings. The measured FPS data confirms this — even at 4K Ultra, the average FPS stays above 300. The GPU's 89th percentile ranking among all GPUs reinforces its position as a high-end part that leaves headroom in less demanding titles like this one.

The GPU also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, covering all rendering paths CS:GO can utilize. The 960.0 GB/s bandwidth becomes relevant at higher resolutions where frame buffer access patterns change, though the game's performance ceiling appears CPU-bound in many scenarios.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the results show an interesting pattern. Low settings deliver 916.5 FPS average, Medium drops slightly to 866.6 FPS, High comes in at 824 FPS, and Ultra still manages 759.3 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is only about 17%, indicating the CPU becomes a limiting factor at this resolution. The game scales well even at lower settings because the processor's 4.30 GHz boost clock and 12 MB of L3 cache keep feeding frames.

Moving to 2560x1440 introduces more GPU involvement. Low settings produce 807.1 FPS average, Medium reaches 708.1 FPS, High hits 613.3 FPS, and Ultra settles at 523.7 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra widens to roughly 35%, showing that resolution scaling begins to tax the GPU more meaningfully. Still, every setting at 1440p exceeds 500 FPS, which is far beyond any display's refresh rate capability.

At 3840x2160, the GPU's workload becomes the primary constraint. Low settings average 489.8 FPS, Medium drops to 419.6 FPS, High reaches 365.1 FPS, and Ultra falls to 307.5 FPS. The delta between Low and Ultra here is about 37%, similar to the 1440p pattern. Even the lowest 4K figure, 307.5 FPS at Ultra, remains exceptionally high for this title.

The scaling behavior across resolutions is telling. At 1080p, the FPS delta between Low and Ultra is 157.2 FPS. At 1440p, that delta grows to 283.4 FPS. At 4K, it reaches 182.3 FPS. The 1440p spread being larger than 4K suggests the CPU-GPU balance hits a sweet spot at that resolution where neither component fully bottlenecks the other.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data supports a clear recommendation for most users: High settings at 2560x1440 delivers 613.3 FPS average, which balances visual quality with frame throughput. This preset at this resolution offers the best combination of image fidelity and performance headroom, especially for competitive play where frame consistency matters.

For players prioritizing maximum frame rates on high-refresh displays, 1920x1080 with Low settings produces 916.5 FPS average. This is the highest measured figure in the entire dataset. The jump from 824 FPS at High to 916.5 FPS at Low at 1080p is meaningful for those chasing every last frame, though the visual trade-off may not be worth it for most users given how well High performs.

At 3840x2160, the choice depends on display capabilities. Ultra settings average 307.5 FPS, which remains above typical high-refresh thresholds of 240 Hz. High settings at 4K produce 365.1 FPS, a 19% improvement over Ultra with minimal visual difference in a competitive shooter. Medium at 4K hits 419.6 FPS, and Low reaches 489.8 FPS. For 4K users, High settings offer the best balance — the 57.6 FPS gain over Ultra is more noticeable than any visual degradation.

The Ultra preset across all resolutions delivers the lowest FPS of any given resolution's options, yet even the worst case (307.5 FPS at 4K Ultra) exceeds what most displays can show. Given that CS:GO is a fast-paced competitive title, the recommendation is to prioritize frame rate over marginal visual improvements. Medium settings at 1440p (708.1 FPS) or High at 4K (365.1 FPS) represent the pragmatic sweet spots depending on your display's native resolution.