Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

The pairing of the Intel Core i5-10400F with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive produces an unusual benchmark profile. This is a game from 2012 running on a current-generation flagship GPU, and the measured data reflects that dynamic. The RTX 5090, with its 32 GB of GDDR7 memory and 1.79 TB/s bandwidth, is vastly overqualified for a title that can run on integrated graphics, yet the results show that the CPU, a 6-core Comet Lake part from 2020, still manages to keep pace at most settings. The data indicates a system where the GPU rarely breaks a sweat, while the processor’s single-thread performance becomes the primary gatekeeper at lower resolutions)Skip deeper into the numbers, and the story becomes clearer: the frame rates are extraordinarily high across the board, but the scaling patterns reveal where each component’s influence ends. This analysis will break down the resolution scaling, the GPU and CPU roles, the combo’s rank among tested systems, the measured FPS breakdown, and settings recommendations, all based solely on the provided FACT PACK.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and predictable drop as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160, but the magnitude of that drop varies significantly by settings preset. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 915 FPS at 1080p to 808 FPS at 1440p, then to 525 FPS at 4K. That represents a 42.6% reduction from 1080p to 4K. At High settings, the drop is steeper percentage-wise: 822 FPS at 1080p falls to 655 FPS at 1440p and 387 FPS at 4K, a 52.9% reduction overall. The Medium preset shows a similar pattern, with 865 FPS at 1080p dropping to 756 FPS at 1440p and 447 FPS at 4K, a 48.3% reduction. The Ultra preset goes from 778 FPS at 1080p to 559 FPS at 1440p and 330 FPS at 4K, a 57.6% reduction.

This scaling behavior suggests that at 1080p, the system is heavily CPU-limited. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p is only 137 FPS (915 vs 778), which is a modest 15% spread. At 1440p, that spread grows to 249 FPS (808 vs 559), a 30.8% difference. At 4K, the spread becomes 195 FPS (525 vs 330), a 37.1% difference. The growing gap between settings as resolution increases indicates that the GPU’s workload is becoming more relevant, but even at 4K Ultra, the 330 FPS average is far above what any monitor can display in terms of refresh rate limits. The limiting component at 1080p is clearly the CPU, as the GPU has enormous headroom — the RTX 5090’s 104.8 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is not being taxed by a game that predates most modern rendering techniques. At 4K, the GPU begins to matter more, but the fact that 4K High still achieves 387 FPS means the CPU continues to be a significant factor even at the highest resolution tested.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 brings specifications that are almost absurd for Counter-Strike: Global Offensive. Its 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus provides 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth, and its base clock of 2017 MHz boosts to 2407 MHz. The GPU has 21760 shading units, 680 TMUs, and 176 ROPs, with a pixel rate of 423.6 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 1,636.8 GTexel/s. In this game, those resources are largely idle. The measured FPS data shows that even at 4K Ultra, the average frame rate is 330 FPS, which suggests the GPU is nowhere near its maximum output. The memory bandwidth alone could handle dozens of concurrent CS:GO instances at 4K.

The GPU’s role in these benchmark results is primarily to ensure that frame rates do not drop below playable thresholds, which they never do. The lowest recorded average is 330 FPS at 4K Ultra, and the minimum FPS recorded at any setting is 380 FPS (at 4K Medium). The RTX 5090’s passmark G3D score of 39650 and 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 18355 place it in the 92nd percentile of all GPUs, but none of that raw compute translates into a meaningful advantage in this title because the CPU cannot feed it fast enough. The GPU’s boost clock of 2407 MHz is high, but the game’s engine, which is CPU-bound for draw call submission, does not scale with GPU clock speed beyond a certain point)Skip deeper, the GPU’s 5 nm process node and 92,200 million transistors are irrelevant to CS:GO’s simple geometry and lighting. The data shows that the RTX 5090 is a bystander in this benchmark, with its performance headroom so vast that the CPU becomes the sole bottleneck at every resolution and settings combination. The only setting where the GPU’s capabilities might matter is at 4K Ultra, where the 330 FPS average is still nearly three times higher than the 144 Hz refresh rate of most gaming monitors.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-10400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Comet Lake architecture, built on Intel’s 14 nm process node. It has a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz, with 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU’s benchmark scores show a strong single-thread performance relative to its multi-thread results: the 3DMark single-thread score is 688, while the 16-thread score is 4748. This is a processor that favors lightly threaded workloads, which is exactly what CS:GO presents. The game’s engine, even in its 2012 iteration, relies heavily on a few fast cores for game logic and render thread submission. The i5-10400F’s boost clock of 4.30 GHz on a single core is what drives the high frame rates at 1080p.

The measured FPS data reveals the CPU’s dominance. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 915 FPS, which is 90 FPS higher than 1080p High (822 FPS) and 137 FPS higher than 1080p Ultra (778 FPS). This narrow range across settings at 1080p is a classic sign of CPU limitation: the GPU is so fast that changing graphical settings has little effect on the frame rate. The CPU’s passmark single-thread score of 2541 and geekbench single-core score of 1420 are modest by 2025 standards, but they are sufficient to push CS:GO to nearly 1000 FPS at 1080p. The CPU’s percentile rank of 68th among all CPUs indicates that it is not a top-tier part, yet in this specific game, it performs far above its average standing.

The 6-core, 12-thread configuration is overkill for CS:GO, which rarely uses more than four threads. The CPU’s multi-thread scores, such as the cinebench R23 multi-core result of 10283, are irrelevant to this game’s performance. Instead, the single-thread boost clock of 4.30 GHz is the key factor. The data shows that the CPU is the limiting component at all resolutions, because even at 4K Ultra, the frame rate drops to 330 FPS, which is still likely CPU-bound given the GPU’s massive headroom. The i5-10400F’s DDR4 memory support with dual-channel bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s is another potential bottleneck, but the measured FPS values suggest that memory bandwidth is not constraining the system in this title.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-10400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 ranks 234th out of 3719 tested combos in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, placing it in the top 6.3% of all configurations. This high rank is surprising given the CPU’s mid-tier status, but it is a direct result of the game’s light CPU demands and the GPU’s ability to maintain high frame rates without being a bottleneck. The combo’s rank is far better than the CPU’s individual percentile (68th among all CPUs) and slightly worse than the GPU’s percentile (92nd among all GPUs). This suggests that the combination performs closer to the GPU’s level than the CPU’s, which is unusual for a game that is typically CPU-bound.

When comparing the CPU to its nearest rivals, the i5-10400F has an average benchmark score of 14185, which is within 0.6% of the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C (14277) and within 0.5% of the AMD EPYC 7552 (14115). The Intel Xeon 6756E is 0.2% behind, and the Intel Core 7 160UL is 0.3% ahead. These tiny deltas indicate that the CPU’s performance is tightly clustered with its rivals, yet the combo’s rank of 234 suggests that the GPU pairing is what boosts the system. For the GPU, the nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB (0.3% higher average score) and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X (1.4% lower average score). The RTX 5090’s average benchmark score of 79842 is 0.6% ahead of the Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB and 1.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT. None of these GPUs are gaming parts, which underscores the absurdity of using the RTX 5090 for CS:GO, yet the data shows the combo still ranks in the top 6.3% of all tested systems.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of the system’s performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the average frame rates are: Low 915 FPS, Medium 865 FPS (with a minimum of 735 FPS and maximum of 995 FPS), High 822 FPS, and Ultra 778 FPS. The 137 FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p is the smallest across all resolutions, confirming the CPU bottleneck. At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low 808 FPS, Medium 756 FPS (minimum 643 FPS, maximum 870 FPS), High 655 FPS, and Ultra 559 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra grows to 249 FPS, showing that the GPU is beginning to influence performance. At 3840x2160, the averages are: Low 525 FPS, Medium 447 FPS (minimum 380 FPS, maximum 514 FPS), High 387 FPS, and Ultra 330 FPS. The 195 FPS spread between Low and Ultra at 4K is smaller than at 1440p, which is counterintuitive but indicates that the CPU is still the primary limiter even at 4K.

The Medium preset is the only one with recorded minimum and maximum FPS values. At 1080p Medium, the minimum is 735 FPS and the maximum is 995 FPS, a range of 260 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the range is 227 FPS (643 to 870), and at 4K Medium, the range is 134 FPS (380 to 514). These ranges suggest that frame pacing is more consistent at higher resolutions, which is paradoxical but likely reflects the GPU’s ability to smooth out CPU hitches when it is not the bottleneck. The data also shows that the High preset consistently outperforms the Ultra preset by a significant margin: at 1080p, High is 44 FPS faster than Ultra (822 vs 778); at 1440p, High is 96 FPS faster (655 vs 559); and at 4K, High is 57 FPS faster (387 vs 330). This indicates that the Ultra preset introduces graphical effects that tax the GPU more than the CPU, but the frame rates remain so high that the difference is academic for most users.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the High preset at 1920x1080 offers the best balance of visual fidelity and performance, with an average of 822 FPS. The Low preset is faster at 915 FPS, but the 93 FPS gain is unlikely to be perceptible on any current monitor, especially given that most high-refresh displays cap at 360 Hz or 540 Hz. The Medium preset at 1080p provides 865 FPS, which is 43 FPS faster than High, but the visual improvements of High over Medium are generally more noticeable in CS:GO than the frame rate difference. For players who prioritize maximum frame rates for competitive play, the Low preset at 1080p is the best choice, as 915 FPS exceeds the refresh rate of even the most advanced esports monitors.

At 2560x1440, the High preset delivers 655 FPS, which is still far above any display’s refresh rate, and it provides a substantial visual upgrade over the Low preset’s 808 FPS. The Medium preset at 1440p offers 756 FPS, but the High preset’s additional graphical detail is worth the 101 FPS drop. At 3840x2160, the High preset’s 387 FPS is the best option for users with 4K displays, as the Low preset’s 525 FPS does not offer a meaningful competitive advantage at that resolution, and the Ultra preset’s 330 FPS is still above the 240 Hz threshold but with diminishing returns. Across all resolutions, the Ultra preset is the worst choice, as it provides the lowest frame rates with visual differences that are minimal in a fast-paced esports title like CS:GO. The data strongly recommends the High preset as the default, with Low reserved for players who demand the absolute maximum FPS at 1080p.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded for this combo in CS:GO?

A: The highest average FPS is 915, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with the Low settings preset.

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

A: The Intel Core i5-10400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 combination ranks 234th out of 3719 tested combos in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive.

Q: What is the lowest average FPS recorded?

A: The lowest average FPS is 330, recorded at 3840x2160 resolution with the Ultra settings preset.

Q: Does the GPU or CPU limit performance at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the CPU is the limiting component, as evidenced by the small 137 FPS difference between Low (915 FPS) and Ultra (778 FPS) settings, indicating that the GPU has significant headroom.

Q: What is the only settings preset with recorded minimum and maximum FPS values?

A: The Medium settings preset is the only one with min and max FPS values: 380-514 at 4K, 643-870 at 1440p, and 735-995 at 1080p.

Q: How much faster is 1080p Low compared to 4K Ultra?

A: 1080p Low averages 915 FPS, which is 585 FPS faster than 4K Ultra’s 330 FPS, a 177% increase in average frame rate.