Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

The Intel Core i5-12400 paired with the Intel Arc B370 delivers a highly playable Counter-Strike: Global Offensive experience, but the data reveals a clear bottleneck: the GPU is the limiting factor at every resolution tested. The measured frame rates show a steep decline as resolution increases, with the frame rate dropping from an average of 273 FPS at 1080p Low to just 82 FPS at 4K High. This 70% performance drop between the lowest and highest resolution settings indicates that the Intel Arc B370’s rendering capabilities are being saturated, while the i5-12400’s six cores and twelve threads provide ample headroom for the game’s CPU demands. The benchmark results confirm that this combo is firmly GPU-limited, meaning that players seeking higher frame rates should prioritize adjusting graphics settings and resolution over CPU upgrades.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a predictable yet pronounced scaling pattern as resolution increases. At 1920x1080, the combo achieves its highest performance, with the Low preset delivering an average of 273 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 drops that average to 188 FPS, a reduction of 85 FPS (31%). At 3840x2160, the Low preset yields 111 FPS, which is 59% lower than the 1080p result. This scaling behavior is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario: the Arc B370’s fill rate and shader throughput are insufficient to maintain high frame rates as pixel count quadruples from 1080p to 4K.

The frame rate gaps between settings widen at higher resolutions. At 1080p, the difference between Low (273 FPS) and Ultra (172 FPS) is 101 FPS. At 1440p, that gap narrows to 70 FPS (188 vs 118), and at 4K it further shrinks to 41 FPS (111 vs 70). This compression of performance differences at higher resolutions is a classic sign of GPU saturation: when the GPU is fully occupied, the relative cost of higher-quality settings becomes less impactful on the final frame rate because the render resolution is the dominant cost. The 4K Medium preset shows an average of 95 FPS with a minimum of 80 FPS and maximum of 109 FPS, indicating that even the medium quality tier struggles to maintain a consistent 100+ FPS experience at this resolution.

The limiting component is unequivocally the GPU. The i5-12400’s 3DMark single-thread score of 910 and multi-thread score of 5890 are far beyond what CS:GO requires for its typically CPU-light engine. The data shows that lowering resolution from 4K to 1440p yields a 69% performance increase (from 111 to 188 FPS at Low), which would not happen if the CPU were the constraint. The Arc B370’s 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184 places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, confirming its position as a modest performer that will always be the primary limiter in this pairing.

FAQ

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

A: The highest measured average is 273 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with the Low preset. This is followed closely by 233 FPS at 1080p Medium and 202 FPS at 1080p High.

Q: Can this combo handle 4K gaming in CS:GO?

A: Yes, but with compromises. The 4K Low preset averages 111 FPS, while 4K High averages 82 FPS and 4K Ultra averages 70 FPS. The 4K Medium preset provides a more stable experience with an average of 95 FPS, a minimum of 80 FPS, and a maximum of 109 FPS.

Q: How does the i5-12400 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The i5-12400’s average benchmark score is 18683, which is 0.1% lower than the AMD EPYC 7643 (18697) and 0.3% lower than the Intel Core i7-1355U (18730). It outperforms the Intel Core i3-14100F by 0.9% (18519) and trails the AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 by 0.7% (18811).

Q: What is the combo’s overall ranking among tested configurations?

A: The combo ranks 2615th out of 2848 tested combinations for this game, placing it in the bottom 8% of all tested setups. This low ranking is driven primarily by the Arc B370’s weak GPU performance.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this setup?

A: The GPU is the clear bottleneck. The Arc B370 has a 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1184, placing it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, while the i5-12400 sits in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs. The FPS scaling with resolution confirms the GPU is saturated at all settings.

Q: What is the best resolution for competitive play with this combo?

A: For competitive play, 1920x1080 is the optimal choice. At this resolution, even the Ultra preset averages 172 FPS, and the Low preset reaches 273 FPS. The 1440p Low preset (188 FPS) is also viable, but the 1080p results offer the highest headroom above typical 144Hz refresh rates.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400’s specifications indicate it is more than sufficient for CS:GO’s engine requirements. With six physical cores and twelve threads, it provides substantial parallel processing capability, evidenced by its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 15989 and 3DMark max-thread score of 5890. The single-thread performance is equally strong, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2257 and a 3DMark single-thread score of 910. These figures place the i5-12400 in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 18683 that is competitive with much more expensive server and mobile processors.

The CPU’s clock speeds range from a 2.50 GHz base to a 4.40 GHz boost, allowing it to dynamically scale performance based on workload. In CS:GO, which is known for its reliance on a few primary threads, the i5-12400’s high boost clock and strong single-core performance are the key attributes. The benchmark results show no evidence of CPU limitation: the FPS at 1080p Low (273) is over three times the FPS at 4K Ultra (70), which would not occur if the CPU were the bottleneck. The L3 cache of 18 MB shared and per-core L2 cache of 1.25 MB provide adequate data locality for the game’s maps and entity logic.

The data suggests that the i5-12400 is effectively overkill for this pairing. The nearest rivals, including the AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 (0.7% faster) and Intel Core i7-1355U (0.3% slower), show that the i5-12400 sits in a performance band where small differences in CPU speed have negligible impact on CS:GO frame rates. The 3DMark 2-thread score of 1692 and 4-thread score of 3012 indicate that even if the game were more heavily threaded, the CPU has significant headroom. In short, the CPU is not a limiting factor; its role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and game state updates, which it does with ease.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides a clear hierarchy for settings optimization. For players prioritizing maximum competitive performance, the 1080p Low preset is the clear choice, delivering 273 FPS average. This provides the highest frame rate headroom for high-refresh-rate monitors and ensures minimal input latency. The 1080p Medium preset offers a notable improvement in visual quality while still delivering 233 FPS average, with a minimum of 198 FPS, making it a strong alternative for those who want a balance.

The 1080p High preset averages 202 FPS, which is still well above the 144Hz threshold, but the drop from 233 to 202 FPS for the visual upgrade from Medium to High is modest. The 1080p Ultra preset, at 172 FPS, is the least recommended for competitive play, as the visual gains are marginal in a fast-paced FPS while the frame rate penalty is significant. For players at 1440p, the Low preset (188 FPS) is the only one that comfortably exceeds 144Hz; the Medium preset (160 FPS) is also viable, but the High (139 FPS) and Ultra (118 FPS) presets fall below the ideal threshold for high-refresh displays.

At 4K, the situation is more constrained. The Low preset (111 FPS) is the only one that breaks 100 FPS, while Medium (95 FPS) and High (82 FPS) are playable but not ideal for competitive play. The Ultra preset (70 FPS) is the least recommended, as it drops below the 75Hz refresh threshold. The data suggests that this combo is best utilized at 1080p, where all settings presets provide playable frame rates. For the best experience per the measured rows, the 1080p Medium preset offers the optimal compromise: 233 FPS average, 198 FPS minimum, and 268 FPS maximum, ensuring smooth gameplay even in complex scenes.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s ranking of 2615th out of 2848 tested combinations places it in the bottom 8% of all configurations tested for CS:GO. This ranking reflects the significant GPU bottleneck created by the Intel Arc B370, which has a 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1184 and sits in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. The nearest GPU rivals are the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, 0.2% faster), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, 0.5% faster), and AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192, 0.7% faster), all of which are older, low-power parts that would similarly struggle with modern game loads.

In contrast, the CPU is a strong performer, ranking in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs. The disconnect between the CPU’s high percentile and the GPU’s low percentile is the primary reason for the combo’s low overall rank. The i5-12400’s average benchmark score of 18683 is comparable to high-end server and mobile processors, but this power is wasted when paired with a GPU that cannot keep up with the rendering demands.

The rank of 2615 out of 2848 indicates that most other tested combos, even those with weaker CPUs, achieve higher frame rates in CS:GO because they have more balanced GPU performance. The data shows that the Arc B370 is the limiting factor in the vast majority of scenarios. For context, the GPU’s 5th percentile ranking means that 95% of tested GPUs outperform it, which directly translates to the low FPS at higher resolutions. This combo is a case study in pairing mismatches: a high-end CPU with an entry-level GPU results in a system that is far less capable than its CPU alone would suggest.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured FPS dataset provides a comprehensive view of the combo’s performance across resolutions and settings.

1920x1080:

• Low: 273 FPS average
• Medium: 233 FPS average, 198 FPS minimum, 268 FPS maximum
• High: 202 FPS average
• Ultra: 172 FPS average

2560x1440:

• Low: 188 FPS average
• Medium: 160 FPS average, 136 FPS minimum, 184 FPS maximum
• High: 139 FPS average
• Ultra: 118 FPS average

3840x2160:

• Low: 111 FPS average
• Medium: 95 FPS average, 80 FPS minimum, 109 FPS maximum
• High: 82 FPS average
• Ultra: 70 FPS average

The data reveals a consistent pattern: the Medium preset offers the most stable frame times, with the only recorded minimum and maximum values across all resolutions. At 1080p, the Medium preset’s minimum of 198 FPS is still higher than the High preset’s average of 202 FPS, indicating that the Medium preset provides better frame pacing. The same holds at 1440p, where Medium’s 136 FPS minimum is close to the High preset’s 139 FPS average, and at 4K, where Medium’s 80 FPS minimum is nearly identical to High’s 82 FPS average.

The drop from Low to Medium at 1080p is 40 FPS (273 to 233), while the drop from High to Ultra is 30 FPS (202 to 172). This suggests that the Low preset is the least demanding on the GPU, while the Ultra preset imposes the highest load. At 4K, the Low to Ultra span is 41 FPS (111 to 70), showing that the GPU’s limited resources are the primary constraint. The average FPS across all settings at 1080p is 220, at 1440p it is 151, and at 4K it is 89.5. These averages underscore the resolution scaling challenge: the combo loses roughly 32% of its performance when moving from 1080p to 1440p, and another 41% when moving from 1440p to 4K.