Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

# CPU Role — Cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core i5-12400 is a 6-core, 12-thread processor from the Core 12th Gen series, built on the Alder Lake architecture with a 10 nm process node. It runs at a 2.50 GHz base clock and boosts to 4.40 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The CPU's L3 cache is 18 MB shared, with 80 KB L1 and 1.25 MB L2 per core. This configuration positions it as a mainstream desktop part, and its benchmark scores confirm it sits in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs tested. The i5-12400's average benchmark score is 18,683, placing it within 0.1% of the AMD EPYC 7643 (18,697) and 0.3% of the Intel Core i7-1355U (18,730), while edging out the Intel Core i3-14100F (18,519) by 0.9%.

In Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, the CPU's role is substantial because the game is an older FPS title from 2012, where frame rates at lower resolutions often hinge on processor throughput. The measured FPS data shows that at 1080p Low settings, the combo achieves 303 FPS average, the highest recorded figure across all tested configurations. This indicates that the i5-12400's 6 cores and 12 threads are more than sufficient to feed the GPU at lower graphical loads. The single-thread performance is notable: the 3dmark single-thread score stands at 910, while Cinebench R23 single-core reaches 2,257. These numbers matter because CS:GO's engine relies heavily on a few primary threads for game logic and draw calls, and the 4.40 GHz boost clock provides the headroom needed to sustain high frame rates without bottlenecking.

The multi-threaded capabilities are strong too, with Cinebench R23 multicore scoring 15,989 and Geekbench multicore at 8,564. In practice, this means the CPU can handle the background processes and map loading without dragging down average FPS. The PassMark multithread score of 18,747 further underscores its balanced throughput. However, the data reveals that at 4K Ultra, the average FPS drops to 77, which suggests that while the CPU is capable, the overall combo becomes limited by other factors at higher resolutions — a point explored in the Resolution Scaling section. The CPU's memory support for both DDR4 and DDR5, along with dual-channel memory bus, provides flexibility, but the measured results do not isolate memory speed effects, so the analysis must rely on the FPS figures as reported.

The i5-12400's integrated UHD Graphics 730 is present, but the measured data uses the discrete Intel Arc B390, so the iGPU's role is negligible here. The CPU's socket is Intel Socket 1700, and it is unlocked, meaning overclocking is possible, though no overclocking results are included in the fact pack. The percentile ranking of 72 places it above most CPUs but not in the top tier, and its nearest rival deltas are all within 1%, indicating tight competition at this performance level. For CS:GO specifically, the 1080p Low result of 303 FPS and 1080p High result of 223 FPS demonstrate that the CPU is not the primary constraint at standard gaming resolutions; the GPU takes over as the limiting factor as settings and resolution increase.

# GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Arc B390 is an integrated GPU (IGP) based on the Panther Lake chip with the Xe3-LPG architecture, fabricated on a 3 nm process node. Its base clock is 300 MHz, boosting to 2500 MHz, and it has no dedicated VRAM — memory is System Shared, with bandwidth described as System Dependent. This is a critical detail because the GPU's memory subsystem relies entirely on the host system's RAM, which affects performance scaling. The GPU has 1,536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, with 12 ray tracing cores. Its compute output is 7.680 TFLOPS FP32 and 15.36 TFLOPS FP16, with a pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s. The TDP is 80 W, and it uses no power connectors, confirming its IGP nature.

The GPU's benchmark presence is minimal — only a single 3dmark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,482 — which places it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, a very low ranking. Its nearest rivals are older NVIDIA parts: the GeForce GT 520MX (1,463, 1.3% behind), GeForce 800M (1,460, 1.5% behind), GeForce GT 625 OEM (1,446, 2.5% behind), and GeForce GT 710 (1,443, 2.7% behind). This positions the Arc B390 as a very low-end performer in absolute terms, but the measured CS:GO results tell a more nuanced story because the game is lightweight by modern standards.

In CS:GO, the Arc B390's performance varies dramatically with settings. At 1080p Low, it hits 303 FPS, which is impressive for an IGP, but at 1080p Ultra, it falls to 190 FPS. The gap widens at 4K: 4K Low yields 123 FPS, while 4K Ultra drops to 77 FPS. These numbers indicate that the GPU's lack of dedicated VRAM and system-dependent bandwidth become more problematic as resolution and settings increase. The 3dmark score of 1,482 is a poor predictor of CS:GO performance because the game's engine is older and less demanding than modern DX12 benchmarks — the Steel Nomad test likely stresses the GPU in ways that don't translate directly to CS:GO's workload. The GPU's 9th percentile ranking suggests it would struggle with most modern titles, but for CS:GO, the data shows it can maintain playable frame rates even at 4K.

The system-shared memory means that the GPU competes with the CPU for bandwidth, which could explain why the FPS drops are steepest at 4K Ultra. The 2500 MHz boost clock is high for an IGP, but the 300 MHz base clock indicates significant power-saving behavior when idle. The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, which are modern APIs, but CS:GO's rendering more likely relies on DirectX 9 or OpenGL paths, given its age. The fact pack does not specify which API is used for the measurements, so the analysis sticks to the observed FPS. The GPU's production status is Active, and its release date is 2026-01-26, making it a very recent part. There is no launch MSRP listed, so no pricing information can be stated.

# Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

The measured FPS data provides a clear hierarchy across settings at each resolution. At 1080p, the Low preset delivers 303 FPS average, Medium delivers 258 FPS (with min 219 and max 296), High delivers 223 FPS, and Ultra delivers 190 FPS. The jump from Low to Medium costs 45 FPS, from Medium to High costs 35 FPS, and from High to Ultra costs 33 FPS. This linear degradation suggests that each settings tier imposes a similar additional load on the GPU. For competitive play, the Low preset at 1080p is the optimal choice because it maximizes frame rate, and the data shows no min FPS reported for Low, implying stable performance. However, Medium at 1080p still offers 258 FPS with a min of 219, which is well above the 144 Hz threshold many monitors use, so it provides a better visual experience without sacrificing smoothness.

At 1440p, the pattern continues with Low at 208 FPS, Medium at 177 FPS (min 151, max 204), High at 154 FPS, and Ultra at 131 FPS. The 1440p Low result is 95 FPS lower than 1080p Low, indicating a significant resolution penalty. For 1440p users, Medium is recommended because its 177 FPS average and 151 FPS minimum keep the experience fluid, while High at 154 FPS is acceptable but leaves less headroom. Ultra at 131 FPS is still playable but approaches the edge of what competitive players would consider acceptable. At 4K, the situation changes: Low delivers 123 FPS, Medium delivers 105 FPS (min 89, max 120), High delivers 91 FPS, and Ultra delivers 77 FPS. The 4K Medium minimum of 89 FPS is borderline for high-refresh displays, so Low is the safer choice for 4K gaming.

The best overall experience per the measured rows is the 1080p Low preset, which achieves 303 FPS and represents the highest measured average FPS in the entire dataset. This config leverages the CPU's single-thread strength (Cinebench R23 single-core 2,257) and the GPU's ability to handle light loads at full boost. For players prioritizing visual fidelity, 1080p Medium at 258 FPS is a strong alternative, as the min FPS of 219 ensures no drops below 200 FPS. The data does not include min/max for most settings, but the available Medium min/max values (1080p: 219/296; 1440p: 151/204; 4K: 89/120) show that the frame pacing is consistent, with the gap between min and max widening as resolution increases. This suggests that the GPU's system-shared memory becomes a bottleneck at 4K, making the Low preset there more consistent.

# How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific combination of Intel Core i5-12400 and Intel Arc B390 ranks 2,510 out of 2,848 tested combos in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive. This places it in the bottom 12% of all configurations tested, which is consistent with the GPU's low 9th percentile ranking despite the CPU's respectable 72nd percentile. The combo rank reflects that the GPU is the limiting component — the CPU is capable (its average benchmark score of 18,683 is competitive with the EPYC 7643), but the Arc B390's 1,482 3dmark score drags the overall performance down. In CS:GO, the combo still produces high absolute FPS (303 at 1080p Low), but relative to other tested combos, many achieve higher frame rates with more powerful GPUs.

The rank of 2,510 out of 2,848 means that 338 combos perform worse, which is a small fraction. This aligns with the GPU's position near the bottom of the GPU hierarchy — its nearest rivals are all older NVIDIA parts from a decade ago. The fact that this combo still exceeds 300 FPS in CS:GO at 1080p Low confirms the game's efficiency, but it also shows that the Arc B390 is a niche part for lightweight titles. The CPU's contribution to the combo rank is positive: if paired with a stronger GPU, the i5-12400's 72nd percentile CPU score would likely push the combo rank much higher, but the data only reflects this specific pairing. The deltaPct of the CPU's nearest rivals (ranging from -0.7% to +0.9%) indicates that the CPU is not the weak link — swapping it for a similar-performing part would barely change the combo's results. Conversely, swapping the GPU for a mid-range part would dramatically alter the rank, but no such data is provided.

The combo's measured FPS at 4K Ultra (77 FPS) is lower than many combos would achieve, but the data does not provide rival combo scores for direct comparison. The rank is the only comparative metric, and it is clear that this combo is positioned for low-end or integrated-graphics scenarios, not high-refresh competitive play at maximum settings. For CS:GO specifically, the rank suggests that while playable, the experience is below what most tested configurations deliver.

# Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data shows a consistent decline as resolution increases from 1080p to 4K across all settings. At Low settings, the progression is 303 FPS at 1080p, 208 FPS at 1440p, and 123 FPS at 4K. This represents a 31% drop from 1080p to 1440p (from 303 to 208), and a 59% drop from 1080p to 4K (from 303 to 123). At High settings, the drop is 223 to 154 (31% lower) from 1080p to 1440p, and 223 to 91 (59% lower) from 1080p to 4K. The consistency of these percentage drops across settings — roughly 31% for each resolution step — indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor, because a CPU-bound scenario would show smaller FPS changes as resolution increases.

The pattern is clear: doubling the pixel count from 1080p (1920x1080 ≈ 2.1 million pixels) to 4K (3840x2160 ≈ 8.3 million pixels) reduces FPS by approximately 59-60% regardless of settings. This is a classic GPU-bound signature. The CPU's performance does not degrade with resolution; it delivers the same instruction throughput, so the FPS drop must come from the GPU's inability to fill pixels fast enough. The Arc B390's system-shared memory and system-dependent bandwidth mean that at 4K, the memory subsystem is likely saturated, explaining why the FPS scales almost inversely with pixel count.

The Medium settings data provides additional insight because it includes min/max FPS. At 1080p Medium, the range is 219-296 FPS (average 258), at 1440p Medium it's 151-204 FPS (average 177), and at 4K Medium it's 89-120 FPS (average 105). The min FPS drops by 68 FPS from 1080p to 1440p, and by 62 FPS from 1440p to 4K, showing that the worst-case frame times also scale with resolution. This further confirms the GPU bottleneck — a CPU limit would show more stable min FPS across resolutions. The CPU's 6 cores and 12 threads are not being maxed out, as evidenced by the 303 FPS at 1080p Low, which exceeds what most CPUs could sustain in this game. The limiting component is unequivocally the GPU, and the data suggests that to improve 4K performance, a GPU with dedicated VRAM and higher bandwidth would be necessary, but such a comparison is outside the fact pack's scope.

# FAQ

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

A: The highest measured average FPS is 303, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B390 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B390 scores 1,482 in the 3dmark Steel Nomad DX12 test, which is 1.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1,463), 1.5% ahead of the GeForce 800M (1,460), 2.5% ahead of the GeForce GT 625 OEM (1,446), and 2.7% ahead of the GeForce GT 710 (1,443).

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more responsible for the combo's 2,510 rank out of 2,848 tested configurations?

A: The GPU is the primary limiting factor. The CPU ranks in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 18,683, while the GPU ranks in the 9th percentile with a score of 1,482. The low GPU rank drags the combo down despite the CPU's solid performance.

Q: What are the FPS differences between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1080p, Low delivers 303 FPS average, while Ultra delivers 190 FPS average, a difference of 113 FPS. Medium (258 FPS) and High (223 FPS) fall in between, showing a consistent step-down per settings tier.

Q: Does the combo maintain playable frame rates at 4K?

A: Yes, but with caveats. At 4K Low, the average FPS is 123, and at 4K Medium it drops to 105 FPS with a minimum of 89 FPS. For 4K Ultra, the average falls to 77 FPS, which is still above 60 FPS but less comfortable for competitive play.

Q: How does resolution scaling indicate the bottleneck in this system?

A: The FPS drops by roughly 31% from 1080p to 1440p and 59% from 1080p to 4K across all settings. This consistent scaling with pixel count is a GPU-bound signature, confirming that the Intel Arc B390's system-shared memory and bandwidth are the limiting components, not the Intel Core i5-12400.