Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

The Intel Core i5-12400 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 delivers exceptionally high frame rates in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, a game that is far more dependent on CPU throughput than on GPU fill rate. Across all tested resolutions and settings, the combination never drops below an average of 147 FPS, even at 4K Ultra. The data indicates that this pairing is heavily CPU-bound at lower resolutions, while the GPU begins to assert its influence as resolution and graphical load increase. The measured results show a clear hierarchy: 1080p Low produces an average of 574 FPS, while 4K Ultra produces an average of 147 FPS, a spread that highlights the scaling behavior of this specific hardware configuration.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate progression from 1080p to 4K reveals a classic pattern of shifting bottlenecks. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the average FPS is 574, which suggests the game is almost entirely limited by the CPU’s single-thread performance and memory latency. Moving to 2560x1440 Low, the average drops to 395 FPS, a reduction of approximately 31% from the 1080p figure. This drop is substantial but still indicates that the CPU remains the primary constraint, as the GPU has ample headroom at these lower resolutions. At 3840x2160 Low, the average falls further to 233 FPS, a 41% decrease from the 1440p result. This steeper decline signals that the GPU is beginning to take on a more significant role, though the absolute frame rate remains far above what any display can realistically refresh.

The scaling pattern changes more dramatically when settings are increased. At High settings, the averages are 423 FPS at 1080p, 291 FPS at 1440p, and 172 FPS at 4K. The percentage drop from 1080p to 1440p is about 31%, similar to the Low setting, but the drop from 1440p to 4K is approximately 41%. This consistency across settings suggests that the resolution scaling is largely independent of the graphical preset, which is typical for a game like CS:GO where the rendering load is modest. The data shows that the RTX 5050, with its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 320.0 GB/s bandwidth, is capable of handling the geometry and texture work at 4K without catastrophic frame rate loss, but the CPU’s 6 cores and 12 threads begin to show their limits when the frame rate target is extremely high.

At Ultra settings, the resolution scaling is more pronounced. The averages are 361 FPS at 1080p, 249 FPS at 1440p, and 147 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 31%, and from 1440p to 4K is 41%. This consistent scaling behavior indicates that the game’s engine scales predictably with pixel count, and the RTX 5050’s compute resources are being utilized more evenly as resolution increases. However, the fact that even at 4K Ultra the average FPS is 147 suggests that the GPU is not the sole bottleneck; the CPU’s peak single-thread score of 910 in 3dMark is likely a contributing factor. In summary, the data shows that this combo is CPU-limited at 1080p, transitions to a more balanced state at 1440p, and becomes GPU-influenced but still CPU-tolerant at 4K.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture using a 5 nm process from TSMC, with a die size of 149 mm² and 16,900 million transistors. Its base clock is 2317 MHz, boosting to 2572 MHz, and the memory operates at 2500 MHz with 20 Gbps effective throughput. The 8 GB GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus provides a bandwidth of 320.0 GB/s, which is more than sufficient for CS:GO’s texture and shadow requirements. The GPU’s 2560 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs deliver a pixel rate of 82.30 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 205.8 GTexel/s, figures that are not stressed by this game’s relatively simple visual effects.

In the measured FPS data, the GPU’s role becomes apparent when comparing Low and Ultra settings at the same resolution. At 1920x1080, the difference between Low (574 FPS) and Ultra (361 FPS) is 213 FPS, a 37% reduction. This gap narrows at 2560x1440, where Low (395 FPS) and Ultra (249 FPS) differ by 146 FPS, a 37% reduction as well. At 3840x2160, Low (233 FPS) and Ultra (147 FPS) differ by 86 FPS, again a 37% reduction. This consistent percentage drop across all resolutions indicates that the GPU’s workload scales linearly with the preset, and the RTX 5050’s compute capability (13.17 TFLOPS FP32) is the limiting factor when settings are raised. However, the absolute frame rates remain high, suggesting that the GPU is never fully saturated, even at 4K Ultra.

The GPU’s performance relative to other cards is modest, ranking in the 66th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL (with a deltaPct of -0.6), the AMD Radeon HD 8970M (deltaPct of -1), and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile (deltaPct of -1.6). These deltas are all within 2% of the RTX 5050’s average benchmark score, indicating that the GPU’s raw compute power is comparable to those older or mobile parts. In CS:GO specifically, the GPU’s role is secondary to the CPU, as evidenced by the fact that even at 4K Ultra, the frame rate stays above 140 FPS. The 8 GB VRAM is not a limiting factor in this game, as CS:GO’s texture sizes are well within that capacity, and the 20 Gbps effective memory speed ensures that bandwidth is not a constraint at any tested resolution.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400 is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Alder Lake architecture, manufactured on Intel’s 10 nm process. Its base clock is 2.50 GHz, boosting to 4.40 GHz, and it has an 18 MB shared L3 cache with 1.25 MB L2 per core. This CPU supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode, and its PCIe Gen 5 interface provides 16 lanes. The CPU’s benchmark results show strong single-thread performance, with a 3dMark single-thread score of 910 and a Geekbench single-core score of 1848. Multi-thread performance is also solid, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 15989 and a Passmark multithread score of 18747.

In CS:GO, the CPU’s single-thread performance is critical, as the game’s engine relies heavily on a single primary thread for game logic and draw call submission. The measured FPS at 1080p Low (574 FPS) is a direct reflection of the i5-12400’s ability to process frames quickly. The boost clock of 4.40 GHz is the key enabler here, as it provides the high clock speed necessary for this workload. The CPU’s 3dmark 2-thread score of 1692 and 4-thread score of 3012 also indicate that the processor can handle the additional threads used for audio, physics, and network processing without bottlenecking the main game thread.

The CPU’s percentile rank of 72nd among all CPUs places it in the upper tier, and its nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 7643 (deltaPct of -0.1), the Intel Core i7-1355U (deltaPct of -0.3), and the AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 (deltaPct of -0.7). The Core i3-14100F is 0.9% ahead, which is a negligible difference. These small deltas suggest that the i5-12400’s performance is well balanced, but in CS:GO, the clock speed and cache architecture are more important than raw core count. The 18 MB L3 cache is particularly beneficial for this game, as it reduces memory latency when accessing frequently used game assets. The data shows that the CPU is the primary driver of frame rates at lower resolutions, and even at 4K Ultra, the CPU’s contribution keeps the average FPS above 140, which reflects its capability in this specific title.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured results are as follows: Low settings produce an average of 574 FPS, Medium produces 489 FPS with a minimum of 416 and a maximum of 562, High produces 423 FPS, and Ultra produces 361 FPS. The Medium settings are the only ones with min and max values recorded, showing a 146 FPS spread between the minimum and maximum, which indicates some variability in frame pacing, though the average remains extremely high. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 213 FPS drop, which is a 37% reduction, indicating that each settings tier adds a consistent amount of GPU workload.

At 2560x1440, the averages are 395 FPS for Low, 336 FPS for Medium (with a minimum of 286 and a maximum of 387), 291 FPS for High, and 249 FPS for Ultra. The difference between Low and Ultra is 146 FPS, again a 37% reduction, which matches the 1080p scaling. The Medium settings show a 101 FPS spread between min and max, which is narrower than at 1080p, suggesting that the GPU is becoming more of a limiting factor and reducing frame time variance. The absolute numbers remain far above the refresh rates of typical gaming monitors, so even the lowest average at this resolution (249 FPS) is sufficient for competitive play.

At 3840x2160, the averages are 233 FPS for Low, 199 FPS for Medium (with a minimum of 169 and a maximum of 229), 172 FPS for High, and 147 FPS for Ultra. The difference between Low and Ultra is 86 FPS, which is a 37% reduction, consistent with the other resolutions. The Medium settings show a 60 FPS spread between min and max, indicating that the GPU’s workload is now more consistent, and the frame pacing is smoother. Even at 4K Ultra, the average of 147 FPS is above the 144 Hz threshold, meaning that this combo can drive high-refresh-rate 4K displays in CS:GO, though the margin is thinner than at lower resolutions.

Across all settings, the data shows a predictable pattern: each resolution step from 1080p to 1440p reduces FPS by about 31%, and each step from 1440p to 4K reduces FPS by about 41%. This non-linear scaling is typical for a game where the CPU becomes less dominant at higher pixel counts. The Medium settings consistently provide the only min/max data, which allows for an analysis of frame time stability; the spread narrows as resolution increases, indicating that the GPU’s frame pacing improves when it is more heavily utilized.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo of the Intel Core i5-12400 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 ranks 1732 out of 2848 tested combinations in CS:GO, placing it in the 39th percentile of all combos. This ranking is surprisingly low given the high absolute frame rates, which indicates that many other CPU-GPU pairings achieve even higher FPS in this game. The ranking is likely influenced by the CPU’s performance ceiling; while the i5-12400 is strong, it is not the top-tier processor for CS:GO, where single-thread clock speed is paramount. The RTX 5050’s GPU ranking of 66th percentile is not the limiting factor, as the game is CPU-bound at most settings.

The combo’s rank of 1732 means that 1116 other combinations perform better, which is a significant number. This suggests that for competitive CS:GO players seeking the absolute highest frame rates, a CPU with a higher boost clock or a larger cache would be more beneficial than a more powerful GPU. The data shows that the i5-12400’s 4.40 GHz boost clock is capable, but not exceptional, and the 18 MB L3 cache, while helpful, is not as large as some other processors. The GPU’s role in this ranking is secondary, as the RTX 5050’s performance at 1080p is more than adequate, and the bottleneck is clearly on the CPU side.

Compared to the nearest rival combos, the i5-12400’s closest CPU rivals are the AMD EPYC 7643 (0.1% slower), Intel Core i7-1355U (0.3% slower), and AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 (0.7% slower), while the Core i3-14100F is 0.9% faster. These small deltas in average benchmark scores do not directly translate to CS:GO performance, as the game’s engine rewards clock speed and cache over core count. The RTX 5050’s GPU rivals are all within 1.6% of its average score, which means that swapping to a different GPU would have minimal impact on CS:GO frame rates. The low combo rank is thus primarily a function of the CPU’s position in the overall hierarchy, not a deficiency in either component’s absolute performance.

FAQ

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

A: The highest average frame rate is 574 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

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

A: Yes, at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the average FPS is 147, which is above the 144 Hz threshold for high-refresh-rate displays.

Q: How does the CPU’s single-thread performance affect the results?

A: The CPU’s 3dMark single-thread score of 910 and boost clock of 4.40 GHz are key to achieving high frame rates, especially at 1080p where the game is CPU-limited.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Low settings produce 395 FPS, while Ultra settings produce 249 FPS, a difference of 146 FPS.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU more important for this game?

A: The data indicates the CPU is the primary bottleneck, as frame rates drop by 37% from Low to Ultra at each resolution, but the CPU’s performance dictates the ceiling at lower resolutions.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to other tested combinations?

A: It ranks 1732 out of 2848 combinations, placing it in the lower half of tested combos, which is surprising given the high absolute frame rates.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience, the Medium settings at 1920x1080 provide an average of 489 FPS with a minimum of 416 and a maximum of 562, which is a good balance of visual quality and performance. The min/max spread of 146 FPS indicates some frame time variance, but the average is sufficiently high to avoid any perceptible stutter. At 2560x1440, Medium settings produce an average of 336 FPS with a minimum of 286 and a maximum of 387, which is also excellent for high-refresh-rate monitors. The narrower spread of 101 FPS suggests more consistent frame pacing, making this a viable option for users with 1440p displays.

For competitive play, Low settings at 1080p offer the highest average FPS (574), but the lack of min/max data means that stability cannot be fully assessed. The Medium preset at 1080p is likely the better choice, as it provides a high average (489 FPS) and includes measured min/max values that confirm it stays above 416 FPS at all times. At 4K, Medium settings (199 FPS average, min 169) are the only 4K option with recorded min/max data, and they deliver a smooth experience even on 144 Hz displays. Ultra settings at 4K (147 FPS) are playable but do not leave much headroom for frame drops, so Medium is recommended for 4K users. Overall, the Medium preset at any resolution offers the best combination of measured stability and visual fidelity, with the 1080p Medium setting being the standout choice for competitive play.