Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, despite its 2012 release, remains a demanding benchmark for modern hardware configurations. This analysis examines the Intel Core i5-12400F paired with the Intel Arc B370, a combination that produces intriguing scaling patterns across resolutions and settings. The data reveals a system where the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions, while the CPU's strong single-thread performance ensures high frame rates at lower settings. This pairing ranks 2615th out of 2848 tested combinations, indicating that while it is not a top-tier performer, it offers a specific set of capabilities that are well-suited to CS:GO's competitive gameplay.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and consistent pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At High settings, the average frame rate drops from 202 FPS at 1080p to 139 FPS at 1440p, a reduction of 63 FPS. Moving to 4K, the average falls further to 82 FPS, representing a significant 120 FPS loss from the 1080p baseline. This steep decline indicates that the Intel Arc B370 is the limiting component at higher resolutions, as the pixel throughput demand outpaces its capabilities.

The scaling behavior changes depending on the settings preset. At Low settings, the frame rate drops from 273 FPS at 1080p to 188 FPS at 1440p, and then to 111 FPS at 4K. This represents a 162 FPS total drop, which is proportionally similar to the High settings drop. However, the absolute numbers remain much higher at Low settings, suggesting that the CPU is better able to feed the GPU when graphical load is reduced. The gap between Low and High settings at 1080p is 71 FPS, but at 4K, this gap narrows to just 29 FPS. This convergence at higher resolutions is a classic indicator of GPU limitation, where the graphics card's raw throughput becomes the sole determinant of performance.

The medium preset, which includes min and max FPS data, provides additional insight into frame time consistency. At 1080p Medium, the average is 233 FPS with a minimum of 198 FPS, showing a tight 35 FPS variance. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 160 FPS with a minimum of 136 FPS, maintaining a similar 24 FPS variance. At 4K Medium, the average falls to 95 FPS with a minimum of 80 FPS, again showing a consistent 15 FPS variance. This consistency suggests that the system does not suffer from severe frame pacing issues, even when approaching the GPU's limits.

The data indicates that the transition from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings costs 85 FPS, while the transition from 1440p to 4K costs 77 FPS. This nearly linear scaling suggests that the GPU's processing power is the primary constraint throughout, rather than memory bandwidth or other secondary factors. The Arc B370's system-shared memory configuration, with bandwidth listed as "System Dependent," likely contributes to this scaling pattern, as the GPU competes with the CPU for memory access.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average frame rate achievable with this configuration?

A: The highest measured average is 273 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This represents the peak performance of the Intel Arc B370 paired with the Core i5-12400F in CS:GO.

Q: How does the CPU's benchmark performance compare to its closest rivals?

A: The Core i5-12400F has an average benchmark score of 19039, placing it at the 73rd percentile of all CPUs. Its closest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS, scores 19047, a negligible 0 percent difference. The Intel Core 3 201E trails slightly at 19056 with a -0.1 percent delta, while the Intel Core i5-1335U scores 18982 (0.3 percent higher) and the AMD EPYC 7773X scores 18979 (0.3 percent higher).

Q: Is this GPU capable of running CS:GO at 4K resolution?

A: Yes, but with compromises. At 3840x2160, the average frame rate ranges from 70 FPS at Ultra settings to 111 FPS at Low settings. The Medium preset provides 95 FPS average, which is playable but below the high refresh rates competitive players often prefer.

Q: What is the GPU's performance ranking relative to other graphics cards?

A: The Intel Arc B370 scores 1184 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark, placing it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, scores 1186 (0.2 percent lower), while the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192 (0.7 percent higher).

Q: How many cores and threads does the CPU offer, and what are its clock speeds?

A: The Intel Core i5-12400F features 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. It has an 18 MB shared L3 cache and 1.25 MB L2 cache per core.

Q: What is the performance difference between the lowest and highest quality presets at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the difference between Low and Ultra settings is 101 FPS. Low averages 273 FPS, while Ultra averages 172 FPS, representing a 37 percent reduction in frame rate for maximum visual quality.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Alder Lake architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process. Its base clock of 2.50 GHz and boost clock of 4.40 GHz provide the single-thread performance that CS:GO heavily relies upon. The CPU's benchmark results show strong multi-threaded capabilities, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 12380 and a single-core score of 1680. The Geekbench scores of 9472 multicore and 1964 single-core further confirm this balance.

In the context of CS:GO, the CPU's role is primarily to maintain high frame rates at lower resolutions and settings where GPU load is minimal. The data shows that at 1080p Low, the system achieves 273 FPS, which is the highest measured value. This suggests that the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU with enough draw calls to sustain very high frame rates. The 3DMark scores provide additional context: the 16-thread score of 5895 and the max-thread score of 5912 indicate that the processor scales well with increased thread utilization, though CS:GO typically relies more on single-thread performance.

The CPU's percentile ranking at 73 percent of all CPUs places it in the upper-midrange tier. Its average benchmark score of 19039 is nearly identical to its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS, which scores 19047. This parity suggests that in CPU-bound scenarios, the i5-12400F will perform comparably to its direct competition. The Passmark scores reinforce this: the multi-thread score of 19433 and single-thread score of 3481 indicate a processor that can handle both heavily threaded workloads and the lighter, latency-sensitive workloads typical of competitive FPS games.

The CPU's memory support for both DDR4 and DDR5, with a dual-channel memory bus, provides flexibility for system builders. While the measured FPS data does not specify memory configuration, the system-shared memory of the GPU means that system memory performance could influence overall results. The CPU's 18 MB of shared L3 cache is sufficient for CS:GO's relatively small working set, helping to maintain consistent frame times. The boost clock of 4.40 GHz is particularly relevant for CS:GO, where high single-thread performance translates directly to higher frame rates in CPU-bound scenarios.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the configuration shows its strongest performance. With Low settings, the average frame rate reaches 273 FPS, providing ample headroom for high-refresh-rate monitors. Medium settings reduce this to 233 FPS, with a minimum of 198 FPS and a maximum of 268 FPS, showing consistent performance. High settings yield 202 FPS, while Ultra settings bring the average down to 172 FPS. These numbers indicate that at 1080p, the system can deliver smooth gameplay across all quality presets, though competitive players would likely favor Low or Medium settings for maximum frame rates.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance drops as expected. Low settings maintain an average of 188 FPS, which is still highly playable. Medium settings average 160 FPS, with a minimum of 136 FPS and a maximum of 184 FPS. High settings produce 139 FPS, while Ultra settings drop to 118 FPS. The 1440p results show that the system can still drive high-refresh-rate monitors at 1440p, particularly at Low and Medium settings, but the frame rate loss from 1080p is noticeable at approximately 31 percent for Low settings.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the clear bottleneck. Low settings average 111 FPS, which is playable but below the threshold for high-refresh-rate competitive play. Medium settings average 95 FPS, with a minimum of 80 FPS and a maximum of 109 FPS. High settings drop to 82 FPS, while Ultra settings fall to 70 FPS. The 4K results show a significant performance penalty, with the Ultra preset running at only 26 percent of the 1080p Low performance. The frame time consistency at 4K Medium, with a 15 FPS variance between minimum and maximum, suggests that the system remains stable even when heavily GPU-limited.

The data reveals that the Medium preset consistently provides the most balanced experience across all resolutions, with frame rates that are 85-89 percent of the Low preset's performance while offering improved visual quality. The High and Ultra presets show diminishing returns, with Ultra costing an additional 25-30 percent performance over Medium at every resolution. For players prioritizing frame rate, the Low preset offers the highest numbers, but the Medium preset appears to be the sweet spot for balancing visual fidelity and performance.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated GPU based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on Intel's 3 nm process. It features 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster operations units, along with 10 ray tracing cores. The GPU operates at a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz, with a TDP of just 25 W. Its memory configuration is entirely system-shared, meaning there is no dedicated VRAM, and bandwidth is dependent on the system's memory subsystem.

The GPU's benchmark performance is modest, scoring 1184 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test. This places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, indicating that it is a low-performance part by modern standards. Its nearest rivals include the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, 0.2 percent lower) and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192, 0.7 percent higher), both of which are significantly older and less capable parts. The GPU's FP32 performance of 6.144 TFLOPS and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s provide context for its capabilities, though these numbers are not directly reflected in the CS:GO FPS data.

In CS:GO, the GPU's role becomes increasingly important as resolution and settings increase. At 1080p Low, the GPU is not the limiting factor, as evidenced by the 273 FPS average. However, at 4K Ultra, the GPU's limitations are fully exposed, with the average dropping to 70 FPS. The system-shared memory configuration means that the GPU must compete with the CPU for memory bandwidth, which could contribute to the performance scaling pattern observed. The 25 W TDP and IGP form factor suggest that this is a power-efficient solution, but one that sacrifices raw performance.

The GPU's API support includes DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, which ensures compatibility with CS:GO's rendering requirements. The pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s are the theoretical maximums, but real-world performance in CS:GO is significantly lower due to the game's engine overhead and the GPU's integrated nature. The boost clock of 2400 MHz is the maximum achievable under load, but thermal and power constraints may prevent sustained operation at this frequency.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the Medium preset offers the most balanced experience for this configuration. At 1920x1080, Medium delivers 233 FPS average, which is only 40 FPS lower than Low but provides noticeably better visual quality. The minimum FPS of 198 ensures that frame drops are unlikely to be noticeable, even during intense combat sequences. At 2560x1440, Medium maintains 160 FPS average, which is still suitable for 144Hz monitors, with a minimum of 136 FPS.

For players with 1080p monitors, the Low preset is recommended for maximum competitive advantage. The 273 FPS average provides significant headroom above typical 144Hz or 240Hz refresh rates, ensuring that the monitor is always fed with fresh frames. The difference between Low and Medium at 1080p is 40 FPS, which could be the difference between consistent 240Hz operation and occasional dips below that threshold.

At 1440p, the High preset at 139 FPS is suitable for 120Hz or 144Hz monitors, but players seeking higher refresh rates should use Medium or Low. The Medium preset at 160 FPS offers the best balance for 144Hz displays, while the Low preset at 188 FPS provides headroom for 165Hz or 180Hz monitors. Ultra settings at 118 FPS are only recommended for players prioritizing visual quality over frame rate.

For 4K gaming, the system struggles to maintain high refresh rates. The Low preset at 111 FPS is the only option for 100Hz+ displays, while Medium at 95 FPS is suitable for 60Hz or 75Hz monitors. High and Ultra presets at 82 FPS and 70 FPS respectively are best avoided unless visual fidelity is the primary concern. The data suggests that this configuration is not well-suited for 4K competitive play, and players should consider lowering resolution to 1440p for a better experience.