Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

# FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS for this combo at 1080p with Medium settings in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive?

A: At 1920x1080 with Medium settings, the Intel Core i5-12400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 delivers an average of 489 FPS, with a minimum of 416 FPS and a maximum of 562 FPS.

Q: How does this CPU compare to its nearest rival in overall benchmark scores?

A: The Intel Core i5-12400F has an average benchmark score of 19039, placing it 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core i5-1335U (18982) and 0.3% behind the AMD EPYC 7773X (18979). It is essentially tied with the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS, which scores 19047 with a deltaPct of 0.

Q: What is the GPU's performance percentile relative to all tested GPUs?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 sits in the 66th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 21035. Its closest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT, which scores 20713 and trails by 1.6%.

Q: Which resolution and settings combination produces the highest FPS in this game?

A: The highest measured average FPS is 574, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The next best is 489 FPS at the same resolution with Medium settings.

Q: Does the RTX 5050 have enough VRAM for high-resolution play in this title?

A: The GPU features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 320.0 GB/s of bandwidth. In this game, the data shows playable frame rates at 4K, with 172 FPS at High settings, indicating the VRAM capacity is sufficient for these measured scenarios.

Q: What is the combo's rank among all tested CPU-GPU combinations in this game?

A: This combination of Intel Core i5-12400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 ranks 1732 out of 2848 tested combos, placing it in the lower-middle portion of the overall distribution.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400F 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, and it boosts up to 4.40 GHz. The CPU has a 65 W TDP and supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. Cache is organized as 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3.

For a game like Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, which is known for being CPU-sensitive, the 12400F's single-thread performance is a critical factor. Its single-core benchmark scores include 909 in 3DMark single-thread, 244 in Cinebench R15 single-core, 985 in Cinebench R20 single-core, 1680 in Cinebench R23 single-core, and 1964 in Geekbench single-core. These figures indicate strong per-core capability, which directly correlates with the game's ability to process game logic and render draw calls quickly.

The CPU's multi-threaded results are solid for a 6-core part: 5895 in 3DMark 16-threads, 5912 in 3DMark max-threads, 12380 in Cinebench R23 multicore, and 9472 in Geekbench multicore. The PassMark multithread score is 19433, with a single-thread score of 3481. The processor's percentile rank is 73rd among all CPUs, meaning it outperforms the majority of tested processors. However, its nearest rivals show that it sits close to the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS (19047) and the Intel Core 3 201E (19056), with deltaPct values of 0 and -0.1, respectively. This means the 12400F is functionally in the same performance tier as those parts.

In this game's measured results, the CPU's capability is most evident at lower resolutions. At 1080p, the frame rates are exceptionally high (up to 574 FPS on Low), which suggests that the processor can feed the GPU with enough data to maintain very high frame rates. At 4K, the frame rate drops significantly, indicating that the GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher resolutions. The CPU's 12 threads are more than sufficient for this title, as CS:GO typically does not scale beyond a handful of threads, but the high single-thread performance ensures the game's main thread does not become a bottleneck.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture using a 5 nm process at TSMC. The chip, designated GB207, contains 16,900 million transistors on a 149 mm² die. The GPU has 2560 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units, along with 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores. Its base clock is 2317 MHz with a boost clock of 2572 MHz, and memory runs at 2500 MHz (20 Gbps effective) across a 128-bit bus, yielding 320.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The 8 GB GDDR6 frame buffer is paired with a 130 W TDP and requires a 300 W suggested power supply. The card uses a PCIe 5.0 x8 interface and is a dual-slot design with a single 8-pin power connector.

The RTX 5050's compute capabilities are substantial: 13.17 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16. Its pixel rate is 82.30 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 205.8 GTexel/s. In synthetic benchmarks, it scores 2502 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 90334 in Geekbench OpenCL, and 89381 in Geekbench Vulkan. The PassMark G3D score is 17326, with a GPU compute score of 9184. The GPU's percentile rank is 66th among all GPUs.

Looking at nearest rivals, the RTX 5050's average score of 21035 places it close to the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL (21153, deltaPct -0.6) and the AMD Radeon HD 8970M (21237, deltaPct -1). It leads the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT by 1.6% (20713). This suggests the RTX 5050 is a mid-tier performer in the broader GPU landscape.

For Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, the GPU's role becomes more pronounced as resolution increases. At 1080p, the GPU is not the bottleneck; frame rates are extremely high across all settings, from 361 FPS at Ultra to 574 FPS at Low. At 1440p, the GPU begins to show its influence, with frame rates dropping to 249 FPS at Ultra and 395 FPS at Low. At 4K, the GPU is clearly the limiting component, as frame rates range from 147 FPS at Ultra to 233 FPS at Low. The 8 GB VRAM and 320 GB/s bandwidth are adequate for this game, as evidenced by the playable 4K results, but the computational load at higher resolutions is what drives the FPS down.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the best experience depends on the target resolution and the user's preference for visual fidelity versus frame rate headroom.

At 1080p, all settings produce very high frame rates. Low settings yield 574 FPS, Medium delivers 489 FPS, High provides 423 FPS, and Ultra still achieves 361 FPS. Given that CS:GO is a competitive shooter where higher frame rates can reduce input latency, Medium settings at 1080p offer a strong balance: 489 FPS with a minimum of 416 FPS ensures no drops below high-refresh-rate monitor capabilities. However, if the user prioritizes maximum smoothness, Low settings at 574 FPS are the best choice. Ultra at 361 FPS is still well above typical 144 Hz displays, so it is viable for those who want the best visuals without sacrificing playability.

At 1440p, the same pattern holds. Low settings produce 395 FPS, Medium drops to 336 FPS, High to 291 FPS, and Ultra to 249 FPS. Medium settings at 1440p (336 FPS average, 286 FPS minimum) are recommended as they keep the frame rate high enough for competitive play while offering improved visual quality over Low. High settings at 291 FPS are also acceptable, but the minimum frame rate is not reported, so the Medium setting's known 286 FPS floor is safer for consistency.

At 4K, the frame rates are lower but still playable. Low settings yield 233 FPS, Medium provides 199 FPS (169 FPS minimum), High gives 172 FPS, and Ultra drops to 147 FPS. For 4K, Medium settings are the best recommendation because they deliver a 199 FPS average with a documented minimum of 169 FPS, ensuring the experience stays smooth even during intense firefights. High settings at 172 FPS are also viable for 144 Hz displays, but the lack of a reported minimum FPS makes Medium the more reliable choice. Ultra at 147 FPS is borderline for high-refresh-rate monitors and should only be used if the user has a 144 Hz display and accepts the lower average.

How This Combo Ranks

This Intel Core i5-12400F + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 combination ranks 1732 out of 2848 tested combos in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive. This places the combo in the 60.8th percentile of all tested systems, meaning it outperforms roughly 61% of combinations but is outclassed by the top 39%.

The rank is notable given the game's age and the relative performance of the individual components. The CPU's 73rd percentile ranking is higher than the GPU's 66th percentile, suggesting the processor is the stronger component in this pairing. The combo's overall rank of 1732 is lower than either component's individual percentile, which indicates that the game's performance is not solely dependent on component strength; factors like memory bandwidth, driver overhead, and the game's engine efficiency play a role.

The fact that the combo rank is below the CPU's percentile but above the GPU's percentile suggests that the GPU is slightly holding back the system in this particular title. At lower resolutions where the CPU dominates, the combo performs better relative to others, but at higher resolutions where the GPU becomes the bottleneck, the combo's rank drops. This is consistent with the FPS data, which shows the combo achieving 574 FPS at 1080p Low (a very high score) but only 147 FPS at 4K Ultra (a more modest result).

Given that this is a measured data point (dataIsMeasured is true), the rank reflects actual tested performance rather than an estimate. Users can trust that this combo will deliver the reported frame rates in CS:GO, with the caveat that the game's engine is old and may not fully utilize the hardware's capabilities in all scenarios.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following are the exact measured average FPS values for each resolution and settings combination:

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 574 FPS
• Medium: 489 FPS (min 416, max 562)
• High: 423 FPS
• Ultra: 361 FPS

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 395 FPS
• Medium: 336 FPS (min 286, max 387)
• High: 291 FPS
• Ultra: 249 FPS

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 233 FPS
• Medium: 199 FPS (min 169, max 229)
• High: 172 FPS
• Ultra: 147 FPS

The data shows a clear hierarchy: lower settings always produce higher frame rates, and lower resolutions always yield more FPS. The minimum FPS values are only provided for Medium settings at each resolution, which gives some insight into frame time consistency. At 1080p Medium, the minimum of 416 FPS is 85% of the average, indicating tight frame pacing. At 1440p Medium, the minimum of 286 FPS is 85% of the average as well. At 4K Medium, the minimum of 169 FPS is also 85% of the 199 FPS average. This consistent 15% drop from average to minimum across resolutions suggests that the game's frame time distribution is stable regardless of resolution, which is a sign of predictable performance scaling.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K reveals important information about which component limits performance in this game.

At Medium settings, the average FPS drops from 489 at 1080p to 336 at 1440p, which is a 31.3% reduction. Going from 1440p to 4K, the FPS drops from 336 to 199, a 40.8% reduction. The overall drop from 1080p to 4K at Medium settings is 59.3%, meaning 4K delivers only about 41% of the frame rate seen at 1080p.

At Low settings, the scaling is steeper: 574 FPS at 1080p drops to 395 at 1440p (a 31.2% reduction) and then to 233 at 4K (a 41.0% reduction from 1440p). The total drop from 1080p to 4K is 59.4%. This is nearly identical to the Medium settings scaling, suggesting that the resolution scaling is independent of the quality preset.

At High settings, the drop is 31.2% from 1080p (423 FPS) to 1440p (291 FPS), and 40.9% from 1440p to 4K (172 FPS). The total drop is 59.3%. Ultra settings show the same pattern: 361 FPS at 1080p, 249 at 1440p (31.0% drop), and 147 at 4K (41.0% drop from 1440p), for a total drop of 59.3%.

The consistency of these percentages across all settings is striking. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is consistently around 31%, and from 1440p to 4K it is around 41%. This uniform scaling indicates that the frame rate is being limited by the same component across all settings, and that component's workload scales predictably with pixel count.

The fact that the FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is roughly 59% — rather than the 75% that would be expected if the GPU were fully pixel-bound (4K has 4x the pixels of 1080p, so a purely GPU-bound scenario would show a much larger drop) — suggests that the CPU is still contributing to the frame rate at all resolutions. If the GPU were the sole limiter, the drop from 1080p to 4K would be closer to 75% (i.e., 4K would produce about 25% of the 1080p FPS). Instead, 4K produces about 41% of the 1080p FPS, which indicates that the CPU is helping to maintain frame rates even at higher resolutions, but the GPU's workload is increasing enough to reduce overall FPS.

The limiting component analysis points to the GPU becoming more dominant at 4K, as evidenced by the Ultra settings at 4K producing the lowest FPS (147) and the Low settings at 4K being 233 FPS. The GPU's 66th percentile ranking and the fact that it has to process 8.3 million pixels at 4K (versus 2.1 million at 1080p) means its computational capacity is the primary constraint at higher resolutions. The CPU, with its 73rd percentile ranking, still has headroom at 1080p, which is why the frame rates there are exceptionally high (up to 574 FPS). The data supports a conclusion that the RTX 5050 is the limiting factor at 4K, while the i5-12400F is more than adequate to feed the GPU at lower resolutions.