Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is a game from 2012 that remains surprisingly demanding on modern hardware, especially at higher resolutions. This analysis examines the Intel Core i5-13400F paired with the Intel Arc B370, a combination that produces a wide FPS spread depending on settings. The data reveals a system where the GPU is the primary bottleneck in most scenarios, but the CPU's architecture ensures that the game remains playable even at lower resolutions where frame rates climb significantly.

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

The Intel Core i5-13400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor from the Raptor Lake-S family, operating on the Intel Socket 1700 platform. It features a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, which is a significant range that allows it to scale with workload. For a game like Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, which was released in 2012 and is known for being more sensitive to single-thread performance than many modern titles, the processor's architecture is critical. The CPU has a 20 MB shared L3 cache and 1.25 MB L2 per core, which helps reduce latency for frequently accessed game data. The data suggests this CPU is far from being a limiting factor; its benchmark scores indicate a robust performer, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 22604 and a single-core score of 3191.

In the context of this game, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and handle game logic. The measured FPS data shows that at 1080p Low settings, the system achieves 273 average FPS. This high frame rate is a direct result of the CPU's ability to process frames quickly, as the GPU is not yet the bottleneck at these lower settings. The i5-13400F's performance relative to its rivals is telling. Its average benchmark score is 25292, placing it in the 77th percentile of all CPUs. It sits nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS (0% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 7 6800H (0.4% faster), while the Intel Core 5 120 and AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D are only 0.3% faster. This indicates that the i5-13400F is in a performance class where small percentage differences do not translate to noticeable FPS changes in CS:GO, given that the CPU is rarely the sole bottleneck.

The processor's 10 cores and 16 threads are more than sufficient for CS:GO's engine, which typically utilizes fewer threads. The boost clock of 4.60 GHz is likely the more important spec here. The benchmark results show a strong 3dmark_single_thread score of 960, which aligns with the game's need for fast, responsive single-core processing. When examining the FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K, the CPU's influence wanes. At 1080p High, the FPS is 202, but at 4K High, it drops to 82. This is a clear sign that the GPU is being overwhelmed at higher resolutions, and the CPU's potential is left untapped. The data implies that in a system bottleneck analysis, the CPU is not the component causing frame rate drops; it is capable of producing high frame rates, but the GPU cannot keep pace when the pixel count increases.

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

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) based on the Xe3-LPG architecture and a 3 nm process node. It has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz, which is a substantial boost for handling bursts of graphical work. A critical detail is its memory configuration: it uses "System Shared" memory, meaning it relies on the system's RAM rather than dedicated VRAM. This has implications for performance, as memory bandwidth is "System Dependent" and not fixed. The GPU has 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 render output units, with 10 ray tracing cores. Its compute power is listed at 6.144 TFLOPS for FP32 operations.

This GPU is not a powerhouse. Its benchmark score in 3dmark_steel_nomad_dx12 is 1184, placing it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. This is a very low ranking, and its nearest rivals are older, less capable cards like the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (-0.2% delta) and the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (-0.5% delta). The data clearly shows that the Arc B370 is a significant bottleneck in this system for CS:GO, especially at higher resolutions. For instance, at 1440p Ultra, the FPS drops to 118, and at 4K Ultra, it falls to 70. These are playable but not high-refresh-rate numbers.

The GPU's 25 W TDP and "IGP" slot width suggest it is designed for low-power, portable devices, not for high-end desktop gaming. The fact that it shares system memory means that the FPS results are also dependent on the system's RAM speed and configuration, which is not specified but adds a layer of variability. In contrast to the CPU's high percentile ranking, the GPU's 5th percentile ranking is a stark indicator of its limitations. The measured FPS data shows that even at 1080p Low, the system only manages 273 FPS, which is high but likely not the CPU's maximum potential. At 4K Low, the FPS drops to 111, showing that the GPU's processing power is being exhausted by the increased pixel count. The data indicates that the Arc B370 is the limiting component in this pairing, and its performance dictates the playable settings and resolutions.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the best experience balances frame rate with visual fidelity. The data provides average FPS for Low, Medium, High, and Ultra presets at three resolutions. For competitive play, achieving high and stable frame rates is paramount. At 1080p, the Low preset yields 273 FPS, which is excellent for a fast-paced shooter. However, the Medium preset still provides a very high 233 FPS, with a minimum of 198 FPS, which is likely more stable than the Low preset's unmeasured minimum. The High preset at 1080p drops to 202 FPS, which is still very fluid.

For a more visually rich experience without sacrificing too much performance, the Medium preset appears to be the sweet spot. At 1440p, the Medium preset delivers 160 FPS with a minimum of 136 FPS, which is still well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. The High preset at 1440p offers 139 FPS, which is also viable. The Ultra preset at 1440p drops to 118 FPS, which is acceptable but begins to approach the threshold where frame pacing might become noticeable.

At 4K, the situation changes. The Medium preset provides 95 FPS with a minimum of 80 FPS, which is the only preset at this resolution that offers a decent balance. The High preset at 4K drops to 82 FPS, and the Ultra preset falls to 70 FPS. The Low preset at 4K offers 111 FPS, which is the highest average at this resolution, but the visual quality is severely compromised. The data suggests that for the best overall experience across all resolutions, the Medium preset is the most balanced choice. It offers a significant FPS boost over High and Ultra while maintaining reasonable visual quality. At 1080p and 1440p, it provides frame rates well above 144 Hz, which is ideal for competitive play. At 4K, it drops below 100 FPS but remains playable. The data implies that users should avoid Ultra settings unless they prioritize visuals over gameplay smoothness, as the performance cost is high.

FAQ

Q: What is the maximum average FPS this system can achieve in CS:GO?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 273 at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the peak performance point for this combination.

Q: Is the Intel Core i5-13400F or the Intel Arc B370 the limiting factor in this game?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the primary bottleneck. The CPU is in the 77th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU is in the 5th percentile. The FPS drops significantly as resolution increases, which is a classic sign of GPU limitation.

Q: How does the Arc B370 compare to its nearest rivals in benchmark scores?

A: The Arc B370 has an average benchmark score of 1184. Its nearest rival, the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, has a score of 1186, which is -0.2% different. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 is 0.5% faster, and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M is 0.7% faster.

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

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset achieves 188 average FPS, while the Ultra preset achieves 118 average FPS. This is a difference of 70 FPS, showing a significant performance cost for maximum visual settings.

Q: Does the CPU's performance change significantly with different settings?

A: The CPU's benchmark scores are static. However, the game's FPS changes with settings, indicating that the GPU's workload changes. The CPU's role is consistent, but its utilization may vary. The data shows the CPU is not the bottleneck because FPS scales with resolution.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for the Medium preset at 4K?

A: The measured data shows a minimum FPS of 80 for the Medium preset at 3840x2160, with an average of 95 FPS.

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

The FPS scaling across resolutions is a textbook example of a GPU-bound system. Starting at 1080p, the system performs admirably. At High settings, the average FPS is 202. Moving to 1440p, the FPS drops to 139, a reduction of 63 FPS or roughly 31%. Moving further to 4K, the FPS drops to 82, which is a 59% reduction from the 1080p High score. This pattern is consistent across all settings. For instance, at Low settings, the FPS drops from 273 at 1080p to 188 at 1440p, and then to 111 at 4K. The drop from 1440p to 4K is more severe than from 1080p to 1440p, which is expected due to the exponential increase in pixel count (from 3.7 million pixels at 1440p to 8.3 million at 4K).

This scaling behavior strongly suggests the GPU is the limiting component. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS would remain relatively flat across resolutions, as the CPU's workload is independent of resolution. The fact that FPS drops sharply as resolution increases means the Intel Arc B370 is unable to process the additional pixels at the same rate. The data shows that the GPU's rendering capabilities are exhausted before the CPU's frame generation potential is reached. For example, the CPU is capable of producing over 273 FPS, as evidenced by the 1080p Low result, but the GPU cannot maintain that throughput at higher resolutions. This is a clear indication that for users looking to play at 1440p or 4K, the GPU will need to be upgraded to achieve higher frame rates, while the CPU can remain as it is.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the system delivers high frame rates across the board. The Low preset achieves an average of 273 FPS. The Medium preset averages 233 FPS, with a minimum of 198 FPS and a maximum of 268 FPS. The High preset averages 202 FPS. The Ultra preset averages 172 FPS. All of these are playable, but the jump from Low to Ultra is 101 FPS, which is significant.

At 2560x1440, performance remains strong but drops noticeably. The Low preset averages 188 FPS. The Medium preset averages 160 FPS, with a minimum of 136 FPS and a maximum of 184 FPS. The High preset averages 139 FPS. The Ultra preset averages 118 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra here is 70 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly struggling. The Low preset averages 111 FPS. The Medium preset averages 95 FPS, with a minimum of 80 FPS and a maximum of 109 FPS. The High preset averages 82 FPS. The Ultra preset averages 70 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 41 FPS, which is smaller than at lower resolutions, indicating that the GPU is hitting its performance ceiling. The data shows that for a stable 144 FPS experience, users must stick to 1080p with Low or Medium settings. For a 60 FPS experience, 1440p High or 4K Medium are viable options, though the latter is close to the minimum FPS threshold.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The Intel Core i5-13400F and Intel Arc B370 combination ranks 2615 out of 2848 tested combos in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive. This places it in the bottom 8% of all tested systems. This ranking is a direct reflection of the GPU's weak performance. While the CPU is a strong performer, the GPU's low benchmark score and poor percentile ranking drag the entire combo down. The data shows that this is not a balanced pairing for a game like CS:GO, which can be CPU-bound at lower resolutions but becomes GPU-bound as resolution increases.

This rank of 2615 out of 2848 suggests that most other tested combinations will outperform this one. The combo's performance is limited by the Arc B370's inability to handle high resolutions and demanding settings. The data indicates that this system is capable of playing the game, but it will not provide a competitive advantage in terms of frame rate at higher settings. The rank is a useful metric for users to understand where this system falls in the broader landscape of tested hardware. It is not a top-tier performer, and users seeking high-refresh-rate 1440p or 4K gaming would need to look at different GPU options. The CPU, however, is not the reason for the low rank; it is the GPU that holds this combo back, as evidenced by the stark contrast between the CPU's 77th percentile and the GPU's 5th percentile ranking.