Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

# Counter-Strike: Global Offensive with Intel Core i5-13400F + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070

The Intel Core i5-13400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 delivers exceptionally high frame rates in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, a game released in August 2012. The measured data shows this combination produces average FPS values that far exceed the refresh rates of virtually all mainstream displays, even at the most demanding settings. The combo ranks 406th out of 1605 tested combinations, placing it comfortably within the top quarter of all systems tested for this title. The data reveals a system that is never meaningfully constrained by the GPU at any resolution, with the CPU's performance headroom being the decisive factor throughout the benchmark runs.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a system where the graphics card is rarely the limiting component. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 653.7 at 1920x1080 to 450.4 at 2560x1440, representing a 31.1% reduction when moving to the higher resolution. Continuing to 3840x2160 High, the average falls to 267.1, which is another 40.7% drop from the 1440p figure. This steep decline suggests that while the RTX 4070 is being pushed harder as pixel count increases, the game engine's CPU overhead remains substantial at lower resolutions.

Looking at Low settings, the pattern becomes even clearer. At 1080p Low, the system produces 893.7 FPS on average, which drops to 616.8 at 1440p and further to 365.9 at 4K. The percentage losses are 31.0% and 40.7% respectively, nearly identical to the High preset scaling. This consistency across presets indicates that resolution scaling affects the frame rate in a predictable, linear fashion regardless of graphical complexity. The fact that Low settings still cannot exceed the 1080p High result by more than 36.7% (893.7 vs 653.7) suggests that at lower resolutions and settings, the CPU becomes the primary bottleneck, preventing the GPU from fully stretching its legs.

The Ultra preset shows the same relative pattern, with 560.1 FPS at 1080p dropping to 383.7 at 1440p and 229.8 at 4K. The percentage reductions are 31.5% and 40.1%, again mirroring the other presets. Notably, the difference between High and Ultra at each resolution is relatively modest: 16.7% at 1080p, 17.4% at 1440p, and 16.2% at 4K. This suggests that Ultra adds visual quality without disproportionately taxing the GPU, as the frame rate penalty remains consistent across resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Core i5-13400F and RTX 4070 achieves a combo rank of 406 out of 1605 tested systems in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive. This places the pairing at the 74.7th percentile of all combinations tested, meaning roughly three-quarters of systems perform worse in this game. The data indicates that this is a strong but not elite result, with the top 25% of combinations generally featuring higher-end CPUs or GPUs that manage to push frame rates even higher.

The CPU itself holds an 82nd percentile ranking among all processors tested globally, with an average benchmark score of 25236. Its nearest rivals in synthetic testing include the Intel Core i7-13620H with an average score of 25201 (0.1% ahead), the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D at 25365 (0.5% ahead), and the AMD EPYC 9474F at 25103 (0.5% behind). These minuscule differences indicate that the i5-13400F sits in a very tightly contested performance band, where no single processor has a decisive advantage in CPU-bound scenarios. The GPU meanwhile ranks at the 81st percentile with an average benchmark score of 37283, and its nearest rivals — the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 (37507, 0.6% ahead), NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A (38008, 1.9% ahead), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile (38135, 2.2% ahead) — are all within a few percentage points, underscoring that the RTX 4070 is also positioned in a crowded performance tier.

Given that the combo rank is lower than either component's individual percentile, the data suggests that Counter-Strike: Global Offensive's performance is more dependent on the CPU than the GPU. The game's engine, dating from 2012, does not scale perfectly with modern multi-core processors, so the i5-13400F's 10 cores and 16 threads are only partially utilized, limiting the overall frame rate ceiling.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides clear guidance on which preset delivers the optimal experience. At 1920x1080, the High preset produces 653.7 FPS on average, while Ultra yields 560.1 FPS. The difference of 93.6 FPS represents a 14.3% reduction for what is typically a marginal visual improvement in CS:GO's relatively simple graphics. Given that competitive players prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity, High at 1080p appears to be the sweet spot, delivering a frame rate that is more than double the refresh rate of most high-end gaming monitors.

For 1440p displays, the High preset at 450.4 FPS remains exceptionally smooth, while Ultra drops to 383.7 FPS. The Medium preset at 524.2 FPS offers an intermediate option that still exceeds the refresh rate of any current monitor. At 4K, High yields 267.1 FPS, which is still well above the 240Hz ceiling of the fastest gaming displays, though Ultra at 229.8 FPS begins to approach more typical high-refresh territory. The Low preset at all resolutions offers diminishing returns: at 1080p it reaches 893.7 FPS, but this is far beyond what any display can show, and the visual downgrade is substantial.

The data shows that Medium settings at each resolution provide a balanced middle ground: 759.2 FPS at 1080p, 524.2 FPS at 1440p, and 306.5 FPS at 4K. However, for most users, High will be the recommended preset as it maintains frame rates that are already excessive for any practical display while offering better image quality than Medium.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS values are as follows: Low produces 893.7 FPS, Medium achieves 759.2 FPS, High reaches 653.7 FPS, and Ultra delivers 560.1 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a consistent decline of roughly 15-18% for each step up in settings, with the largest single drop occurring between Medium and High at 13.9%.

Moving to 2560x1440, the figures are 616.8 FPS at Low, 524.2 FPS at Medium, 450.4 FPS at High, and 383.7 FPS at Ultra. The relative differences between presets remain similar to 1080p, with High being 14.1% slower than Medium and Ultra being 14.8% slower than High. The resolution increase from 1080p to 1440p costs between 29.7% (Medium) and 31.5% (Ultra) of the frame rate.

At 3840x2160, the data shows 365.9 FPS at Low, 306.5 FPS at Medium, 267.1 FPS at High, and 229.8 FPS at Ultra. The step from 1440p to 4K reduces frame rates by 40.7% at both High and Ultra, and by 41.5% at Low. Interestingly, the gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is 136.1 FPS, which is proportionally similar to the 333.6 FPS gap observed at 1080p, indicating that the GPU scaling remains consistent across all resolutions.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo can achieve in CS:GO?

A: The highest measured average FPS is 893.7 at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This far exceeds any display's refresh rate capability, making it purely a theoretical maximum.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 4K?

A: At High settings, the average FPS drops from 653.7 at 1080p to 267.1 at 4K, a reduction of approximately 59.1%. The relative loss is similar across all presets, ranging from 59.1% to 60.8%.

Q: Is this combo better suited for competitive or casual play?

A: The data shows exceptional frame rates even at Ultra settings on 4K (229.8 FPS), so it comfortably handles both competitive play at 1080p with over 500 FPS and casual 4K gaming with over 200 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU's synthetic benchmark score compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The i5-13400F has an average benchmark score of 25236, placing it just 0.1% behind the Intel Core i7-13620H and 0.5% behind the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D, while being 0.5% ahead of the AMD EPYC 9474F.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between High and Ultra settings?

A: At 1080p, High produces 653.7 FPS while Ultra produces 560.1 FPS, a difference of 93.6 FPS. At 1440p the difference is 66.7 FPS, and at 4K it is 37.3 FPS.

Q: Does Low settings provide a meaningful advantage over High?

A: At 1080p, Low delivers 893.7 FPS versus 653.7 FPS for High, a 36.7% increase. However, both values are already far beyond display refresh rates, so the practical benefit is negligible.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-13400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor based on Raptor Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. It features 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU's synthetic benchmarks show strong multi-threaded performance with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21279 and a single-core score of 3004, while 3DMark scores range from 1880 with 2 threads up to 7314 with 16 threads.

In CS:GO, the CPU's role is critical. The game's engine, designed in 2012, does not efficiently utilize more than a few cores, so the i5-13400F's single-thread performance becomes the determining factor. The 3DMark single-thread score of 960 and the Passmark single-thread score of 3634 indicate strong per-core capability, which is essential for maintaining high frame rates in this title. The fact that the combo ranks at the 74.7th percentile despite the GPU being in the 81st percentile suggests that CPU limitations are holding back overall performance more than the GPU.

The L3 cache size of 20 MB shared across all cores helps with game data access patterns, while the dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 memory support provides ample bandwidth for the game's modest requirements. The processor's 65W TDP and 10nm process node make it an efficient choice, though the boost clock of 4.60 GHz is what matters most for CS:GO's frame rate generation. The benchmark data showing 893.7 FPS at 1080p Low indicates that even at the lowest graphics settings, the CPU is able to feed the GPU with enough frames to approach the 900 FPS mark, which confirms its per-core strength.