Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is a game that rewards high frame rates above almost everything else, and this combination of an Intel Core i5-13400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 delivers them in abundance. The data shows a system that is heavily GPU-bound at higher resolutions but transitions to a CPU-bound scenario at 1080p, where the sheer speed of the RTX 4080 begins to outpace the processor's rendering capacity for this specific title. The measured FPS figures reveal a straightforward scaling pattern that is typical for a game of this age and engine, with the most significant performance cliffs occurring when moving from Medium to Ultra settings. For a competitive shooter, the implications are clear: the hardware is overqualified for maximum visual fidelity but perfectly suited for pushing refresh rate limits.

Resolution Scaling

The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is steep, but not uniform across all settings. At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 514 FPS at 1920x1080 to 337 FPS at 2560x1440, a reduction of 177 FPS. Moving to 3840x2160, the average drops further to 186 FPS, which is a 328 FPS decline from the 1080p figure. This represents a 63.8% performance loss from 1080p to 4K at High settings, which is a substantial hit that clearly indicates the rendering workload is shifting entirely onto the GPU as pixel count increases.

The pattern is similar but with different magnitudes at Low settings. The 1080p Low result of 670 FPS drops to 466 FPS at 1440p and then to 257 FPS at 4K. The percentage drop from 1080p to 4K here is 61.6%, which is slightly less severe than at High settings. This suggests that at Low settings, the CPU is still able to feed frames at a rate that keeps the GPU more occupied, but the 4K resolution still presents a massive pixel fill challenge that the RTX 4080 cannot overcome without seeing frame rates cut by more than half.

The most telling data point for identifying the limiting component comes from the Medium settings rows, which include min and max FPS values. At 1920x1080 Medium, the average is 606 FPS with a min of 515 FPS and a max of 697 FPS. At 2560x1440 Medium, the average is 397 FPS with a min of 337 FPS and a max of 457 FPS. At 3840x2160 Medium, the average is 219 FPS with a min of 186 FPS and a max of 252 FPS. The spread between min and max FPS remains relatively consistent across resolutions, but the average falls in near-perfect proportion to the pixel count increase, confirming that the RTX 4080 is the primary bottleneck at 1440p and 4K. It is only at 1080p that the frame rate ceiling appears to be influenced by the i5-13400F, as the average of 606 FPS at Medium is already so high that the GPU's raw speed is being constrained by the CPU's ability to issue draw calls.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-13400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. Its benchmark scores show a strong multi-threaded capability, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 22604 and a Geekbench multicore score of 11068. However, for Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, the single-thread performance is more relevant, and the processor's Geekbench single-core score of 1996 and 3DMark single-thread score of 960 indicate solid but not exceptional per-core speed.

The data shows that at 1080p Low, the system achieves 670 FPS, which is the highest measured average in the entire dataset. At 1080p High, the average is 514 FPS. The difference between these two is 156 FPS, which is a 23.3% reduction. This gap is much larger than the difference seen between High and Ultra at the same resolution, where the average drops from 514 FPS to 386 FPS, a 24.9% reduction. The fact that even the lowest settings cannot push past 670 FPS indicates that the i5-13400F is reaching its practical limit for this game's engine at 1080p. The CPU's percentile rank of 77 against all CPUs puts it in a solid position, but its nearest rivals, such as the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D with a deltaPct of -0.3 and the Intel Core 5 120 with a deltaPct of -0.3, are statistically tied in synthetic benchmarks, suggesting that the 13400F is not uniquely advantaged for this workload.

The boost clock of 4.60 GHz is the key specification for CS:GO, as the game's engine relies heavily on a few threads for main game logic and rendering submission. The benchmark results show that the CPU's 16 threads are not a limiting factor at higher resolutions, where the GPU takes over as the bottleneck. At 4K Ultra, the system still manages 140 FPS, which is entirely GPU-limited, but at 1080p Ultra, the 386 FPS average suggests that the CPU is still keeping up reasonably well, though it is clearly the component that prevents the frame rate from scaling linearly with the GPU's power.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 is a monster of a graphics card, built on the Ada Lovelace architecture with 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 716.8 GB/s. Its boost clock of 2505 MHz and 9728 shading units give it a theoretical FP32 performance of 48.74 TFLOPS. The card's Passmark G3D score of 34457 and its 86th percentile rank among all GPUs confirm its high-end status, though its nearest rivals in the benchmark database, such as the RTX 4080 SUPER with a deltaPct of 0.1 and the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X with a deltaPct of -1.1, are extremely close in synthetic performance.

In this game, the RTX 4080's role changes dramatically depending on resolution. At 1080p, the card is effectively coasting, with the CPU bottleneck preventing it from fully stretching its legs. The 670 FPS at Low settings shows how easily the GPU handles the low pixel count. However, at 4K, the card's limits become apparent. The 186 FPS at High settings and 140 FPS at Ultra settings are still very playable, but they show a clear performance ceiling that is directly tied to the GPU's pixel throughput and memory bandwidth. The 16 GB of VRAM is more than sufficient for CS:GO, which is not a VRAM-intensive title, but the 256-bit memory bus and the 716.8 GB/s bandwidth are what matter for pushing those high resolutions.

The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is a 117 FPS drop, from 257 FPS to 140 FPS. This is a 45.5% reduction, which is a larger percentage drop than at 1080p, where the difference between Low and Ultra is 284 FPS, a 42.4% reduction. This indicates that the GPU's shading units and texture units are being taxed more heavily at 4K, and the settings have a more pronounced effect on the final frame rate. The RTX 4080 is clearly the dominant component in this pairing for 1440p and 4K gaming, with the CPU only becoming a meaningful partner at 1080p.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to play CS:GO with this hardware for maximum frame rate?

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 at Low settings yields the highest average FPS at 670. If you want a higher refresh rate experience, 2560x1440 at Low still provides a very high 466 FPS average, making it a viable option for 360Hz monitors.

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

A: At High settings, the average FPS drops from 514 at 1920x1080 to 186 at 3840x2160, a 63.8% reduction. At Low settings, the drop is from 670 to 257 FPS, a 61.6% reduction.

Q: Is the RTX 4080 overkill for CS:GO?

A: At 1080p, yes, the CPU is the limiting factor. The GPU's performance is capped by the i5-13400F, as evidenced by the 670 FPS ceiling at Low settings. At 4K, the RTX 4080 is still powerful enough to deliver over 140 FPS at Ultra settings, so it is not overkill for high-resolution play.

Q: Which component is the bottleneck in this system?

A: It depends on the resolution. At 1920x1080, the CPU is the primary bottleneck, as the frame rate does not scale with GPU power beyond 670 FPS. At 2560x1440 and 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the limiting component, with frame rates falling in proportion to the increased pixel count.

Q: How does the Ultra preset compare to High in terms of FPS?

A: At 1080p, Ultra averages 386 FPS versus High's 514 FPS, a 24.9% drop. At 4K, Ultra averages 140 FPS versus High's 186 FPS, a 24.7% drop. The relative penalty is consistent across resolutions.

Q: What is the frame rate consistency like at Medium settings?

A: The Medium settings rows provide min and max FPS data. At 1080p, the average is 606 FPS with a min of 515 and max of 697. At 1440p, the average is 397 FPS with a min of 337 and max of 457. At 4K, the average is 219 FPS with a min of 186 and max of 252. The min FPS is consistently about 85% of the average, indicating decent frame pacing.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data for this combination of Intel Core i5-13400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is as follows, broken down by resolution and settings.

At 1920x1080, the system achieves its highest frame rates. Low settings produce an average of 670 FPS. Medium settings yield an average of 606 FPS, with a minimum of 515 FPS and a maximum of 697 FPS. High settings result in an average of 514 FPS. Ultra settings produce an average of 386 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a steady decline, with the largest single drop occurring between High and Ultra, a difference of 128 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates remain very high but show a clear step down from 1080p. Low settings average 466 FPS. Medium settings average 397 FPS, with a minimum of 337 FPS and a maximum of 457 FPS. High settings average 337 FPS. Ultra settings average 253 FPS. The drop from Low to Ultra is 213 FPS, representing a 45.7% reduction in performance.

At 3840x2160, the GPU begins to show its limits. Low settings average 257 FPS. Medium settings average 219 FPS, with a minimum of 186 FPS and a maximum of 252 FPS. High settings average 186 FPS. Ultra settings average 140 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra here is 117 FPS, a 45.5% reduction, which is proportionally similar to the 1440p drop but with a smaller absolute gap.

The Medium setting rows are the only ones that include min and max FPS data, which provides insight into frame pacing. At all three resolutions, the min FPS is notably lower than the average, with the 1080p min of 515 FPS being 91 FPS below the average. The 1440p min of 337 FPS is 60 FPS below the average, and the 4K min of 186 FPS is 33 FPS below the average. This suggests that while the average frame rates are extremely high, there are occasional dips that could be perceptible on very high refresh rate displays.

Settings Recommendations

For competitive play, the data clearly favors lower settings to maximize frame rate. The Low preset at 1920x1080 delivers the highest average FPS of 670, which is ideal for a 360Hz or 500Hz monitor. The difference between Low and Medium at 1080p is 64 FPS, which is a 9.5% reduction. This is a small price to pay for potentially better visual clarity on some maps, but for pure performance, Low is the best choice.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset still provides an average of 466 FPS, which is sufficient for most high-refresh-rate monitors. The Medium preset at 397 FPS is also a solid option if you want better visuals without sacrificing too much performance. The High preset at 337 FPS is still very playable, but the Ultra preset at 253 FPS may introduce noticeable input lag on very fast displays.

At 3840x2160, the situation changes. Low settings at 257 FPS are the only option that guarantees a smooth experience on a 240Hz display. Medium at 219 FPS is also acceptable, and it provides a better visual experience. High at 186 FPS is borderline for 240Hz, and Ultra at 140 FPS is best reserved for 144Hz monitors. The data suggests that for 4K gaming with this hardware, Medium settings offer the best balance between visual quality and frame rate, as the difference between Low and Medium is only 38 FPS, while the jump from Medium to High is 33 FPS, and the jump to Ultra is another 46 FPS.

The overall recommendation is to prioritize resolution and frame rate over visual fidelity. At 1080p, use Low for maximum FPS. At 1440p, Low or Medium are both excellent choices. At 4K, Medium provides the best experience, with Low being the fallback for absolute maximum performance. The Ultra preset is only recommended for 1440p or lower if you have a monitor with a lower refresh rate and want the best image quality, as the 253 FPS at 1440p Ultra is still very high.