Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is not a typical GPU stress test, but the measured frame rates for the Intel Core i5-13400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 combination reveal a clear pattern of scaling that points directly at the CPU as the primary performance ceiling at lower resolutions. The data shows that moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 produces a substantial performance drop across all settings, but the most dramatic scaling occurs when stepping up to 3840x2160. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 574 FPS at 1080p to 395 FPS at 1440p, a 31% reduction, and then further to 233 FPS at 4K, which is a 59% drop from the 1080p baseline. This steep decline at higher resolutions is typical of a game that becomes increasingly GPU-bound as pixel count rises, but the absolute numbers at 1080p—where even the Ultra preset averages 361 FPS—suggest that the CPU is the limiting factor at lower resolutions, as the RTX 5050 is capable of rendering far more frames than the processor can feed it. The Medium preset shows the same pattern, with averages of 489 FPS at 1080p, 336 FPS at 1440p, and 199 FPS at 4K, confirming that the scaling is consistent regardless of graphical load. The High preset follows suit: 423 FPS at 1080p, 291 FPS at 1440p, and 172 FPS at 4K. What this tells a builder is that at 1080p, this combo is heavily CPU-limited, meaning that upgrading the graphics card alone would yield little to no benefit in this title, while at 4K, the RTX 5050 becomes the bottleneck, and the frame rate scales more predictably with GPU performance.

How This Combo Ranks

The measured performance of this specific CPU-GPU pairing in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive places it at rank 1732 out of 2848 tested combinations, which puts it in the lower half of the database but not at the bottom. This ranking is particularly interesting because the individual components have respectable benchmark scores on their own—the i5-13400F sits at the 77th percentile among all CPUs, while the RTX 5050 lands at the 66th percentile among GPUs—yet the combination in this game does not crack the top 40% of tested systems. This suggests that Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is not a title where this pairing excels relative to other hardware combinations, likely due to the game's age and its sensitivity to single-threaded performance rather than raw multi-core throughput. When looking at the CPU's nearest rivals, the i5-13400F is essentially tied with the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS, showing a 0% delta in average benchmark score, and it is only 0.3% behind both the Intel Core 5 120 and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D. This indicates that in general processing tasks, the i5-13400F is right in the middle of a tight pack of competitors, and the same likely holds true in this game, where the frame rate at 1080p is more dependent on how well the CPU can execute the game's core logic than on the GPU's raw fill rate. The GPU side tells a similar story, with the RTX 5050's average benchmark score of 21035 placing it just 0.6% behind the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL, 1% behind the AMD Radeon HD 8970M, and 1.6% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT. These are all older or lower-tier parts, which underscores that the RTX 5050 is not a high-end GPU by any measure, but its performance in this game is sufficient to push very high frame rates at 1080p when paired with a capable CPU. The rank of 1732 out of 2848 means that roughly 39% of tested combos perform better in this specific title, and many of those likely feature higher-end CPUs with superior single-thread performance, which is the key metric for Counter-Strike.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 brings 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 320.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is modest by modern standards but more than adequate for a game that launched in 2012. The GPU's base clock is 2317 MHz with a boost clock of 2572 MHz, and it achieves a pixel rate of 82.30 GPixel/s alongside a texture rate of 205.8 GTexel/s. These specifications translate to a 13.17 TFLOPS FP32 compute rating, which is the raw mathematical throughput that the card can deliver. In the context of Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, the GPU's role becomes more pronounced as resolution increases, which the measured FPS data confirms. At 4K Ultra settings, the average frame rate drops to 147 FPS, which is the lowest measured result in the entire dataset, and this is where the RTX 5050's 8 GB frame buffer and 320.0 GB/s bandwidth are most heavily taxed. The card's memory clock runs at 2500 MHz, or 20 Gbps effective, which is a modest speed for the 50-series, and this likely contributes to the significant performance gap between 1440p and 4K. For example, moving from 1440p Ultra at 249 FPS to 4K Ultra at 147 FPS represents a 41% reduction in frame rate, which is a larger percentage drop than the jump from 1080p to 1440p at the same settings, where the decrease is 31%. This non-linear scaling is characteristic of a GPU that is reaching its memory bandwidth or pixel throughput limits. The RTX 5050's benchmark scores reflect its mid-range positioning: it scores 17326 in Passmark G3D, which places it at the 66th percentile of all GPUs, and it manages 90334 in Geekbench OpenCL and 89381 in Geekbench Vulkan. These numbers are not exceptional, but they are consistent with a card that can handle esports titles like Counter-Strike at high frame rates, provided the resolution and settings do not overwhelm its 8 GB of VRAM. The GPU's nearest rivals in the database—the Radeon RX Vega M GL, Radeon HD 8970M, and Radeon RX 5600 XT—are all older or lower-tier parts, which reinforces that the RTX 5050 is a capable entry-level to mid-range card, but it is not going to dominate in a game that is notoriously CPU-bound at competitive settings.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the best experience for a player using this combo depends heavily on the resolution of their monitor. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers the highest average frame rate at 574 FPS, but this is far beyond what any 60Hz or even 144Hz display can show, so the extra performance is effectively wasted. The Medium preset averages 489 FPS with a minimum of 416 FPS, which is still an extremely high frame rate that would satisfy even the most demanding esports players with 360Hz monitors, and it likely offers better visual clarity than Low without sacrificing any meaningful performance. The High preset at 1080p averages 423 FPS, which is also above the refresh rate of most gaming monitors, and it provides a better visual experience than Medium. The Ultra preset drops to 361 FPS, which is still very playable and would be the choice for players who prioritize visual quality over maximum frame rate, but the data shows that Ultra does not offer a proportional visual improvement over High for the 15% performance cost. For 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 395 FPS, which is excellent, but the Medium preset at 336 FPS with a minimum of 286 FPS is the sweet spot, as it maintains a high frame rate while providing better graphical fidelity. The High preset at 291 FPS is also viable for 144Hz or 165Hz monitors, but the Ultra preset drops to 249 FPS, which is still above 240Hz but begins to show the GPU's limitations. At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 233 FPS, which is just barely enough for a 240Hz 4K display, but the Medium preset at 199 FPS with a minimum of 169 FPS is more realistic for most 4K monitors, which typically run at 60Hz or 144Hz. The High preset at 172 FPS is a good choice for 144Hz 4K displays, but the Ultra preset at 147 FPS is the only setting that does not deliver a triple-digit frame rate, and it would be best to avoid it unless visual fidelity is the absolute priority. The data suggests that Medium or High settings provide the best balance of frame rate and visual quality across all resolutions, with Low being reserved for players who demand the absolute maximum FPS for competitive play.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured average frame rates are 574 FPS on Low, 489 FPS on Medium, 423 FPS on High, and 361 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset reports a minimum of 416 FPS and a maximum of 562 FPS, indicating a very stable frame delivery with only a 15% variance between the average and the minimum. The other presets do not report minimum or maximum values in the data, but the averages alone show a clear progression: Low is 17% faster than Medium, Medium is 16% faster than High, and High is 17% faster than Ultra. This consistent ~16-17% step between each preset level suggests that the graphical settings have a uniform impact on performance at 1080p, which is typical for a game where the CPU is not the limiting factor at this resolution. At 2560x1440, the averages are 395 FPS on Low, 336 FPS on Medium, 291 FPS on High, and 249 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset here shows a minimum of 286 FPS and a maximum of 387 FPS, with the minimum being 15% below the average, which is a slightly larger variance than at 1080p but still very stable. The step between presets at 1440p is not as uniform as at 1080p: Low to Medium is an 18% drop, Medium to High is a 13% drop, and High to Ultra is a 14% drop, which indicates that the GPU is beginning to become more of a factor as resolution increases. At 3840x2160, the averages are 233 FPS on Low, 199 FPS on Medium, 172 FPS on High, and 147 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset at 4K shows a minimum of 169 FPS and a maximum of 229 FPS, with the minimum being 15% below the average, consistent with the other resolutions. The preset steps at 4K are 15% from Low to Medium, 14% from Medium to High, and 15% from High to Ultra, which is more uniform than at 1440p and suggests that the GPU is now the dominant bottleneck. Across all resolutions, the Low preset consistently delivers the highest frame rates, and the gap between Low and Ultra grows from 37% at 1080p to 37% at 1440p and 37% at 4K, meaning the relative performance difference between presets remains constant, but the absolute frame rates drop significantly with resolution.

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. It features a 20 MB shared L3 cache and per-core L1 and L2 caches of 80 KB and 1.25 MB respectively, and it supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration. The CPU's benchmark scores are strong for its class: it achieves 22604 in Cinebench R23 multicore, 3191 in Cinebench R23 singlecore, and 25032 in Passmark multithread, with a single-thread Passmark score of 3634. In Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, the CPU's role is most evident at 1080p, where the frame rates are exceptionally high but also capped by the processor's ability to issue draw calls and process game logic. The data shows that at 1080p Low, the combo averages 574 FPS, which is an extremely high number, but it is not as high as what a top-tier CPU like a 7800X3D might achieve in the same scenario, as indicated by the combo ranking at 1732 out of 2848. The CPU's 10 cores are more than enough for this game, which is known to be lightly threaded, but the boost clock of 4.60 GHz on the performance cores is what matters most for single-threaded performance. The CPU's 3DMark single-thread score of 960 and Cinebench R23 singlecore score of 3191 are reasonable but not class-leading, and this is reflected in the game's frame rates at 1080p, which, while very high, are not at the top of the database. The CPU's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS (0% delta), Intel Core 5 120 (-0.3%), and AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D (-0.3%), all of which have similar average benchmark scores of around 25290-25365, confirming that the i5-13400F is in the middle of a competitive pack. At 1440p and 4K, the CPU's influence diminishes as the GPU becomes the limiting factor, but the 1080p results clearly show that the i5-13400F is the reason this combo does not rank higher in this game. The CPU's 16 threads are largely underutilized in Counter-Strike, but the high boost clock and decent single-thread performance ensure that the game remains playable at extremely high frame rates, making this a solid choice for esports-focused builds where the GPU is not the primary bottleneck.