Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is an esports title where frame pacing and raw throughput often matter more than visual fidelity, and the measured results for the Intel Core i5-14400F paired with the Intel Arc B390 paint a clear picture of a CPU-heavy workload. The i5-14400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor from the Core 14th Gen family, built on Raptor Lake architecture with a 10 nm process node. It operates with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, which are critical for a game like CS:GO that relies heavily on single-thread performance for game logic and physics. The processor’s cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 20 MB L3 cache, allowing frequently accessed data to stay close to the execution cores. The CPU’s benchmarks support its positioning: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21645 and a single-core score of 3055, while Geekbench shows 11268 multi-core and 2058 single-core. PassMark multithread score sits at 25470, and single-thread at 3701, with the CPU’s percentile ranking at 83 across all tested processors.

The role of the CPU in these CS:GO results is dominant. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo reaches 303 FPS average, which is the highest measured figure across any resolution or setting combination. This high frame rate at a low resolution strongly suggests that the CPU is doing the heavy lifting, as the GPU has less pixel work to do but the game’s simulation still demands consistent processing. The i5-14400F’s boost clock of 4.70 GHz provides the per-core speed needed to feed the game’s update loop, and the 10-core count ensures background threads do not starve the primary render thread. Compared to its nearest rivals, the i5-14400F has an average benchmark score of 32279, which is 0.1% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U (32233) and 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core i9-11900 (32226). It trails the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS by 0.2% (32354) and leads the Intel Core i7-12800H by 0.5% (32121). These marginal differences in synthetic benchmarks translate to real-world consistency in CS:GO, where even a few percent in CPU throughput can affect minimum frame stability. The data shows that at 1440p Low, the combo still achieves 208 FPS, and at 4K Low it drops to 123 FPS, indicating that while resolution scaling does reduce frame rates, the CPU remains the bottleneck at lower settings.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is an integrated graphics processor based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process node. It features 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output units, with 12 ray tracing cores. The GPU’s base clock is 300 MHz, boosting up to 2500 MHz, and its memory is classified as System Shared, meaning it draws from the host system’s RAM rather than dedicated VRAM. This shared memory configuration has a system-dependent bandwidth, which is a notable consideration for a game like CS:GO that can be sensitive to memory latency. The GPU’s pixel rate is 60.00 GPixel/s and texture rate is 120.0 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance rated at 7.680 TFLOPS and FP16 at 15.36 TFLOPS (2:1). The Arc B390’s 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 1482, placing it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs. This low percentile is telling: the GPU is not designed for high-end gaming, yet the measured CS:GO results show it can still deliver playable frame rates, primarily because the game is not graphically intensive relative to modern titles.

In the context of these results, the GPU’s role becomes clearer when examining the scaling between settings. At 1080p Low, the combo produces 303 FPS, but at 1080p Ultra, it drops to 190 FPS. That 113 FPS difference is attributed to the GPU having to render more complex lighting and shadow effects. The Arc B390’s nearest rivals in benchmark scores include the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463, 1.3% slower), NVIDIA GeForce 800M (1460, 1.5% slower), NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM (1446, 2.5% slower), and NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 (1443, 2.7% slower). The Arc B390 outperforms all of these, but they are all low-end GPUs, confirming that this integrated solution is entry-level. The GPU’s boost clock of 2500 MHz is respectable for an iGPU, but the shared memory system means that at higher resolutions like 4K, the memory bandwidth becomes a limiting factor. The data shows that at 4K Ultra, the combo only manages 77 FPS, which is a 74% drop from 1080p Low. This indicates that while the CPU is strong enough to push high frame rates at low resolutions, the GPU cannot maintain that pace when pixel count quadruples.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals how the balance between CPU and GPU shifts as resolution increases. Starting at 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo achieves 303 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 Low, that drops to 208 FPS, a reduction of 95 FPS or approximately 31%. At 3840x2160 Low, the frame rate falls to 123 FPS, another 85 FPS drop from 1440p. This scaling pattern shows that the GPU is increasingly the limiting component as resolution rises, because the CPU’s workload does not change significantly with resolution—it still has to process the same game state and physics. The CPU is capable of delivering high frame rates, as evidenced by the 303 FPS at 1080p, but the Arc B390’s shared memory bandwidth and limited shading units struggle to fill more pixels.

For High settings, the resolution scaling is similar but with lower absolute numbers. At 1080p High, the combo hits 223 FPS, dropping to 154 FPS at 1440p High, and then 91 FPS at 4K High. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 69 FPS, and from 1440p to 4K is another 63 FPS. The Medium settings show a consistent pattern: 258 FPS at 1080p, 177 FPS at 1440p, and 105 FPS at 4K. Ultra settings follow the same trend: 190 FPS at 1080p, 131 FPS at 1440p, and 77 FPS at 4K. Across all settings, the ratio of 4K to 1080p performance is roughly 0.4, meaning that moving to 4K approximately cuts the frame rate by 60%. This is a classic sign of a GPU-bound scenario at higher resolutions, while the 1080p results are more CPU-bound. The limiting component analysis is clear: at 1080p, the CPU is the primary driver, as raising settings from Low to Ultra only reduces FPS from 303 to 190, a 37% drop. At 4K, the same setting change reduces FPS from 123 to 77, a 37% drop as well, but the absolute numbers are much lower, indicating the GPU is saturated.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The exact measured frames per second provide a detailed view of this combo’s performance. At 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the combo delivers 303 FPS on Low settings, 258 FPS on Medium, 223 FPS on High, and 190 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset also recorded a min FPS of 219 and a max FPS of 296, showing some frame variance but still well above competitive thresholds. At 2560x1440, the numbers drop: 208 FPS on Low, 177 FPS on Medium, 154 FPS on High, and 131 FPS on Ultra. The 1440p Medium preset has a min FPS of 151 and a max of 204, indicating that even with more pixels, the frame pacing remains stable enough for gameplay. At 3840x2160, the combo manages 123 FPS on Low, 105 FPS on Medium, 91 FPS on High, and 77 FPS on Ultra. The 4K Medium preset shows a min FPS of 89 and a max of 120, which is a wider spread, suggesting occasional dips when the shared memory system is stressed.

Interpreting these numbers, the 1080p Low result of 303 FPS is exceptional for an integrated GPU, and it demonstrates that the i5-14400F can drive frame rates well beyond the refresh rates of most monitors. The 1080p Medium result of 258 FPS is still very high, and even 1080p Ultra at 190 FPS is playable. At 1440p, the Low preset’s 208 FPS is smooth, but Ultra at 131 FPS is nearing the lower bound of what competitive players might accept. At 4K, the results are more modest: Low at 123 FPS is playable, Medium at 105 FPS is borderline, High at 91 FPS is acceptable for casual play, and Ultra at 77 FPS is the minimum. The data shows that the combo is most comfortable at 1080p and 1440p, where it can maintain high frame rates across all settings. The 4K results, while not terrible, are clearly limited by the GPU’s shared memory and lower compute capacity. The min FPS values, where available, show that the system does not experience severe stutters, but the variance increases at higher resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested CPU-GPU combinations for Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, this pairing of the Intel Core i5-14400F and Intel Arc B390 ranks 2510 out of 2848 combos. This places it in the lower 12% of all tested systems, which is expected given the GPU’s 9th percentile standing. The CPU itself is in the 83rd percentile, showing that the processor is not the limiting factor in this ranking. The combo’s rank is dragged down almost entirely by the Arc B390’s low performance relative to other GPUs. To contextualize, the CPU’s benchmark score of 32279 is competitive with its nearest rivals, but the GPU’s 3DMark score of 1482 is far below any discrete gaming GPU. The rank of 2510 means that 338 other combos performed worse, but the vast majority of systems with dedicated GPUs outperform this integrated solution.

The data indicates that this combo’s ranking is a reflection of the GPU’s position in the market. The CPU is capable of supporting much higher frame rates, as evidenced by the 303 FPS at 1080p Low, but the GPU cannot scale those results to higher resolutions or settings. In the context of CS:GO, where high FPS is the primary goal, this combo’s rank is misleading for 1080p play. At 1080p, the combo performs like a mid-range system, but at 4K, it falls to entry-level territory. The ranking across all tested combos is a single number, but the measured FPS data shows that this combo has a wide performance envelope depending on resolution and settings. The 2510 rank is a summary, but the detailed rows reveal that at 1080p Low, this combo is in the top tier of frame rates, while at 4K Ultra, it is near the bottom. This suggests that the rank should be interpreted with the resolution context in mind.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the target resolution and the desired frame rate. For 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers 303 FPS, which is the best result in the entire dataset. This is ideal for competitive play where maximum frame rate is prioritized over visual quality. The Medium preset at 258 FPS is also excellent, offering a slight visual improvement with only a 45 FPS penalty. The High preset at 223 FPS is still very smooth, and even Ultra at 190 FPS is above the 144 Hz threshold for many monitors. For 1080p, any setting is playable, but Low or Medium provides the headroom needed for intense firefights where min FPS can dip. The Medium preset’s min FPS of 219 at 1080p shows that it maintains a high floor, making it a safe choice.

For 2560x1440, the Low preset at 208 FPS is the best option for competitive play, as it keeps the frame rate well above 144 FPS. The Medium preset at 177 FPS is still good, with a min FPS of 151, which is acceptable for most players. The High preset at 154 FPS is borderline, and Ultra at 131 FPS may be too low for players used to 144 Hz monitors. For 1440p, Low or Medium is recommended, with Medium offering a balance between visual quality and performance. For 3840x2160, the Low preset at 123 FPS is the only setting that provides a comfortable experience for 60 Hz or 120 Hz displays. The Medium preset at 105 FPS is playable but may show dips to 89 FPS, which could be noticeable. High at 91 FPS and Ultra at 77 FPS are better suited for slower-paced gameplay or non-competitive modes. The data suggests that for the best overall experience, 1080p Medium or Low is the sweet spot, as it maximizes FPS while still providing a stable frame time. For those who prioritize visual fidelity over raw speed, 1440p Medium is a reasonable compromise, but 4K should be reserved for Low settings to maintain playable frame rates. The measured rows clearly indicate that this combo’s strength lies in lower resolutions and lower settings, where the CPU’s power can shine through.