Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is a game where the CPU and GPU both matter, but the balance shifts depending on resolution and settings. This combo pairs an Intel Core i5-14400F, a 10-core, 16-thread Raptor Lake desktop processor, with an Intel Arc B570, a Battlemage-generation GPU built on TSMC's 5 nm process. The CPU's boost clock reaches 4.70 GHz, which is critical for CS:GO's frame generation, while the GPU's 2304 shading units handle the rendering workload. The data shows this pairing is capable of very high frame rates, but the bottlenecks shift predictably as resolution increases.

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

The Intel Core i5-14400F is a desktop processor from the Core 14th Gen family, built on the Raptor Lake-R architecture and manufactured on Intel's 10 nm process node. It features 10 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 20 MB L3 cache. This processor supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, and it connects to the rest of the system via PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The integrated graphics are listed as N/A, meaning the Arc B570 handles all visual output.

For CS:GO, the single-core performance is particularly relevant. The CPU's Cinebench R23 single-core score is 3055, and its Geekbench single-core score is 2058. These numbers indicate strong per-thread performance, which is what CS:GO's game logic and physics calculations rely on. The multi-core scores are also robust — Cinebench R23 multi-core is 21645, and Geekbench multi-core is 11268 — but the game's engine historically favors fewer, faster threads. The PassMark single-thread score of 3701 reinforces this picture. The processor sits at the 83rd percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 32279. Its nearest rivals in the aggregate benchmark data include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U (0.1% ahead), the Intel Core i9-11900 (0.2% ahead), and the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS (0.2% behind), showing the i5-14400F is in a tight cluster of high-performing chips.

In the measured FPS data, the CPU's influence is most visible at 1080p Low settings, where the average frame rate hits 465 FPS. That is a very high number, suggesting the CPU's 4.70 GHz boost clock is keeping the game's main thread fed. At 1080p High, the average drops to 343 FPS; this drop is more attributable to the GPU's workload, but the CPU still has headroom. The 10-core, 16-thread configuration also helps with background tasks and any modern game updates that use additional threads. The processor's 65 W TDP is modest, but that is a power envelope detail, not a performance metric for CS:GO.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The database ranks this specific CPU-GPU combination at position 2271 out of 2848 tested combos for Counter-Strike: Global Offensive. That percentile position — roughly the 20th percentile from the top — is an important context for the measured FPS. Many other combos in the database achieve higher frame rates, particularly those pairing top-tier CPUs with high-end GPUs. However, the absolute FPS numbers are already well above the refresh rates of most monitors, so the rank reflects raw headroom rather than playability.

The nearest rivals for the CPU, based on average benchmark scores, include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U (0.1% faster), the Intel Core i9-11900 (0.2% faster), and the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS (0.2% slower). These are all close matches in aggregate CPU performance, but their gaming results in CS:GO would depend on the paired GPU. For the GPU, the Arc B570's nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile (0.1% faster), the Intel Arc A750 (0.1% slower), and the AMD Radeon R9 M390X (0.5% slower). The GPU sits at the 65th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 20556.

The combination rank of 2271 out of 2848 suggests that this pairing is not optimized for maximum CS:GO performance relative to the entire database. But it is essential to look at the actual measured FPS. At 1080p Low, the combo delivers 465 FPS average, which is in the top tier of playable frame rates. The rank is lower because many combos with faster CPUs or GPUs push even higher. For example, at 1080p Low, the difference between this combo and a top-tier combo might be 100-200 FPS, but both are beyond the 360 Hz or 500 Hz refresh rates that exist. The data shows a capable combo, but not a record-breaking one.

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

The measured FPS data shows a clear pattern of scaling across resolutions. At 1080p Low, the average is 465 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low, it drops to 320 FPS, a reduction of about 31%. At 4K Low, the average is 189 FPS, which is roughly 41% lower than 1440p. This scaling is typical for a GPU-bound scenario at lower settings, where the CPU can still feed frames quickly but the GPU's pixel throughput becomes the limit.

At High settings, the pattern is similar but with lower absolute numbers. 1080p High averages 343 FPS, 1440p High drops to 236 FPS (a 31% reduction), and 4K High averages 139 FPS (a 41% reduction from 1440p). The percentage drops are consistent, indicating that the GPU is the primary limiter once settings are fixed. The CPU's role is to maintain a high enough frame rate ceiling, and the data suggests it does so.

The Medium settings rows include min and max FPS values, which add detail. At 1080p Medium, the average is 396 FPS, with a min of 337 and a max of 456. At 1440p Medium, the average is 273 FPS, with a min of 232 and a max of 314. At 4K Medium, the average is 161 FPS, with a min of 137 and a max of 185. The gap between min and max FPS widens at lower resolutions, which is typical because CPU-bound scenarios can cause more frame time variance. At 4K, the min-to-max spread is tighter, suggesting the GPU is more uniformly loaded.

The Ultra settings show the lowest frame rates. 1080p Ultra averages 293 FPS, 1440p Ultra averages 201 FPS, and 4K Ultra averages 119 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is about 31%, and from 1440p to 4K is about 41%. This consistent pattern across all settings confirms that the GPU is the dominant bottleneck at higher resolutions. The CPU's 10 cores and 16 threads are sufficient to keep up, but the Arc B570's 10 GB of GDDR6 memory and 160-bit bus are more stressed as pixel count increases.

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

The data provides exact average FPS for three resolutions and four settings, with min and max values for Medium settings only.

At 1920x1080, the frame rates are as follows. Low settings produce an average of 465 FPS. Medium settings average 396 FPS, with a minimum of 337 and a maximum of 456. High settings average 343 FPS. Ultra settings average 293 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a drop of 172 FPS, or about 37%. This is a significant reduction, but even the Ultra average of 293 FPS is well above most monitor refresh rates.

At 2560x1440, the numbers are lower. Low settings average 320 FPS. Medium settings average 273 FPS, with a minimum of 232 and a maximum of 314. High settings average 236 FPS. Ultra settings average 201 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 119 FPS, or about 37% — the same relative drop as at 1080p. This consistency suggests the GPU's performance scales linearly with the pixel count increase.

At 3840x2160, the frame rates are the lowest but still playable. Low settings average 189 FPS. Medium settings average 161 FPS, with a minimum of 137 and a maximum of 185. High settings average 139 FPS. Ultra settings average 119 FPS. The drop from Low to Ultra is 70 FPS, or about 37%. The 4K Medium min of 137 FPS is still above 120 FPS, meaning even at the lowest frame dips, the game remains smooth on high-refresh displays.

The min and max FPS values for Medium settings provide insight into frame pacing. At 1080p, the min is 337 and the max is 456, a spread of 119 FPS. At 1440p, the spread is 82 FPS (232 to 314). At 4K, the spread is 48 FPS (137 to 185). This tightening spread at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU's workload is more consistent, reducing frame time spikes that can occur when the CPU has to catch up.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run CS:GO at 1080p on a 144 Hz monitor?

A: Yes, easily. The measured average FPS at 1080p Low is 465, and even at Ultra it is 293. Both are far above 144 Hz, so the game will run smoothly.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to maintain 200+ FPS?

A: At 1440p, the average FPS is 320 on Low, 273 on Medium, 236 on High, and 201 on Ultra. All of these are above 200 FPS, so 1440p is a viable option for high-refresh gameplay.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in aggregate benchmarks?

A: The Core i5-14400F has an average benchmark score of 32279. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U is 0.1% faster, the Intel Core i9-11900 is 0.2% faster, and the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS is 0.2% slower.

Q: Is the GPU the bottleneck at 4K?

A: Yes, the data indicates a GPU bottleneck at 4K. The average FPS drops to 189 on Low and 119 on Ultra, and the frame time variance tightens, suggesting the GPU is the limiting component.

Q: What is the minimum FPS at 1440p Medium?

A: The minimum FPS at 1440p Medium is 232, with an average of 273 and a maximum of 314. This shows the combo maintains a high floor even in demanding scenes.

Q: How does the Arc B570 compare to the Intel Arc A750?

A: The Arc B570 has an average benchmark score of 20556, while the Arc A750 is 0.1% faster in the database. Both are close in overall GPU performance.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience, the measured data suggests prioritizing resolution over settings, as the FPS drops are consistent across settings at each resolution. At 1080p, all settings produce frame rates above 290 FPS, so players can choose Ultra for maximum visual fidelity without sacrificing playability. The 293 FPS average at Ultra is still well above 240 Hz, making it a viable choice for competitive play.

At 1440p, the High preset offers a balanced experience with an average of 236 FPS, which is sufficient for 240 Hz displays. The Ultra preset drops to 201 FPS, which is still playable but may not fully saturate a 240 Hz panel. For those who prioritize frame rate over visuals, the Low preset at 1440p delivers 320 FPS, but the visual quality is noticeably reduced.

At 4K, the Medium preset provides the best compromise. It averages 161 FPS, with a minimum of 137 FPS, ensuring the game stays above 120 FPS even in the worst case. The High preset at 139 FPS is also acceptable, but the Ultra preset at 119 FPS may dip below the refresh rate of some 120 Hz displays. The Low preset at 4K averages 189 FPS, but the visual downgrade is significant.

The data shows that the sweet spot for this combo is 1440p High, which offers a strong balance of visual quality and frame rate. At 1080p, the Ultra preset is recommended for maximum fidelity, as the GPU has ample headroom. At 4K, the Medium preset is the safest choice to maintain a consistent frame rate above 120 FPS. The measured min FPS values at Medium settings — 337 at 1080p, 232 at 1440p, and 137 at 4K — indicate that even the lowest dips remain comfortable for high-refresh gaming.