Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is a 2012 title that relies heavily on CPU throughput for high frame rates, yet the data for this pairing shows a system where the GPU is decisively dominant. The Intel Core i5-9400 is a 6-core, 6-thread processor from the Coffee Lake family, running at a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. Its 9 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support are standard for its era, but its benchmark percentile of 47 places it in the middle of the pack for all CPUs. In contrast, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 sits at the 92nd percentile among GPUs, with a massive 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus and a boost clock of 2407 MHz. The performance gap between these components is the defining story of this benchmark set, shaping every frame rate measured in CS:GO.

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

The i5-9400 provides six physical cores without hyper-threading, meaning it can handle six threads simultaneously. For a game like CS:GO, which is known for being sensitive to single-core performance, the processor’s 4.10 GHz boost clock is the most relevant specification. The measured FPS at lower resolutions suggests that the CPU is a limiting factor, but not a prohibitive one. At 1080p Low settings, the average FPS is 872, which is the highest figure recorded in the entire dataset. This indicates that even with the GPU rendering at maximum speed, the CPU can feed it enough frames to reach near-900 FPS, but the gap between 1080p and 4K reveals where the bottleneck shifts.

The processor’s general benchmark scores are modest: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 6629 and a single-core score of 935. These numbers align with its 47th percentile ranking, showing it is not a high-end part by modern standards. In the context of this game, the CPU’s role is to maintain a high minimum frame rate during intense scenes with many players and projectiles. The data supports this: at 1080p Medium, the minimum FPS is 700, which is a significant drop from the 872 average at Low settings but still far above the refresh rates of most monitors. The CPU’s 65W TDP and end-of-life status suggest it is an older design, yet its performance in CS:GO is adequate to avoid a complete system stall, as evidenced by the playable frame rates at all resolutions.

When compared to its nearest rivals, the i5-9400’s average benchmark score of 2254 is nearly identical to the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 (2259, -0.2% delta) and the Intel Core i3-10305 (2264, -0.4% delta). This means the CPU is not a unique outlier in performance; it is a typical mid-range processor from its generation. For CS:GO, this translates to a situation where the CPU can handle the game’s physics and game logic calculations without issue, but it is not the component responsible for the extraordinary frame rates seen here. The GPU’s sheer power, combined with the game’s relatively light CPU load, allows the i5-9400 to keep up, but the measured data shows diminishing returns as resolution increases, which points to the GPU becoming the primary driver of frame rate changes.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The RTX 5090 is a current-generation flagship with specifications that far exceed the requirements of a 2012 esports title. Its 32 GB of GDDR7 memory and 1.79 TB/s bandwidth are overkill for CS:GO, which typically uses less than 4 GB of VRAM, but the data shows how this headroom translates into massive frame rates. The GPU’s base clock of 2017 MHz and boost clock of 2407 MHz, combined with 21760 shading units, allow it to render frames at a pace that the CPU cannot always match. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 18355 and Passmark G3D score of 39650 confirm its top-tier status, though these synthetic tests do not directly translate to CS:GO’s older engine.

The GPU’s role in this pairing is to provide a ceiling that is never reached. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 330, which is still remarkably high for a resolution that typically halves frame rates compared to 1080p. The fact that the RTX 5090 can push CS:GO to 387 FPS at 4K High shows that it is not the limiting component at any setting. Instead, the GPU’s performance is so far ahead of the CPU that the frame rate differences between resolutions are driven by the CPU’s ability to issue draw calls. The nearest rivals for the RTX 5090, such as the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB (0.3% delta), are workstation cards, which highlights how this consumer GPU is in a league of its own for gaming workloads.

The GPU’s 575W TDP and 950W suggested PSU are irrelevant to the game’s actual performance, but they underscore the hardware’s power. In CS:GO, the RTX 5090’s 104.8 TFLOPS of FP32 compute is never fully utilized, as the game’s rendering pipeline is not that demanding. The measured FPS at 1080p Low (872) is likely close to the engine’s maximum frame rate cap or the CPU’s limit, not the GPU’s. This means the GPU is essentially idle at lower resolutions, waiting for the CPU to provide more work, which is a classic sign of a CPU bottleneck in a high-refresh-rate scenario.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS data, the Medium preset offers the best balance between visual quality and performance across all resolutions. At 1080p Medium, the average FPS is 824, with a minimum of 700 and a maximum of 948. This is only 48 FPS lower than the Low preset’s average of 872, but it provides a significant visual upgrade in terms of texture filtering and shadow quality. The minimum FPS of 700 is the key metric, as it ensures consistent frame pacing without drops below the refresh rate of most 144Hz or 240Hz monitors. The Ultra preset at 1080p averages 741 FPS, which is still high, but the lack of a recorded minimum FPS in the data makes it harder to recommend without knowing the worst-case scenario.

At 1440p, the Medium preset again stands out. It averages 728 FPS, with a minimum of 618 and a maximum of 837. This is a drop of about 12% from the 1080p Medium result, but the frame rate remains well above 500 FPS, which is more than enough for competitive play. The High preset at 1440p averages 655 FPS, which is 73 FPS lower than Medium, suggesting that the extra visual detail comes at a measurable cost. For 4K, the Medium preset averages 447 FPS, with a minimum of 380 and a maximum of 514. This is the only resolution where the minimum FPS drops below 400, but it is still playable on high-refresh-rate displays. The Low preset at 4K averages 525 FPS, which is higher, but the visual fidelity is noticeably worse.

The Ultra preset is not recommended for this pairing, as it produces the lowest average FPS at every resolution: 741 at 1080p, 559 at 1440p, and 330 at 4K. While 330 FPS at 4K is still impressive, the drop from 447 FPS on Medium represents a 26% performance loss for marginal visual gains. The data shows that Medium is the sweet spot, offering the highest minimum FPS in the recorded metrics (700 at 1080p, 618 at 1440p, 380 at 4K) while maintaining average frame rates that exceed the refresh rates of all but the most extreme gaming monitors. For players seeking maximum frame rates, Low is the choice, but for a balanced experience, Medium is the clear winner.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific combination of CPU and GPU ranks 347th out of 3719 tested combos in CS:GO, placing it in the top 9.3% of all systems. This ranking is surprisingly low given the RTX 5090’s power, but it reflects the i5-9400’s modest performance. The data indicates that the CPU is holding the system back from reaching the top tiers, as combos with newer, higher-end processors likely achieve even higher frame rates. The rank of 347 suggests that while this system is fast, it is not the fastest, and the bottleneck is clearly the CPU, not the GPU.

The combo’s position in the rankings can be interpreted through the lens of the GPU’s nearest rivals. The RTX 5090’s average benchmark score of 79842 is only 0.3% higher than the Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB, yet in a gaming scenario, the RTX 5090 is far superior due to its drivers and features. However, the combo rank shows that the CPU’s 47th percentile performance drags the overall system down. A pairing with a top-tier CPU like a Core i9 or Ryzen 9 would likely push this combo into the top 100, but the i5-9400’s six threads limit the system’s ability to maintain maximum frame rates in CPU-bound scenarios.

The ranking also highlights the diminishing returns of pairing a high-end GPU with an older CPU. While the RTX 5090 can render CS:GO at 387 FPS on 4K High, a system with a better CPU might achieve 450 FPS or more. The 347th rank is not a failure, but it is a clear signal that the CPU is the primary constraint. For comparison, the GPU alone ranks in the 92nd percentile, meaning it is one of the best parts available, but the combo rank of 347 out of 3719 shows that the whole is less than the sum of its parts. This is a critical insight for anyone assessing this pairing.

FAQ

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-9400 bottleneck the RTX 5090 in CS:GO?

A: Yes, the data indicates a CPU bottleneck at lower resolutions. At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 872, but at 4K Ultra, it drops to 330. The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K is not proportional to the GPU’s workload, suggesting the CPU limits the maximum frame rate.

Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The highest average FPS is 872, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This is the peak performance point in the measured data, with Medium settings trailing at 824 FPS and Ultra at 741 FPS.

Q: Is the RTX 5090’s 32 GB VRAM useful for CS:GO?

A: No, CS:GO is a 2012 game that does not require large amounts of VRAM. The 32 GB GDDR7 memory is far beyond the game’s needs, but it does not hurt performance. The GPU’s high clock speeds and shading units are what drive the frame rates, not the VRAM capacity.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to all other tested systems?

A: The combo ranks 347th out of 3719 total tested combos in CS:GO. This places it in the top 9.3% of systems, but it is not a top-tier ranking due to the CPU’s mid-range performance.

Q: What is the minimum FPS at 1080p Medium, and is it consistent?

A: The minimum FPS at 1080p Medium is 700, with an average of 824 and a maximum of 948. This suggests the frame rate is consistent, and the minimum is high enough for smooth gameplay on most monitors.

Q: Which settings preset provides the best playable experience at 4K?

A: The Medium preset at 4K provides an average FPS of 447, with a minimum of 380 and a maximum of 514. This is the best balance, as Low offers higher FPS (525) but worse visuals, while Ultra drops to 330 FPS.

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

At 1920x1080, the frame rates are consistently high across all settings. Low settings produce an average of 872 FPS, with no minimum or maximum recorded. Medium settings average 824 FPS, with a minimum of 700 and a maximum of 948. High settings average 783 FPS, and Ultra settings average 741 FPS, with no min/max reported for either. The spread between Low and Ultra is 131 FPS, showing that the graphics settings have a moderate impact at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain high but show a clearer separation. Low settings average 770 FPS, which is a 102 FPS drop from 1080p Low. Medium settings average 728 FPS, with a minimum of 618 and a maximum of 837. High settings average 655 FPS, and Ultra settings average 559 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 211 FPS, indicating that the GPU’s workload is becoming more significant, but the CPU still holds the system back from higher frame rates.

At 3840x2160, the frame rates drop more noticeably. Low settings average 525 FPS, which is the highest at this resolution. Medium settings average 447 FPS, with a minimum of 380 and a maximum of 514. High settings average 387 FPS, and Ultra settings average 330 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is 195 FPS, which is similar to the 1440p spread, but the absolute numbers are lower. This data shows that at 4K, the GPU is working harder, yet the CPU still limits the peak frame rates, as evidenced by the 525 FPS ceiling on Low settings.

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

The data shows a clear pattern of frame rate scaling across resolutions. For Low settings, the average FPS drops from 872 at 1080p to 770 at 1440p, a 12% decrease, and then to 525 at 4K, a further 32% decrease. This steep drop from 1440p to 4K suggests that the GPU is becoming the limiting factor at higher resolutions, as the rendering workload increases significantly. However, the fact that the 1080p to 1440p drop is only 12% indicates that the CPU is still the primary constraint at lower resolutions.

For Medium settings, the average FPS drops from 824 at 1080p to 728 at 1440p (12% decrease) and then to 447 at 4K (39% decrease). The larger drop from 1440p to 4K highlights the GPU’s growing role, but the absolute frame rates remain high. For Ultra settings, the drop is from 741 at 1080p to 559 at 1440p (25% decrease) and then to 330 at 4K (41% decrease). This shows that at Ultra, the GPU is more heavily utilized, but the CPU still prevents the frame rates from scaling linearly with resolution.

The key insight is that the CPU is the limiting component at 1080p and 1440p, as evidenced by the relatively small FPS drops when increasing resolution from 1080p to 1440p. At 4K, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, as the rendering load finally overwhelms the RTX 5090’s capabilities. The 525 FPS at 4K Low is the GPU’s ceiling, while the 872 FPS at 1080p Low is the CPU’s ceiling. This means that to achieve higher frame rates at 1080p, a better CPU is needed, but at 4K, the GPU is already performing at its maximum for this game. The scaling pattern is a textbook example of a balanced system shifting from CPU-bound to GPU-bound as resolution increases.