Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive with the Intel Core i7-14700F and Intel Arc B370 presents a peculiar performance profile where the GPU is the dominant limiting factor across all resolutions. The measured data shows a clear pattern: frame rates scale predictably with resolution, but the absolute numbers are modest, placing this combo in the 8th percentile of all tested configurations (rank 2615 out of 2848). This analysis breaks down the measured FPS rows, the hardware constraints, and what settings offer the most playable experience based solely on the provided data.

Resolution Scaling

The resolution scaling data reveals a steep and consistent drop in performance as pixel count increases, a classic indicator of a GPU-bound scenario. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves 273 FPS average. Moving to 1440p Low drops that to 188 FPS, a reduction of 85 FPS. Scaling further to 2160p Low yields 111 FPS, another 77 FPS reduction. The pattern holds across all settings presets, with the delta between 1080p and 2160p remaining substantial regardless of quality level.

For High settings, the progression is 202 FPS at 1080p, falling to 139 FPS at 1440p, and finally 82 FPS at 2160p. That represents a 120 FPS loss from the lowest to highest resolution tested. Medium settings follow a similar trajectory: 233 FPS at 1080p, 160 FPS at 1440p, and 95 FPS at 2160p. Ultra settings are the most demanding, starting at 172 FPS at 1080p, dropping to 118 FPS at 1440p, and bottoming out at 70 FPS at 2160p.

The scaling pattern shows that the half-resolution step from 1080p to 1440p costs roughly 30-35% of the frame rate, while the step to 4K costs another 40-45%. This non-linear decay is typical of a component that is saturated well before the highest resolution. The limiting component here is clearly the Intel Arc B370, whose 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184 places it at the 5th percentile among all GPUs. The CPU, by contrast, is not the bottleneck; the i7-14700F’s multi-threaded Passmark score of 41317 and single-thread score of 4257 position it at the 91st percentile among all CPUs.

The data suggests that at 1080p, the system is still heavily GPU-limited, as evidenced by the fact that even the largest FPS gap between Low and Ultra settings (273 vs 172 FPS, a 101 FPS difference) does not indicate CPU headroom exhaustion. If the CPU were the constraint, the Low and Ultra numbers would converge more tightly. Instead, the GPU’s compute capacity, measured at 6.144 TFLOPS FP32, is the ceiling. The gap between 1080p and 1440p is proportionally larger than the gap between 1440p and 2160p in percentage terms, suggesting the GPU’s memory bandwidth, labeled as "System Dependent" in the spec sheet, becomes progressively more strained at higher resolutions.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is the decisive factor in this combo’s performance. Its specifications paint a picture of an entry-level integrated graphics solution rather than a discrete gaming card. The chip, using the Xe3-LPG architecture on a 3 nm process, has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The memory is "System Shared," meaning there is no dedicated VRAM; it relies on the system’s main memory, with bandwidth described as "System Dependent." This architecture choice explains the modest frame rates.

The GPU’s rendering resources are limited: 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster output units. This yields a pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s. In practical terms, these figures are low enough that the 4K resolution (3840x2160, over 8.3 million pixels) overwhelms the rasterization pipeline. The measured FPS at 2160p Ultra (70 FPS) is barely above the threshold for playable, while 2160p High (82 FPS) and Medium (95 FPS) are more viable but still far from the 144Hz territory that competitive CS:GO players often target.

The GPU’s benchmark percentile of 5% underscores its position. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184 sits within 1.4% of the AMD FirePro M2000 (score 1168) and within 0.5% of the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (score 1190). These are all legacy or low-end parts. The fact that the Arc B370’s performance rivals these older cards, despite its modern architecture and 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, suggests that the system-shared memory and the lack of dedicated VRAM bandwidth are severe handicaps in a game like CS:GO, which relies on quick texture fetches and draw calls.

The GPU’s clock behavior is also telling. With a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost of 2400 MHz, the card has an 8x headroom, but the measured FPS indicates it likely stays near the lower end under sustained load in this title, or the memory subsystem becomes the constraint. The DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4 are modern, but they don’t compensate for the physical resource limits. The FP16 throughput of 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1) is not leveraged in CS:GO’s standard rendering path, which is primarily FP32-bound.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i7-14700F is an overwhelmingly capable processor that is effectively idle in this pairing. With 20 cores and 28 threads, a base clock of 2.10 GHz, and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, this is a high-end desktop part. Its cache hierarchy includes 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 33 MB shared L3. The CPU’s benchmark results are exemplary: Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 35122, single-core score of 4958, and Geekbench multi-core of 19620. The Passmark multi-thread score of 41317 and single-thread of 4257 place it at the 91st percentile among all CPUs.

In the context of CS:GO, which is a CPU-light game at these settings, the i7-14700F’s role is to feed the GPU without bottlenecking. The data confirms it does so easily. At 1080p Low, the 273 FPS average is likely close to the GPU’s maximum output, not the CPU’s. The CPU’s single-thread performance, as measured by Cinebench R23 single-core at 4958, is more than sufficient for CS:GO’s game logic and draw call dispatch. The boost clock of 5.40 GHz ensures that even the most demanding single-threaded scenarios are handled without issue.

The CPU’s nearest rivals in the benchmark database, such as the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X (deltaPct 0.6%) and the Intel Xeon 6505P (deltaPct -0.2%), show that the i7-14700F is competitive with top-tier parts. However, in this specific game, the CPU’s 28 threads are largely unused; CS:GO rarely scales beyond a few cores. The measured FPS differences between settings at the same resolution are entirely attributable to the GPU. For example, at 1440p, the difference between Low (188 FPS) and Ultra (118 FPS) is 70 FPS, which is a GPU-side effect of increased shading and texture work, not CPU limitations.

The CPU’s memory support for DDR4 and DDR5, with a dual-channel bus, means the system-shared GPU memory bandwidth is dictated by the installed RAM. The fact that the GPU’s bandwidth is "System Dependent" means that a faster DDR5 kit could theoretically improve the Arc B370’s performance, but the measured FPS data does not specify which memory type was used. Regardless, the CPU is not the constraint here; it is a 91st-percentile part paired with a 5th-percentile GPU.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured rows, the optimal settings balance depends on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For 1080p, the Low preset delivers the highest average FPS at 273, which is ideal for competitive play where high refresh rates are paramount. The Medium preset at 233 FPS offers a substantial visual upgrade while still maintaining frame rates above 200, making it a strong recommendation for most players. High at 202 FPS is also viable, but Ultra at 172 FPS, while smooth, may not justify the visual gain over Medium for a game like CS:GO where visibility is key.

For 1440p, the Low preset at 188 FPS remains the best for high-refresh monitors. Medium at 160 FPS is a solid middle ground, providing better texture quality while staying above the 144 FPS threshold. High at 139 FPS dips below that threshold, which could be a concern for players with 144Hz displays. Ultra at 118 FPS is playable but not optimal for twitch-based shooting.

At 2160p (4K), the situation changes. Low at 111 FPS is the only preset that breaks the 100 FPS barrier, making it the recommended choice for 4K play. Medium at 95 FPS is borderline acceptable, but the drop below 100 FPS may introduce perceptible stutter on some displays. High at 82 FPS and Ultra at 70 FPS are best avoided unless visual fidelity is the sole priority, as the frame rates are near the lower bound of smooth gameplay. The Medium preset at 2160p has a documented minimum FPS of 80 and a maximum of 109, showing significant variance, whereas the Low preset’s average of 111 suggests more consistent performance.

The data also shows that the Ultra preset’s cost in FPS is steep: it is 37% slower than Low at 1080p (172 vs 273 FPS) and 37% slower at 1440p (118 vs 188 FPS), and 37% slower at 2160p (70 vs 111 FPS). This consistent percentage drop indicates that Ultra’s extra effects (likely shadows and anti-aliasing) are uniformly taxing on the Arc B370. Therefore, the Medium preset offers the best balance of visual improvement and frame rate retention, especially at 1080p and 1440p.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to play CS:GO with this combo?

A: Based on the measured data, 1080p yields the highest frame rates across all settings, with Low averaging 273 FPS and Medium averaging 233 FPS. 1440p is also viable with Low at 188 FPS, but 2160p drops below 111 FPS even on Low.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this system?

A: The data clearly indicates the GPU is the bottleneck. The Intel Arc B370’s 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1184 places it at the 5th percentile, while the i7-14700F is at the 91st percentile across all CPUs. The FPS drops between resolutions are consistent with GPU limits.

Q: How does the Arc B370 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Arc B370’s benchmark score of 1184 is within 0.5% of the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190) and 1.4% of the AMD FirePro M2000 (1168). It is effectively in the same performance tier as these older cards.

Q: What is the highest average FPS achievable at 1080p?

A: The Low settings preset provides the highest measured average FPS at 1080p, reaching 273 FPS. Medium follows at 233 FPS, High at 202 FPS, and Ultra at 172 FPS.

Q: Is the Ultra preset worth the performance cost?

A: No. The Ultra preset is 37% slower than Low at every resolution tested. At 1080p, it drops from 273 to 172 FPS, and at 2160p it falls from 111 to 70 FPS, which is a significant loss for marginal visual gains.

Q: Does the CPU’s 20 cores help in CS:GO?

A: Not significantly. CS:GO is not a highly threaded game, and the measured FPS differences are driven by the GPU. The CPU’s single-thread score of 4257 in Passmark is more relevant, and it is more than sufficient to avoid bottlenecking the Arc B370.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete matrix of performance across four settings presets and three resolutions. At 1920x1080, the Low preset leads with an average of 273 FPS. The Medium preset averages 233 FPS, with a documented minimum of 198 FPS and maximum of 268 FPS. High averages 202 FPS, and Ultra averages 172 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra is 101 FPS.

At 2560x1440, Low averages 188 FPS. Medium averages 160 FPS, with a minimum of 136 FPS and maximum of 184 FPS. High averages 139 FPS, and Ultra averages 118 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra narrows to 70 FPS.

At 3840x2160, Low averages 111 FPS. Medium averages 95 FPS, with a minimum of 80 FPS and maximum of 109 FPS. High averages 82 FPS, and Ultra averages 70 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra is 41 FPS.

Notably, only the Medium preset has complete min/max data. The lack of min/max for other presets suggests the measurement methodology focused on average throughput. The Medium preset’s min/max data shows a variance of 29 FPS at 1080p, 48 FPS at 1440p, and 29 FPS at 2160p, indicating that frame pacing is relatively stable but not perfectly consistent.

The data shows that as resolution increases, the absolute FPS drop between Low and Ultra shrinks (101 to 70 to 41 FPS), but the percentage drop remains constant at 37%. This is a hallmark of a GPU that is shader-bound rather than bandwidth-bound, as the relative cost of Ultra effects scales linearly with pixel count.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of the Intel Core i7-14700F and Intel Arc B370 ranks 2615 out of 2848 tested combos in CS:GO, placing it in the 8th percentile of all configurations. This ranking is driven almost entirely by the GPU’s low standing, as the CPU is a top-tier part. The combo’s rank is a direct consequence of the Arc B370’s 5th percentile GPU benchmark score.

The ranking implies that 91.8% of tested combos achieve higher frame rates in CS:GO. This is unsurprising given that the Arc B370’s nearest rivals are legacy parts like the ATI Radeon HD 5770 and the AMD FirePro M2000. The i7-14700F, which would typically be paired with a discrete high-end GPU, is severely hamstrung by the integrated-class Arc B370.

The combo’s rank of 2615 means it is near the bottom of the database. For context, the CPU’s own percentile is 91, so if the combo were CPU-limited, it would rank much higher. Instead, the GPU’s 5th percentile drags the overall ranking down. The measured FPS values, particularly at 1080p Low (273 FPS), may seem respectable, but they are likely lower than what a mid-range discrete GPU would achieve with the same CPU.

The data suggests that this combo is mismatched: a high-end CPU with an entry-level GPU. In CS:GO, which is less demanding than modern AAA titles, the combo still manages playable frame rates at 1080p, but the ranking reflects that it is not competitive with mainstream gaming setups. The 8th percentile ranking is a clear signal that users seeking higher CS:GO performance should prioritize a better GPU, as the CPU has ample headroom.