Fivem

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

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 3 architecture (Vermeer codename), built on TSMC's 7 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.00 GHz, with a 65 W TDP and support for DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The CPU's L3 cache is 32 MB shared across all cores, which is substantial for a mid-range desktop part. In PassMark's multithreaded benchmark, the 5600F scores 19236, and its single-thread score is 2872, placing it at the 85th percentile among all CPUs tested. This indicates strong per-core performance that matters for game logic and physics in a multiplayer environment like Fivem, where many entities and scripts run concurrently.

For Fivem specifically, the CPU's role is significant because the game is an online multiplayer modification framework built on Grand Theft Auto V's engine. This engine tends to be heavily dependent on single-thread performance for the main game loop, but the 5600F's 12 threads provide headroom for background simulation, network handling, and other players' actions. The PassMark physics score of 1043 and integer math score of 59339 suggest the processor can handle the complex calculations that Fivem's servers push to clients. The CPU's 85th percentile ranking versus all CPUs means it outperforms the majority of installed processors, which is beneficial when many players congregate in dense urban areas with numerous NPCs and vehicles.

However, the measured FPS data reveals that this CPU is not the primary constraint in most scenarios. At 1080p Low settings, the system achieves 76 FPS on average, which is the highest measured result across all resolutions and settings. This suggests that at lower graphical loads, the CPU can feed the GPU adequately. The drop from 76 FPS at 1080p Low to 48 FPS at 1080p High (a 37% reduction) is more attributable to GPU load than CPU limitations, as the GTX 1650 is a modest graphics card. The CPU's nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 5 225, scores nearly identically (avgScore 36938 vs 36945), with a deltaPct of 0, meaning performance parity. The AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D is only 0.2% slower, while the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 and Intel Core i9-12900T are 0.4% and 0.5% slower respectively. These tight margins indicate the 5600F is well-positioned in its performance tier.

FAQ

Q: What average FPS does this combo achieve at 1080p with Medium settings?

A: At 1920x1080 with Medium settings, the measured average FPS is 60, with a minimum of 51 and a maximum of 69. This is the most balanced setting for smooth gameplay, as it sits exactly at the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in Fivem with this configuration?

A: Benchmark results indicate the GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher settings. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 76 FPS, but at 1080p Ultra it drops to 37 FPS — a 51% reduction. The CPU's PassMark single-thread score of 2872 and multithread score of 19236 are strong enough to support higher frame rates, but the GTX 1650's PassMark G3D score of 7880 caps performance.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested configurations?

A: The combination of AMD Ryzen 5 5600F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 ranks 2887 out of 3005 tested combos in Fivem. This places it in the lower percentile of tested systems, reflecting the GPU's modest capabilities rather than CPU shortcomings.

Q: What is the best resolution for playable frame rates?

A: At 1920x1080, all settings except Ultra produce average FPS above 48, with Low reaching 76 FPS. At 2560x1440, only Low (50 FPS) and Medium (40 FPS) are playable, while High drops to 32 FPS. At 3840x2160, no setting achieves above 28 FPS.

Q: Does the GTX 1650's 4 GB VRAM affect performance in Fivem?

A: The GPU has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory with a 128-bit bus and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth. At higher resolutions and settings, this limited VRAM likely contributes to the steep FPS drops, as the game world's textures and draw distances require more memory than available.

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

A: The Ryzen 5 5600F has an average benchmark score of 36945. Its closest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 5 225, scores 36938 (0% delta). The AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D scores 37018 (-0.2%), the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 scores 37093 (-0.4%), and the Intel Core i9-12900T scores 37112 (-0.5%). All are within 0.5% of each other.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data shows a clear trade-off between visual fidelity and performance. For the best experience at 1920x1080, the Medium preset delivers an average of 60 FPS with a minimum of 51 FPS, providing a consistent frame rate that stays above the common playability threshold. This is the optimal choice because it maintains fluidity while still offering acceptable visual quality. Low settings push the average to 76 FPS, which is ideal for competitive play or high-refresh-rate monitors, but the visual downgrade may be noticeable. High settings at 48 FPS are borderline playable but risk dropping below 45 FPS in busy scenes. Ultra settings at 37 FPS are not recommended for smooth gameplay.

At 2560x1440, the situation changes. Low settings at 50 FPS are the only option that consistently stays above 45 FPS. Medium settings at 40 FPS with a minimum of 34 FPS may cause visible stuttering during intense moments. High and Ultra at 32 FPS and 25 FPS respectively are too low for comfortable play. At 3840x2160, all settings are below 28 FPS, with Ultra at 14 FPS making the game unplayable. The data suggests that users should stick to 1080p Medium for the best balance, or 1080p Low if they prioritize frame rate consistency. The 4 GB VRAM on the GTX 1650 likely constrains higher settings at higher resolutions, as the measured FPS drops disproportionately when moving from Medium to High at each resolution.

How This Combo Ranks

This system ranks 2887 out of 3005 tested combos in Fivem, placing it in the bottom 4% of tested configurations. This low ranking is primarily due to the GPU's performance ceiling. The GTX 1650 sits at the 40th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 7472. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (0.3% faster), Intel UHD Graphics 750 (0.4% faster), and AMD Radeon R7 350 (0.6% faster), while the Intel Arc A310 is 1% slower. These comparisons show the GTX 1650 is at the lower end of the desktop GPU spectrum. In contrast, the CPU is far more capable, ranking at the 85th percentile among all CPUs.

The disparity between the CPU and GPU capabilities means the combo's rank is dragged down by the graphics card. If the same CPU were paired with a stronger GPU, the ranking would likely be significantly higher. The measured FPS data confirms this: at 1080p Low, the system achieves 76 FPS, but this drops to 60 FPS at Medium and 48 FPS at High. The pattern of diminishing returns with each settings increase is characteristic of a GPU-bound system. The CPU's PassMark multithread score of 19236 and single-thread score of 2872 are more than adequate for the game's demands, as evidenced by the relatively high frame rates at low graphical settings.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals how performance scales across resolutions. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the system achieves 76 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 Low drops this to 50 FPS, a 34% reduction. At 3840x2160 Low, the average falls to 28 FPS, which is a 63% reduction from 1080p. For Medium settings, the progression is 60 FPS at 1080p, 40 FPS at 1440p (33% drop), and 22 FPS at 4K (63% drop). High settings go from 48 FPS at 1080p to 32 FPS at 1440p (33% drop) and 18 FPS at 4K (63% drop). Ultra settings drop from 37 FPS at 1080p to 25 FPS at 1440p (32% drop) and 14 FPS at 4K (62% drop).

The consistent ~33% FPS reduction from 1080p to 1440p and ~63% reduction from 1080p to 4K across all settings indicates that the GPU is the limiting component. The pixel count increases from 2.07 million (1080p) to 3.69 million (1440p) — a 78% increase — yet FPS only drops by about a third. This suggests that the game's rendering at these resolutions is not purely pixel-bound; other factors like fill rate and memory bandwidth are also constraining performance. The GTX 1650's 128.1 GB/s memory bandwidth and 53.28 GPixel/s pixel rate are modest, and the 4 GB VRAM may cause texture thrashing at higher resolutions. The CPU's performance remains consistent across resolutions, as evidenced by the proportional FPS drops that align with GPU workload increases rather than CPU stalls.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers the following average FPS: Low settings achieve 76 FPS, Medium achieves 60 FPS (minimum 51, maximum 69), High achieves 48 FPS, and Ultra achieves 37 FPS. This is the only resolution where any setting reaches above 60 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 39 FPS, indicating significant GPU sensitivity to settings. The Medium setting's minimum of 51 FPS suggests occasional dips, but the average remains playable.

At 2560x1440, performance drops noticeably. Low settings average 50 FPS, Medium averages 40 FPS (minimum 34, maximum 45), High averages 32 FPS, and Ultra averages 25 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra narrows to 25 FPS, meaning that even the lowest settings cannot maintain high frame rates. The Medium minimum of 34 FPS indicates that demanding scenes can cause stuttering. At 3840x2160, the system struggles: Low averages 28 FPS, Medium averages 22 FPS (minimum 19, maximum 25), High averages 18 FPS, and Ultra averages 14 FPS. No setting achieves playable frame rates at this resolution.

The data also shows diminishing returns from settings changes at higher resolutions. At 1080p, moving from Low to Medium costs 16 FPS (76 to 60), but at 4K, the same change costs only 6 FPS (28 to 22). This is because the GPU is already saturated at 4K, so reducing settings has less impact. The Medium settings at each resolution include minimum and maximum FPS values, providing insight into frame time consistency: at 1080p Medium the range is 51-69 (18 FPS spread), at 1440p Medium it's 34-45 (11 FPS spread), and at 4K Medium it's 19-25 (6 FPS spread). The narrowing range at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU is consistently bottlenecked, whereas at 1080p, there's more variance likely due to CPU-driven scene complexity. Overall, the measured results show a system that is well-suited for 1080p gaming at Medium settings, adequate for 1440p only at Low settings, and unsuitable for 4K gaming.