Fivem

# Fivem CPU/GPU Combo Analysis: AMD Ryzen 5 7400F + Intel Arc B390

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F paired with the Intel Arc B390 is a severely unbalanced combination for Fivem, with the integrated-class GPU acting as a hard bottleneck at every resolution and preset. The combo ranks 2656th out of 3005 tested combinations in this game, placing it in the bottom 12% of all systems. Benchmark results show that the CPU has ample headroom for this multiplayer title, but the Arc B390's modest graphics throughput (7.680 TFLOPS FP32, 60.00 GPixel/s pixel rate) caps playability well below acceptable levels for smooth multiplayer sessions. The data indicates this pairing is only viable at 1080p Low settings, where it produces 88 FPS average, but any increase in resolution or visual quality results in a rapid collapse of frame rates.

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

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F brings six Zen 4 cores with twelve threads, running at a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. This Raphael-generation processor, built on TSMC's 5 nm process, features 32 MB of shared L3 cache and 83.2 GB/s of dual-channel DDR5 memory bandwidth. With a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21765 and a single-core score of 3072, the 7400F demonstrates strong computational capability that ranks it at the 83rd percentile among all tested CPUs. Its PassMark multithread score of 25645 and single-thread score of 3689 further confirm that processing power is not the limiting factor in this system.

In Fivem, a multiplayer modification platform, frame rates are often sensitive to CPU performance because of the game's complex scripting and entity management. However, the measured FPS data shows that the 7400F is never the constraint in this pairing. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 88 FPS, while at 4K Ultra it falls to just 16 FPS — a pattern that points overwhelmingly to GPU limitation rather than CPU starvation. The CPU's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-14600T (0.1% faster), Intel Core Ultra 7 155H (0.2% faster), and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H (0.2% slower), all of which have nearly identical average benchmark scores around 32700. This means the 7400F sits in a competitive performance tier, yet the Arc B390's 9th percentile GPU ranking (versus all GPUs) ensures that CPU advantages are wasted in practice.

The 7400F's 65 W TDP and unlocked multiplier suggest it could sustain high clocks in a properly cooled system, but the Arc B390 operates as an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with system-shared memory. This configuration means the CPU's memory bandwidth advantage is diluted by the GPU's reliance on shared system memory, with bandwidth described as "System Dependent." The 83.2 GB/s memory bandwidth figure applies to CPU operations, but the GPU's performance is constrained by whatever system memory allocation is available, which varies by laptop or desktop configuration.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combo rank of 2656 out of 3005 total combinations places this system in the bottom tier of all tested Fivem configurations. This is a strikingly low position given the CPU's 83rd percentile standing, and it underscores how severely the Arc B390 drags down overall performance. The GPU's own percentile ranking of 9th versus all GPUs, with an average 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1482, places it in the same performance class as NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1.3% faster), GeForce 800M (1.5% faster), GT 625 OEM (2.5% faster), and GT 710 (2.7% faster) — all legacy or entry-level parts with minimal gaming capability.

The contrast between CPU and GPU rankings is stark: the 7400F's nearest rivals all score within 0.3% of each other in average benchmark performance, indicating a tightly clustered mid-range CPU tier. In comparison, the Arc B390's nearest rivals are separated by up to 2.7% deltaPct, showing that the GPU sits at the very bottom of the performance ladder. When combined, the system's 2656th rank out of 3005 combos means that only 349 tested configurations perform worse in Fivem. This rank reflects the measured FPS data, which shows the system struggling to maintain playable frame rates at most settings.

Benchmark results indicate that the combo's position is not a reflection of the CPU's capabilities but rather the GPU's severe limitations. The 7400F could support significantly higher frame rates if paired with a discrete GPU, as evidenced by the fact that Fivem's frame rates scale almost entirely with resolution and settings — both of which primarily affect GPU load. The combo's low rank should be interpreted as a warning to users considering this pairing for Fivem: the CPU is overqualified for the GPU's output.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for this system in Fivem?

A: The only configuration that achieves a comfortable average frame rate is 1920x1080 with Low settings, producing 88 FPS average. At 1440p Low, the average drops to 58 FPS, and at 4K Low, it falls to 32 FPS.

Q: How does the Arc B390 compare to its closest GPU rivals in raw performance?

A: The Arc B390's 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1482 places it 1.3% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463), 1.5% behind the GeForce 800M (1460), 2.5% behind the GT 625 OEM (1446), and 2.7% behind the GT 710 (1443). These deltaPct values are within a narrow band, confirming the B390 sits at the entry-level GPU tier.

Q: Is the Ryzen 5 7400F the limiting factor in Fivem performance?

A: No. The CPU's benchmark scores — including Cinebench R23 multi-core 21765 and single-core 3072 — place it at the 83rd percentile, while the GPU sits at the 9th percentile. The FPS scaling across resolutions (88 FPS at 1080p Low to 32 FPS at 4K Low) indicates GPU-bound performance.

Q: What are the FPS differences between Medium and High settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, Medium settings produce an average of 70 FPS with a minimum of 59 and maximum of 80, while High settings produce 56 FPS average. The 14 FPS gap between Medium and High shows that each preset tier has a measurable impact on this system.

Q: How does the system perform at 4K resolution across all presets?

A: At 3840x2160, the system achieves 32 FPS on Low, 25 FPS on Medium (min 22, max 29), 20 FPS on High, and 16 FPS on Ultra. These figures are all below playable thresholds for a multiplayer game.

Q: Does the combo rank reflect CPU or GPU performance limitations?

A: The 2656th rank out of 3005 combos is driven by the GPU's 9th percentile standing. The CPU's 83rd percentile ranking and its nearest rival deltas (all within 0.3%) show that the processor is not the bottleneck in this pairing.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the only settings preset that delivers a comfortable multiplayer experience is 1920x1080 with Low settings, which produces an 88 FPS average. This is the sole configuration where the system exceeds the 60 FPS threshold that most players consider minimum for smooth gameplay in Fivem. The next-best option, 2560x1440 on Low, yields 58 FPS — just below that threshold and likely to feel slightly less fluid in intense multiplayer moments.

At 1080p Medium, the system averages 70 FPS with a minimum of 59 FPS, which is technically playable but leaves little margin for demanding scenes. The minimum FPS of 59 at this setting indicates that the system is near its limit, and any heavy script activity or large player gatherings could push frame rates lower. For users who prioritize visual quality over frame rate, 1080p Medium is the highest preset that maintains an average above 60 FPS, but the 59 FPS minimum is a warning sign.

The 1440p High preset, at 37 FPS average, is not recommended for Fivem's multiplayer environment, where responsiveness is critical. Similarly, all 4K presets produce averages between 16 and 32 FPS, which are unplayable for any action-oriented gameplay. The data strongly suggests that users should stick to 1080p and choose between Low for maximum smoothness or Medium for a balance of visuals and performance. Ultra settings at any resolution are not viable, with 1080p Ultra producing only 43 FPS average.

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

The resolution scaling pattern in the measured data provides clear evidence of GPU-bound performance. From 1080p Low (88 FPS) to 1440p Low (58 FPS), the frame rate drops by 34%, and from 1440p Low to 4K Low (32 FPS), it drops another 45%. This is a total decline of 64% from 1080p Low to 4K Low. The same pattern holds for High settings: 1080p High produces 56 FPS, 1440p High produces 37 FPS (34% drop), and 4K High produces 20 FPS (46% drop from 1440p). This consistent scaling with pixel count indicates that the GPU is fully saturated at all resolutions.

If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see frame rates that remain relatively flat across resolutions, since lowering resolution reduces GPU load but does not affect CPU workload. Instead, the data shows a nearly linear relationship between pixel count and frame rate, which is the classic signature of GPU limitation. The Arc B390's specifications support this interpretation: with only 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, the GPU simply lacks the throughput to handle higher resolutions, particularly when system-shared memory bandwidth further constrains performance.

The scaling from Medium settings across resolutions reinforces this conclusion. At 1080p Medium, the system averages 70 FPS; at 1440p Medium, 46 FPS (34% drop); and at 4K Medium, 25 FPS (46% drop from 1440p). The consistent 34% and 46% drops across all preset tiers (Low, Medium, High) show that the GPU is the sole limiting factor, with no evidence of CPU stalls or memory bandwidth saturation from the CPU side. The 7400F's 83.2 GB/s memory bandwidth is sufficient for the CPU's tasks, but the GPU's "System Shared" memory configuration means it competes for the same bandwidth, further degrading performance at higher resolutions.

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

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its best performance across all presets. Low settings produce an average of 88 FPS, which is the highest measured value for this combo in Fivem. Medium settings yield 70 FPS average with a minimum of 59 FPS and maximum of 80 FPS. High settings drop to 56 FPS average, and Ultra settings produce only 43 FPS average. The spread between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 45 FPS, representing a 51% performance penalty for maximum visual quality.

At 2560x1440, performance declines substantially across the board. Low settings average 58 FPS, which is 30 FPS lower than at 1080p Low. Medium settings average 46 FPS with a minimum of 39 FPS and maximum of 53 FPS. High settings produce 37 FPS average, and Ultra settings drop to 29 FPS average. The 1440p results show that even the lowest preset barely reaches 60 FPS, making this resolution marginal for multiplayer use.

At 3840x2160, the system falls below playable thresholds for all presets. Low settings average 32 FPS, Medium settings average 25 FPS with a minimum of 22 FPS and maximum of 29 FPS, High settings average 20 FPS, and Ultra settings average 16 FPS. The 4K results demonstrate that this combo is not suitable for high-resolution gaming in Fivem, with even the lowest settings failing to reach 33 FPS. The minimum FPS of 22 at 4K Medium indicates that the system can dip to near-unplayable levels during demanding scenes.

The complete measured FPS table shows a clear hierarchy: 1080p Low (88 FPS) > 1080p Medium (70 FPS) > 1080p High (56 FPS) > 1440p Low (58 FPS) > 1440p Medium (46 FPS) > 1080p Ultra (43 FPS) > 1440p High (37 FPS) > 4K Low (32 FPS) > 1440p Ultra (29 FPS) > 4K Medium (25 FPS) > 4K High (20 FPS) > 4K Ultra (16 FPS). This ordering reveals that 1080p Medium outperforms 1440p Low by 12 FPS, and that 1080p Ultra narrowly beats 1440p High by 6 FPS, confirming that resolution has a greater impact on this system than preset quality.