Fivem

# Fivem Performance Analysis: AMD Ryzen 7 7700 + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER delivers a mid-range Fivem experience, placing in the 1250th position out of 1792 tested combinations. This pairing combines a strong 8-core, 16-thread Zen 4 processor with a 12nm Turing GPU that is now end-of-life, creating a system that handles 1080p and 1440p gaming comfortably but struggles at 4K. The CPU ranks in the 91st percentile among all processors, while the GPU sits in the 63rd percentile, indicating a processor-heavy combination where the graphics card is likely the primary constraint in most gaming scenarios.

FAQ

Q: How does the Ryzen 7 7700 compare to its closest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Ryzen 7 7700 achieves an average benchmark score of 40,468. This places it 0.1% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 7940H (40,431) and 0.5% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 (40,262). It trails the Intel Core i9-13905H by 0.6% (40,712) and leads the Intel Core Ultra 5 235T by 1.2% (39,995).

Q: What is the GPU's standing relative to its nearest competitors?

A: The RTX 2060 SUPER posts an average benchmark score of 19,774, placing it 0.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN (19,706) and 0.5% ahead of the RTX 2070 (19,680). It outperforms the NVIDIA Quadro K5200 by 0.8% (19,623) and the Tesla K40m by 1.3% (19,519).

Q: What framerates can this combo achieve at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the system delivers an average of 161.1 FPS on Low settings, 126.8 FPS on Medium, 98.9 FPS on High, and 80.1 FPS on Ultra. These numbers indicate smooth gameplay across all settings at this resolution.

Q: Is 1440p a viable resolution for this combination?

A: Yes, 1440p remains playable. At 2560x1440, average framerates range from 104 FPS on Low to 52 FPS on Ultra, with Medium at 81.1 FPS and High at 64.6 FPS. The High preset stays above 60 FPS, making it the sweet spot for quality and performance balance.

Q: How does the system handle 4K resolution?

A: 4K gaming is challenging for this pairing. At 3840x2160, average FPS drops to 55.8 on Low, 48.8 on Medium, 35.2 on High, and 30.9 on Ultra. Only the Low preset approaches playable territory, while Ultra falls below 31 FPS.

Q: What are the key specifications of this CPU-GPU pairing?

A: The Ryzen 7 7700 features 8 cores and 16 threads with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and boost up to 5.30 GHz, using 65W TDP on the AM5 socket. The RTX 2060 SUPER has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth, a base clock of 1470 MHz, and boost of 1650 MHz.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of AMD Ryzen 7 7700 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER ranks 1250th out of 1792 tested combos in Fivem, placing it in the lower-middle portion of the database. This ranking reflects a significant imbalance: the CPU is a modern, high-performance part while the GPU is several generations old and end-of-life. The data confirms that this is a GPU-limited configuration in most scenarios, as the processor's 91st percentile standing far exceeds the GPU's 63rd percentile.

Benchmark results indicate that the CPU's multicore strength — evidenced by a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 29,302 and a Passmark multithread score of 34,470 — does not directly translate to Fivem performance gains. The game's framerates correlate more strongly with the GPU's capabilities. The RTX 2060 SUPER's Passmark G3D score of 16,462 and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,011 suggest modest DirectX 12 performance, which aligns with the measured FPS results showing diminishing returns as resolution increases.

When compared to other tested combinations, this pairing sits in the 69.7th percentile of the database, meaning roughly 30% of tested combos perform worse. However, the delta between the CPU's potential and actual game performance highlights that upgrading the GPU would yield substantially better Fivem results, while the CPU has headroom to support a more powerful graphics card.

GPU Role

The RTX 2060 SUPER plays the decisive role in this combination's Fivem performance. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which becomes increasingly strained as resolution climbs. The GPU's boost clock of 1650 MHz and base clock of 1470 MHz are modest by modern standards, and the 7.181 TFLOPS FP32 compute capacity limits shader-heavy workloads common in multiplayer environments.

At 1080p, the GPU delivers playable framerates across all settings, with the difference between Low (161.1 FPS) and Ultra (80.1 FPS) representing a 50.3% performance drop. The scaling pattern suggests the GPU handles the game's draw calls and geometry efficiently at lower resolutions but begins to hit memory bandwidth limits at higher pixel counts. At 1440p, the frame rate drops more sharply per setting tier: High produces 64.6 FPS while Low reaches 104 FPS, a 37.9% reduction. This indicates the GPU's 448.0 GB/s bandwidth becomes a bottleneck as pixel fill rate demands increase.

At 4K, the GPU's limitations are fully exposed. The average FPS ranges from 55.8 on Low to 30.9 on Ultra, with High at 35.2 FPS. These numbers fall below the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay, even on Low settings. The 8 GB VRAM capacity, while sufficient for 1080p and 1440p, may also contribute to the steep 4K performance penalty. The GPU's 12nm process node and 175W TDP indicate an older architecture that lacks the efficiency of newer designs, further explaining the steep performance cliffs at higher resolutions.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data shows clear trade-offs between visual quality and framerate across each resolution. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset offers the best balance, delivering 126.8 FPS average — comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold while maintaining reasonable visual fidelity. High at 98.9 FPS is also viable for users prioritizing image quality, while Ultra at 80.1 FPS remains playable but offers diminishing returns over High.

For 2560x1440, the High preset at 64.6 FPS represents the optimal choice, staying above 60 FPS while providing strong visuals. Medium at 81.1 FPS is the safer option for users who prefer a larger performance buffer, while Low at 104 FPS suits competitive play. Ultra at 52 FPS dips below the smoothness threshold and is not recommended for sustained gameplay.

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves 60 FPS. Low at 55.8 FPS is the only setting approaching playability, while Medium at 48.8 FPS and High at 35.2 FPS are marginal. Ultra at 30.9 FPS is essentially unplayable for most users. For 4K, the data suggests reducing resolution to 1440p is the preferable strategy, as the GPU lacks the bandwidth and compute resources to provide a consistent experience at 2160p.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of this combo's capabilities across twelve configurations. At 1920x1080, the system achieves its highest framerates: Low settings produce 161.1 FPS average, Medium reaches 126.8 FPS, High delivers 98.9 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 80.1 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra represents a 50.3% drop, showing consistent but steep performance degradation as settings increase.

At 2560x1440, the averages are 104 FPS on Low, 81.1 FPS on Medium, 64.6 FPS on High, and 52 FPS on Ultra. The transition from 1080p to 1440p costs roughly 35-36% performance across all settings, indicating that resolution scaling is the primary factor in frame rate reduction. The gap between Medium and High at 1440p is 16.5 FPS, while High to Ultra drops 12.6 FPS.

The 3840x2160 results show severe limitations: 55.8 FPS on Low, 48.8 FPS on Medium, 35.2 FPS on High, and 30.9 FPS on Ultra. Moving from 1440p to 4K causes a 46-48% performance hit across all settings, with the absolute FPS values falling below playable thresholds for most presets. The data shows that this combination is best suited for 1080p gaming with High or lower settings, or 1440p with Medium to High settings, while 4K should be avoided unless users accept compromised visual quality and framerates.