Fivem

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER pairing delivers a predictable but distinct performance profile in Fivem. The 8-core, 16-thread Zen 5 processor provides substantial headroom, while the 8 GB Turing-based GPU becomes the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions. This analysis breaks down how each component influences the measured frame rates, how the combo scales across settings, and where it stands among the 3005 tested configurations.

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

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F is built on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge codename) using a 4 nm process from TSMC. It packs 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. This is a 65 W TDP part on the AMD Socket AM5 platform, supporting DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode with a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The 32 MB shared L3 cache and 1 MB L2 per core contribute to its strong synthetic scores, including a Passmark single-thread score of 4691 and a multithread score of 36470.

In Fivem, a multiplayer mod that often relies on single-core performance for game logic and physics, the 9700F's 5.50 GHz boost clock is a significant asset. The Passmark single-thread score of 4691 places it in the 94th percentile among all CPUs, indicating top-tier responsiveness for the CPU-bound portions of the game. The data shows that at 1080p Low settings, the combo reaches 159 FPS average, which is the highest measured result in the entire set. This suggests the CPU is far from saturated; the frame rate ceiling at that setting is likely dictated by the GPU's raw output capability rather than the processor's limits.

Looking at the nearest rivals, the 9700F's average benchmark score of 69996 is remarkably close to the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX (69875, deltaPct 0.2) and the Intel Core i7-14700KF (70163, deltaPct -0.2). It also edges out the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X (69515, deltaPct 0.7) and the Intel Core i7-14700K (69355, deltaPct 0.9). This clustering means that in CPU-bound scenarios, swapping between these processors would yield negligible differences. For Fivem specifically, the 9700F's high boost clock and strong single-thread performance are more relevant than its raw multithread capability, which is why it maintains high frame rates even when the GPU is not the limiting factor.

The 9700F's L3 cache of 32 MB shared across 8 cores is ample for the game's data streaming, and its 4 nm process node keeps power draw low while maintaining high clocks. The benchmark results indicate that the processor's Passmark data compression score of 421988 and floating-point math score of 77955 are robust, but these are less directly tied to gaming performance than the single-thread and physics scores. The physics score of 2122 is moderate, but Fivem's multiplayer nature means that server-side calculations and client-side entity updates can create unpredictable CPU loads. The 9700F's 16 threads provide enough parallelism to handle these bursts without causing frame drops, as evidenced by the consistent minimum FPS values at Medium settings (107 FPS at 1080p, 70 FPS at 1440p, 39 FPS at 4K).

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER is a Turing-architecture GPU (TU106 chip) manufactured on a 12 nm process. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering a bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s. The base clock is 1470 MHz with a boost clock of 1650 MHz, and memory runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). With 2176 shading units, 136 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, the card also includes 34 RT cores and 272 tensor cores, supporting DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4.

In Fivem, the RTX 2060 SUPER's 8 GB VRAM is adequate for the game's typical texture loads at 1080p and 1440p. The memory bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s ensures that texture streaming and high-resolution assets do not cause stuttering. The GPU's Passmark G3D score of 16462 places it in the 62nd percentile among all GPUs, which is a mid-range position. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile (18159, deltaPct -0.4) and the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 (18189, deltaPct -0.5), showing that the 2060 SUPER is within a small margin of these newer or mobile parts.

The 2060 SUPER's FP32 performance of 7.181 TFLOPS and texture rate of 224.4 GTexel/s are the key metrics for rasterization in Fivem. At 1080p High settings, the combo achieves 101 FPS average, which is a playable level for most users. However, the data shows that the GPU becomes the primary limiter as resolution increases. The 12 nm process node and 175 W TDP are relatively power-hungry by modern standards, but the card's dual-slot cooler and single 8-pin connector are conventional. The suggested PSU of 450 W is not a constraint for most builders.

The RTX 2060 SUPER's DirectX 12 score of 61 in Passmark is low, but Fivem is not a heavily DX12-dependent title. The game's performance is more tied to raw shader throughput and memory bandwidth, both of which the 2060 SUPER provides in adequate measure for the measured settings. The 8 GB VRAM capacity is sufficient for the game's draw distances and entity counts, which are typically CPU-bound in multiplayer scenarios. The GPU's G2D score of 854 is respectable but irrelevant to gaming; the compute score of 6721 suggests the card can handle some light compute workloads, but this does not impact Fivem's frame rates.

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

The measured FPS data across resolutions reveals a clear pattern of GPU-bound scaling. At 1080p Low, the combo hits 159 FPS average. Moving to 1440p Low, the average drops to 105 FPS, a reduction of 54 FPS. At 4K Low, the average falls to 58 FPS, a further drop of 47 FPS. This scaling is steep, indicating that the GPU is struggling to fill the increasing pixel count. The CPU's performance headroom is demonstrated by the fact that the frame rate is still high at 1080p Low, suggesting the 9700F is not limiting the 2060 SUPER's output.

At Medium settings, the pattern is similar but with a notable minimum FPS data point. At 1080p Medium, the average is 126 FPS with a minimum of 107 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the average is 83 FPS with a minimum of 70 FPS. At 4K Medium, the average is 46 FPS with a minimum of 39 FPS and a maximum of 53 FPS. The minimum FPS values are consistently about 15-20% below the averages, which suggests that the GPU is hitting occasional memory bandwidth or shader bottlenecks during complex scenes. The fact that the minimum FPS scales proportionally with the average indicates a consistent GPU limitation rather than sporadic CPU stalls.

The High settings show a similar reduction: 101 FPS at 1080p, 66 FPS at 1440p, and 37 FPS at 4K. The percentage drop from 1080p to 4K is roughly 63% for High, 64% for Medium, and 63% for Low. This consistency across settings strongly implies the GPU is the dominant limiting component at all resolutions above 1080p. If the CPU were limiting, the frame rate would remain flat or drop less severely as resolution increases, because the CPU work per frame is constant regardless of pixel count. The data shows the opposite: frame rates halve from 1080p to 4K, which is characteristic of GPU-bound rendering.

At Ultra settings, the 4K average drops to 28 FPS, which is barely playable. The 1440p Ultra average is 51 FPS, and the 1080p Ultra average is 78 FPS. The Ultra preset likely increases shadow quality, draw distance, and post-processing effects that heavily tax the GPU's 7.181 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. The 2060 SUPER's 12 nm process and older Turing architecture are not efficient at handling the extra shader load, resulting in the steepest scaling curve of all settings. The conclusion is clear: for this combo, the RTX 2060 SUPER is the bottleneck at 1440p and 4K, while the Ryzen 7 9700F has ample headroom that is only partially utilized even at 1080p Low.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER ranks 2078 out of 3005 tested combos in Fivem. This places it in the lower-middle tier of the database, which aligns with the GPU's mid-range percentile (62nd) and the CPU's high percentile (94th). The rank of 2078 means there are 2077 other processor/GPU pairings that achieve higher average frame rates in this game, but also 927 combos that perform worse. This position is consistent with a strong CPU paired with a weaker GPU; the combo's performance is held back by the 2060 SUPER's limitations.

To contextualize the rank, consider that the CPU's nearest rivals (Ryzen 9 7940HX, i7-14700KF, Ryzen 9 7950X, i7-14700K) all have similar average scores within a deltaPct of less than 1%. If any of these CPUs were paired with the same RTX 2060 SUPER, the combo rank would likely be nearly identical, because the GPU would still be the limiting factor. Conversely, pairing the 9700F with a higher-tier GPU would likely place the combo in the top 500, given the CPU's strong single-thread performance. The rank of 2078 is therefore a reflection of the GPU's tier, not the CPU's capability.

The data shows that the combo's best performance is at 1080p Low (159 FPS), which is competitive with many higher-ranked combos that might use mid-range GPUs. However, at 4K Ultra (28 FPS), the combo falls below the threshold for smooth gameplay, which is why it ranks below combos with more powerful GPUs. The gap between the CPU's 94th percentile and the GPU's 62nd percentile is the defining characteristic of this pairing. It means that for Fivem, the user is leaving significant FPS on the table by not having a stronger GPU, especially at higher resolutions. The rank of 2078 out of 3005 is a useful metric for builders: it indicates that this combo is adequate for 1080p gaming but will struggle at 4K, and that upgrading the GPU would yield a disproportionate improvement in the combo's rank.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the recommended settings depend heavily on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For 1080p, the Low preset delivers 159 FPS average, which is ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors. The Medium preset at 126 FPS average with a minimum of 107 FPS is also excellent, offering a better visual experience without sacrificing smoothness. The High preset at 101 FPS average is still playable, but the Ultra preset at 78 FPS average is not recommended for competitive play, as the frame rate dips below the 80 FPS threshold that most players prefer.

At 1440p, the Low preset yields 105 FPS average, which is playable but not silky smooth. The Medium preset at 83 FPS average with a minimum of 70 FPS is the sweet spot for this resolution, providing a balance between visual quality and responsiveness. The High preset at 66 FPS average is borderline, and the Ultra preset at 51 FPS average is too low for a smooth experience. For 1440p, Medium is the recommended preset, as it maintains a minimum FPS above 70, which is generally considered the playable threshold for fast-paced multiplayer games.

At 4K, the situation is more challenging. The Low preset at 58 FPS average is the only truly playable option, but it requires sacrificing visual fidelity. The Medium preset at 46 FPS average is suboptimal, and the High preset at 37 FPS average is unplayable for most users. The Ultra preset at 28 FPS average is not viable for any serious gameplay. Given that Fivem is a multiplayer game where frame rate consistency matters more than absolute visual quality, the recommendation for 4K is to use the Low preset, which provides a playable frame rate. Alternatively, users should consider lowering the resolution to 1440p with Medium settings for a better overall experience.

The data indicates that the Medium preset at 1440p offers the best balance of performance and visuals for this combo, with an average FPS of 83 and a minimum of 70. For 1080p, the Medium preset is also recommended, as it delivers 126 FPS average with a minimum of 107 FPS, ensuring no drops below the refresh rate of most 144 Hz monitors. The Ultra preset should be avoided at all resolutions, as the gains in visual quality do not justify the steep FPS penalty. The measured rows show that the jump from Medium to High costs roughly 20% of the frame rate at any resolution, while the jump from High to Ultra costs another 25-30%, making these presets inefficient for this GPU.

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

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of the combo's performance across three resolutions and four settings presets.

At 3840x2160 (4K), the results are as follows: Low settings yield an average FPS of 58. Medium settings produce an average of 46 FPS, with a minimum of 39 FPS and a maximum of 53 FPS. High settings drop to 37 FPS average. Ultra settings bottom out at 28 FPS average. The minimum FPS data is only available for the Medium preset, but the spread between min and max (39-53) suggests the GPU is working at its limits, with frame times varying due to scene complexity. The gap between Low (58 FPS) and Ultra (28 FPS) is a 30 FPS difference, or a 52% reduction, highlighting the GPU's sensitivity to the Ultra preset's additional shader work.

At 2560x1440 (1440p), the measured results show: Low settings deliver 105 FPS average. Medium settings produce 83 FPS average, with a minimum of 70 FPS and a maximum of 95 FPS. High settings drop to 66 FPS average. Ultra settings yield 51 FPS average. The Medium preset's minimum of 70 FPS is notable because it indicates that the combo can maintain a playable frame rate even during intense multiplayer scenes. The step from Medium to High is a 17 FPS reduction (83 to 66), while the step from High to Ultra is a 15 FPS reduction (66 to 51). This linear scaling suggests the GPU's pixel fill rate is the limiting factor, as each preset adds a consistent load.

At 1920x1080 (1080p), the data shows: Low settings achieve 159 FPS average, the highest measured value. Medium settings produce 126 FPS average, with a minimum of 107 FPS and a maximum of 145 FPS. High settings deliver 101 FPS average. Ultra settings drop to 78 FPS average. The 1080p results demonstrate that the combo is capable of high refresh rates at lower settings. The 33 FPS gap between Low (159) and Medium (126) is significant, but the Medium preset's minimum of 107 FPS ensures a smooth experience. The High preset at 101 FPS is still above 100 FPS, making it viable for 144 Hz monitors, but the Ultra preset at 78 FPS is the first setting that falls below the 100 FPS mark.

Comparing across resolutions at the same setting: at Low, the drop from 1080p to 1440p is 54 FPS (159 to 105), and from 1440p to 4K is 47 FPS (105 to 58). At Medium, the drops are 43 FPS (126 to 83) and 37 FPS (83 to 46). At High, the drops are 35 FPS (101 to 66) and 29 FPS (66 to 37). At Ultra, the drops are 27 FPS (78 to 51) and 23 FPS (51 to 28). The diminishing absolute FPS drops at higher settings confirm that the GPU is the bottleneck; as the per-frame load increases, the relative impact of resolution scaling becomes less pronounced because the GPU is already saturated. The minimum FPS data at Medium settings shows the same pattern: 107 at 1080p, 70 at 1440p, and 39 at 4K, which are all approximately 15-17% below their respective averages. This consistency indicates a stable GPU performance profile without thermal throttling or driver issues.