Fivem

# How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER ranks 2,569 out of 3,005 tested combos in Fivem, placing it in the lower tier of systems benchmarked for this multiplayer title. This ranking reflects a fundamental imbalance: the CPU is a top-tier processor while the GPU is a last-generation entry-level card. The Ryzen 9 9900X3D sits in the 91st percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 54,762, while the GTX 1660 SUPER lands in the 53rd percentile among GPUs with an average score of 12,986. This gap means the combo's overall position is dragged down almost entirely by the graphics card, which is the limiting factor in nearly every scenario.

Looking at the CPU's nearest rivals clarifies its strength. The Ryzen 9 9900X3D scores 0.6% below the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF (55,093 vs. 54,762) and 1.3% above the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K (54,053). It also edges out the Intel Xeon 6505P by 2.0% and the Intel Core i7-14700F by 2.1%. These are narrow margins, indicating that in raw compute terms, the 9900X3D is competitive with but not dramatically superior to its closest alternatives. However, for Fivem specifically, the GPU bottleneck means this CPU advantage rarely translates into higher frame rates.

The GPU's nearest rivals show a similar cluster. The GTX 1660 SUPER is 0.4% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (12,940 vs. 12,986) and 0.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 580 (12,928). It also trails the NVIDIA Tesla M2090 by 0.7% and leads the AMD Radeon 740M by 0.9%. These deltaPct values are all within a single percentage point, meaning the GTX 1660 SUPER is performance-equivalent to a broad range of mid-range GPUs from its era, but none of them are capable of driving high frame rates at demanding settings in Fivem.

The ranking position is consistent with the measured FPS data. At 1080p, the combo achieves playable frame rates at all settings, but at 4K it drops below 30 FPS on High and Ultra presets. For a multiplayer game where responsiveness matters, this system is best suited for lower resolutions and conservative settings. The data suggests that users would need to upgrade the GPU to meaningfully improve the combo's rank, as the CPU has ample headroom.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings for this combo depend heavily on the target resolution. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset delivers 97 average FPS with a minimum of 82 FPS and a maximum of 111 FPS. This is the sweet spot: it provides a smooth, responsive experience for multiplayer gameplay while maintaining a comfortable margin above typical 60 FPS thresholds. The Low preset pushes the average to 123 FPS, but the visual quality trade-off may not be worth the extra 26 FPS, especially since Medium already clears 90 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset yields 64 average FPS with a minimum of 54 FPS and a maximum of 73 FPS. This is borderline playable; the minimum dips below 60 FPS, which could cause noticeable stutter in busy multiplayer scenes. The Low preset at 81 average FPS is the safer choice for 1440p, as it provides a more consistent experience. The High preset at 51 FPS and Ultra at 40 FPS are too low for competitive play, as frame drops below 50 FPS become distracting.

At 3840x2160, none of the settings are truly comfortable. The Low preset averages 45 FPS, which is below ideal for multiplayer. The Medium preset averages 35 FPS with a minimum of 30 FPS and a maximum of 41 FPS, which is playable only in single-player or low-stakes scenarios. The High preset at 28 FPS and Ultra at 22 FPS are effectively unplayable for a fast-paced multiplayer title. The data clearly shows that 4K should be avoided unless the user is willing to accept significant compromises.

The best experience per the measured rows is 1080p Medium. It balances visual fidelity with performance, maintaining a minimum FPS above 80 and an average near 100. For users with 1440p monitors, dropping to Low is recommended to keep the average above 80 FPS. There is no scenario where Ultra settings are advisable, as even at 1080p, the average FPS drops to 60, leaving no headroom for demanding multiplayer situations.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS data reveals a steep drop-off as resolution increases, which is typical for a GPU-bound system. Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 at Medium settings reduces the average FPS from 97 to 64, a decline of 34%. At High settings, the drop is from 77 to 51, a 34% reduction as well. Scaling from 1440p to 4K at Medium settings brings the average down from 64 to 35, a 45% decline. This accelerating loss at higher resolutions is a clear sign that the GTX 1660 SUPER's memory bandwidth and compute resources are being saturated.

The pattern is consistent across all settings. At Low, the average FPS goes from 123 at 1080p to 81 at 1440p (34% drop) to 45 at 4K (44% drop from 1440p). At Ultra, the numbers are 60, 40, and 22, with a 33% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 45% drop from 1440p to 4K. This uniformity suggests that the GPU's fill rate and pixel throughput are the primary constraints, rather than any specific setting.

The CPU's role in this scaling is minimal. The Ryzen 9 9900X3D has a boost clock of 5.50 GHz and 24 threads, which is far more than Fivem requires at any resolution. The fact that FPS scales nearly linearly with pixel count (1080p to 1440p is 1.78x pixels, and 1440p to 4K is 2.25x pixels) indicates that the frame rate is dictated by the GPU's pixel processing capability. The GTX 1660 SUPER's 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus with 336.0 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient for 1080p but becomes a bottleneck at higher resolutions, where texture memory and bandwidth demand increase.

The data shows that the limiting component is unambiguously the GPU. Users upgrading from 1080p to 1440p will see FPS roughly halve at equivalent settings, and moving to 4K will cut it by another half again. This is not a CPU limitation; the 9900X3D has the compute headroom to drive far more frames if paired with a stronger GPU.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its best performance. The Low preset averages 123 FPS, with no minimum or maximum reported. Medium averages 97 FPS with a minimum of 82 FPS and a maximum of 111 FPS. High averages 77 FPS, and Ultra averages 60 FPS. This resolution is the only one where all settings exceed the 60 FPS threshold, making it the default choice for this system.

At 2560x1440, performance drops significantly. Low averages 81 FPS, which is still playable. Medium averages 64 FPS with a minimum of 54 FPS and a maximum of 73 FPS, meaning the minimum falls below the 60 FPS mark during demanding scenes. High averages 51 FPS, and Ultra averages 40 FPS. For competitive multiplayer, only Low and possibly Medium are viable at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles. Low averages 45 FPS, Medium averages 35 FPS with a minimum of 30 FPS and a maximum of 41 FPS, High averages 28 FPS, and Ultra averages 22 FPS. None of these are suitable for fast-paced gameplay, and even the Low preset dips below 50 FPS, which would be noticeable in a multiplayer environment. The Medium preset's minimum of 30 FPS indicates severe frame pacing issues during heavy load.

The delta between Low and Ultra at each resolution is instructive. At 1080p, the spread is 63 FPS (123 vs. 60). At 1440p, it narrows to 41 FPS (81 vs. 40). At 4K, it shrinks further to 23 FPS (45 vs. 22). This narrowing suggests that at higher resolutions, the GPU is so bottlenecked that reducing settings has diminishing returns. The system is already near its limits, and the extra rendering work at 4K overwhelms the card regardless of preset.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER is built on the Turing architecture with the TU116 chip, fabricated on a 12 nm process. It has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The base clock is 1530 MHz with a boost clock of 1785 MHz, and memory runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The card features 1408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 48 raster output units, with a pixel rate of 85.68 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 157.1 GTexel/s. Its FP32 performance is 5.027 TFLOPS.

These specifications place the GTX 1660 SUPER in the 53rd percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 12,986. Its nearest rival, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile, scores 12,940 (0.4% higher), while the RX 580 scores 12,928 (0.4% lower). The Tesla M2090 scores 13,075 (0.7% higher), and the Radeon 740M scores 12,870 (0.9% lower). This clustering indicates that the GTX 1660 SUPER is a solid mid-range card for its generation, but it lacks the raw power for 1440p and 4K gaming at high frame rates.

The 6 GB VRAM capacity is a notable limitation for Fivem at higher resolutions. While 6 GB is adequate for 1080p, the measured FPS data shows that 4K performance collapses, suggesting that memory bandwidth and capacity are constraining factors. The 192-bit bus delivers 336.0 GB/s, which is sufficient for 1080p but becomes a bottleneck at 4K where pixel throughput requirements multiply.

The card's end-of-life production status and its release in 2019 mean it is outdated by current standards. Its DirectX 12 (12_1) support and Vulkan 1.4 API compatibility are adequate for Fivem, but the lack of ray tracing cores and tensor cores (both listed as null) means it cannot leverage modern rendering features. In Fivem, this translates to the measured FPS figures: playable at 1080p Medium, marginal at 1440p Low, and unplayable at 4K.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Fivem?

A: The data shows 1920x1080 is the only resolution where all settings exceed 60 FPS. At Medium, the average is 97 FPS with a minimum of 82 FPS, making it the recommended resolution.

Q: Can this system run Fivem at 4K?

A: Technically yes, but the results are poor. The Low preset averages 45 FPS, Medium averages 35 FPS, and High and Ultra drop to 28 and 22 FPS respectively. None of these are suitable for multiplayer gameplay.

Q: How does the GTX 1660 SUPER compare to its closest rivals?

A: The GPU is within 1% of several competitors. It is 0.4% slower than the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile, 0.4% faster than the RX 580, 0.7% slower than the Tesla M2090, and 0.9% faster than the Radeon 740M.

Q: Is the Ryzen 9 9900X3D bottlenecked by the GTX 1660 SUPER?

A: Yes. The CPU ranks in the 91st percentile among all CPUs, while the GPU ranks in the 53rd percentile. The FPS scaling with resolution indicates the GPU is the limiting factor, as the CPU has ample compute headroom.

Q: What settings should I use at 1440p?

A: The Low preset averages 81 FPS and is the safest choice. Medium averages 64 FPS but has a minimum of 54 FPS, which could cause stuttering in busy scenes. High and Ultra are not recommended.

Q: What is the GPU's average benchmark score and percentile?

A: The GTX 1660 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 12,986 and sits in the 53rd percentile among all GPUs.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D is a 12-core, 24-thread processor from the 9000 series, built on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge) using a 4 nm process. It has a base clock of 4.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, with a TDP of 120 W. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 128 MB of L3 cache. It supports DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth and has 24 PCIe Gen 5 lanes.

In synthetic benchmarks, the 9900X3D demonstrates exceptional performance. It scores 47,737 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 6,739 in single-core. Geekbench shows 22,884 multi-core and 3,041 single-core. PassMark multi-thread score is 56,154 with a single-thread score of 4,646. The 3DMark results range from 1,269 single-thread to 13,795 max threads. These numbers place the CPU in the 91st percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 54,762.

Despite this compute power, the CPU's role in Fivem is secondary due to the GPU bottleneck. The comparison to nearest rivals shows it is 0.6% slower than the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF and 1.3% faster than the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K, with similar margins against the Xeon 6505P and i7-14700F. These are negligible differences in gaming scenarios where the GPU is the constraint.

The 9900X3D's high boost clock of 5.50 GHz and large 128 MB L3 cache are theoretically beneficial for Fivem's multiplayer workloads, which can involve many NPCs and physics calculations. However, the measured FPS data shows no evidence of CPU limitation: at 1080p Low, the system hits 123 FPS, which is well below what this CPU could drive with a stronger GPU. The CPU's idle headroom is substantial, meaning users upgrading the GPU would see immediate FPS gains without changing the processor.

The CPU's launch MSRP is $599, positioning it as a high-end desktop part. Its 24 threads and 12 cores are overkill for Fivem, which is not known for heavy multi-threading. The 3DMark results show strong scaling from 2 threads (2,512) to 8 threads (9,002) to max threads (13,795), indicating efficient thread utilization, but this is irrelevant when the GPU limits frame rates to below 125 FPS at any setting.