Fivem

The benchmark data for Fivem, captured with an Intel Core i5-10400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060, presents a clear profile of a system that is heavily constrained by the graphics card at higher resolutions. The measured frames per second (FPS) across the twelve tested configurations show a predictable scaling pattern, but the magnitude of the performance drop between 1080p and 4K reveals the boundary of this GPU's capability in this specific multiplayer title.

Resolution Scaling

The transition from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 produces a dramatic reduction in frame rate, indicating that the RTX 2060 becomes the limiting component as pixel count increases. At the High preset, the average FPS falls from 88.8 at 1080p to 61.9 at 1440p, a drop of approximately 30%, and then further to 35.7 at 4K, representing a near 60% reduction from the 1080p baseline. This steep curve is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario, where the 6 GB frame buffer and the 336.0 GB/s memory bandwidth are saturated by the demands of 4K rendering.

The scaling is even more pronounced when examining the Low preset. At 1080p, the system achieves a high 143.3 FPS, which drops to 96.4 at 1440p and then to 52 at 4K. While the absolute numbers are higher, the percentage loss from 1080p to 4K is roughly 64%, confirming that the rendering load at 4K overwhelms the GPU regardless of the graphical complexity. The data suggests that the i5-10400F, with its six cores and twelve threads, is not the primary bottleneck in these high-resolution scenarios; the consistent decline in FPS aligns with the GPU's pixel throughput limits.

Interestingly, the gap between the Low and Ultra presets narrows as resolution increases. At 1080p, the difference between Low (143.3 FPS) and Ultra (71.1 FPS) is a substantial 72.2 FPS. However, at 4K, this gap compresses to just 23.4 FPS, with Low at 52 FPS and Ultra at 28.6 FPS. This convergence indicates that at 4K, the GPU is so heavily loaded that the additional work required by higher settings has a relatively smaller impact on the absolute frame rate, though it still pushes the experience into unplayable territory.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060, built on the Turing architecture with a TU106 chip, is the central figure in these results. Its 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus provides a bandwidth of 336.0 GB/s, which is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p gaming but becomes a limiting factor at 4K. The benchmark data shows that at the Ultra preset, the GPU cannot maintain a smooth experience at any resolution, with the 4K average sitting at a low 28.6 FPS.

The GPU's boost clock of 1680 MHz and base clock of 1365 MHz are the operational speeds that drive these results. The data indicates that the card performs admirably at lower resolutions, but the 4K results suggest that the 6 GB memory capacity is a constraint; the High preset at 4K yields 35.7 FPS, which is only marginally better than the Medium preset at 39.8 FPS, hinting that memory allocation is a significant factor. The GPU's 1920 shading units and 48 ROPs are tasked with processing the frame, and the measured FPS reflects a card that is working at its limits when the pixel count quadruples from 1080p.

Relative to its peers, the RTX 2060 sits in a specific performance tier. Its average benchmark score of 16074 places it at the 58th percentile of all GPUs. In the nearest rival comparisons, it is 0.5% behind the AMD Radeon RX 7600S and 1.8% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W5500. This positioning indicates that while it is not a top-tier card, it holds its own against similar-class hardware, but the Fivem data shows that this level of performance is best suited for 1080p or 1440p gaming, not 4K.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal experience for this combination is found at the High preset at 1920x1080. This configuration delivers an average of 88.8 FPS, which is comfortably above the threshold for smooth gameplay in a fast-paced multiplayer environment. The Medium preset at 1080p offers a higher frame rate of 113.7 FPS, but the jump to High provides a better balance of visual fidelity and performance without the steep cost seen at Ultra.

For users with a 1440p monitor, the High preset is the recommended choice, yielding an average of 61.9 FPS. This is a playable frame rate, though it is noticeably lower than the 1080p result. The Medium preset at 1440p provides a higher 73 FPS, but the visual quality reduction may not be worth the performance gain. The Ultra preset is not recommended at any resolution, as it produces the lowest frame rates across the board, including a 47.2 FPS average at 1440p and a 28.6 FPS average at 4K, both of which are below the threshold for a responsive experience.

At 4K, the data strongly suggests avoiding this resolution altogether. Even the Low preset only manages a 52 FPS average, which is marginal, and the High preset drops to 35.7 FPS. The GPU is simply not equipped to handle the pixel load at this resolution, and the results show that the best course is to stick with 1080p or 1440p with High settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete set of measured FPS values provides a detailed picture of performance scaling across all settings and resolutions.

At 1920x1080, the system demonstrates its strongest performance. The Low preset achieves an average of 143.3 FPS, while Medium hits 113.7 FPS. High follows at 88.8 FPS, and Ultra is the lowest at 71.1 FPS. These numbers show a clear hierarchy where each step up in settings costs roughly 20-30 FPS, but even the most demanding Ultra preset remains playable.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates drop considerably. Low still manages a high 96.4 FPS, but Medium falls to 73 FPS. High is at 61.9 FPS, and Ultra drops to 47.2 FPS. The scaling here is less linear than at 1080p, with the gap between Medium and High narrowing, suggesting that the GPU is beginning to struggle with the increased pixel count.

At 3840x2160, the performance is severely limited. Low produces a 52 FPS average, Medium 39.8 FPS, High 35.7 FPS, and Ultra a low 28.6 FPS. The differences between presets are smaller in absolute terms, but the overall experience is poor. The data indicates that this resolution is beyond the capabilities of the RTX 2060 for Fivem, with even the lowest settings failing to deliver a consistently smooth frame rate.

How This Combo Ranks

In the broader context of tested hardware combinations for Fivem, this specific pairing of the Intel Core i5-10400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 holds a rank of 1475 out of 1792 total combos. This places it in the lower 18% of all tested systems, which is a notable finding given the individual components' respectable benchmark scores. The CPU, with an average benchmark score of 14168, sits at the 73rd percentile of all CPUs, and the GPU is at the 58th percentile. However, the combined rank suggests that in this particular game, the pairing does not punch above its weight.

The rank likely reflects the game's demanding nature at higher resolutions, where the RTX 2060's 6 GB memory becomes a liability. The CPU's nearest rivals, such as the AMD EPYC 7552 with a delta of 0.4% and the Intel Core i5-8500 with a delta of -1.1%, show that the i5-10400F is competitive in raw processing power. The GPU's rivals, including the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 with a delta of -1.7%, similarly indicate that the hardware is in a standard performance tier. Yet, the low combo rank implies that Fivem's specific workload, likely involving heavy multi-player scripting and asset streaming, does not favor this configuration.

The data shows that while the components are individually average, their combined performance in Fivem is below the median. This is likely due to the game's sensitivity to both CPU and GPU performance in equal measure, and the fact that this system, while capable at 1080p, cannot sustain high frame rates at higher resolutions. The rank of 1475 serves as a warning that users with this hardware should target 1080p or 1440p for the best experience, as the 4K results are consistently poor across all settings.