Fivem

The benchmark data for Fivem, running on an Intel Core i5-10400F paired with an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060, reveals a configuration that is heavily influenced by the game's unique engine and multiplayer demands. The measured frame rates across resolutions and settings show a clear scaling pattern that points to the CPU as a primary limiter in many scenarios, while the GPU's capabilities define the upper bounds at lower settings. This analysis breaks down the measured performance to identify where the bottleneck lies and which settings deliver the best experience.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate progression from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 is telling. At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves an average of 189.8 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops this to 125.7 FPS, a reduction of 64.1 FPS. The jump to 4K Low further reduces performance to 71.2 FPS. This scaling is not linear; the drop from 1080p to 1440p is severe, and the 4K result is less than half of the 1080p figure. This indicates that the GPU is becoming the dominant factor as resolution increases, but the initial large drop at 1440p suggests the CPU is already working hard at 1080p.

For High settings, the pattern shifts. At 1080p High, the average is 117.4 FPS. At 1440p High, it falls to 76.5 FPS, and at 4K High, it plummets to 43.6 FPS. The delta between 1080p and 1440p High is 40.9 FPS, which is a significant hit. The 4K High result is only 37% of the 1080p High score, showing that the combination of higher resolution and increased graphical fidelity heavily taxes the GPU. The data reveals that while the CPU can push high frame rates at 1080p with Low settings, the GPU’s 8 GB memory and 128-bit bus become a limiting factor when pixel count and texture detail increase.

The scaling at Ultra settings confirms this. From 92.5 FPS at 1080p to 58.3 FPS at 1440p, and finally 33.2 FPS at 4K, the performance drops are consistent. The 4K Ultra result is not playable for smooth multiplayer action, and even 1440p Ultra is below the 60 FPS threshold. The data suggests that the RTX 4060, with its 272.0 GB/s bandwidth, is stretched thin at 4K, while the i5-10400F’s six cores and twelve threads are adequate for lower resolutions but cannot compensate for the GPU load at higher settings.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 is the clear performance driver at higher resolutions and settings. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 128-bit bus width are modest by modern standards, and the benchmark results reflect this. At 4K Ultra, the card produces only 33.2 FPS, indicating that it is overwhelmed by the combination of resolution and detail. This is not a surprise given that the GPU's memory bandwidth is 272.0 GB/s, which is insufficient for heavy 4K textures in a demanding multiplayer environment.

The GPU's clock behavior is also relevant. The boost clock of 2460 MHz is high, but the card's 115 W TDP and dual-slot design suggest it is not a high-power beast. The measured results show that the card can deliver strong performance when the load is lighter. At 1080p Low, the 189.8 FPS average shows the GPU can keep up with the CPU’s output. However, the pixel rate of 118.1 GPixel/s and texture rate of 236.2 GTexel/s become bottlenecks as the resolution climbs. The 15.11 TFLOPS FP32 compute is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p gaming, but the memory subsystem holds it back at 4K.

The GPU's role is further clarified by the comparison with its nearest rivals. The RTX 4060’s average benchmark score is 23181, which places it 0.6% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6600M and 0.7% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti. It is 0.7% ahead of the Intel Arc B580 and 0.8% ahead of the AMD Radeon 760M. These are small deltas, indicating that the RTX 4060 is not a class leader but is competitive. In Fivem, this means the card is capable, but its memory capacity and bus width are the limiting factors when pushing high resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of the Intel Core i5-10400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 ranks 1007 out of 1792 tested combos in Fivem. This places it in the 56th percentile of all configurations, which is a solid mid-pack result. The ranking reflects the balance between the CPU and GPU. The i5-10400F has an average benchmark score of 14168, which is 0.4% above the AMD EPYC 7552 and 1.1% below the Intel Core i5-8500. The CPU’s percentile vs all CPUs is 73, meaning it is better than 73% of processors tested.

The GPU's percentile vs all GPUs is 66, which is lower than the CPU's percentile. This suggests that the GPU is the weaker link in this pairing for Fivem. The combo rank of 1007 is not exceptional, but it is not poor. It indicates that the system is capable of playing the game at decent settings, but it will not dominate the charts. The CPU’s single-thread performance, with a passmark single-thread score of 2541, is good for Fivem, which often relies on single-core performance for game logic and network code. However, the GPU’s 66th percentile ranking means that at higher resolutions, the system will fall behind combos with more powerful graphics cards.

The combination of a strong mid-range CPU and a mid-range GPU results in a system that is balanced for 1080p gaming but struggles at 4K. The rank of 1007 out of 1792 shows that there are many faster combos, but also many slower ones. The data indicates that the system is best suited for 1080p or 1440p gaming, where the CPU and GPU can work together effectively.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this hardware depend on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For smooth, competitive multiplayer play, the 1080p Medium preset offers an average of 149.8 FPS, which is well above the typical 60 FPS target and provides a responsive experience. The 1080p High setting at 117.4 FPS is also a strong option, offering better visual quality with a still-playable frame rate.

For 1440p, the Low preset at 125.7 FPS is the best choice for high-refresh-rate monitors, but the Medium preset at 98.3 FPS is a better balance of visual fidelity and performance. The High preset at 76.5 FPS is acceptable for slower-paced gameplay but may feel less smooth in fast action. The 1440p Ultra setting at 58.3 FPS is borderline, dipping below the 60 FPS threshold, and is not recommended for consistent play.

At 4K, the situation is less favorable. The Low preset at 71.2 FPS is the only playable option, but it comes with significant visual compromises. The Medium preset at 56.4 FPS and High at 43.6 FPS are not recommended for smooth multiplayer. The Ultra preset at 33.2 FPS is effectively unplayable for a fast-paced game like Fivem. The data suggests that 4K is not a viable resolution for this combo, and users should stick to 1440p or 1080p for the best experience.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of performance across all settings. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers the highest average at 189.8 FPS, followed by Medium at 149.8 FPS, High at 117.4 FPS, and Ultra at 92.5 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 97.3 FPS, showing a significant performance cost for maximum detail.

At 2560x1440, the order remains the same, but the numbers drop. Low averages 125.7 FPS, Medium 98.3 FPS, High 76.5 FPS, and Ultra 58.3 FPS. The delta between Low and Ultra is 67.4 FPS, which is smaller than at 1080p but still substantial. The 1440p results show that the GPU is becoming more of a limiting factor, as the frame rate drops more sharply with each setting increase.

At 3840x2160, the performance is heavily constrained. Low averages 71.2 FPS, Medium 56.4 FPS, High 43.6 FPS, and Ultra 33.2 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 38.0 FPS, which is the smallest spread across the resolutions. This indicates that the GPU is saturated at 4K, and the settings have less impact on the final frame rate. The data shows that the system is capable of high frame rates at 1080p and 1440p on lower settings, but the 4K results are consistently below ideal playability thresholds. The measured FPS breakdown confirms the bottleneck analysis: the CPU is strong enough for high FPS at lower resolutions, but the GPU's limitations become apparent as the pixel count and detail level increase.