Fivem

# Fivem with Intel Core i5-14400F + NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti

This combination of the Intel Core i5-14400F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti delivers a playable but constrained experience in Fivem, with performance that depends heavily on resolution and quality settings. The combo ranks 2911th out of 3707 tested combinations, placing it in the lower portion of the database, and the data shows a system that can handle 1080p gaming comfortably but struggles to maintain high frame rates at 4K with demanding presets.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows 1920x1080 is the most viable resolution, with average FPS ranging from 69 at Ultra to 148 at Low. At 2560x1440, averages drop to between 48 and 103 FPS, while 3840x2160 only achieves playable averages at Low (61 FPS) and Medium (42 FPS).

Q: How does the GTX 1660 Ti's VRAM affect performance at higher resolutions?

A: The GPU has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory with a 192-bit bus and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS falls to 28, indicating that the memory capacity and bandwidth are insufficient for the highest settings at this resolution, though the card still manages 61 FPS at 4K Low.

Q: What is the CPU's role in this game's performance?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400F has 10 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and boost clock of 4.70 GHz. Its PassMark multithread score of 25470 and single-thread score of 3701 suggest it is not the primary bottleneck when the GPU is struggling at high resolutions, but at 1080p Low it may become more relevant in CPU-bound scenes.

Q: How does this combo compare to other tested systems in the database?

A: The combination ranks 2911th out of 3707 tested combos for Fivem. This places it below the median, meaning a majority of tested systems deliver better frame rates in this game.

Q: What settings preset provides the most balanced experience at 1080p?

A: Medium at 1080p yields an average of 103 FPS with a minimum of 87 FPS and maximum of 118 FPS, offering a substantial improvement over High (86 FPS) while staying well above the 60 FPS threshold. Ultra drops to 69 FPS average, which is still playable but with less headroom.

Q: How does the GPU's DirectX 12 performance relate to Fivem's results?

A: The PassMark DirectX 12 score is 51, which is the lowest among the card's DirectX tests (DirectX 9: 190, DirectX 11: 103, DirectX 10: 66). This suggests the card's newer API performance is comparatively weak, which may contribute to the significant FPS drops seen when increasing settings at higher resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 2911 out of 3707 tested combinations places it in the bottom 21% of all tested systems for Fivem. This positioning indicates that while the system is functional, it does not deliver the high or ultra settings experiences that many other tested combinations achieve, particularly at higher resolutions.

The CPU's percentileVsAllCpus of 83 means the i5-14400F outperforms 83% of all CPUs in the database, which is a strong position. However, the GPU's percentileVsAllGpus of 41 shows the GTX 1660 Ti is below average, sitting at the 41st percentile. This imbalance suggests the graphics card is the limiting factor in this pairing.

The nearest CPU rivals show the i5-14400F is tightly clustered with other processors. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U is 0.1% ahead, the Intel Core i9-11900 is 0.2% ahead, the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS is 0.2% behind, and the Intel Core i7-12800H is 0.5% ahead. These deltas are minimal, indicating the CPU's performance is well-matched with its peers.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals reveal a different story. The AMD Radeon 540 is 0.7% ahead, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 is 1.9% ahead, the AMD Radeon R7 250 is 2.2% ahead, and the Intel Arc A310 is 2.3% ahead. These are small margins, but they all place the GTX 1660 Ti at the bottom of its immediate comparison group.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is built on the Turing architecture using the TU116 chip, manufactured on a 12 nm process at TSMC. It features 1536 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, and 48 raster output units. The card's base clock is 1500 MHz with a boost clock of 1770 MHz.

Memory configuration consists of 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory runs at 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective speed. These specifications produce a pixel rate of 84.96 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 169.9 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance at 5.437 TFLOPS.

The GPU's benchmark results show a PassMark G3D score of 12871 and a PassMark GPU compute score of 5226. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 1061, and Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan scores are 51029 and 5827 respectively.

In Fivem, the GPU's role becomes clear when examining the FPS drops across settings. At 1080p, moving from Low to Ultra reduces the average from 148 to 69 FPS, a 53% decrease. At 4K, the same settings change drops the average from 61 to 28 FPS, a 54% decrease. This consistency indicates the GPU's rendering load scales predictably with quality settings.

The 6 GB VRAM capacity is a notable constraint. At 4K Ultra, the system produces only 28 FPS average, suggesting the memory is overwhelmed. Even at 4K High, the average is 36 FPS, which is below the playable threshold for most users.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the data shows the following average FPS values across settings: Low produces 148 FPS, Medium produces 103 FPS with a minimum of 87 and maximum of 118, High produces 86 FPS, and Ultra produces 69 FPS. This resolution offers the widest range of playable options, with even Ultra staying above 60 FPS.

Moving to 2560x1440, the averages drop significantly. Low yields 103 FPS, Medium yields 71 FPS with a minimum of 60 and maximum of 82, High yields 60 FPS, and Ultra yields 48 FPS. The Medium preset at this resolution barely maintains 60 FPS at the minimum, while Ultra falls below the standard 60 FPS threshold.

At 3840x2160, the results are more challenging. Low produces 61 FPS, which is the only preset at this resolution that stays above 60 FPS. Medium produces 42 FPS with a minimum of 36 and maximum of 49, High produces 36 FPS, and Ultra produces 28 FPS. These numbers indicate that 4K gaming is only viable at the lowest settings.

The medium settings at each resolution provide the most complete data, with minimum and maximum values recorded. At 1080p Medium, the minimum of 87 FPS ensures smooth gameplay even during demanding scenes. At 1440p Medium, the minimum of 60 FPS is right at the edge of playability. At 4K Medium, the minimum of 36 FPS creates noticeable stuttering.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience according to the measured data, 1920x1080 with Medium settings is the optimal configuration. This combination produces an average of 103 FPS, with a minimum of 87 FPS and maximum of 118 FPS, providing both high frame rates and sufficient headroom for scene complexity variations.

If the user prefers higher visual quality at 1080p, High settings deliver an average of 86 FPS, which remains comfortably above 60 FPS. Ultra at 1080p drops to 69 FPS average, which is still playable but leaves less margin for frame time spikes.

At 2560x1440, the recommended setting is Low, producing 103 FPS average. Medium at this resolution averages 71 FPS but has a minimum of 60 FPS, which could result in occasional dips below the refresh rate of a 60 Hz monitor. High at 1440p averages exactly 60 FPS, which is borderline, while Ultra at 48 FPS is not recommended for smooth play.

For 3840x2160, only Low settings provide an acceptable experience at 61 FPS average. Medium at 42 FPS and High at 36 FPS will produce noticeable judder, and Ultra at 28 FPS is effectively unplayable for most users.

The data suggests that users with 1080p displays should choose Medium for the best balance, while those with 1440p displays should stick to Low or Medium with the understanding that minimum frame rates will be near 60 FPS. 4K users are limited to Low settings for a playable experience.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-14400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor from the Core 14th Gen series, based on Raptor Lake architecture. It has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The CPU supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration and uses the Intel Socket 1700.

The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The processor is manufactured on Intel's 10 nm process with a die size of 215 mm².

Benchmark scores for the i5-14400F show strong multi-threaded performance. Cinebench R15 multicore scores 2181 and singlecore scores 307. Cinebench R20 multicore scores 9090 and singlecore scores 1283. Cinebench R23 multicore scores 21645 and singlecore scores 3055. Geekbench multicore scores 11268 and singlecore scores 2058.

PassMark results further illustrate the CPU's capabilities: multithread score of 25470, single-thread score of 3701, physics score of 1523, integer math score of 81524, floating point math score of 61319, data compression score of 315521, and data encryption score of 16949.

In Fivem, the CPU's role is to maintain frame pacing and handle the multiplayer game's server-side and client-side logic. The high single-thread performance of 3701 in PassMark is particularly relevant for a game like Fivem, which is known for CPU-heavy scenes in populated servers.

Comparing the FPS data across resolutions reveals the GPU bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the system produces 148 FPS, which is likely near the CPU's limit for this game. At 1080p Ultra, the FPS drops to 69, showing the GPU is the limiting factor when settings increase. The CPU's capability is sufficient to feed the GPU at all settings tested, as evidenced by the consistent frame rates at lower resolutions.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS progression from 1080p to 4K shows the GPU becoming increasingly dominant as the bottleneck. At Low settings, the average FPS moves from 148 at 1080p to 103 at 1440p and 61 at 4K. This represents a 30% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 41% drop from 1440p to 4K.

At Medium settings, the averages are 103 at 1080p, 71 at 1440p, and 42 at 4K. The percentage drops are 31% from 1080p to 1440p and 41% from 1440p to 4K, showing a similar scaling pattern to Low settings.

High settings produce averages of 86 at 1080p, 60 at 1440p, and 36 at 4K. This represents a 30% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 40% drop from 1440p to 4K. The consistency of these percentage drops across settings indicates that the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth are scaling as expected with pixel count.

Ultra settings show averages of 69 at 1080p, 48 at 1440p, and 28 at 4K. The drops are 30% from 1080p to 1440p and 42% from 1440p to 4K. The slightly larger drop at 4K Ultra suggests that the 6 GB VRAM is being fully utilized at this configuration, adding memory pressure to the already heavy rendering load.

The consistent scaling pattern across all settings indicates that the GTX 1660 Ti is the primary limiting component at every resolution and quality level. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see diminishing FPS differences at lower resolutions, but the data shows linear scaling that tracks with pixel count. The i5-14400F's strong single-thread performance ensures it does not constrain the system until frame rates exceed approximately 148 FPS at 1080p Low.