Fivem

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core i5-14600K compare to its closest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The i5-14600K posts an average benchmark score of 49166, placing it in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs. It sits nearly level with the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X, which scores 49062 (a 0.2% difference), and trails the Intel Core i5-14600KF by just 0.4% (49367). Against the AMD EPYC 4345P, it is 0.9% behind (49595), while it leads the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H by 1% (48698).

Q: What is the GPU's VRAM capacity and memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4 GB has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering a memory bandwidth of 192.0 GB/s. Its memory clock is listed as 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective speed, while the GPU's base clock is 1545 MHz and boost clock is 1740 MHz.

Q: What FPS can this combo achieve at 1080p with Low settings?

A: At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the measured average FPS is 110.8. This is the highest frame rate recorded across all tested resolutions and settings for this pairing in Fivem.

Q: How does the combo rank among all tested combinations in Fivem?

A: This CPU-GPU combo ranks 1610 out of 1792 tested combinations in Fivem, placing it in the lower percentile of all systems evaluated. The data indicates it outperforms only a small fraction of the tested combos in this specific game.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the CPU?

A: The Intel Core i5-14600K has a launch MSRP of $319. This processor features 14 cores and 20 threads with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz.

Q: What are the CPU's cache specifications?

A: The i5-14600K has an L1 cache of 80 KB per core, an L2 cache of 2 MB per core, and a shared L3 cache of 24 MB. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration.

How This Combo Ranks

The data places this Intel Core i5-14600K + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4 GB combination at rank 1610 out of 1792 tested combos in Fivem. That is a strikingly low position — roughly the 10th percentile — which suggests a significant bottleneck somewhere in the pairing. The CPU itself is a high-end part, sitting in the 93rd percentile among all processors and competing closely with the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X (0.2% difference in average score) and the Core i5-14600KF (0.4% behind). The GPU, however, is a decidedly mid-range component, landing in the 50th percentile among all GPUs with no benchmark scores or nearest rivals listed in the data.

This rank implies that in Fivem, the combination is held back far more by the graphics card than by the processor. The CPU's strength — a 14-core, 20-thread design with a 5.30 GHz boost clock — cannot compensate for the GPU's relatively modest specifications. The gap between the CPU's high percentile standing and the combo's low game rank is the central story here. It tells us that Fivem's performance ceiling for this system is dictated almost entirely by the GPU, and that even a top-tier CPU cannot lift this pairing out of the lower ranks. Benchmark results indicate a mismatch: a processor capable of competing with server-grade Xeons paired with a GPU designed for entry-level 1080p gaming.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4 GB is the limiting factor in this combo, and the FPS data makes that clear. Its 4 GB of GDDR6 memory is modest by modern standards, and the 192.0 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient for low-to-medium settings at lower resolutions but struggles as load increases. The GPU's 2048 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs are paired with 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores, yet the 7.127 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is not enough to drive high frame rates in Fivem's more demanding settings.

The memory subsystem is particularly telling. With only 4 GB of VRAM, the card is likely spilling over into system memory at higher settings and resolutions, which would explain the dramatic FPS drops observed. The memory clock of 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) and 128-bit bus width produce that 192.0 GB/s figure — respectable for a card in this class but insufficient for the texture-heavy loads that Fivem's Ultra settings present. The GPU's boost clock of 1740 MHz provides some headroom, but the data shows that even at 1080p, Ultra settings drop to 52.5 average FPS, suggesting the card is running out of both memory capacity and compute throughput simultaneously.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured results show a clear progression: Low settings deliver 110.8 average FPS, Medium drops to 91.3, High falls to 71.9, and Ultra bottoms out at 52.5. These numbers indicate that the GPU can handle 1080p gaming comfortably at lower presets but begins to struggle as graphical demands increase. The 58.3 FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p is substantial, showing how sensitive this card is to settings changes.

Moving to 2560x1440, the pattern continues but with steeper penalties. Low settings yield 74.3 average FPS, Medium drops to 59.1, High falls to 48.6, and Ultra sinks to 35.2. The delta between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 39.1 FPS, and even the Low setting here barely matches the High setting at 1080p (74.3 vs. 71.9). At 3840x2160, the results become marginal: Low produces 43.9 average FPS, Medium drops to 32.9, High falls to 27.9, and Ultra collapses to 17.9. These 4K numbers are generally below playable thresholds, with even the lowest settings unable to maintain 60 FPS.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is dramatic and reveals the GPU-bound nature of this system. At Low settings, the transition from 1920x1080 (110.8 FPS) to 2560x1440 (74.3 FPS) represents a 33% reduction, and further to 3840x2160 (43.9 FPS) is a 60% reduction from the 1080p baseline. At High settings, the drops are steeper proportionally: 71.9 FPS at 1080p falls to 48.6 at 1440p (32% drop) and then to 27.9 at 4K (61% drop from 1080p).

These scaling patterns indicate that the GPU is being saturated at higher resolutions. A CPU-bound system would show relatively flat FPS across resolutions, but the data here shows consistent, significant declines as pixel count increases. The 4K Ultra result of 17.9 FPS is particularly revealing — it suggests the GPU is overwhelmed both by resolution and by settings complexity. The 4 GB VRAM capacity likely becomes a hard bottleneck at 4K, forcing constant memory swapping that tanks performance. Even at 4K Low (43.9 FPS), the system cannot approach the 60 FPS target, confirming that this resolution is beyond the card's practical capabilities regardless of settings.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-14600K is a formidable processor that is not the bottleneck in this configuration. Its 14 cores and 20 threads, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and boost clock of 5.30 GHz, provide ample compute headroom for Fivem's multiplayer workloads. The CPU's benchmark scores reinforce this: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32881 and single-core score of 4642, with a Geekbench multi-core score of 15846 and single-core score of 2803. These place it in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, competing directly with the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X (0.2% difference) and outperforming the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H by 1%.

The CPU's 24 MB of shared L3 cache, along with 2 MB L2 cache per core, provides fast access to frequently used data — valuable for a game like Fivem that must handle many concurrent player interactions. The PassMark multi-thread score of 38682 and single-thread score of 4270 indicate strong performance in both lightly-threaded and heavily-threaded scenarios. However, the measured FPS data shows that this CPU power is largely untapped. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 110.8 FPS, but at 1080p Ultra it drops to 52.5 — a pattern that points to GPU limitation, not CPU. The processor is likely waiting on the GPU to finish rendering frames, leaving its 20 threads partially idle. The boost clock of 5.30 GHz is more than sufficient for Fivem's typical frame-by-frame simulation logic, and the 125W TDP suggests the CPU can sustain high clocks under load without thermal throttling.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution. At 1920x1080, Low settings (110.8 FPS) provide the smoothest experience, but Medium (91.3 FPS) offers a strong balance of visual quality and performance — still well above the 60 FPS threshold. High settings (71.9 FPS) remain playable, while Ultra (52.5 FPS) dips below the 60 FPS mark and is not recommended for competitive play. For 1080p users, Medium offers the best trade-off between frame rate and visual fidelity.

At 2560x1440, Low settings (74.3 FPS) are the only preset that comfortably exceeds 60 FPS. Medium (59.1 FPS) is borderline, and High (48.6 FPS) and Ultra (35.2 FPS) will feel sluggish. Users at 1440p should prioritize Low or Medium settings to maintain responsive gameplay. At 3840x2160, none of the presets achieve playable frame rates — even Low (43.9 FPS) falls below the 60 FPS standard, and Ultra (17.9 FPS) is effectively unplayable. The data suggests that 4K is not a viable option for this combo in Fivem, and users should either lower their resolution or accept significant performance compromises. For the best overall experience, 1080p with Medium settings provides the highest frame rate while retaining some graphical detail, making it the recommended configuration based on the measured rows.