Fivem

The Intel Core i5-9400 is a six-core, six-thread processor based on the Coffee Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. Its L3 cache is 9 MB shared across all cores, and it connects to system memory via a dual-channel DDR4 interface with 42.7 GB/s of bandwidth. In synthetic testing, the chip produces a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 7969 and a single-core score of 1125, placing it at the 50th percentile among all CPUs. Its average benchmark score of 2305 is nearly identical to that of the Intel Core i3-10305, which scores 2300 (a 0.2% delta), and the Intel Core i3-1125G4 at 2299 (also 0.2% ahead). The i5-9400 sits 0.6% above the Intel Xeon E-2134 (2295) and 0.6% below the Intel Core i7-8809G (2319). For a multiplayer title like Fivem, which is known for heavy server-side scripting and simulation logic, the CPU's six threads are the primary constraint. The data shows that at lower resolutions, where the GPU has less work per frame, the CPU's limits become more apparent; the measured frame rates at 1080p scale far less aggressively with settings than they do at higher resolutions, indicating that the i5-9400 is often the bottleneck even when paired with a flagship-class GPU.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The i5-9400 provides six physical cores without hyper-threading, which is a modest configuration for modern multiplayer games that frequently spawn dozens of AI agents and network-tied entities. Its 2.90 GHz base and 4.10 GHz boost clocks are adequate for single-threaded tasks, but the lack of additional threads means that background game logic and anti-cheat processes must share those six cores. In Fivem specifically, the game's simulation thread often cannot leverage more than a few cores, so the boost clock of 4.10 GHz is the more relevant figure for maintaining minimum frame rates. The Cinebench R20 single-core score of 472 and multi-core score of 3346 show that the chip is roughly balanced for its era, but it trails modern mid-range parts in raw throughput. Compared to its nearest rivals, the i5-9400 is effectively indistinguishable in aggregate performance from the i3-10305 and i3-1125G4, with deltas of just 0.2% in either direction. This means the CPU's performance class is firmly entry-to-mid level; it is not a high-end part, and benchmark results in Fivem will reflect that ceiling. At 1080p, the measured FPS values show that even with a powerful GPU, the CPU limits the maximum frame rate to around 213 FPS on Low settings, suggesting that the processor's six threads are saturated. The 65 W TDP indicates a moderate power envelope, but that is irrelevant to gameplay; what matters is that the chip's single-core performance is only sufficient to feed the GPU at lower resolutions, not to push beyond 200 FPS consistently.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX is a 5 nm RDNA 3.0 part with 24 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus, delivering 960.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its boost clock is 2498 MHz, with a game clock of 2365 MHz, and it contains 6144 shading units, 384 TMUs, and 192 ROPs. The GPU's raw compute potential is enormous—61.39 TFLOPS FP32—and its pixel rate is 479.6 GPixel/s. In synthetic benchmarks, it scores 31238 in Passmark G3D and 189573 in Geekbench OpenCL, placing it at the 85th percentile among all GPUs. Its average benchmark score of 44019 is 0.4% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro 580 (44195, -0.4% delta), 0.8% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile (43667), and 2% lower than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti (44900). For Fivem, this GPU is dramatically over-provisioned for the graphical load; the game's art style and draw distances are not demanding enough to stress the 7900 XTX's 24 GB frame buffer or its 960 GB/s bandwidth. The data confirms this: at 4K Ultra, the GPU still delivers 55.7 FPS, but the bottleneck is clearly the CPU, as the frame rate drops are far steeper when moving from Low to Ultra at 4K (111.9 to 55.7 FPS) than they are at 1080p (213.5 to 147.6 FPS). The GPU's role here is to ensure that visual settings never become the limiting factor; even at 4K, the 7900 XTX has headroom to spare, which means the measured results are almost purely a reflection of CPU and game engine limitations.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of CPU limitation at lower resolutions and GPU involvement at higher ones. At 1080p, the frame rates are: Low 213.5, Medium 193.6, High 178.8, and Ultra 147.6 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 65.9 FPS, which is a 31% drop. At 1440p, the values are Low 186.8, Medium 157.3, High 121.5, and Ultra 99.5 FPS—a spread of 87.3 FPS, or a 47% drop from Low to Ultra. At 4K, the values are Low 111.9, Medium 87.6, High 68.6, and Ultra 55.7 FPS—a spread of 56.2 FPS, or a 50% drop. The key observation is that from 1080p to 4K, the Low settings frame rate falls from 213.5 to 111.9 FPS, a 48% reduction, while the Ultra settings frame rate falls from 147.6 to 55.7 FPS, a 62% reduction. This indicates that at 1080p, the CPU is the primary limiter, because even with Low settings (which reduce GPU load), the frame rate cannot exceed 213 FPS. As resolution increases, the GPU becomes more stressed, and the frame rate drops proportionally more on Ultra settings, where the GPU has more work per pixel. The fact that 4K Low still produces 111.9 FPS shows that the CPU can feed the GPU at that resolution, but the 4K Ultra result of 55.7 FPS suggests that the GPU is now the bottleneck, as the 7900 XTX's compute is being fully utilized. The scaling is not linear: 1080p to 1440p costs about 12% performance on Low, but 1440p to 4K costs another 40% on Low, which is consistent with pixel count increases outpacing the CPU's ability to submit draw calls.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific pairing of the Intel Core i5-9400 and AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX ranks 408th out of 1792 tested combos for Fivem, placing it in the top 23% of all systems. That rank is surprisingly high given the CPU's mid-range standing, which suggests that Fivem's performance is more dependent on the GPU than on the CPU at higher resolutions. However, the rank also reflects that many tested combos likely use weaker GPUs with stronger CPUs, and the 7900 XTX's raw power compensates for the i5-9400's limitations. The CPU's 50th percentile ranking among all CPUs would normally predict a mid-pack placement, but the GPU's 85th percentile ranking pulls the combo upward. In practical terms, this combo outperforms systems with a newer CPU but a slower GPU, such as those with a 60th-percentile CPU and a 50th-percentile GPU. The data shows that the combo's rank is not a simple average of the two component percentiles; instead, the GPU's dominance in Fivem's rendering pipeline means that even a modest six-core CPU can maintain playable frame rates. The 408th rank out of 1792 means there are 1384 combos that are slower, and only 407 that are faster, which indicates that this setup is well above the median experience for this game. The delta between the CPU and GPU performance tiers is stark, but the game's engine appears to favor GPU throughput over CPU thread count, as evidenced by the high rank despite the CPU's 50th percentile score.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS values are: Low 213.5, Medium 193.6, High 178.8, and Ultra 147.6. The gap between Low and Medium is 19.9 FPS, between Medium and High is 14.8 FPS, and between High and Ultra is 31.2 FPS. The largest drop occurs when moving from High to Ultra, which suggests that Ultra enables effects that are disproportionately taxing relative to their visual benefit. At 2560x1440, the values are: Low 186.8, Medium 157.3, High 121.5, and Ultra 99.5. The drop from Low to Medium is 29.5 FPS, Medium to High is 35.8 FPS, and High to Ultra is 22 FPS. The pattern here is different from 1080p: the Medium-to-High transition is the most costly, indicating that at 1440p, certain High settings (likely shadow quality and draw distance) become more expensive as pixel count increases. At 3840x2160, the values are: Low 111.9, Medium 87.6, High 68.6, and Ultra 55.7. The drop from Low to Medium is 24.3 FPS, Medium to High is 19 FPS, and High to Ultra is 12.9 FPS. The diminishing absolute drops at 4K show that the GPU is becoming the limiting factor, as each additional setting tier has less headroom to lose. Across all resolutions, the Low setting consistently delivers the highest FPS, which is expected, but the relative scaling shows that the CPU bottleneck is most severe at 1080p Low, where the 213.5 FPS figure is likely near the engine's simulation rate cap. The data also shows that the 1440p High result of 121.5 FPS is nearly identical to the 4K Low result of 111.9 FPS, meaning that users can trade resolution for quality without losing much performance, but only up to a point.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and refresh rate. For 1080p, even Ultra settings deliver 147.6 FPS, which is above the 144 Hz threshold, so players with a 144 Hz monitor can enable Ultra without dropping below the refresh window. However, the 213.5 FPS on Low suggests that the CPU is the ceiling, so if the goal is maximum frame rate for competitive play, Low settings provide a 45% improvement over Ultra (213.5 vs 147.6 FPS). For 1440p, the High preset at 121.5 FPS is the sweet spot for 120 Hz displays, as it offers a 22% improvement over Ultra's 99.5 FPS while still looking substantially better than Medium's 157.3 FPS. The Medium preset at 157.3 FPS is better suited for 144 Hz monitors, but the visual compromise may not be worth the 36 FPS gain over High. For 4K, the data shows that High at 68.6 FPS is only marginally above the 60 FPS line, while Medium at 87.6 FPS provides a comfortable 46% margin over High. Given that the 7900 XTX has 24 GB of VRAM, there is no memory constraint, so the decision is purely about frame rate versus fidelity. The recommendation is to choose Medium at 4K (87.6 FPS) for a smooth experience, as Ultra at 55.7 FPS dips below 60 FPS and may cause stutter on variable refresh rate displays. At 1440p, High (121.5 FPS) is the best balance, and at 1080p, Ultra (147.6 FPS) is acceptable, but Low (213.5 FPS) is the only preset that fully saturates a 200 Hz monitor. The data consistently shows that the CPU limits the Low preset at 1080p, so users should not expect to exceed 213 FPS regardless of GPU settings, making Low the only preset that approaches the CPU's maximum throughput.