Fivem

Fivem is a notoriously demanding multiplayer modification for Grand Theft Auto V, and the combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 with the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT produces a highly playable but resolution-sensitive experience. Benchmark data shows this pairing ranks 2096th out of 3005 tested configurations for this specific game, placing it in the lower half of the database but still capable of delivering smooth frame rates at 1080p and 1440p with the right settings. The measured results reveal a system that scales predictably: the CPU provides a strong foundation for high-frame-rate scenarios, while the GPU becomes the limiting factor as resolution increases, particularly at 4K where only Low settings approach playability.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows 1920x1080 is the strongest resolution for this pairing, with all four tested settings delivering average FPS above 78. At 2560x1440, average FPS ranges from 51 (Ultra) to 105 (Low), while 3840x2160 drops to a maximum average of 58 FPS on Low settings, making 1080p the clear choice for consistent performance.

Q: How does the RX 6600 XT compare to its nearest GPU rivals in overall benchmarks?

A: The Radeon RX 6600 XT has an average benchmark score of 24442, placing it 0.7% above the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 (24277) and 0.8% above the GTX 780 Ti (24236). It sits 0.8% below the Intel Arc A350M (24647) and 1.1% above the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER (24170), showing it clusters tightly with these competitors.

Q: What is the CPU’s performance percentile and how does it stack against rivals?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 ranks in the 89th percentile of all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 46062. It is nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (46030, 0.1% ahead), Intel Core i9-13900HX (46098, 0.1% behind), AMD EPYC 4364P (45970, 0.2% ahead), and AMD EPYC 7303 (45960, 0.2% ahead).

Q: Which Fivem settings preset provides the highest FPS jump from Low to Medium?

A: At 1920x1080, moving from Low (159 FPS) to Medium (126 FPS) costs 33 FPS, which is a 20.8% drop. At 2560x1440, the drop is from 105 FPS to 83 FPS (22 FPS, 21.0%), and at 3840x2160 it goes from 58 FPS to 46 FPS (12 FPS, 20.7%). The relative penalty is consistent across resolutions.

Q: Is the RX 6600 XT’s 8 GB VRAM a concern for Fivem at high settings?

A: The GPU features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. In Fivem, the measured data shows average FPS dropping from 100 at 1080p High to 66 at 1440p High, and further to 37 at 4K High, indicating that VRAM capacity and bandwidth become increasingly taxed at higher resolutions, though the card still delivers playable results at 1080p and 1440p High.

Q: What are the launch MSRP values for these components?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 had a launch MSRP of $257, and the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT had a launch MSRP of 379 USD.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture using the Navi 23 chip, manufactured on a 7 nm process by TSMC with 11,060 million transistors on a 237 mm² die. It operates with a base clock of 1968 MHz, a game clock of 2359 MHz, and a boost clock of 2589 MHz, with memory running at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). The card has 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, 64 ROPs, and 32 ray tracing cores, delivering a pixel rate of 165.7 GPixel/s, a texture rate of 331.4 GTexel/s, and 10.60 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. The 8 GB GDDR6 VRAM is paired with a 128-bit bus, yielding 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

In Fivem, the GPU’s role becomes dominant as resolution climbs. At 1920x1080, the graphics card is able to push high frame rates: Low settings average 159 FPS, Medium 126 FPS, High 100 FPS, and Ultra 78 FPS. These numbers indicate the GPU is not the bottleneck at 1080p, as even the most demanding preset stays well above 60 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440, performance drops noticeably: Low averages 105 FPS, Medium 83 FPS, High 66 FPS, and Ultra 51 FPS. The 1440p Ultra result falling below 60 FPS suggests the RX 6600 XT is starting to hit its limits with 8 GB of VRAM and 256 GB/s bandwidth, as the higher pixel count increases memory pressure.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly the limiting component. Low settings average 58 FPS, Medium 46 FPS, High 37 FPS, and Ultra 28 FPS. The 4K High and Ultra results are not playable for smooth multiplayer action, and even Medium sits below 60 FPS. The memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s becomes a severe constraint at 4K, as the card must move significantly more data per frame. The GPU’s 70th percentile ranking among all GPUs (average benchmark score 24442) reflects its mid-range position, and the measured Fivem data confirms that it excels at 1080p but struggles to maintain high frame rates at 4K.

The nearest GPU rivals highlight the RX 6600 XT’s competitive position. It is 0.7% faster than the GTX 1630, 0.8% faster than the GTX 780 Ti, and 1.1% faster than the RTX 2080 SUPER, while being 0.8% slower than the Arc A350M. These deltas are small, meaning the card sits in a tight performance band. For Fivem specifically, the measured data shows that the GPU’s 8 GB VRAM and 128-bit bus are the primary factors behind the 4K performance collapse, as the card cannot sustain high frame rates at that resolution regardless of preset.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 is a 14-core, 14-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake-S architecture, part of the Core Ultra Series 2 generation, built on a 3 nm TSMC process with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. It runs at a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is DDR5 via a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s theoretical bandwidth, and the CPU connects via PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes.

For Fivem, the CPU’s single-thread performance is critical because the game’s multiplayer environment relies heavily on scripting and simulation. The Core Ultra 5 235 scores 2085 in Cinebench R23 single-core and 4516 in Passmark single-thread, with a Passmark physics score of 2570. These numbers indicate strong per-core performance, which translates to good FPS in CPU-bound scenarios. At 1080p Low, the measured average FPS is 159, which suggests the CPU is feeding the GPU well enough to reach very high frame rates. The 14 cores and 14 threads (no hyperthreading) provide ample parallel processing for background tasks, but Fivem’s main thread benefits most from the 5.00 GHz boost clock.

The CPU’s overall benchmark performance is solid, with an average score of 46062 and an 89th percentile ranking among all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are extremely close: the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (46030, 0.1% slower), Intel Core i9-13900HX (46098, 0.1% faster), AMD EPYC 4364P (45970, 0.2% slower), and AMD EPYC 7303 (45960, 0.2% slower). This means the Core Ultra 5 235 is effectively a peer of these processors in general compute, but for Fivem, the specific combination of high boost clock and 24 MB L3 cache is what matters.

Looking at the measured FPS, the CPU’s influence is most apparent at 1080p, where the GPU is not fully stressed. At 1080p Ultra, the average FPS is 78, which is a 50.9% drop from Low’s 159 FPS. This drop is larger than the GPU’s raw performance scaling would suggest, indicating that Fivem’s CPU load increases with settings (e.g., more NPCs, traffic, and draw distance). The CPU’s Passmark multi-thread score of 37816 and Cinebench R23 multi-core of 14769 show it can handle heavy threads, but the game’s single-threaded nature means the 5.00 GHz boost is the key spec. At 1440p and 4K, the GPU becomes the bottleneck, as seen in the FPS drops, but the CPU still maintains a floor that prevents catastrophic frame dips — the minimum FPS recorded is 39 at 4K Medium, indicating the CPU never completely stalls the pipeline.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions and four settings presets, providing a clear picture of performance scaling. At 1920x1080, the results are: Low averages 159 FPS, Medium averages 126 FPS with a minimum of 107 and maximum of 144, High averages 100 FPS, and Ultra averages 78 FPS. This resolution offers the highest frame rates, with even Ultra staying above 75 FPS. The Medium preset shows a 107-144 FPS range, meaning the minimum is well above 60 FPS for smooth play.

At 2560x1440, performance drops as expected: Low averages 105 FPS, Medium averages 83 FPS (minimum 70, maximum 95), High averages 66 FPS, and Ultra averages 51 FPS. The 1440p Medium range of 70-95 FPS is still playable, but Ultra falls below 60 FPS on average, which is a concern for fast-paced multiplayer. High settings at 66 FPS are borderline, with the 51 FPS Ultra result being the first clear sign of GPU limitations.

At 3840x2160, the numbers decline sharply: Low averages 58 FPS, Medium averages 46 FPS (minimum 39, maximum 53), High averages 37 FPS, and Ultra averages 28 FPS. Only Low settings exceed 50 FPS on average, and even then, it is below the 60 FPS target. Medium’s minimum of 39 FPS indicates that frame times can spike, making 4K playable only on Low. The 4K results are consistent with the GPU’s 8 GB VRAM and 256 GB/s bandwidth being saturated.

Comparing settings across resolutions, the relative penalty of higher presets is consistent. At 1080p, Ultra is 50.9% slower than Low (78 vs 159 FPS). At 1440p, Ultra is 51.4% slower than Low (51 vs 105 FPS). At 4K, Ultra is 51.7% slower than Low (28 vs 58 FPS). This consistency suggests that the settings presets scale similarly regardless of resolution, meaning the game’s quality options have a proportional impact on GPU load. The Medium preset offers the best documentation of frame variability, with minimums of 107 (1080p), 70 (1440p), and 39 (4K), showing that the gap between average and minimum FPS widens as resolution increases — a sign of growing GPU memory pressure.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and reveals the limiting component. At Low settings, the average FPS goes from 159 at 1080p, to 105 at 1440p, to 58 at 4K. That is a 34.0% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a 44.8% drop from 1440p to 4K (or 63.5% total from 1080p to 4K). At Medium settings, the averages are 126 (1080p), 83 (1440p), and 46 (4K), representing a 34.1% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 44.6% drop from 1440p to 4K. High settings show 100 (1080p), 66 (1440p), and 37 (4K), with drops of 34.0% and 43.9% respectively. Ultra settings yield 78 (1080p), 51 (1440p), and 28 (4K), dropping 34.6% and 45.1%.

These percentage drops are remarkably consistent across all settings, which indicates that resolution scaling is primarily a GPU limitation. The RX 6600 XT has a fixed pixel rate of 165.7 GPixel/s and texture rate of 331.4 GTexel/s, and as resolution increases, the number of pixels to fill grows exponentially. 4K has four times the pixels of 1080p, and the measured FPS drops to roughly one-third to one-quarter of the 1080p value depending on settings (e.g., Low: 159 to 58, which is 36.5%; Ultra: 78 to 28, which is 35.9%). The fact that the drop is proportionally similar across presets suggests that the GPU’s fillrate and memory bandwidth are the bottlenecks, not the CPU.

The CPU’s role in resolution scaling is minimal because Fivem’s CPU load (scripting, AI, physics) does not change with resolution — only the GPU’s rendering load changes. The Core Ultra 5 235’s strong single-thread score (2085 in R23 single-core) and 5.00 GHz boost clock ensure that even at 4K, the CPU can feed the GPU with draw calls, as evidenced by the fact that the 4K Low average of 58 FPS is not limited by CPU single-thread performance. However, the 4K Ultra result of 28 FPS shows that the GPU is so overwhelmed that the CPU has idle capacity. In contrast, at 1080p Low (159 FPS), the CPU is likely the limiting factor, as the GPU could potentially push even higher FPS if the CPU allowed it. The data shows that the sweet spot for this combo is 1440p, where the GPU is still strong enough to deliver 66 FPS on High, and the CPU is not fully maxed out.

The 1440p Medium result (83 FPS average, 70 minimum) is particularly telling: it shows that the GPU can handle a moderate preset at this resolution without frame drops below 70 FPS. At 4K, even Low settings (58 FPS) are below 60 FPS, confirming that 4K is not a viable target for this pairing. The scaling pattern — consistent 34% drops from 1080p to 1440p and 44-45% drops from 1440p to 4K — matches the pixel count increases (1.78x from 1080p to 1440p, 2.25x from 1440p to 4K), which is a classic sign of a GPU-bound scenario.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the best experience for this CPU/GPU combo in Fivem depends on the resolution target. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset (78 FPS average) is the best choice because it stays above 75 FPS while providing the highest visual quality. The High preset (100 FPS) is also excellent if the user prefers smoother motion over maximum fidelity, but the gap between High and Ultra (22 FPS) is acceptable given the visual gains. Medium (126 FPS) is unnecessary at 1080p because High already exceeds 100 FPS, and Low (159 FPS) sacrifices too much visual quality for marginal frame rate gains.

At 2560x1440, the High preset (66 FPS average) is the recommended setting because it maintains frame rates above 60 FPS while offering good visual detail. The Medium preset (83 FPS) is a safer choice for users who experience frame drops in busy multiplayer areas, as its minimum of 70 FPS provides more headroom. Ultra at 1440p (51 FPS) is not recommended because it drops below 60 FPS, which can cause noticeable stuttering in fast-paced gameplay. Low (105 FPS) is playable but leaves visual quality on the table, making High the best balance of performance and fidelity.

At 3840x2160, only the Low preset (58 FPS) approaches playability, but it still falls short of 60 FPS. Medium (46 FPS) is borderline at best, with a minimum of 39 FPS that will cause noticeable hitches. High (37 FPS) and Ultra (28 FPS) are not suitable for multiplayer gaming. For 4K users, the data suggests that the RX 6600 XT is not sufficient for Fivem at any preset, and the user should either lower to 1440p or consider a different GPU. The 8 GB VRAM is the primary constraint, as the 4K results show a clear memory bandwidth wall.

The overall best experience across all tested configurations is 1920x1080 with the Ultra preset, delivering 78 FPS average. This provides the highest visual quality without sacrificing frame rate, and the 78 FPS is well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth multiplayer. For users prioritizing frame rate over visuals, 1920x1080 High (100 FPS) is an excellent alternative. At 1440p, High (66 FPS) is the recommended compromise, while Medium (83 FPS) offers more headroom. The data does not support 4K gaming with this combo, as even the lowest settings fail to sustain 60 FPS. The measured minimum FPS values (only available for Medium settings) show that at 1080p, the minimum is 107 FPS; at 1440p, it is 70 FPS; and at 4K, it is 39 FPS. These minimums reinforce the recommendation to stay at 1080p or 1440p for a consistent experience.