Fivem

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

The measured FPS data for this Intel Core Ultra 5 245 + NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER combination in Fivem reveals a pronounced resolution sensitivity that clearly identifies the GPU as the primary performance constraint. At 1080p Low, the combo delivers 123 FPS average — a figure that suggests the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU well beyond what the graphics card can process at higher resolutions. Dropping to 1440p Low reduces that to 81 FPS, a 34% decline, and moving to 4K Low produces 45 FPS, which represents a 63% reduction from the 1080p Low baseline.

This pattern becomes even more telling when examining the High preset across resolutions. At 1080p High, the system achieves 77 FPS; at 1440p High, it falls to 51 FPS; and at 4K High, it bottoms out at 28 FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 4K at High settings is a 64% drop, nearly identical to the 63% drop at Low settings. This consistency across settings strongly implies that the GPU's pixel-pushing capability, not game logic or draw-call processing, is the limiting factor. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the percentage decline between resolutions would flatten considerably at lower settings, where the reduced pixel count would expose processor limitations.

The data shows an interesting asymmetry: the gap between Low and Ultra settings widens dramatically as resolution increases. At 1080p, the spread from Low (123 FPS) to Ultra (60 FPS) is 63 FPS. At 1440p, that spread narrows to 41 FPS (81 to 40), and at 4K, it compresses further to 23 FPS (45 to 22). This compression at higher resolutions is a classic signature of a GPU-bound scenario — when the render target grows, the graphics card's fill rate and shading throughput become the dominant cost, making the difference between quality presets less impactful in absolute terms but still proportionally significant.

The 4K Medium measurement of 35 FPS average, with a minimum of 30 FPS and maximum of 41 FPS, provides a useful window into frame pacing. The 11 FPS range between minimum and maximum suggests that even at this demanding resolution, the system maintains relatively stable performance without severe spikes. In contrast, the 1080p Medium range of 82 to 111 FPS (29 FPS spread) indicates more variability, likely due to the CPU being able to process frames faster than the GPU can consistently render them, creating occasional queuing effects.

What does this mean for identifying the bottleneck? The evidence points squarely at the GTX 1660 SUPER. The Ultra 5 245, with its 14 cores and 14 threads, boost clock up to 5.10 GHz, and a PassMark single-thread score of 4394, has ample headroom to drive Fivem's multiplayer workloads. The GTX 1660 SUPER, by contrast, sits at the 53rd percentile among all GPUs, with 1408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. Its 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus provides 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth — sufficient for 1080p gaming but increasingly strained as pixel counts escalate.

# How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific CPU-GPU pairing ranks 2569th out of 3005 tested combinations in Fivem, placing it in the lower 14.5% of all tested configs. That ranking might seem surprising given the CPU's strength — the Ultra 5 245 sits at the 90th percentile among all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 48995 — but it underscores how heavily Fivem's performance in this test setup depends on the graphics subsystem. The GTX 1660 SUPER's 53rd percentile standing among GPUs drags the overall combo ranking down significantly.

The nearest rival CPUs in the database provide context for the processor's capability. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G scores 49196 on average, which is 0.4% higher than the Ultra 5 245's 48995. The AMD Ryzen 9 7900 scores 49228, 0.5% higher. Interestingly, the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H scores 48698, which is 0.6% lower, and the Intel Core i5-14600K scores 48618, 0.8% lower. These deltas are all within 1% of the Ultra 5 245's average score, indicating that the CPU is competitive with a broad range of processors from both AMD and Intel, including server-class and enthusiast desktop parts.

For the GPU side, the nearest rivals show how tightly grouped the mid-range graphics landscape is. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile scores 12940, just 0.4% higher than the GTX 1660 SUPER's 12986 average. The AMD Radeon RX 580 scores 12928, 0.4% lower. The NVIDIA Tesla M2090 scores 13075, 0.7% higher, and the AMD Radeon 740M scores 12870, 0.9% lower. This clustering means that in raw compute terms, the GTX 1660 SUPER is essentially interchangeable with several other cards from different generations and market segments.

The combo rank of 2569 out of 3005 suggests that for Fivem specifically, this pairing is towards the lower end of what the database tracks. However, the resolution-dependent FPS numbers indicate that this ranking is not a reflection of a fundamentally broken combination — rather, it reflects that most tested combos include more powerful GPUs. The Ultra 5 245 is clearly not the limiting factor here, and pairing it with a stronger GPU would likely yield substantially better results in this game.

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

The GTX 1660 SUPER's specifications directly explain its performance profile in Fivem. The card operates at a base clock of 1530 MHz and boosts to 1785 MHz, which is adequate for a GPU from the Turing architecture generation. Its memory runs at an effective 14 Gbps, and with a 192-bit bus, it achieves 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a critical figure for Fivem, which is a multiplayer modification of a large open-world game that streams assets continuously as players move through the environment.

The 6 GB VRAM capacity is the most likely culprit for the severe FPS drops at 4K. At 3840x2160, the frame buffer demands can easily exceed 6 GB when textures are set to High or Ultra, forcing the card to page data through the relatively slower system memory interface. The data shows 4K High at 28 FPS and 4K Ultra at 22 FPS, while 4K Medium manages 35 FPS and 4K Low reaches 45 FPS. The fact that 4K Low is 63% faster than 4K Ultra suggests that texture compression and asset streaming are playing a significant role — reducing quality settings likely keeps the working set within the 6 GB limit, avoiding severe memory thrashing.

The card's pixel rate of 85.68 GPixel/s and texture rate of 157.1 GTexel/s provide theoretical ceilings that align with the observed performance. At 4K (8.3 million pixels), the pixel rate alone would suggest a maximum of roughly 10.3 GPixel/s divided by 8.3 million pixels, but the actual 28-45 FPS range indicates that shading and texture sampling, not just pixel fill, are the bottlenecks. The FP32 throughput of 5.027 TFLOPS is modest by modern standards, and Fivem's shader complexity at higher settings appears to exploit this limitation.

The GPU's DirectX 12 (12_1) support and 1.4 Vulkan API compatibility are relevant for Fivem, which runs on a modified version of the RAGE engine. The passmark DirectX 11 score of 104 and DirectX 12 score of 50 suggest that the card performs better under older API paths, which may explain why Low settings (which likely use simpler draw calls) achieve much higher frame rates than Ultra settings. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1278 is a modern benchmark that this card handles poorly, reinforcing that it is an aging architecture for contemporary workloads.

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

At 1080p, the full settings spectrum is playable. Low settings deliver 123 FPS average, Medium delivers 97 FPS with a minimum of 82 and maximum of 111, High delivers 77 FPS, and Ultra delivers 60 FPS. This is a smooth, consistent progression where each quality tier costs roughly 15-25 FPS. The 1080p Medium range of 82 to 111 FPS shows some variance, but the average of 97 indicates that the system spends most of its time well above the 60 FPS threshold that many players consider the baseline for smooth gameplay.

Moving to 1440p, the frame rates remain respectable but begin to show strain. Low settings produce 81 FPS, Medium produces 64 FPS (minimum 54, maximum 73), High produces 51 FPS, and Ultra produces 40 FPS. The 1440p Medium range of 54 to 73 FPS is tighter than the 1080p Medium range, which suggests that the GPU is becoming more consistently loaded — there's less headroom for frame rate spikes because the render target is larger. The 81 FPS at Low settings indicates that even at this resolution, the combo can handle esports-style settings comfortably, but High and Ultra push it closer to the edge of playability.

At 4K, the picture changes dramatically. Low settings yield 45 FPS, Medium yields 35 FPS (minimum 30, maximum 41), High yields 28 FPS, and Ultra yields 22 FPS. The 4K Medium minimum of 30 FPS is right at the edge of what most players would consider acceptable, and the Ultra average of 22 FPS is borderline unplayable for a multiplayer game that demands quick reaction times. The fact that 4K Low achieves 45 FPS is notable — it suggests that with aggressive settings reductions, the GTX 1660 SUPER can still function at 4K, but the experience would be visually compromised.

The full table of measured results is sparse on min/max FPS for most settings — only the Medium presets at each resolution include these values. This means we can only analyze frame consistency at Medium settings across resolutions. At 1080p Medium, the 82-111 FPS range represents a 35% variation from minimum to maximum. At 1440p Medium, the 54-73 FPS range is a 35% variation as well. At 4K Medium, the 30-41 FPS range is a 37% variation. This consistency in relative variation across resolutions suggests that Fivem's frame pacing is stable regardless of resolution, which is a positive sign for gameplay smoothness even when absolute frame rates are low.

# FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Fivem at 1080p with high settings?

A: Yes, the measured data shows 77 FPS average at 1920x1080 with High settings, which provides a smooth experience for most multiplayer scenarios.

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

A: The data indicates that 1080p is the sweet spot, with all settings from Low (123 FPS) to Ultra (60 FPS) maintaining playable frame rates. At 1440p, only Low (81 FPS) and Medium (64 FPS) exceed 60 FPS.

Q: Is 4K gaming viable with the GTX 1660 SUPER in Fivem?

A: Only at Low settings, which achieves 45 FPS average. Medium settings hit 35 FPS, while High (28 FPS) and Ultra (22 FPS) fall below playable thresholds.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 has an average benchmark score of 48995, which is within 1% of the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (49196), AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (49228), Intel Xeon Gold 5318H (48698), and Intel Core i5-14600K (48618).

Q: What is the GPU's standing relative to other graphics cards?

A: The GTX 1660 SUPER sits at the 53rd percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 12986, placing it near the NVIDIA RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (12940), AMD RX 580 (12928), and AMD Radeon 740M (12870).

Q: Does the combo rank reflect poor performance?

A: This combo ranks 2569th out of 3005 tested combinations in Fivem, which places it in the lower 14.5%, but this is driven primarily by the GPU, not the CPU — the processor is at the 90th percentile among CPUs.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 is a 14-core, 14-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It has a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, which are substantial figures. Its PassMark single-thread score of 4394 and multithread score of 38706 demonstrate that this is a highly capable processor for both lightly-threaded and heavily-threaded workloads. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 32924 and single-core score of 4648 reinforce this assessment.

In Fivem, which is a multiplayer modification that often has significant CPU overhead due to server-side scripts, player synchronization, and world streaming, a strong single-threaded performance is critical. The Ultra 5 245's single-thread score of 4394 places it in the top tier of processors, and its 5.10 GHz boost clock ensures that it can handle the per-thread demands of the game's simulation logic. The 14 cores provide ample parallel processing for background tasks like asset loading and network handling, though Fivem's engine is not known for scaling perfectly across many cores.

The CPU's L3 cache of 24 MB shared, along with L2 cache of 3 MB per core and L1 cache of 192 KB per core, provides a substantial memory hierarchy that can reduce latency for frequently accessed game data. The DDR5 memory support with dual-channel configuration and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth ensures that the CPU can feed the GPU without memory bandwidth bottlenecks, especially at lower resolutions where the CPU is more likely to be the constraint.

The PassMark data compression score of 400942 and encryption score of 30236 indicate strong general-purpose compute performance, which is relevant for Fivem's server-side processing that might involve data serialization and network packet handling. The floating-point math score of 120548 and integer math score of 91187 show balanced arithmetic capability, useful for physics calculations and game logic. However, the measured FPS data suggests that the CPU is rarely the limiting factor in this pairing — the 1080p Low result of 123 FPS is likely close to the engine's frame rate ceiling, and the GPU becomes the bottleneck as resolution increases.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution. At 1080p, the Medium preset at 97 FPS average (82-111 FPS range) offers the best balance of visual quality and performance. The jump from Low (123 FPS) to Medium (97 FPS) costs 26 FPS but likely provides significant visual improvements in texture detail and draw distance, while the jump to High (77 FPS) costs an additional 20 FPS for diminishing returns. The Ultra preset at 60 FPS is exactly at the threshold for smooth gameplay but leaves no headroom for demanding multiplayer scenarios with many players on screen.

At 1440p, the Low preset at 81 FPS is the only configuration that comfortably maintains high frame rates. The Medium preset at 64 FPS is acceptable but may struggle during intense moments (minimum 54 FPS). High (51 FPS) and Ultra (40 FPS) fall below the 60 FPS threshold and are not recommended for competitive play. If a player insists on 1440p, Low settings provide the most consistent experience, and Medium is acceptable for less demanding situations.

At 4K, only Low settings at 45 FPS are playable, and even that is marginal. Medium at 35 FPS (minimum 30) is borderline, and High (28 FPS) and Ultra (22 FPS) are not recommended. For this resolution, the data suggests that the combo is at the edge of its capabilities, and players should consider either lowering the resolution or accepting significant visual compromises.

The best overall experience, considering both frame rate and visual quality, is the 1080p Medium preset. It delivers 97 FPS average with a minimum of 82 FPS, which provides a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold for most multiplayer interactions. The 82 FPS minimum ensures that even in crowded scenes, the game remains responsive. This configuration leverages the CPU's strength (which can feed frames up to 123 FPS at Low) while giving the GPU enough visual work to produce a more polished image without pushing it into performance degradation. The 1080p High preset at 77 FPS is a viable alternative for players who prioritize visual fidelity over maximum smoothness, but the 20 FPS cost over Medium may not justify the visual gains in a fast-paced multiplayer environment.