Fivem

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

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 brings 14 cores and 14 threads to the Fivem workload, operating from a 3.50 GHz base clock up to a 5.10 GHz boost. This is a desktop Arrow Lake-S part built on a 3 nm TSMC process, with 24 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB of L2 per core. The CPU's single-threaded capabilities are particularly relevant for Fivem, a multiplayer modification framework where server-side logic and client-side simulation often create serialized bottlenecks.

Benchmark data shows the Core Ultra 5 245 produces a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4648 and a multi-core score of 32924. In Passmark's single-thread test, it scores 4394, while the multithread score reaches 38706. The single-thread performance is critical here: Fivem's engine frequently depends on a few threads handling the bulk of the game simulation, and the 5.10 GHz boost clock provides the headroom needed to keep those threads fed. The multi-core results indicate substantial parallel capacity, which helps when numerous players, vehicles, and scripts are active simultaneously.

The CPU's average benchmark score of 48995 places it in the 90th percentile of all tested CPUs. Its nearest rivals in aggregate performance include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G at 49196 (0.4% higher), the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 at 49228 (0.5% higher), and the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H at 48698 (0.6% lower). The Intel Core i5-14600K scores 48618, which is 0.8% lower. This clustering means the Core Ultra 5 245 sits in a tightly contested performance band, with no meaningful aggregate advantage over its closest competitors.

For Fivem specifically, the CPU's role is amplified by the game's nature as a multiplayer platform. The 14 threads can handle background tasks, voice communication, and network processing, while the strong single-core performance maintains acceptable frame pacing in densely populated areas. The 65 W TDP suggests efficient power delivery, though this does not directly translate to in-game performance metrics.

# FAQ

Q: How does the Core Ultra 5 245 compare to its closest rival in aggregate CPU performance?

A: The Core Ultra 5 245 has an average benchmark score of 48995, which is 0.4% lower than the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (49196) and 0.5% lower than the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (49228). Against the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H (48698), it is 0.6% higher, and it beats the Intel Core i5-14600K (48618) by 0.8%.

Q: What is the best average FPS achieved by this CPU-GPU combo in Fivem?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 159, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. At the same resolution, High settings yield 101 FPS, Medium yields 126 FPS, and Ultra yields 78 FPS.

Q: How does the GPU's performance percentile compare to the CPU's?

A: The RTX 2060 SUPER sits in the 62nd percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 18093. The Core Ultra 5 245 ranks in the 90th percentile of CPUs, indicating the CPU is a relatively stronger component in this pairing.

Q: What is the combo's ranking among all tested Fivem configurations?

A: This combo ranks 2078 out of 3005 tested combos for Fivem, placing it in the lower-middle portion of the performance distribution.

Q: Does the 8 GB VRAM on the RTX 2060 SUPER become a limiting factor at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, the average FPS drops to 37 on High settings and 28 on Ultra, indicating that the GPU's memory capacity and bandwidth are stressed. The 8 GB GDDR6 memory operates at 448.0 GB/s, which is insufficient to maintain smooth frame rates at 4K Ultra.

Q: How much faster is the combo at 1080p Low compared to 4K Ultra?

A: The 1080p Low average of 159 FPS is more than five times higher than the 4K Ultra average of 28 FPS, demonstrating the dramatic impact of resolution scaling on this configuration.

# Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a steep performance curve as resolution increases. At 1920x1080, the combo delivers 159 FPS on Low settings, 126 FPS on Medium, 101 FPS on High, and 78 FPS on Ultra. Moving to 2560x1440, these figures drop to 105 FPS (Low), 83 FPS (Medium), 66 FPS (High), and 51 FPS (Ultra). At 3840x2160, the averages fall further to 58 FPS (Low), 46 FPS (Medium), 37 FPS (High), and 28 FPS (Ultra).

The scaling from 1080p to 1440p shows a reduction of roughly one-third across all settings. For example, High settings drop from 101 FPS to 66 FPS, a 35% decrease. The transition from 1440p to 4K is even steeper: High settings fall from 66 FPS to 37 FPS, a 44% drop. This pattern indicates that the GPU becomes increasingly the limiting component as pixel count rises, while the CPU's strong single-thread performance can sustain higher frame rates at lower resolutions.

At 1080p, the gap between Low (159 FPS) and Ultra (78 FPS) is 81 FPS, suggesting the GPU is still capable of significant work at this resolution. However, at 4K, the Low-to-Ultra gap narrows to 30 FPS (58 vs 28), showing that the GPU's compute resources are saturated even at Low settings. The 8 GB VRAM and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth are clearly insufficient for 4K Ultra, where the average drops below 30 FPS.

The data suggests that 1080p is the sweet spot for this combo, with all settings remaining playable. At 1440p, Low and Medium settings are viable, while High and Ultra fall below 70 FPS. At 4K, only Low settings achieve near-60 FPS, and even that is marginal at 58 FPS.

# How This Combo Ranks

This CPU-GPU pairing ranks 2078 out of 3005 tested combos specifically for Fivem. This places it in approximately the 69th percentile of all tested configurations — meaning about 31% of combos perform worse, while nearly 70% perform better. The rank reflects the overall balance of the Core Ultra 5 245 and the RTX 2060 SUPER within Fivem's specific workload characteristics.

The CPU's 90th percentile standing among all processors contrasts sharply with the GPU's 62nd percentile. This imbalance suggests that the RTX 2060 SUPER is the primary constraint on the combo's overall ranking. In Fivem, where both CPU and GPU loads are significant, the GPU's mid-range position drags the combo down relative to configurations pairing high-end CPUs with stronger graphics cards.

The combo's rank of 2078 indicates that while this setup is far from the bottom, it is not competitive with high-end configurations. The measured FPS at 1080p High (101 FPS) and 1440p High (66 FPS) are respectable, but the inability to maintain 60 FPS at 4K Ultra (28 FPS) is a clear limitation. For players targeting 1080p or 1440p gaming, this combo sits in a usable but not outstanding position. The data shows that the CPU has headroom that the GPU cannot exploit at higher resolutions.

# Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo achieves its best results. Low settings produce an average of 159 FPS, Medium yields 126 FPS with a minimum of 107 FPS and maximum of 145 FPS, High reaches 101 FPS, and Ultra drops to 78 FPS. All settings at this resolution remain above 60 FPS, making 1080p the only resolution where Ultra is fully playable.

At 2560x1440, performance declines noticeably. Low settings average 105 FPS, Medium averages 83 FPS with a range of 70 to 95 FPS, High averages 66 FPS, and Ultra averages 51 FPS. The Medium setting's minimum of 70 FPS indicates that even this preset can experience dips below the average, though it remains above 60 FPS. High settings at 66 FPS are borderline, while Ultra's 51 FPS average falls below the 60 FPS threshold.

At 3840x2160, the combo struggles. Low settings average 58 FPS, Medium averages 46 FPS with a range of 39 to 53 FPS, High averages 37 FPS, and Ultra averages 28 FPS. Only Low settings approach playable frame rates, and the Medium minimum of 39 FPS shows significant frame drops. The Ultra average of 28 FPS is below the 30 FPS threshold typically considered minimally playable.

The settings scaling within each resolution follows an expected pattern: Low to Medium gains roughly 20-30%, Medium to High loses 15-20%, and High to Ultra loses another 20-25%. At 1080p, the Low-to-Ultra spread is 81 FPS; at 1440p, it is 54 FPS; at 4K, it narrows to 30 FPS. This compression at higher resolutions confirms that the GPU becomes the bottleneck, reducing the impact of settings changes.

# Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution. At 1920x1080, High settings at 101 FPS provide an excellent balance of visual quality and performance, while Ultra at 78 FPS remains viable for players prioritizing image quality. Medium at 126 FPS is ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors, offering a substantial FPS boost with moderate visual compromises.

At 2560x1440, Medium settings at 83 FPS are the recommended choice, as they maintain smooth gameplay while providing a minimum of 70 FPS. High settings at 66 FPS are playable but leave little headroom for demanding scenes, and Ultra at 51 FPS falls below the 60 FPS target. Low settings at 105 FPS are suitable for competitive play where frame rate takes precedence over visuals.

At 3840x2160, the data suggests that this combo is not well-suited for high-quality 4K gaming. Low settings at 58 FPS are the only preset that approaches playability, while Medium at 46 FPS and High at 37 FPS are marginal. Ultra at 28 FPS is not recommended. Players with 4K displays should consider reducing resolution to 1440p or accepting Low settings.

The best overall experience, balancing visual fidelity and performance, is 1080p High at 101 FPS or 1440p Medium at 83 FPS. For players who prioritize competitive responsiveness, 1080p Low at 159 FPS or 1440p Low at 105 FPS are superior choices. The data indicates that Medium settings at 1440p offer the best compromise for most users, providing a playable frame rate with reasonable visual quality.

# GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER is built on the Turing architecture with a TU106 chip manufactured on a 12 nm process. It features 2176 shading units, 136 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation pipelines, along with 34 RT cores and 272 tensor cores. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1470 MHz and a boost clock of 1650 MHz, with memory running at 1750 MHz effective (14 Gbps). The 8 GB GDDR6 memory is connected via a 256-bit bus, providing 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

In Fivem, the GPU's role is primarily to handle rendering tasks, including geometry, textures, and post-processing effects. The 8 GB VRAM is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p gaming, but becomes a limiting factor at 4K, where the measured FPS drops sharply. The pixel rate of 105.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 224.4 GTexel/s are adequate for mid-range performance but cannot sustain high frame rates at 4K Ultra settings.

The GPU's benchmark scores reflect its mid-range position. It achieves a Passmark G3D score of 16462 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 77402, with a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2011. Its average benchmark score of 18093 places it in the 62nd percentile of all GPUs. The nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile (18159, 0.4% higher), AMD Radeon Pro 5700 (18189, 0.5% higher), AMD Radeon RX 460 (18373, 1.5% higher), and Intel Arc A770M (18383, 1.6% higher). This tight clustering indicates that the RTX 2060 SUPER is squarely in the middle of its performance class.

The GPU's FP32 compute of 7.181 TFLOPS and FP16 of 14.36 TFLOPS (2:1) provide sufficient compute power for Fivem's rendering demands at lower resolutions. However, the data shows that at 4K, the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck, with even Low settings failing to reach 60 FPS. The 175 W TDP and dual-slot design are typical for this performance class, and the PCIe 3.0 x16 interface is adequate for the GPU's bandwidth requirements.

The GPU's 62nd percentile ranking, combined with the CPU's 90th percentile, creates a noticeable imbalance. In Fivem, this manifests as CPU-bound behavior at 1080p (where the GPU can keep up with the CPU's frame generation) and GPU-bound behavior at 4K (where the GPU's limits are exposed). The measured FPS data clearly shows this transition: at 1080p Low, the 159 FPS average suggests the CPU is the limiting factor, while at 4K Ultra, the 28 FPS average indicates the GPU is fully saturated.