Fivem

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

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is a 16-core, 16-thread mobile processor built on Intel's 3 nm Panther Lake architecture. It carries a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, with 18 MB of shared L3 cache and 2.5 MB of L2 per core. The chip posts a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 28221 and a single-core score of 3984, which places it in the 87th percentile of all CPUs tested. Its average benchmark score of 40518 sits within 0.2% of the AMD Ryzen 9 7940H (40431) and within 0.1% of the Intel Core 7 253PE (40557), indicating that this processor is competitive with established high-end mobile parts despite its modest 25 W TDP.

In Fivem, the CPU's role is substantial because the game is a multiplayer modification framework that relies heavily on server-side scripting and client-side entity simulation. The data shows that even at 1080p Low, the combo achieves 79 FPS, but this drops to 38 FPS at 1080p Ultra. The gap between Low and Ultra at the same resolution suggests that the CPU is not the sole bottleneck—otherwise, the frame rate would remain relatively flat as settings change. Instead, the 41 FPS delta between Low and Ultra at 1080p indicates that graphical settings are influencing performance significantly, which points to the GPU carrying more of the load at higher presets.

However, the processor's 16 threads and high boost clock of 5.00 GHz are still relevant for Fivem's many background tasks. The Passmark multi-thread score of 32956 and integer math score of 88083 suggest strong parallel processing capability, which is useful for handling the game's multiple connected clients and dynamic world events. The L3 cache of 18 MB is shared across all cores, helping with the frequent data exchanges that occur in multiplayer sessions. The memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s over LPDDR5X dual-channel also feeds both the CPU and the integrated GPU, which is a critical factor for this combo.

The Cinebench R20 single-core score of 1673 and Passmark single-thread score of 4005 indicate that per-core performance is solid, which matters for Fivem's main game thread that often cannot fully utilize all cores. The CPU's percentile ranking of 87% versus all CPUs reinforces that this is a high-tier mobile processor, but the measured FPS in this game will ultimately be limited by the GPU at higher resolutions and settings.

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

The AMD Radeon 890M is an integrated GPU based on the RDNA 3.5 architecture, built on a 4 nm process by TSMC. It features 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 16 ray tracing cores, with a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz. The memory is system-shared, meaning its bandwidth and size are dependent on the host system's RAM. Its pixel rate is 92.80 GPixel/s and texture rate is 185.6 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance of 5.939 TFLOPS. The GPU's average benchmark score is 9210, placing it in the 45th percentile of all GPUs.

The 890M's nearest rivals in average score are the AMD Radeon Vega 8 (9221, delta -0.1%), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 (9273, delta -0.7%), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 (9294, delta -0.9%), and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M (9302, delta -1%). This means the 890M is essentially on par with a desktop GTX 960, which is a respectable comparison for an integrated solution. In Fivem, the GPU's performance is the dominant factor at higher settings, as evidenced by the measured FPS scaling.

The 890M's DirectX 12 Ultimate support and Vulkan 1.4 capability are relevant for Fivem, which can leverage modern APIs. The Passmark DirectX 12 score of 37 and DirectX 11 score of 73 show that the GPU handles older APIs better, which aligns with Fivem's origins on an older engine. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 590 is modest, reflecting the GPU's mid-range position. The GPU's 45th percentile ranking indicates it sits just below the median of all GPUs, so users should expect playable but not high-end performance in demanding scenarios.

The system-shared memory is a double-edged sword. On one hand, it allows the GPU to access the full system RAM pool, which is beneficial for Fivem's large open-world assets. On the other hand, the bandwidth is system-dependent, and the CPU and GPU must share the same 153.6 GB/s LPDDR5X memory bus. This contention likely contributes to the performance drop at higher resolutions, where the GPU needs more data throughput but must compete with CPU demands.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combo of Intel Core Ultra X7 368H and AMD Radeon 890M ranks 2823 out of 3005 tested combos in Fivem. This places it in the bottom 6% of all tested configurations, which is surprisingly low given the CPU's high percentile ranking. The data indicates that the integrated GPU is the limiting factor, dragging down what would otherwise be a capable processor.

The rank suggests that most other combos—likely those with discrete GPUs—outperform this pairing in Fivem. For context, the CPU alone sits in the 87th percentile, but the GPU sits in the 45th percentile, and the combo rank reflects a weighted result that heavily penalizes the GPU's relative weakness. This is a common trend with integrated graphics solutions, where the CPU's potential is capped by the GPU's throughput.

The measured FPS numbers confirm this interpretation. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 79 FPS, which is playable, but at 1080p High it drops to 50 FPS, and at 1080p Ultra it falls to 38 FPS. These numbers are far below what a discrete GPU combo would typically deliver, explaining the low rank. The combo's position at 2823 out of 3005 means that 94% of tested configurations are faster, which is a critical consideration for users who expect smooth gameplay in Fivem's multiplayer environments.

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

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of performance across resolutions and settings. At 3840x2160 (4K), the combo delivers 18 FPS on High, 29 FPS on Low, 23 FPS on Medium, and 14 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset has min/max of 19/26 FPS, while the other presets lack min/max data. These numbers are largely unplayable for a multiplayer game, where responsiveness is critical.

At 2560x1440 (1440p), the results improve but remain marginal. High averages 33 FPS, Low averages 52 FPS, Medium averages 41 FPS (min 35, max 47), and Ultra averages 25 FPS. The jump from Low to High at 1440p is 19 FPS, showing that the GPU struggles as settings increase. The 14 FPS difference between Low and Medium at this resolution further highlights the GPU's sensitivity to graphical load.

At 1920x1080 (1080p), the combo becomes more viable. High delivers 50 FPS, Low delivers 79 FPS, Medium delivers 62 FPS (min 53, max 71), and Ultra delivers 38 FPS. The 29 FPS gap between Low and High at 1080p is significant, but the Low preset is the only one that approaches smooth multiplayer performance. Medium's 62 FPS is acceptable for casual play, but the min of 53 FPS may cause stutters in busy scenes. Ultra's 38 FPS is below the threshold for comfortable gameplay.

The data shows a consistent pattern: each resolution step down from 4K to 1080p yields roughly a 1.7x to 1.9x improvement in FPS at the same settings, which aligns with the pixel count reduction. However, the absolute numbers at 4K and 1440p are too low for practical use, making 1080p the only realistic option for Fivem.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 is the only resolution where average FPS exceeds 50 on any preset. At 2560x1440, the best average is 52 FPS on Low, but at 3840x2160, the best average is 29 FPS on Low. For playable performance, 1080p is recommended.

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

A: The AMD Radeon 890M has an average benchmark score of 9210, which is within 1% of the AMD Radeon Vega 8 (9221), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 (9273), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 (9294), and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M (9302). This means it performs nearly identically to a desktop GTX 960.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more responsible for the low FPS at 4K?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the primary bottleneck at 4K. At 3840x2160, the FPS ranges from 14 to 29 across all presets, which is too low for the CPU's high percentile ranking to matter. The GPU's 45th percentile and system-shared memory limit its ability to push pixels at high resolutions.

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

A: The combo ranks 2823 out of 3005 tested combos in Fivem, placing it in the bottom 6%. This rank reflects the integrated GPU's limitations rather than the CPU's capabilities, as the CPU alone sits in the 87th percentile.

Q: Why does the Medium preset have min/max FPS data but not others?

A: The FACT PACK includes min/max FPS only for the Medium preset at each resolution. At 1080p Medium, the range is 53 to 71 FPS; at 1440p Medium, it is 35 to 47 FPS; and at 4K Medium, it is 19 to 26 FPS. This data is not provided for Low, High, or Ultra presets.

Q: Can this combo handle Fivem at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the best average FPS is 52 on Low, but High drops to 33 FPS and Ultra to 25 FPS. For a multiplayer game, 52 FPS on Low may be borderline, but the inconsistency across presets makes 1440p a risky choice for smooth gameplay.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data suggests that the Low preset at 1080p is the only configuration that provides a consistently smooth experience, with an average of 79 FPS. This is the only preset across all resolutions that exceeds 70 FPS, making it the clear recommendation for competitive or fast-paced multiplayer play. The Medium preset at 1080p achieves 62 FPS on average, with a min of 53 FPS, which is acceptable for casual sessions but may dip during intense scenes with many players or vehicles.

For users who prioritize visual quality over frame rate, the High preset at 1080p offers 50 FPS, but this is below the 60 FPS threshold that many players prefer. The Ultra preset at 1080p drops to 38 FPS, which is generally considered too low for a multiplayer game where reaction time matters. At 1440p, the Low preset at 52 FPS is the only viable option, but it still falls short of 1080p Low's performance. At 4K, no preset is playable, with the best being Low at 29 FPS.

The data implies that the Medium preset at 1080p provides the best balance between visual fidelity and playability, especially given its min/max range of 53 to 71 FPS. This range suggests that the game remains responsive even in demanding moments, unlike the High and Ultra presets which lack min/max data but have lower averages. For players who cannot tolerate frame drops, the Low preset at 1080p is the safest choice, as its 79 FPS average leaves ample headroom for fluctuations.

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

The measured FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals the nature of the bottleneck in this combo. At Low settings, the average FPS goes from 79 at 1080p to 52 at 1440p to 29 at 4K. This represents a 34% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 63% drop from 1080p to 4K. At High settings, the FPS goes from 50 at 1080p to 33 at 1440p to 18 at 4K, a 34% drop and then a 64% drop. The consistency of these percentage drops across presets indicates that the scaling is resolution-driven rather than settings-driven.

The pixel count increases by 1.78x from 1080p to 1440p and by 4x from 1080p to 4K. If the GPU were the sole bottleneck, we would expect FPS to scale roughly inversely with pixel count—so 1080p to 1440p should yield about a 44% FPS reduction, and 1080p to 4K should yield about a 75% reduction. The actual reductions of 34% and 63% are less than these theoretical values, suggesting that the CPU is providing some relief at higher resolutions by not being fully utilized, or that the system-shared memory is partially mitigating the GPU's load.

However, the absolute FPS at 4K (14 to 29 across presets) is so low that the GPU is clearly the limiting factor. The CPU's high single-thread performance (Passmark single-thread score of 4005) cannot compensate for the GPU's inability to render at 4K. The data also shows that the difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 41 FPS, while at 4K it is only 15 FPS. This shrinking gap at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU becomes so overwhelmed that preset changes have diminishing returns, further confirming the GPU bottleneck. In contrast, the CPU's role is more apparent at 1080p, where the 41 FPS delta between Low and Ultra suggests that both components are being stressed, but the GPU still dominates the performance curve.