Counter-Strike 2
The transition from Global Offensive to Counter-Strike 2 marked the end of the DX9 era for Valve. The new Source 2 engine introduces physically based rendering and dynamic smoke that interacts with lighting, significantly changing the performance profile. While CS:GO was light on the GPU, CS2 requires a competent card to handle these effects without stuttering. It remains CPU-heavy at competitive settings, where the 'sub-tick' server architecture demands strong single-thread performance. CPUs with large L3 caches, like AMD's X3D line, offer a major advantage. 8GB of RAM is now the absolute minimum, though more is recommended to avoid hitches.
Actual FPS may vary based on RAM speed, background processes, and other system factors
Performance Report
At 1080p, all quality settings exceed 416 FPS, suitable for 144Hz+ monitors. At 1440p, all settings exceed 351 FPS. At 4K, all settings exceed 238 FPS.
The GeForce RTX 5090 is 140% above the recommended GPU (GeForce RTX 2070) for Counter-Strike 2. The Core i5-13600KF is 115% above the recommended CPU (Core i7-9700K).
No major FPS-ceiling mismatch detected. The GeForce RTX 5090 and Core i5-13600KF stay close in effective frame-generation ceiling across the tested resolutions and quality settings.
Approximated average price on current market:
Combo price: $2958. At 1080p Ultra, this combo delivers 416 FPS, equivalent to 0.14 FPS per dollar.
| Resolution | Low | Medium | High | Ultra |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1080p | 0.214 fps/$ | 0.180 fps/$ | 0.152 fps/$ | 0.141 fps/$ |
| 1440p | 0.183 fps/$ | 0.160 fps/$ | 0.136 fps/$ | 0.119 fps/$ |
| 4k | 0.107 fps/$ | 0.095 fps/$ | 0.091 fps/$ | 0.080 fps/$ |
* Table values represent FPS per Dollar (higher is better)
Affiliate Disclosure
ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.
Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.
This chart answers a simple question: which upgrade is more likely to increase FPS first? In this case, there is no clear winner.
The largest gap still appears at 1080p Low, where the Core i5-13600KF reaches about 632 FPS, while the GeForce RTX 5090 still has headroom up to roughly 722 FPS.
That means neither part is consistently hitting its ceiling far ahead of the other. Across all tested settings, this pairing is GPU-limited in 3 out of 12 cases, CPU-limited in 4, and balanced in 5.
Overall, this is a balanced combination in this game.
Neither the Core i5-13600KF nor the GeForce RTX 5090 stands out as the consistent limiter in this game, so the better upgrade depends more on your target settings than on one obvious bottleneck.
This chart shows which upgrade is more likely to unlock more FPS in each tested setting. The lower line represents the part that reaches its limit first. When the CPU and GPU lines stay close together, the system is more balanced. When the gap widens, one component is more clearly holding the other back. Hover any setting to inspect it.
The lower line is the current limiter. The closer the two lines are, the more balanced the CPU and GPU are for this game.
Each line represents an estimated FPS ceiling for one component, rather than live usage alone.
To estimate the CPU ceiling, we pair the Core i5-13600KF with GeForce RTX 5090, our current GPU anchor. To estimate the GPU ceiling, we pair the GeForce RTX 5090 with Ryzen 9 9950X3D, our current CPU anchor.
The lower line indicates the current limiter, since that component reaches its FPS ceiling first. In most scenarios, that is also the part most likely to deliver the bigger performance uplift if upgraded first.
The percentage shown represents the gap between the two ceilings. In practical terms, it shows how much of the stronger component's potential is left unused because the weaker one becomes the bottleneck first.
See how your processor and graphics card compare against the game official minimum and recommended system specs. The placement of your hardware is calculated using relative synthetic performance scores to help you gauge overall playability.
Your CPU is 115% above and your GPU is 140% above the recommended specs. Ultra settings at 1080p, or High at 1440p/4K.
+115%vsrecommended
+140%vsrecommended
+1370%vsminimum
+862%vsminimum
Yes, the Core i5-13600KF paired with the GeForce RTX 5090 can run Counter-Strike 2 smoothly up to 4k achieving around 238 FPS at Ultra quality. Your GPU is 140% above the recommended specs, and your CPU is 115% above the recommended requirements.
This CPU + GPU combo costs approximately $2,958 ($258 CPU + $2,700 GPU). This is a well-balanced setup, meaning you're getting good value from both components without significant waste.
This setup is already well-balanced for Counter-Strike 2. In the Performance Limiter Analysis, neither side consistently defines the maximum FPS across the tested presets. Across all tested settings, the distribution is 3/12 GPU-limited, 4/12 CPU-limited, and 5/12 balanced. In practice, this pairing behaves as a well-balanced combination in this game. Because of that, upgrading only one component would usually bring smaller gains than improving the overall pairing.
Counter-Strike 2 does not currently support Frame Generation technologies like DLSS 3 or FSR 3. Your performance is based entirely on native rendering. If the game adds support in a future update, newer GPUs will benefit the most.
Counter-Strike 2 requires at minimum a Core i5 750 (CPU) and GeForce GTX 660 (GPU) with 8 GB RAM and 85 GB storage. For the recommended experience, you need a Core i7-9700K and GeForce RTX 2070 with 16 GB RAM. Your Core i5-13600KF and GeForce RTX 5090 both exceed the recommended specs, so you're well-positioned for a great experience.
These Counter-Strike 2 FPS results are not arbitrary numbers. They come from calculations informed by thousands of real gaming benchmarks, and the typical accuracy range is around 10% to 15%. That makes them far more useful than generic FPS calculators that simply invent values without a benchmark foundation. Actual in-game performance can still vary with drivers, updates, RAM configuration, cooling, and the exact scene being rendered.
Performance estimates are based on synthetic benchmarks and hardware capabilities.
Results may vary based on drivers, OS, and background processes.
