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 234 FPS, suitable for 144Hz+ monitors. At 1440p, all settings exceed 203 FPS. At 4K, all settings exceed 159 FPS.
The GeForce RTX 4090 is 136% above the recommended GPU (GeForce RTX 2070) for Counter-Strike 2. The EPYC 8324P is 227% above the recommended CPU (Core i7-9700K).
The EPYC 8324P sets the FPS ceiling at all 1080p settings, all 1440p settings, all 4k settings, while the GeForce RTX 4090 still has headroom.
Approximated average price on current market:
Combo price: $5247. At 1080p Ultra, this combo delivers 234 FPS, equivalent to 0.04 FPS per dollar.
| Resolution | Low | Medium | High | Ultra |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1080p | 0.086 fps/$ | 0.065 fps/$ | 0.051 fps/$ | 0.045 fps/$ |
| 1440p | 0.076 fps/$ | 0.059 fps/$ | 0.047 fps/$ | 0.039 fps/$ |
| 4k | 0.051 fps/$ | 0.045 fps/$ | 0.036 fps/$ | 0.030 fps/$ |
* Table values represent FPS per Dollar (higher is better)
This section is based on estimated CPU/GPU FPS ceilings, not utilization percentages.
At 1080p ultra, the EPYC 8324P sets the ceiling at about 229 FPS, while the GeForce RTX 4090 could reach 431 FPS. In this scenario, the CPU limits the GPU potential by 47% (FPS gap: 202 FPS). Overall distribution: CPU limits 12/12 cells, GPU limits 0/12, balanced 0/12.
Your EPYC 8324P is the limiting side in the heaviest mismatch. This means part of the GeForce RTX 4090 rendering potential remains unused in those settings.
| Resolution | Low | Medium | High | Ultra |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1080p (Full HD) | CPU Limits GPU 36% | CPU Limits GPU 44% | CPU Limits GPU 46% | CPU Limits GPU 47% |
| 1440p (2K QHD) | CPU Limits GPU 39% | CPU Limits GPU 43% | CPU Limits GPU 46% | CPU Limits GPU 46% |
| 4K (Ultra HD) | CPU Limits GPU 39% | CPU Limits GPU 42% | CPU Limits GPU 45% | CPU Limits GPU 45% |
We estimate the maximum FPS the processor can sustain and the maximum FPS the graphics card can sustain in each setting, then compare those limits directly.
Limit Factor formula: (stronger - weaker) / stronger. Example: if CPU ceiling is 200 FPS and GPU ceiling is 140 FPS, then GPU limits CPU by 30%.
CPU Limits GPU means the processor ceiling is lower. GPU Limits CPU means the graphics ceiling is lower. Balanced means the FPS ceilings are close enough that the gap is negligible.
A component can still be the FPS limiter without reaching 100% utilization. The displayed percentages are derived from FPS ceilings, not generic utilization heuristics.
| Resolution | Low | Medium | High | Ultra |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1080p (Full HD) | CPU40% - 80% <> GPU21% - 36% <> | CPU38% - 77% <> GPU28% - 52% <> | CPU37% - 74% <> GPU30% - 53% <> | CPU38% - 69% <> GPU31% - 54% <> |
| 1440p (2K QHD) | CPU30% - 57% <> GPU48% - 52% <> | CPU27% - 56% <> GPU61% - 85% <> | CPU25% - 55% <> GPU65% - 89% <> | CPU25% - 52% <> GPU66% - 90% <> |
| 4K (Ultra HD) | CPU27% - 38% <> GPU47% - 83% <> | CPU26% - 36% <> GPU75% - 87% <> | CPU24% - 36% <> GPU76% - 90% <> | CPU25% - 37% <> GPU74% - 90% <> |
The EPYC 8324P + GeForce RTX 4090 pairing runs this title with CPU utilization between 24% and 80% and GPU utilization between 21% and 90%. EPYC 8324P stays in a controlled operating range, while GeForce RTX 4090 is utilized efficiently without persistent saturation. As resolution scales, average GPU load rises from 38% at 1080p to 78% at 4K, while CPU averages move from 57% to 31%.
The utilization pattern is relatively even. The GeForce RTX 4090 reaches 83% average at its highest-load preset, while the EPYC 8324P peaks at 60% average. This suggests a fairly controlled load distribution, but the actual FPS-limiting side should still be read from the limiter analysis above.
At 1080p, averages sit around CPU 57% and GPU 38%. At 1440p, that shifts to CPU 41% and GPU 70%, and at 4K it reaches CPU 31% and GPU 78%. This shows that workload scaling is present on both components, with stronger pressure on the GPU.
4K (Ultra HD) High is the most balanced preset based on this dataset. It runs around CPU 30% (24-36%) and GPU 83% (76-90%), which keeps GeForce RTX 4090 well utilized without constant max-out behavior while EPYC 8324P remains stable for consistent frame delivery.
Current utilization does not show an urgent upgrade requirement for either component; the EPYC 8324P and GeForce RTX 4090 remain reasonably matched for this title.
Understanding Hardware Utilization: These percentages represent how much of your component's maximum processing power is actively being used during gameplay. They describe hardware load, but they do not directly tell you which component sets the FPS ceiling.
Important: a CPU or GPU can still be the FPS limiter without reaching 100% utilization. Two processors can both show 40% usage and still deliver very different frame rates, depending on per-core speed, cache, engine threading, driver overhead, and frame preparation efficiency.
Data generated by our Machine Learning engine trained on real-world benchmarks. Shows the approximate average utilization at each setting.
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 227% above and your GPU is 136% above the recommended specs. Ultra settings at 1080p, or High at 1440p/4K.
+227%vsrecommended
+136%vsrecommended
+2144%vsminimum
+843%vsminimum
Yes, the EPYC 8324P paired with the GeForce RTX 4090 can run Counter-Strike 2 smoothly up to 4k achieving around 159 FPS at Ultra quality. Your GPU is 136% above the recommended specs, and your CPU is 227% above the recommended requirements.
This CPU + GPU combo costs approximately $5247 ($3598 CPU (Rank #301 Value) + $1649 GPU (Rank #77 Value)). Your EPYC 8324P provides phenomenal top-tier performance but at a premium enthusiast price. Since you are essentially at the ceiling of current hardware capabilities, there are no meaningful performance upgrades available. However, if you wanted a more cost-effective build that still delivers a great experience, you could theoretically step down to a high-end processor with a significantly better value rating. For example, the EPYC 9355P is a great upgrade option for around $2998 (Rank #287 for value) while costing less than your current CPU.
Your EPYC 8324P is already an incredibly powerful processor. While it's technically the first component to hit its limit (which is completely normal in state-of-the-art builds), there is no meaningful upgrade path that would drastically improve your Counter-Strike 2 performance right now. CPU fully utilized at: 1080p low, 1080p medium, 1080p high, 1080p ultra, 1440p low, 1440p medium, 1440p high, 1440p ultra, 4k low, 4k medium, 4k high, 4k ultra.
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 EPYC 8324P and GeForce RTX 4090 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.
