Every figure below is a measurement aggregated from published review charts — the CPU's frame-rate ceiling and the frame rate the GPU delivers in this game, combined. The CPU figure is the highest frame rate that CPU sustained in this game with a flagship GPU installed — past that frame rate, the CPU is the limit. Settings: Highest settings (TechPowerUp RTX 5090 review suite), Ryzen 7 9800X3D. CPU ceiling measured at 1080p, highest settings (TechPowerUp CPU suite), RTX 5090; Ryzen 5 5600X from Hardware Unboxed's AM4 revisit (Very High preset).
Strong CPU limit
Expected frame rate: 290–290 fps (measured range across sources).
The CPU side is lower by about 38.9% in this game at 1080p. The math, from the two measured figures above: the pair runs at the lower one (~290 fps), and the gap to the faster side is (474 − 290) ÷ 474 ≈ 38.9% of the faster side's output. That percentage belongs to this game, this resolution and these settings only — the same two parts score differently in another game, which is why no universal bottleneck percentage exists for a pair of parts. Upgrading the faster part alone would not raise the frame rate.
That range feeds a 165 Hz or faster monitor — this is high-refresh territory in this game.
Confidence: MEDIUM — based on 2 source measurements for these two parts.
Balanced pairing
Expected frame rate: 290–290 fps (measured range across sources).
The CPU ceiling and the GPU's delivered rate sit within 11.9% of each other — neither part wastes much of the other. The gap is measured between the two figures above: (faster − slower) ÷ faster.
That range feeds a 165 Hz or faster monitor — this is high-refresh territory in this game.
Confidence: MEDIUM — based on 2 source measurements for these two parts.
Strong GPU limit
Expected frame rate: 163–163 fps (measured range across sources).
The GPU side is lower by about 43.7% in this game at 4K. The math, from the two measured figures above: the pair runs at the lower one (~163 fps), and the gap to the faster side is (290 − 163) ÷ 290 ≈ 43.7% of the faster side's output. That percentage belongs to this game, this resolution and these settings only — the same two parts score differently in another game, which is why no universal bottleneck percentage exists for a pair of parts. Upgrading the faster part alone would not raise the frame rate.
That range justifies a 144 Hz monitor in this game.
Confidence: MEDIUM — based on 2 source measurements for these two parts.
Full data: Counter-Strike 2 benchmarks · how verdicts are computed.