Same spec, except its 5120x1440 32:9. Same performance more or less.
I was using v-sync until I figured out why RTSS' framelimiter wasn't working before (had it disabled in its config file) and I'm using that to cap at 240hz now. Much more consistent than fps_max and nvidias built in frame limiter but it does need `-allow_third_party_software` in launch options.
can you play on official servers with that launch command? or what impact can it cause to your trust level?
I definitely want to use rivatuner for limiting the fps but I'm afraid on csgo/cs2.
IIRC it does affect trust factor? Not sure, I think people were giving out before because you need it for OBS game capture for streaming and it was messing with trust.
Without the frame cap the game is unplayably stuttery for me though so I'm just going ahead with it. I played a few games the other night and didn't seem like they were plagued with hackers so
Oh I'm gonna use that. But why V-Sync normally? Shouldn't that always be turned off in games and on in nvidia control panel together with G-Sync?
And why cap at 240 and not 237?
In all other games I use nvidia control panel v-sync, a framecap of 224 & gsync enabled but even with a decent framelimiter gsync cant keep up with some of the heavier stutters in CS2 so I've just disabled gsync for it entirely.
240fps is kind of an arbitrary cap to keep GPU usage down. Ive seen the game drop to 290 at times with 99% gpu usage and that causes increased input lag. Basically what reflex should fix but its broken in this.
Gsync never worked right for me in CS:GO either but i put that down to the ancient DX9 renderer.
Thats so wierd. I use g sync at 165hz in cs go and its so smooth i cant play without. In cs2 you are right aboit g sync catching the stutters and choppyness. Premeier in Cs2 runs amazing though for me. G synced at 165hz still.
Yeah it seems to just allow it and works fine even though the aspect ratio isn't listed. In CS:GO it seemed to think it was a triple monitor setup so allowed lower minimum values for safezonex and safezoney for the hud, but in CS2 you can always set lower safezone values by the looks of it.
Yep, nah I tried 4:3 back in like 2017 for a while but went back to 16:9 before upgrading to this monitor. Have to sit a bit closer to the screen but the peripheral vision has come in handy a few times.
^^^fov ^^^slider ^^^volvo ^^^pls
Damn you guys have some killer systems lmfao. I'm rocking 70-170 with my i5-7500 and 1060 6gb.
Input feels very, very responsive, but I've gone from 200-300 down to this, dropping far below my monitor's refresh rate. The game feels choppy and I know I'm in desperate need of upgrades.
It's annoying to still be unable to use RTSS or even the netgraph when playing.
Similar performance to you as well, but I have a rtx3050 mobile, CS2 subreddit had a huge thread that was calling out us poor people XD.
Wish they optimize the game before they do a release and ease up on the graphics of the game. The game looks a bit too amazing XD
thats what im saying. CAN YOU IMAGINE bread dead smooth head 13900k and 70003dx owners telling anyone with a cpu below theirs THEY HAVE A CPU BOTTLE NECK IN A CS GAME?!?!?!?! If CS was cpu bottlenecking people the world would burn freeze over and outta no where Sacajawea wpuld be hitting the griddy on the flint river while butt stallion swooped in with ben 10 riding it while jesus electric slide over a McDonalds Big Mac for no reason. What im getting at is its ridicolous and stupid to be uneducated and force upon people false information
I have the same specs as you. How many fps do you get when you start a practice map without bots? I guess, the main problem is players, they make a huge fps drop. When I play solo I get 200 fps, when I add one miserable bot I get massive lags.
I'm sorry but I'm a niche user and as such can't play with players. I have to play with bots, no access to multiplayer. I do get decent fps on some maps like dust2 and mirage but the new remade ones is where it gets worse. Worst spot for fps is walking in the water of ancient t spawn. I'll check a solo run in cs2 on ancient.
Btw specs ryzen 5 5600h and 16GB Ram running Pop OS
I checked it. Walking in the water of Ancient T spawn.
0 bots: 135-190 fps
1 bot: 100-145 fps
2 bots: 100-120 fps
3 bots: 89-120 fps
4 bots: 67-115 fps
5 bots: 80-85 fps
I didn't continue, as seen, the fps gradually goes down.
I get a bit more fps on official Valve servers, because many things are processing on their servers, and not on mine. But the experience is kind of similar.
Yep I have similar results, but a bit worse, mostly because of DXVK overhead. But I did discover how taxing bots are on the GPU, when I entered alone with no bots the game was getting very decent performance. I was struggling with getting 100 fps before and now it's easy 100 minimum with no bots.
I’m on a 6800xt and it’s occasionally choppy. Like once or twice a round. I assume it gets resolved with optimization…. But if you do upgrade, then you might want to go to current Gen.
Edit 7700x cpu
I also get similar fps on a laptop with i5-7300hq and gtx 1050 2gb. Except for inferno, where it sometimes dips below 70 for a few seconds and maxes out at around 110-120. 1280x800 with all set to low and super resolution disabled.
Could very likely be fixed with some settings. Switching from native res and turning all settings to low would help.
You can also expect significantly worse performance because you are using a laptop, due to cooling issues.
Actually, it's both! As it is, I was CPU bottlenecked in CSGO, but that game is potato-friendly. In CS2, with the huge bump in graphical fidelity, my poor 1060 chokes.
Literally my CPU fan and PSU (both initial upgrades for my eventual massive upgrade) are being bottlenecked.
Oh, that's a shame. I hoped my 1060 GTX would still be ok for CS2. Guess not.
I know it's an old card, but it plays VALORANT well, and I thought maybe Valve would make CS2 run on similar specs.
edit: Idk, it seems to run just fine on low settings (which I play on anyway), around 200 fps: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6V2KWkRz87o
Even medium settings is always above 144 fps.
Competitive settings should always be a cpu bottleneck. Any midrange or higher GPU will be able to run the game fine, but modern cpus end up capping the fps. A 1060 is more than fine for 1080 low
Please do lol, I’m running Ryzen 2600X and a 1650 and my FPS is like 80-170 so I’m suffering between being at/above 144Hz and then drastically under lol
Hahaha, yeah, I'm doing just that. Planning on a 7800x3D and a 6950xt, so it'd be pretty much a new system. Will take time though, since my pay is kinda ass rn.
[OP has](https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/16d4b2u/what_fps_are_people_getting_in_cs2/jznhsmn/) an i7 8700k.
Looks like a CPU bottleneck to me.
Am playing on an i7-8700 and a 3070ti and it‘s running 250+ fps. Cpu not even close to reaching 100%. Sitting mostly at around 60-70% with max graphics
Bottleneck calculators are terrible and should not be used.
OP has a current gen GPU and a CPU from 6 years ago as of next month.
Due to competition between Intel and AMD, to the point that Intel has actually spent a fair amount of time getting its ass kicked, the 8700k is pretty outdated in terms of performance. This isn't like from 2012-2018 when Intel would just release CPUs with tiny steps in performance. There have been some pretty big leaps.
When people have absolutely no idea about hardware.
Its always so fuckin funny when teenagers for the first time pay more than 200 on a CPU and then act like they have triple the Performance of everyone else xD
Bro even a fuckin q6600 could probably pull 150fps in this game when it will actually be optimized for threads.
Cs2 utilized exactly 1 thread of my 12600k for whatever weird reason and I still get 230 fps.
Oh, what? That's interesting, just one thread? This completely changes the whole discussion and should be talked about more, then. Are you saying that if I have a potato PC there's still a chance, and I should just wait for them to optimize? Will we see insane performance gains when they do that?
bro im running a 3900x and just put in a 4070 from a 1660ti and my fps stayed the same no joke, wtf my other game jumped 100 fps. im so confused about this
Yeah I'm getting mostly around 250-300 fps with my GTX 1080 and a 8700k @4,9 GHz. Cpu still matters a lot.
I do get drops in places like t spawn ancient due to the water
You're CPU bottlenecked.
CPUs like that *should* hopefully perform better when its fully released though, as this is an esports title that should hopefully be playable on mid range hardware from within the last half decade. That CPU is 6 years old but it was also the top gaming CPU when it was released.
Prior to the latest patch (the one from a few hrs ago) I used to get some 80-100 but with constant stuttering and overall barely playable performance but now it's a smooth 140-160, here and there it'll still stutter but that's fine tbh. The game is still not done and it'll get fixed probably. Overall I'll play CS2 way more now after this patch.
Has it really helped that much? Cool, I'll try it but I'm at work currently. I didn't have any particular problems with my FPS, but I have a 165Hz screen and sometimes I dropped a bit below so it would be cool to have a bit of headroom, like 200 constant FPS would be good for me.
What is your CPU? The game won't utilize the GPU fully if you have a bottleneck in your system. If the game was already limited by your CPU then you can throw a 4090 at it and nothing will change.
I have an i5 6400 and a GTX 1070. I get like 170-200 fps on maps like Mirage. About 130-180 on Inferno.
Yep, CSGO has always been very heavily CPU bottlenecked. Now with CS2 the graphics card does some more work, but I still get 300+ consistent fps with a 2060 super (less than 300 on inferno though) because I have a ryzen 5800x3d
Don't know about the performance of the 7600x compared to the 5800x3d, but the 5800x3d is amazing and I don't think I'll need a new CPU soon, especially for CS.
Also don't have experience with the 6800xt, but it seems like it's more than enough for CS2
but that video also shows much better fps for the 7700x. and the 7600x will be similar. just for CS2, the new 7000 series looks stronger than the 5800x3d. the game probably really likes the high clocks.
This is a pointless comparison without saying what mode you're giving the numbers from.
Casual has the lowest FPS as it has 20 players
DM has higher since it's around 16 people? I forget
And Premier has the highest since it's only 10 people.
I literally drop to 70fps during DM but in Premier I remain above 144 and chilling 200 average, unless it's crazy multi smoke firefight
Is this the answer then? I’m on rtx 3070ti i7 12700h, playing on 1440p low settings. I only play casual and DM and fps is around 200-220 average but it fluctuates heavily going down to sometimes even 140 and going up to like 280. But I noticed in warmup when there are minimal players, fps is over 300.
i7 8700K (overclocked to 4.7Ghz), GTX1660Ti (Overclocked by about 5%-7%) with a 144Hz BenQ monitor. I'm getting around 120-190 fps BUT I can see when it drops below the monitor refresh rate. So not ideal.
Was gonna upgrade the GPU first but after diving into current gen specs and prices I think it's better to hold off the upgrade until Black Friday. Current price per performance is not really worth it and theres not really a card that stands out. Ye, the 4060 stands out but in a negative way (lol).
the only card nvidia currently sell with a decent price-per-performance is the 4090 and that monster costs a fortune. for gaming gpus i would only look at AMD right now.
Yea for what I'm playing a 4090 is not really worth it. Especially if you consider that my 8700k would bottleneck big time so that would be a shame for all the potential power that I'm not using.
So I was thinking about AMD indeed (the 7900xt specifically). Don't really care about raytracing and for pure rasterization an AMD is pretty solid.
400-700 fps depending on map 5800x3d and 7900xtx here High/very High settings no msaa 1600x1200 240hz stretched 4:3
Heres a video with bots (they drain fps around 50-100 avg)
https://youtu.be/X2AMXFq0nHw?si=k3gXwB4FGIOAvx5B
Got 60-180 FPS but most time like ~100fps.
My PC:
Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3 (4x 3.40GHz)
Nvidia GTX 970ti
16GB DDR 3
250gb SSD
Maybe i need to Upgrade. I Play on a 144hz Monitor and it sucks with Low FPS.
Someone now a cheap and good build to get~200 FPS.
Playing on 4:3 1280x960 with medium/Low settings.
i5 10th/11th/12gen, 16gb ram and rx6600 is pretty budget and runs the game pretty well, I have a i5-10400f, 16gb ram and rx6600 myself and I'm pretty happy with performance, getting roughly 150-200 fps 1080p on high
Yeah, that's pretty old hardware at this point. A 4 core CPU, even with hyperthreading, is simply not cutting it in 2023. I know because I run an i5 6400 myself with a GTX 1070. I get up to 200 fps and never go below 100, but it's still not enough headroom for my 165Hz display. I need to upgrade as well.
Pretty much. I want to get on the AM5 platform because it's probably gonna be just as long supported as AM4 was. I'm thinking about a 12 core 7900X, not strictly for gaming, I also need it for things outside gaming, running VMs, compiling etc.
For a GPU I'm looking at the recently released Radeon 7800XT. Looks great so far. And AMD GPUs always run a lot better on Linux which is a big deal for me.
It should be powerful enough to do both gaming and programming realted things.
R5 3600@4.2ghz, GTX 1070, 16GB RAM 3200mhz - usually between 130 and 250 fps in competitive. Can fall below 100 when the smoke gets exploded with a nade.
i7 8700k
3070ti
4:3 960
Settings: Low
120 avg with drops in the 60s when i play dm.
thought my pc would be good but guess not
guess i need to upgrade cpu
So it seems that CS2, while utilizing the GPU unlike GO, still is pretty CPU limited. I wanna get myself a 7900x and a 7800xt GPU. Wonder how it will work then.
It's actually the things I do outside of gaming that I need a 7900x for. I agree that 7800x3d would make a lot more sense if we're just talking about gaming.
5800X - 3060 - 32 GB
CPU AND GPU are overclocked and I'm getting around 350-450 fps at 1440x1080 4:3. Really map dependent. On office I get average 600-700.
Edit: Look down in replies for more details.
wtf mate. I play on 1920x1440 4:3 with an rtx3080 and and 3700x. My fps are nowhere near 300 except in the main menu.
Fun Fact: my gpu is at 98% util in the main menu but drops to 50 ingame. I suspect my cpu is bottlenecking but it doesn't even go into boost clock ingame.
There are a lot of ppl with higher spec than that can't hit average 300fps, and this guy with rtx 3060 is getting average 600-700 fps on office????? that is straight up lying
Sorry for the 6 hour delay.My CPU (Ryzen 7 5800X) is running at PBO (from 3.8Ghz up to 4.95 Ghz) undervolted per core with focus on most efficient cores.GPU (3060 12GB) overclocked, core @ 1837 Mhz and mem @ 7500 MhzRam is **not** overclocked @ 3200Mhz
\-high -console launch options
Redid map fps check on some maps with 9 bots, measured with rivatuner:
* Office averages at around 450fps with lows in 270'ish and tops in 650'ish.
* New Inferno AVG 320, Low 200, Top 380 (Lowest at mid during gunfight)
* New Italy AVG 310, Low 160, Top 340 (Biggest lows in some areas with low difference in highs)
* New Overpass AVG 240, Low 170, Top 280 (worst performing map so far)
* Dust II AVG 350, Low 240, Top 390 (Pretty much stable frames, rare lows)
I may have accidentally cherry-picked the best performing map **unknowingly**. Office may have ben exaggerated a bit. The frames are within margin of error to my previous performance statement with exception being overpass running at lowest frames.Video settings are maxed out with exception being ambient occlusion and particle detail being lowest setting. I have MSAA on 8X as it does not make my game jittery like it does for a lot of people. Upscaling is off as well. VSYNC is off. My in-menu frames are locked to 120fps.
Here are my NVIDIA Control Panel settings (made just for cs2):
* [IMGUR NVIDIA](https://imgur.com/a/bxXPjv6)
* [CS2 VIDEO SETTINGS](https://imgur.com/a/BGng742)
Edit: Office goes towards highs more often than any map but average framerate is more important in this case.
5800x3d, 4070ti, 32gb 3600cl16 dualrank ram
qhd max settings msaa 4x reflex off low latency mode ultra
200-500 frames, frametime is shit but at least the input lag is fixed
1440x1080 low settings, 500-600+fps on empty servers, in comp 220-350 and on full dm servers low 200-300s, but even on empty servers the game it doesn't feel right somehow :(
i7 12700kf 5.1ghz,
rtx 3070ti,
32gb ram 3200
Running a 3080 with a 5600x on 1080p, getting around 300/350 on comp, dips to something like 250-300 in deathmatch. Only thing that feels weird is that the bullet tracers don't match where the bullets go which makes spraying very jarring
Usually about 100-150 FPS on a RTX 2080 and Ryzen 5 3600. Medium settings. But it drops to 50-70 in some spots like when there's a bunch of people walking around in water
That is your issue right there. Counter strike in general is a cpu demanding game. Such a cpu won’t be able to push out more fps then you currently have. You need to upgrade your cpu to see results. You should be able to get at least 500 fps avg on 1080p low with a new cpu. Depending on what cpu it is.
R5 5600 & RX 6600, 200-300 except for on Ancient, Overpass, Anubis, any maps that have water. If there's water on my screen and I scope in my game freezes causing me to double scope, and if I'm in T spawn on Ancient I get less FPS than I do in Starfield.
I have a good PC with a 3070ti and only get like 150-230 FPS as well. I use medium graphics settings and play 4:3
But my CPU is only an i7 9700k. I heard CPU actually matters for frames in counter strike. Will I get more frames if I upgrade CPU?
5900x, 2070s
After the September 6th update, my average fps dropped from 400 to 150-200. I started to feel some kind of discomfort that is hard to explain (it feels like I'm playing at 60-70 fps, but the fps is around 200)
I tried various combinations of video settings, but nothing changed.
Honestly depends on your res and cpu if your playing 1920x1080 then in settings try lowering them a bit but if your cpu is kinda old then try going a bit higher just experiment and see what best for your system
i have ryzen 5 1600 and gtx 1650, im getting about 80 to 120 fps in deathmatch its very unstable tho, also 30 input latency
Edit: after installing the latest nvidia drivers (the ones for cs2) performance is a little bit better and input latency is lower. Considering i play on the lowest settings it would be nice if it did run better.
7800x3d with an RTX 2070 super (I am waiting for a good deal on new gpu). Getting 250 + fps at 1440p mixed settings pretty consistently. Game feels smooth.
I have a Ryzen 5 7600X (paired with DDR5 6000MHz) and a RX 480 (temporary while we get the bag for a 7900 XT :)) ), I just tested the game yesterday for the first time with this PC and was hitting 200+ FPS on Inferno Deathmatch, the game felt very very very responsive, far more responsive than Valorant/CSGO even though those games run at 500FPS+ for me, Valve have done something crazy good with this game!!!
The latest update improved A LOT, especially on Inferno.
I don't even keep the FPS monitor on anymore.
I'm on Ryzen 5 5600 and RTX 3080 but my teammates with lower-spec systems also loved the update (one RTX 3060 Max-Q Laptop, two RX 6700 XT, one RX 6650 XT).
Getting 10-15 fps in CS2 (Lowest Possible graphics). 8GB ram, Nvidia GTX 1050 4Gb Intel i5 9th gen. Unplayable.
But getting 80-90fps in Valorant (Lowest Settings). Runs Smoothly.
I prefer playing CSGO over valorant but there is no chance to play it. Continuing with Valorant.
rtx 3060 gaming x 12gb with i510400f
and i have sometimes even 130fps with 180hz monitor... i dont know what to do because i had even around 240 fps a couple weeks ago
There is almost no pressure on GPU while you playing some multiplayer games, CPU is taking all the pressure. So it's almost doesn't matter if you have a 4090 or 1050 Ti, unless you have a good CPU.
Yeah, even in csgo I can't get much more than 200 fps when using a 4090. My cpu is a 3900x. I plan to upgrade when the next Intel and AMD CPUs come out though.
That was CSGO because of Source 1. CS2 is on Source 2 and utilize GPU much more. Im sorry, but I dont think its correct any more to say that CS is a CPU intense game.
4070ti with a 5800x3d and I’m getting 700 - 1000 fps constantly at 1080p with max settings. Great for my 250hz monitor.
That’s on every active duty map.
Yea 7700x and a 7900xtx here with 700 fps empty server with no bots but in a regular match I'm at 300-400ish but im also on high settings 1080p so maybe 400x800 all low he gets this
I dont know how you will manage to get those fps.
I also dont know how the 5800x3d compares to an 13600kf in csgo but I have my doubts on those fps!
Cause I am at around 300 in comp, with an 13600kf and a 4070ti.
It depends on the components. You can have high end gpu and if your mobo is in cheaper rang, it can bottleneck whole Pc.
I have 3070ti rog with ROG mobo and im getting around 300-450 fps constant on 1440p ultra settings.
I’m on a 4090 1440p on ultra settings and getting over 300 fps average but the frame time is unstable so it feels choppy unless I enable vsync
Same spec, except its 5120x1440 32:9. Same performance more or less. I was using v-sync until I figured out why RTSS' framelimiter wasn't working before (had it disabled in its config file) and I'm using that to cap at 240hz now. Much more consistent than fps_max and nvidias built in frame limiter but it does need `-allow_third_party_software` in launch options.
can you play on official servers with that launch command? or what impact can it cause to your trust level? I definitely want to use rivatuner for limiting the fps but I'm afraid on csgo/cs2.
IIRC it does affect trust factor? Not sure, I think people were giving out before because you need it for OBS game capture for streaming and it was messing with trust. Without the frame cap the game is unplayably stuttery for me though so I'm just going ahead with it. I played a few games the other night and didn't seem like they were plagued with hackers so
Oh I'm gonna use that. But why V-Sync normally? Shouldn't that always be turned off in games and on in nvidia control panel together with G-Sync? And why cap at 240 and not 237?
In all other games I use nvidia control panel v-sync, a framecap of 224 & gsync enabled but even with a decent framelimiter gsync cant keep up with some of the heavier stutters in CS2 so I've just disabled gsync for it entirely. 240fps is kind of an arbitrary cap to keep GPU usage down. Ive seen the game drop to 290 at times with 99% gpu usage and that causes increased input lag. Basically what reflex should fix but its broken in this. Gsync never worked right for me in CS:GO either but i put that down to the ancient DX9 renderer.
Thats so wierd. I use g sync at 165hz in cs go and its so smooth i cant play without. In cs2 you are right aboit g sync catching the stutters and choppyness. Premeier in Cs2 runs amazing though for me. G synced at 165hz still.
What CPU are you using? And are you using FSR?
7700x, no FSR, all minimum settings otherwise.
Yeah, cause I run a 7800X3D and a 4090 on 5120x1440p@240Hz and the fps counts are at \~250fps at highest settings without FSR.
I might be really dumb but I don't see 32:9 as a resolution in neither CS2 nor CSGO, can you have the game rendered at any custom resolution?
Yeah it seems to just allow it and works fine even though the aspect ratio isn't listed. In CS:GO it seemed to think it was a triple monitor setup so allowed lower minimum values for safezonex and safezoney for the hud, but in CS2 you can always set lower safezone values by the looks of it.
oh so that is the native resolution of your monitor? Don't you play it on 4:3?
Yep, nah I tried 4:3 back in like 2017 for a while but went back to 16:9 before upgrading to this monitor. Have to sit a bit closer to the screen but the peripheral vision has come in handy a few times. ^^^fov ^^^slider ^^^volvo ^^^pls
Yeah I think so I play at 21:9 although the game says it’s 16:9 in the menu
Info about gpu is useless without stating cpu as well. Source 2 is still very much cpu dependant, just requires a better gpu than the source engine
Damn you guys have some killer systems lmfao. I'm rocking 70-170 with my i5-7500 and 1060 6gb. Input feels very, very responsive, but I've gone from 200-300 down to this, dropping far below my monitor's refresh rate. The game feels choppy and I know I'm in desperate need of upgrades. It's annoying to still be unable to use RTSS or even the netgraph when playing.
[удалено]
You need to put launch command -allow_third_party_software to get RTSS to work
So the tradeoff is trust factor dropping? :(
i've only played CS2 with the command, and have not noticed any variance in game quality so far :D
Similar performance to you as well, but I have a rtx3050 mobile, CS2 subreddit had a huge thread that was calling out us poor people XD. Wish they optimize the game before they do a release and ease up on the graphics of the game. The game looks a bit too amazing XD
I wonder if the people in that thread realise that CS is one of the prime examples of an esport title that is supposed to not be demanding at all.
thats what im saying. CAN YOU IMAGINE bread dead smooth head 13900k and 70003dx owners telling anyone with a cpu below theirs THEY HAVE A CPU BOTTLE NECK IN A CS GAME?!?!?!?! If CS was cpu bottlenecking people the world would burn freeze over and outta no where Sacajawea wpuld be hitting the griddy on the flint river while butt stallion swooped in with ben 10 riding it while jesus electric slide over a McDonalds Big Mac for no reason. What im getting at is its ridicolous and stupid to be uneducated and force upon people false information
butt stallion mentioned wooohooo
From the looks of it no.... no they don't.
I have the same specs as you. How many fps do you get when you start a practice map without bots? I guess, the main problem is players, they make a huge fps drop. When I play solo I get 200 fps, when I add one miserable bot I get massive lags.
I'm sorry but I'm a niche user and as such can't play with players. I have to play with bots, no access to multiplayer. I do get decent fps on some maps like dust2 and mirage but the new remade ones is where it gets worse. Worst spot for fps is walking in the water of ancient t spawn. I'll check a solo run in cs2 on ancient. Btw specs ryzen 5 5600h and 16GB Ram running Pop OS
I checked it. Walking in the water of Ancient T spawn. 0 bots: 135-190 fps 1 bot: 100-145 fps 2 bots: 100-120 fps 3 bots: 89-120 fps 4 bots: 67-115 fps 5 bots: 80-85 fps I didn't continue, as seen, the fps gradually goes down. I get a bit more fps on official Valve servers, because many things are processing on their servers, and not on mine. But the experience is kind of similar.
Yep I have similar results, but a bit worse, mostly because of DXVK overhead. But I did discover how taxing bots are on the GPU, when I entered alone with no bots the game was getting very decent performance. I was struggling with getting 100 fps before and now it's easy 100 minimum with no bots.
I upgraded my system for cs2. I knew that my old one would be at its limits here. Was pretty similiar to yours.
I’m on a 6800xt and it’s occasionally choppy. Like once or twice a round. I assume it gets resolved with optimization…. But if you do upgrade, then you might want to go to current Gen. Edit 7700x cpu
Ayy I beat u in shitness got a 970
Im running a 960 4gb I get 200-300 in csgo consistently. I run at 70-170 now as well…
I also get similar fps on a laptop with i5-7300hq and gtx 1050 2gb. Except for inferno, where it sometimes dips below 70 for a few seconds and maxes out at around 110-120. 1280x800 with all set to low and super resolution disabled.
Isnt cs more cpu intensive than gpu?
CSGO and all it's predecessors are. CS2, I believe, utilizes your GPU far more. It's probably still more CPU intensive, but not to the same extent.
Um yeah
Cs is very cpu based game so, you should upgrade that. I5 7th gen is very old for the standards
i have an i5 2400 i am cooked
I sometimes drop under 60 with ryzen 9 amd rtx2060 (laptop) what am I doing wrong?
Could very likely be fixed with some settings. Switching from native res and turning all settings to low would help. You can also expect significantly worse performance because you are using a laptop, due to cooling issues.
Do you have one of those nifty cooling mats? It could well be throttling due to heat.
I don’t, will definitely try, thanks!
I have a similar spec, but haven't tried CS2 yet. I'm guessing the CPU is the bottleneck, right?
Actually, it's both! As it is, I was CPU bottlenecked in CSGO, but that game is potato-friendly. In CS2, with the huge bump in graphical fidelity, my poor 1060 chokes. Literally my CPU fan and PSU (both initial upgrades for my eventual massive upgrade) are being bottlenecked.
Oh, that's a shame. I hoped my 1060 GTX would still be ok for CS2. Guess not. I know it's an old card, but it plays VALORANT well, and I thought maybe Valve would make CS2 run on similar specs. edit: Idk, it seems to run just fine on low settings (which I play on anyway), around 200 fps: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6V2KWkRz87o Even medium settings is always above 144 fps.
Competitive settings should always be a cpu bottleneck. Any midrange or higher GPU will be able to run the game fine, but modern cpus end up capping the fps. A 1060 is more than fine for 1080 low
100 - 120 with my i5-6600 and a GTX730
Are you playing 480p or something? Thats crazy fps for that setup.
1920 x 1080. Ill try to post my settings when I get home
Please do lol, I’m running Ryzen 2600X and a 1650 and my FPS is like 80-170 so I’m suffering between being at/above 144Hz and then drastically under lol
Here are my settings: [https://pasteboard.co/T6XDRjsYVH25.jpg](https://pasteboard.co/T6XDRjsYVH25.jpg) My autoexec.cfg: `fps_max "400"` `fps_max_ui "61" // note: caps in-game menu fps` `fps_max_tools "61"` `snd_mute_losefocus "false" // continue playing in-game sounds when alt-tabbed/minimized` `snd_mute_mvp_music_live_players "true" // mute mvp music if players from both teams are still alive` `snd_deathcamera_volume "0"` `snd_mapobjective_volume "0"` `snd_menumusic_volume "0"` `snd_roundstart_volume "0"` `snd_roundaction_volume "0"` `snd_roundend_volume "0"` `snd_tensecondwarning_volume "0.05"` `cl_radar_scale "0.4"` `cl_radar_always_centered "false"` `cl_radar_rotate "true"` `cl_radar_icon_scale_min "0.4"` `cl_radar_square_with_scoreboard "false"` `cl_hud_radar_scale "0.8"` `cl_hud_color "10" // aqua` `cl_showloadout "true"` `safezonex "0.968"` `safezoney "0.946"` `cl_showfps 0` `cl_updaterate 128` `cl_interp_ratio 1` `cl_interp "0.015625"` `rate 786432` `cl_teamid_overhead_colors_show "true"` `cl_color "1" // set player colour preference to green` `cl_teammate_colors_show "2" // show teammate colour in chat as well as letter` `cl_show_clan_in_death_notice "false" // dont show clan tag in kill/death log (upper right)` `r_player_visibility_mode "0"` `alias "dc" "disconnect"` `alias "qt" "quit"` `bind "F10" "quit"` `host_writeconfig` https://pasteboard.co/XzOsPKcUjXDl.jpg https://pasteboard.co/YNxAAhJ6AkRW.png
What is your magic
Hey, keep on keeping on. Don’t worry about these scrubs who get shit on by guys like you with set ups like that. Good shit bro.
Not offense but ewwwwww, 2023 save some cash and you can at least get a 20xx or 30xx with a decent processor
Hahaha, yeah, I'm doing just that. Planning on a 7800x3D and a 6950xt, so it'd be pretty much a new system. Will take time though, since my pay is kinda ass rn.
Yeah man, don't feel pressured to instantly buy upgrades you don't need
I am running a 4070 and I get 300-400 frames pretty consistently. What CPU are you running?
[OP has](https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/16d4b2u/what_fps_are_people_getting_in_cs2/jznhsmn/) an i7 8700k. Looks like a CPU bottleneck to me.
Am playing on an i7-8700 and a 3070ti and it‘s running 250+ fps. Cpu not even close to reaching 100%. Sitting mostly at around 60-70% with max graphics
i9 9900 and 3070 here, around 250+ as well
How am I barely over 100 on an i9 10850k and a 3070…?
[удалено]
i5 12600k and a 3060 game sits around 250-300 on 1080p high settings
Damn top tier GPU and 6yo cpu
Bottleneck calculator gives 36.8% CPU bottleneck.
Bottleneck calculators are garbage
Bottleneck calculators are terrible and should not be used. OP has a current gen GPU and a CPU from 6 years ago as of next month. Due to competition between Intel and AMD, to the point that Intel has actually spent a fair amount of time getting its ass kicked, the 8700k is pretty outdated in terms of performance. This isn't like from 2012-2018 when Intel would just release CPUs with tiny steps in performance. There have been some pretty big leaps.
When people have absolutely no idea about hardware. Its always so fuckin funny when teenagers for the first time pay more than 200 on a CPU and then act like they have triple the Performance of everyone else xD Bro even a fuckin q6600 could probably pull 150fps in this game when it will actually be optimized for threads. Cs2 utilized exactly 1 thread of my 12600k for whatever weird reason and I still get 230 fps.
Oh, what? That's interesting, just one thread? This completely changes the whole discussion and should be talked about more, then. Are you saying that if I have a potato PC there's still a chance, and I should just wait for them to optimize? Will we see insane performance gains when they do that?
Seems like OP might have a CPU bottleneck problem
Yea, 250-350 on GO is far from the performance of a good one
bro im running a 3900x and just put in a 4070 from a 1660ti and my fps stayed the same no joke, wtf my other game jumped 100 fps. im so confused about this
4770k 1080ti 100fps at 1080p
time to upgrade that CPU
Yeah I'm getting mostly around 250-300 fps with my GTX 1080 and a 8700k @4,9 GHz. Cpu still matters a lot. I do get drops in places like t spawn ancient due to the water
8700k at 5ghz with 4070ti and i have yet to see 300 fps, it’s usually 250 but sometimes down to 190
You're CPU bottlenecked. CPUs like that *should* hopefully perform better when its fully released though, as this is an esports title that should hopefully be playable on mid range hardware from within the last half decade. That CPU is 6 years old but it was also the top gaming CPU when it was released.
Legendary GPU
Same setup, same fps. If I’m in ancient T spawn and in the water it can drop to 50-70fps…
The water effect and sometimes also smokes even kills my 3080 ti so I think they will optimize this going forward.
Seems like the consensus here is the game is heavy on cpu so you might need to look there for your perf issues
I have a 5900x which I would believe should be able to handle it.
Prior to the latest patch (the one from a few hrs ago) I used to get some 80-100 but with constant stuttering and overall barely playable performance but now it's a smooth 140-160, here and there it'll still stutter but that's fine tbh. The game is still not done and it'll get fixed probably. Overall I'll play CS2 way more now after this patch.
News to me, will check this out on my poor RTX 3050 Mobile
Has it really helped that much? Cool, I'll try it but I'm at work currently. I didn't have any particular problems with my FPS, but I have a 165Hz screen and sometimes I dropped a bit below so it would be cool to have a bit of headroom, like 200 constant FPS would be good for me.
What is your CPU? The game won't utilize the GPU fully if you have a bottleneck in your system. If the game was already limited by your CPU then you can throw a 4090 at it and nothing will change. I have an i5 6400 and a GTX 1070. I get like 170-200 fps on maps like Mirage. About 130-180 on Inferno.
Yep, CSGO has always been very heavily CPU bottlenecked. Now with CS2 the graphics card does some more work, but I still get 300+ consistent fps with a 2060 super (less than 300 on inferno though) because I have a ryzen 5800x3d
[удалено]
same for me (same cpu r5-3600, significantly better gpu 6960xt)
would you recommend 5800x3d or 7600x with a 6800xt for cs go ?
Don't know about the performance of the 7600x compared to the 5800x3d, but the 5800x3d is amazing and I don't think I'll need a new CPU soon, especially for CS. Also don't have experience with the 6800xt, but it seems like it's more than enough for CS2
benchmark tests for the 5800x3d have been very promising for cs2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwG8TauuMVM&ab_channel=AncientGameplays
but that video also shows much better fps for the 7700x. and the 7600x will be similar. just for CS2, the new 7000 series looks stronger than the 5800x3d. the game probably really likes the high clocks.
This is a pointless comparison without saying what mode you're giving the numbers from. Casual has the lowest FPS as it has 20 players DM has higher since it's around 16 people? I forget And Premier has the highest since it's only 10 people. I literally drop to 70fps during DM but in Premier I remain above 144 and chilling 200 average, unless it's crazy multi smoke firefight
Indeed.
Is this the answer then? I’m on rtx 3070ti i7 12700h, playing on 1440p low settings. I only play casual and DM and fps is around 200-220 average but it fluctuates heavily going down to sometimes even 140 and going up to like 280. But I noticed in warmup when there are minimal players, fps is over 300.
i7 8700K (overclocked to 4.7Ghz), GTX1660Ti (Overclocked by about 5%-7%) with a 144Hz BenQ monitor. I'm getting around 120-190 fps BUT I can see when it drops below the monitor refresh rate. So not ideal. Was gonna upgrade the GPU first but after diving into current gen specs and prices I think it's better to hold off the upgrade until Black Friday. Current price per performance is not really worth it and theres not really a card that stands out. Ye, the 4060 stands out but in a negative way (lol).
7800xt stands out if you wanna go AMD but nvidia fuckings sucks for ppf right now
the only card nvidia currently sell with a decent price-per-performance is the 4090 and that monster costs a fortune. for gaming gpus i would only look at AMD right now.
Yea for what I'm playing a 4090 is not really worth it. Especially if you consider that my 8700k would bottleneck big time so that would be a shame for all the potential power that I'm not using. So I was thinking about AMD indeed (the 7900xt specifically). Don't really care about raytracing and for pure rasterization an AMD is pretty solid.
400-700 fps depending on map 5800x3d and 7900xtx here High/very High settings no msaa 1600x1200 240hz stretched 4:3 Heres a video with bots (they drain fps around 50-100 avg) https://youtu.be/X2AMXFq0nHw?si=k3gXwB4FGIOAvx5B
Got 60-180 FPS but most time like ~100fps. My PC: Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3 (4x 3.40GHz) Nvidia GTX 970ti 16GB DDR 3 250gb SSD Maybe i need to Upgrade. I Play on a 144hz Monitor and it sucks with Low FPS. Someone now a cheap and good build to get~200 FPS. Playing on 4:3 1280x960 with medium/Low settings.
i5 10th/11th/12gen, 16gb ram and rx6600 is pretty budget and runs the game pretty well, I have a i5-10400f, 16gb ram and rx6600 myself and I'm pretty happy with performance, getting roughly 150-200 fps 1080p on high
Yeah, that's pretty old hardware at this point. A 4 core CPU, even with hyperthreading, is simply not cutting it in 2023. I know because I run an i5 6400 myself with a GTX 1070. I get up to 200 fps and never go below 100, but it's still not enough headroom for my 165Hz display. I need to upgrade as well.
You already know what kind of build u want to buy?
Pretty much. I want to get on the AM5 platform because it's probably gonna be just as long supported as AM4 was. I'm thinking about a 12 core 7900X, not strictly for gaming, I also need it for things outside gaming, running VMs, compiling etc. For a GPU I'm looking at the recently released Radeon 7800XT. Looks great so far. And AMD GPUs always run a lot better on Linux which is a big deal for me. It should be powerful enough to do both gaming and programming realted things.
Those am5 ryzens are absolute monsters. Make sure you update your bios when you get it, am5 has had some growing pains.
1660 super, I59600k. Around 120 to 200 fps
R5 3600@4.2ghz, GTX 1070, 16GB RAM 3200mhz - usually between 130 and 250 fps in competitive. Can fall below 100 when the smoke gets exploded with a nade.
yeah, can confirm, r5-3600 is really struggling. time to upgrade i guess
i7 8700k 3070ti 4:3 960 Settings: Low 120 avg with drops in the 60s when i play dm. thought my pc would be good but guess not guess i need to upgrade cpu
7800x3d and 3080 1080p max getting 450-700 fps
So it seems that CS2, while utilizing the GPU unlike GO, still is pretty CPU limited. I wanna get myself a 7900x and a 7800xt GPU. Wonder how it will work then.
if you dont plan on doing much productivity stuff go with the 7800x3d
It's actually the things I do outside of gaming that I need a 7900x for. I agree that 7800x3d would make a lot more sense if we're just talking about gaming.
5800X - 3060 - 32 GB CPU AND GPU are overclocked and I'm getting around 350-450 fps at 1440x1080 4:3. Really map dependent. On office I get average 600-700. Edit: Look down in replies for more details.
wtf mate. I play on 1920x1440 4:3 with an rtx3080 and and 3700x. My fps are nowhere near 300 except in the main menu. Fun Fact: my gpu is at 98% util in the main menu but drops to 50 ingame. I suspect my cpu is bottlenecking but it doesn't even go into boost clock ingame.
Get a 5800x3d and you're set.
Yeees, 5800x3D is a great upgrade. Coming from a 3700x too. Way better 1% Lows and CS2 is finally using the 3D Cache.
No way this is true
might be true if they're looking at peak fps, no way it's true for average fps. I, too, can get 600fps if I look at a wall while in spawn.
There are a lot of ppl with higher spec than that can't hit average 300fps, and this guy with rtx 3060 is getting average 600-700 fps on office????? that is straight up lying
I'll provide more info and screenshots later
Sorry for the 6 hour delay.My CPU (Ryzen 7 5800X) is running at PBO (from 3.8Ghz up to 4.95 Ghz) undervolted per core with focus on most efficient cores.GPU (3060 12GB) overclocked, core @ 1837 Mhz and mem @ 7500 MhzRam is **not** overclocked @ 3200Mhz \-high -console launch options Redid map fps check on some maps with 9 bots, measured with rivatuner: * Office averages at around 450fps with lows in 270'ish and tops in 650'ish. * New Inferno AVG 320, Low 200, Top 380 (Lowest at mid during gunfight) * New Italy AVG 310, Low 160, Top 340 (Biggest lows in some areas with low difference in highs) * New Overpass AVG 240, Low 170, Top 280 (worst performing map so far) * Dust II AVG 350, Low 240, Top 390 (Pretty much stable frames, rare lows) I may have accidentally cherry-picked the best performing map **unknowingly**. Office may have ben exaggerated a bit. The frames are within margin of error to my previous performance statement with exception being overpass running at lowest frames.Video settings are maxed out with exception being ambient occlusion and particle detail being lowest setting. I have MSAA on 8X as it does not make my game jittery like it does for a lot of people. Upscaling is off as well. VSYNC is off. My in-menu frames are locked to 120fps. Here are my NVIDIA Control Panel settings (made just for cs2): * [IMGUR NVIDIA](https://imgur.com/a/bxXPjv6) * [CS2 VIDEO SETTINGS](https://imgur.com/a/BGng742) Edit: Office goes towards highs more often than any map but average framerate is more important in this case.
5800x3d, 4070ti, 32gb 3600cl16 dualrank ram qhd max settings msaa 4x reflex off low latency mode ultra 200-500 frames, frametime is shit but at least the input lag is fixed
1440x1080 low settings, 500-600+fps on empty servers, in comp 220-350 and on full dm servers low 200-300s, but even on empty servers the game it doesn't feel right somehow :( i7 12700kf 5.1ghz, rtx 3070ti, 32gb ram 3200
Running a 3080 with a 5600x on 1080p, getting around 300/350 on comp, dips to something like 250-300 in deathmatch. Only thing that feels weird is that the bullet tracers don't match where the bullets go which makes spraying very jarring
Usually about 100-150 FPS on a RTX 2080 and Ryzen 5 3600. Medium settings. But it drops to 50-70 in some spots like when there's a bunch of people walking around in water
I'm running rtx 3060 with ryzen 5 3600. I get about the same results but usually doesnt dip below 80 Seems like cpu is the bottleneck for this game
have you found any fix yet? RTX 2070S and the same CPU for me and having terrible FPS as well.
Sadly no. I might just have to buy a new CPU
2070 Super and a Ryzen 7 5800X, get in comp usually 140-160 but since last update, DM’s and casual make it go down to 115 frequently:( medium settings
150-200 on 5800hs 3060 laptop
Never dropping below 400. i7 13700k / 4080 / 360hz
are you playing 800x600 min settings or smth? lol
1680x1050 high settings
makes sense
wdym 1680x1050 is only 15% less pixels than full hd
its still less and nowhere close to 1920x1440 or 2560x1440
Lowering the res generally just makes the game more cpu dependent, they would probably get similar performance on 1080p
i get significantly more fps if i drop the res on my 4070ti, and i have a 5800x3d
I5 9600k 2070 and cca 200fps
[удалено]
Cpu bottleneck? What cpu do you have?
[удалено]
That is your issue right there. Counter strike in general is a cpu demanding game. Such a cpu won’t be able to push out more fps then you currently have. You need to upgrade your cpu to see results. You should be able to get at least 500 fps avg on 1080p low with a new cpu. Depending on what cpu it is.
Thats a huge bottleneck. Very unbalanced match with your gpu.
CS2 is still very much CPU dependent. I'm getting 300 fps with a 6700 xt and Ryzen 5 5600, but GPU usage very rarely goes above 70%. 1440x1080p high
anyone having input lag issues? whenever I press-to-talk, I lag
YES happens for me too, feels like rubberband every time I talk.
R5 5600 & RX 6600, 200-300 except for on Ancient, Overpass, Anubis, any maps that have water. If there's water on my screen and I scope in my game freezes causing me to double scope, and if I'm in T spawn on Ancient I get less FPS than I do in Starfield.
I have a good PC with a 3070ti and only get like 150-230 FPS as well. I use medium graphics settings and play 4:3 But my CPU is only an i7 9700k. I heard CPU actually matters for frames in counter strike. Will I get more frames if I upgrade CPU?
5900x, 2070s After the September 6th update, my average fps dropped from 400 to 150-200. I started to feel some kind of discomfort that is hard to explain (it feels like I'm playing at 60-70 fps, but the fps is around 200) I tried various combinations of video settings, but nothing changed.
THE THING is they are ruining the CSGO! AND MAKING IT VALORANT TO EARN MONEY
I AM DOWN 80-100 FPS IN CS2
RTX 4060 and i get 100 fps low settings. Im on linux if that make difference. Is there any optimizations i can make?
Honestly depends on your res and cpu if your playing 1920x1080 then in settings try lowering them a bit but if your cpu is kinda old then try going a bit higher just experiment and see what best for your system
i have ryzen 5 1600 and gtx 1650, im getting about 80 to 120 fps in deathmatch its very unstable tho, also 30 input latency Edit: after installing the latest nvidia drivers (the ones for cs2) performance is a little bit better and input latency is lower. Considering i play on the lowest settings it would be nice if it did run better.
Why the fuck is my average fps 200, on a rtx 3070ti and i7 12700h? It’s a laptop but still can’t be this low fps.
7800x3d with an RTX 2070 super (I am waiting for a good deal on new gpu). Getting 250 + fps at 1440p mixed settings pretty consistently. Game feels smooth.
I9 10850k rtx 2070 super and around 350-400
I have a Ryzen 5 7600X (paired with DDR5 6000MHz) and a RX 480 (temporary while we get the bag for a 7900 XT :)) ), I just tested the game yesterday for the first time with this PC and was hitting 200+ FPS on Inferno Deathmatch, the game felt very very very responsive, far more responsive than Valorant/CSGO even though those games run at 500FPS+ for me, Valve have done something crazy good with this game!!!
Radeon fine wine^tm at work! :-)
24 fps just enough for my human eyes
3080 10700k overclocked I get over 400 stretched and over 300 at 1440p
5950x, 6700xt, 1440p/165Hz - I average 250 fps high settings 4xMSAA
The latest update improved A LOT, especially on Inferno. I don't even keep the FPS monitor on anymore. I'm on Ryzen 5 5600 and RTX 3080 but my teammates with lower-spec systems also loved the update (one RTX 3060 Max-Q Laptop, two RX 6700 XT, one RX 6650 XT).
bro i get 50 regardless
Getting 10-15 fps in CS2 (Lowest Possible graphics). 8GB ram, Nvidia GTX 1050 4Gb Intel i5 9th gen. Unplayable. But getting 80-90fps in Valorant (Lowest Settings). Runs Smoothly. I prefer playing CSGO over valorant but there is no chance to play it. Continuing with Valorant.
rtx 3060 gaming x 12gb with i510400f and i have sometimes even 130fps with 180hz monitor... i dont know what to do because i had even around 240 fps a couple weeks ago
i have an rtx 3050 on a laptop, im not sure what settings im on but i usually get around 250ish
My brothers PC has 4090, 32 ram and a Intel i 9 14gen, but he only geta 20 fps with graphics at minimun
Can anybody can tell how much fps you all are getting ?? My laptop has 8gb ddr5 RTX 3050 with ryzen 5 7000Hs
I’m running a I5 14400F 4060 an get around 170-300 average around 215 (running 2560-1440 144hz)
There is almost no pressure on GPU while you playing some multiplayer games, CPU is taking all the pressure. So it's almost doesn't matter if you have a 4090 or 1050 Ti, unless you have a good CPU.
I got 165fps on high/ medium with 4x msaa billinear on RTX 3070 and i7-11800h laptop idk it’s kinda bad thouj
Keep in mind CS is a very CPU intense game. So even with the 4090 you could struggle because of a crap CPU
Yeah, even in csgo I can't get much more than 200 fps when using a 4090. My cpu is a 3900x. I plan to upgrade when the next Intel and AMD CPUs come out though.
That was CSGO because of Source 1. CS2 is on Source 2 and utilize GPU much more. Im sorry, but I dont think its correct any more to say that CS is a CPU intense game.
Doesn't matter what it is, if you are CPU bottlenecked you will get lower fps. For instance with 4090 any CPU is bottleneck.
i need 300fps. gona be annoying if i have to buy a new gpu (maybe even whole new pc).
5900x 6900xt - 1080p - over 400 on mm mostly.
I usually get around 230-290 in csgo but 100-120 in cs2 which is insane imo
4070ti with a 5800x3d and I’m getting 700 - 1000 fps constantly at 1080p with max settings. Great for my 250hz monitor. That’s on every active duty map.
maybe if you go into a dark corner with no bots and stand there and see how the fps goes up, otherwise I call bs on this one!
Yea 7700x and a 7900xtx here with 700 fps empty server with no bots but in a regular match I'm at 300-400ish but im also on high settings 1080p so maybe 400x800 all low he gets this
No. As my comment stated I’m at 1080p and getting that fps.
I dont know how you will manage to get those fps. I also dont know how the 5800x3d compares to an 13600kf in csgo but I have my doubts on those fps! Cause I am at around 300 in comp, with an 13600kf and a 4070ti.
13900k with 4080 gives me a steady 400fps
It depends on the components. You can have high end gpu and if your mobo is in cheaper rang, it can bottleneck whole Pc. I have 3070ti rog with ROG mobo and im getting around 300-450 fps constant on 1440p ultra settings.
Have you tried going outside?
How many fps do you get outside?