Valorant

Similar Performance Alternatives

The Intel Core i3-12100F sits at the 68th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 13494. Its closest rivals in aggregate CPU performance are a tight cluster: the Intel Core 3 N355 scores 13492, essentially identical with a 0% delta, the Intel Core i5-9500 scores 13452 (0.3% slower), and the Intel Core 5 120UL scores 13594 (0.7% faster). The Intel Core i7-1250U trails slightly at 13351, 1.1% behind. In practical terms, any of these processors would deliver nearly indistinguishable frame pacing in Valorant, since the game is far more dependent on GPU throughput at the tested settings.

On the GPU side, the Intel Arc B570 ranks at the 65th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 20556. Its nearest rivals are remarkably close: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile scores 20534, just 0.1% lower, while the Intel Arc A750 scores 20582, 0.1% higher. The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M and AMD Radeon R9 M390X also fall within 0.5% of the Arc B570's aggregate score, though those are older mobile parts with very different feature sets. For Valorant specifically, the Arc A750 is the most relevant comparison: same architecture family, similar overall compute throughput, and likely similar frame rates at identical settings. The RTX 3070 Mobile being this close in aggregate score suggests that a desktop RTX 3070 would be somewhat faster, but the mobile variant's power constraints bring it down to parity.

The composite picture is a CPU that is firmly mid-pack in the database but more than adequate for a competitive shooter, paired with a GPU that punches near upper-midrange territory. Neither component is a bottleneck at the frame rates this game actually produces, which becomes evident in the measured FPS data.

CPU and GPU Roles

Valorant is a lightly threaded competitive shooter, and the recorded data shows that the GPU dominates performance scaling across resolutions and presets. At 1920x1080 Low, the combo produces 508 FPS average; at 3840x2160 Low, it drops to 347 FPS. That is a 31.7% reduction in average FPS when moving from 1080p to 4K at the same preset, a scaling pattern that points directly at GPU rendering load rather than CPU instruction throughput. The CPU's single-thread score of 893 in 3dmark and 1674 in Cinebench R23 single-core is sufficient to feed the GPU at these frame rates; if the CPU were the limiter, the 1080p to 4K gap would be much smaller.

Preset scaling reinforces this. At 2560x1440, moving from Low to High reduces average FPS from 434 to 272, a 37.3% drop. At 1920x1080, the same preset transition drops from 508 to 319, a 37.2% drop. The consistency of these percentages across resolutions indicates that the GPU's shading workload is scaling predictably with both resolution and image quality settings. The CPU's role is essentially static: it must maintain high instruction throughput for the game's simulation and draw call submission, and the i3-12100F's 4-core, 8-thread design with a 4.30 GHz boost clock handles this without introducing a measurable ceiling at any tested configuration.

At 3840x2160 Ultra, the average FPS is 207, which is still far above the 60 FPS playable threshold. The gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is 140 FPS, while at 1080p the same preset gap is 204 FPS. This narrowing at higher resolutions is the classic signature of a GPU-bound scenario: as pixel count rises, the relative cost of each frame's shading increases, compressing the difference between preset levels. The CPU's contribution is constant, so the frame rate differences are almost entirely attributable to the Arc B570's pixel throughput and texture rate (200.0 GPixel/s and 360.0 GTexel/s respectively).

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, with an average of 304 FPS. The database records no minimum FPS for this preset, but the average is so far above the threshold that even a severe frame time spike would not approach 60 FPS. The Low preset reaches 508 FPS, Medium 335 FPS, and High 319 FPS, but Ultra is the best visual quality option while still delivering over five times the playable threshold.

At 2560x1440, Ultra again is the best choice, averaging 259 FPS. The progression is 434 FPS on Low, 286 FPS on Medium, and 272 FPS on High. The gap between High and Ultra is only 13 FPS, making Ultra a nearly free upgrade in visual terms relative to High. Medium and Low offer diminishing returns for competitive play, but Ultra remains the recommended preset for image quality.

At 3840x2160, Ultra averages 207 FPS, again clearing the 60 FPS threshold by a wide margin. Low averages 347 FPS, Medium 228 FPS, and High 217 FPS. The step from High to Ultra costs only 10 FPS on average, so there is no reason to drop below Ultra at any resolution unless a player is chasing maximum frame rates for a high refresh rate display. The 4K Ultra figure of 207 FPS is particularly notable because it demonstrates that this combination does not require any compromise settings even at the highest common resolution.

The Verdict

Yes, this PC can run Valorant, and it clears the 60 FPS playable threshold at every resolution and preset combination recorded in the database. The verdict by resolution is unambiguous: at 3840x2160, all four presets (High, Low, Medium, Ultra) are playable, with the best setting being Ultra at 207 FPS average. At 2560x1440, all four presets are playable, with Ultra at 259 FPS average. At 1920x1080, all four presets are playable, with Ultra at 304 FPS average.

The lowest recorded average FPS across the entire test matrix is 207 FPS at 4K Ultra, which is still 3.45 times the playable threshold. The only measured minimum FPS values in the entire dataset come from the Medium preset at each resolution: 285 FPS at 1080p, 243 FPS at 1440p, and 194 FPS at 4K. Even the worst of those minimums is more than three times the 60 FPS threshold. There is no scenario in the recorded data where this combination drops below 100 FPS, let alone below 60.

Players with 144 Hz or 240 Hz monitors will find that the system can drive those refresh rates at 1080p and 1440p without dropping below the panel's refresh rate in the measured data. At 4K, a 240 Hz panel would see occasional dips below its refresh rate, but a 144 Hz panel would be saturated by the 207 FPS average. The Arc B570's 10 GB of GDDR6 memory and 380.0 GB/s bandwidth are more than sufficient for Valorant's modest VRAM requirements at any tested setting.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full preset ladder is as follows: Low averages 508 FPS with no recorded minimum or maximum, Medium averages 335 FPS with a minimum of 285 and a maximum of 385, High averages 319 FPS with no extremum recorded, and Ultra averages 304 FPS with no extremum recorded. The spread from Low to Ultra is 204 FPS, and the Medium preset's min-max range of 100 FPS indicates some frame time variance, though the minimum remains far above the playable threshold.

At 2560x1440, Low averages 434 FPS, Medium averages 286 FPS with a minimum of 243 and a maximum of 329, High averages 272 FPS, and Ultra averages 259 FPS. The Low to Ultra spread narrows to 175 FPS compared to 1080p, and the Medium min-max range tightens to 86 FPS. The resolution increase from 1080p to 1440p costs roughly 14.6% of average FPS at Low, 14.6% at Medium, 14.7% at High, and 14.8% at Ultra, an almost perfectly uniform scaling factor.

At 3840x2160, Low averages 347 FPS, Medium averages 228 FPS with a minimum of 194 and a maximum of 263, High averages 217 FPS, and Ultra averages 207 FPS. The Low to Ultra spread compresses further to 140 FPS. Moving from 1440p to 4K costs 20.0% of average FPS at Low, 20.3% at Medium, 20.2% at High, and 20.1% at Ultra. The consistency of these scaling percentages across presets and the gradual compression of the preset spread as resolution increases both confirm that the GPU is the primary performance driver throughout the test matrix.

The Medium preset is the only one with recorded minimum and maximum values at every resolution, which allows a direct comparison: the 1080p minimum of 285 FPS drops to 243 FPS at 1440p and 194 FPS at 4K. These minimums scale at nearly the same rate as the averages, suggesting that frame time variance is proportional to average frame time rather than a separate bottleneck.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Valorant at 4K Ultra?

A: Yes. The measured average FPS at 3840x2160 Ultra is 207, which is well above the 60 FPS playable threshold. All four presets at 4K are marked playable in the database.

Q: What is the best preset to use at 1920x1080?

A: Ultra is the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS, averaging 304 FPS. Since it clears the threshold by a wide margin and offers the highest visual quality, it is the recommended choice.

Q: How much performance is lost when going from 1080p to 1440p?

A: At the Low preset, average FPS drops from 508 to 434, a 14.6% reduction. At Ultra, it drops from 304 to 259, a 14.8% reduction. The scaling is nearly uniform across all presets.

Q: Does the CPU or GPU limit performance in this game?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the limiting factor. The percentage drop in FPS from 1080p to 4K is substantial at every preset, and the spread between Low and Ultra narrows as resolution increases, which is characteristic of GPU-bound rendering.

Q: What is the lowest minimum FPS recorded in the entire test matrix?

A: The lowest minimum is 194 FPS, recorded at 3840x2160 with the Medium preset. This is still more than three times the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B570 compare to the Intel Arc A750?

A: The Arc B570 has an average benchmark score of 20556, while the Arc A750 scores 20582, a difference of 0.1%. In aggregate compute terms they are effectively equivalent, though the B570 uses the newer Xe2-HPG architecture with 2304 shading units and 10 GB of GDDR6 memory.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i3-12100F paired with the Intel Arc B570 ranks 2872 out of 3708 tested combinations in Valorant, placing it in the 22.5th percentile of all combos in the database for this specific game. That ranking may seem low given the high absolute frame rates, but it reflects the fact that Valorant is an exceptionally lightweight title where even modest hardware achieves triple-digit FPS. The 3708 combos tested include many high-end configurations that push 1080p Low past 800 or 900 FPS, which compresses the relative standing of this midrange pairing.

The rank is more meaningful when interpreted alongside the raw performance data. A combo in the bottom quarter of tested systems still delivers 508 FPS at 1080p Low and 207 FPS at 4K Ultra. The ranking therefore indicates that while this system is not competitive with top-tier combinations in absolute FPS, it is far beyond what the game requires for smooth play. Players prioritizing frame rate over image quality can push toward the higher end of the measured range, while those wanting maximum visual fidelity still receive over 200 FPS at 4K. The system occupies an unusual position: low in the rankings, yet fully capable of saturating all but the most extreme high refresh rate displays.