Valorant

Best Settings per Resolution

Valorant is a highly scalable competitive FPS, and the measured data for the Intel Core i5-10400F with the Intel Arc B370 shows that this combination clears the 60 FPS playable threshold with substantial headroom at every resolution tested. The most demanding preset that remains at or above 60 FPS is, in all cases, the highest preset available in the database: Ultra. The recorded average frame rates at Ultra are 122 FPS at 3840x2160, 152 FPS at 2560x1440, and 178 FPS at 1920x1080. None of these averages dip near the 60 FPS floor, and the minimum recorded frame rates at Medium settings, the only preset with min data, are 114 FPS at 4K, 143 FPS at 1440p, and 167 FPS at 1080p. This indicates that even the most demanding settings leave a large performance buffer before any playability concern arises.

At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset delivers an average of 122 FPS, which is more than double the 60 FPS playability threshold. The High preset at 4K averages 128 FPS, while Medium averages 134 FPS and Low averages 204 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra at 4K is 82 FPS, showing that the Ultra preset costs about 40% of the Low preset's frame rate, yet still remains comfortably playable. Since the goal is the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS, the answer is unequivocally Ultra at every resolution. The system does not force a compromise to a lower preset to maintain playability; instead, it maintains high frame rates even at maximum settings.

At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset averages 152 FPS, with High at 160 FPS, Medium at 168 FPS, and Low at 255 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at this resolution is 103 FPS, a larger absolute gap than at 4K, but the relative performance is similar. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset averages 178 FPS, High averages 187 FPS, Medium averages 197 FPS, and Low averages 299 FPS. The Low to Ultra gap at 1080p is 121 FPS. Across all resolutions, the Ultra preset never falls below 122 FPS average, meaning that users can select the highest visual quality without any risk of dropping below the 60 FPS threshold. The data shows a consistent pattern: the Arc B370 and i5-10400F combination is powerful enough that preset selection becomes a matter of visual preference rather than a performance constraint.

CPU and GPU Roles

The interaction between the Intel Core i5-10400F and the Intel Arc B370 in Valorant reveals a workload that is primarily GPU-limited at higher resolutions, while the CPU's strong single-thread performance ensures that low-resolution frame rates remain exceptionally high. The CPU benchmarks show a single-thread score of 688 in 3dmark_single_thread and 2541 in passmark_single_thread, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1451. These figures indicate a capable processor for lightly threaded game logic, which is typical for a competitive FPS. The GPU, by contrast, has a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184 and a percentile rank of 5 among all GPUs, placing it in a low absolute performance tier, yet the measured FPS in Valorant are far higher than that low percentile would suggest for most games.

The scaling between resolutions provides the clearest evidence of GPU dominance. At Ultra settings, moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 reduces the average frame rate from 178 to 152 FPS, a drop of 26 FPS, or about 15%. Moving from 2560x1440 to 3840x2160 reduces the average from 152 to 122 FPS, another 30 FPS drop, or about 20%. The total reduction from 1080p to 4K at Ultra is 56 FPS, or about 31% of the 1080p value. This consistent degradation with increasing pixel count is the signature of a GPU-bound workload. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the frame rate would remain nearly constant across resolutions because the CPU's workload (game logic, draw call preparation) scales only mildly with resolution. Instead, the data shows a strong resolution dependence, confirming that the Arc B370's rendering throughput is the primary constraint at higher settings.

However, the CPU still plays a non-trivial role at lower resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080 Low, the average FPS reaches 299, which is just shy of the 300 FPS mark. The fact that the frame rate does not exceed this level even at the lowest settings suggests that the CPU, or some other bottleneck, is limiting the maximum achievable frame rate. The CPU's 3dmark_2_threads score of 1350 and 3dmark_4_threads score of 2560 indicate moderate multi-thread performance, but the single-thread score of 688 is the more relevant metric for Valorant's main thread. The passmark_single_thread score of 2541 places the i5-10400F in the 68th percentile among all CPUs, which is solid but not top-tier. In a game like Valorant, which is known for high frame rate demands, the CPU's single-thread ceiling becomes the limiting factor when the GPU has little work to do, such as at Low settings and 1080p.

At Medium settings, the min FPS data further illuminates the CPU-GPU balance. At 1920x1080 Medium, the min FPS is 167, while the average is 197. At 2560x1440 Medium, the min is 143 and the average is 168. At 3840x2160 Medium, the min is 114 and the average is 134. The min-to-average gap grows from 30 FPS at 1080p to 25 FPS at 1440p and 20 FPS at 4K. This suggests that frame time consistency improves slightly at higher resolutions because the GPU becomes the bottleneck and delivers more uniform frame pacing, whereas at lower resolutions, CPU-side hitches can cause more pronounced dips. Overall, the data indicates that for competitive play at high refresh rates, the CPU matters most at 1080p Low and Medium, while the GPU becomes the deciding factor for 1440p and 4K Ultra settings.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the Intel Core i5-10400F, based on aggregate benchmark scores, offer a reference point for expected CPU behavior in Valorant. The i5-10400F has an average benchmark score of 14185, with a percentile rank of 68 among all CPUs. Its closest rival is the Intel Xeon 6756E, which scores 14163, a delta of 0.2% (the i5-10400F is effectively tied). The Intel Core 7 160UL scores 14232, which is 0.3% higher than the i5-10400F, meaning it would deliver virtually identical frame rates in CPU-limited scenarios. The AMD EPYC 7552 scores 14115, 0.5% lower, and the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C scores 14277, 0.6% higher. These deltas are all within 1% of the i5-10400F's score, so any of these CPUs would produce nearly indistinguishable performance in Valorant, particularly at 1080p Low where the CPU is more influential. The Ryzen 3 7320C, despite being a lower-tier product, actually benchmarks slightly above the i5-10400F, so it would be a viable alternative if paired with the same GPU.

For the Intel Arc B370, the situation is more pronounced because its average benchmark score is only 1184, placing it in the 5th percentile among all GPUs. The nearest rival is the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, which scores 1186, a delta of -0.2% (the Arc B370 is slightly lower). The ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190, 0.5% higher, and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192, 0.7% higher. The AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168, which is 1.4% lower. These rivals are all older or lower-tier GPUs, and their performance in Valorant would be expected to be within a few percentage points of the Arc B370. However, the measured FPS for the Arc B370 in this game are far above what these low benchmark scores would suggest, indicating that Valorant is not particularly demanding on the GPU's raw compute resources. A user with any of these rival GPUs would likely see similar frame rates at the same settings, though driver optimizations and memory bandwidth differences could cause slight variations.

It is also importantly the GPU's nearest rivals are all integrated or older discrete parts with significantly lower feature sets, yet the Arc B370's 25 W TDP and integrated form factor (labeled as IGP) suggest it is a low-power solution. The CPU rivals, by contrast, are a mix of server and mobile parts, but their aggregate scores are close enough that the i5-10400F's 6-core, 12-thread configuration is not a distinguishing factor in Valorant. In practice, any of these alternative CPUs paired with a comparable GPU would deliver a playable experience at all tested resolutions.

The Verdict

Yes, this PC can run Valorant, and it does so with exceptional margin. The verdict by resolution is unambiguous: at 3840x2160, the playable settings include High, Low, Medium, and Ultra, with the best settings being Ultra at an average of 122 FPS. At 2560x1440, all presets are playable, and Ultra is again the best at 152 FPS. At 1920x1080, all presets are playable, and Ultra is the best at 178 FPS. The playable threshold is defined as 60 FPS, and this combination clears it by at least 62 FPS even at the most demanding resolution and preset combination tested (4K Ultra at 122 FPS). The system does not merely meet the threshold; it exceeds it by a wide margin, making it suitable for high refresh rate monitors at 1080p and 1440p, and for smooth 4K gameplay on standard 60 Hz displays.

The combination's rank in the database for this game is 3411 out of 3708 combinations, placing it in the lower portion of all tested configurations. This rank reflects the GPU's low absolute benchmark percentile (5th), but the measured FPS in Valorant are so high that the rank is misleading for this specific title. The data shows that Valorant is far more forgiving on GPU hardware than many other modern games, and the i5-10400F's 68th percentile CPU performance is sufficient to feed the GPU at all settings. For a competitive FPS, the ability to run Ultra at 122 FPS minimum at 4K, with min FPS at Medium being 114 FPS, ensures that there are no playability concerns for any user. The verdict is a clear pass for all resolutions and presets tested.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded measurements provide a complete picture of performance across three resolutions and four settings levels. At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset averages 122 FPS with no min or max data recorded. High averages 128 FPS, Medium averages 134 FPS with a min of 114 and max of 154, and Low averages 204 FPS. The progression from Ultra to Low at 4K shows a steady increase: 122, 128, 134, and 204 FPS. The jump from Medium to Low is particularly large, at 70 FPS, suggesting that Low settings remove a significant rendering burden. The min FPS at Medium (114) is still nearly double the 60 FPS threshold, so even the worst recorded frame times are comfortable.

At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset averages 152 FPS, High averages 160 FPS, Medium averages 168 FPS with a min of 143 and max of 193, and Low averages 255 FPS. The step from Ultra to High is 8 FPS, from High to Medium is also 8 FPS, and from Medium to Low is 87 FPS. The min at Medium (143) is well above the playability threshold. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset averages 178 FPS, High averages 187 FPS, Medium averages 197 FPS with a min of 167 and max of 226, and Low averages 299 FPS. The increments between Ultra, High, and Medium are 9 and 10 FPS, while the jump to Low is 102 FPS.

The min FPS data, available only for Medium settings, shows that the 1080p min of 167 FPS is 84% of the average, the 1440p min of 143 FPS is 85% of the average, and the 4K min of 114 FPS is 85% of the average. This consistency indicates that frame pacing is stable across all resolutions at Medium settings. The max FPS values at Medium are 226 (1080p), 193 (1440p), and 154 (4K), showing a clear scaling with pixel count. The absence of min/max data for other presets limits the analysis, but the average FPS alone is sufficient to confirm playability.

FAQ

Q: What is the maximum average FPS this system achieves in Valorant?

A: The highest recorded average frame rate is 299 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The next highest is 255 FPS at 2560x1440 Low, followed by 204 FPS at 3840x2160 Low.

Q: Can this system handle 4K Ultra settings in Valorant?

A: Yes. At 3840x2160 Ultra, the average FPS is 122, which is more than double the 60 FPS playable threshold. The Medium preset at 4K has a minimum FPS of 114, so even the most demanding settings remain smooth.

Q: Which component limits performance at 1080p Low settings?

A: At 1920x1080 Low, the average FPS reaches 299, which is likely near the CPU's single-thread limit. The Intel Core i5-10400F has a single-thread benchmark score of 688 in 3dmark_single_thread and 2541 in passmark_single_thread, indicating that the CPU becomes the bottleneck when the GPU has minimal work to do.

Q: How does this system compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The CPU's average benchmark score is 14185, within 0.6% of its nearest rivals (Intel Xeon 6756E at 14163, Intel Core 7 160UL at 14232, AMD EPYC 7552 at 14115, AMD Ryzen 3 7320C at 14277). The GPU's score is 1184, within 1.4% of its rivals (ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 at 1186, ATI Radeon HD 5770 at 1190, AMD Radeon HD 7650M at 1192, AMD FirePro M2000 at 1168).

Q: Is the Arc B370's low benchmark percentile a concern for Valorant?

A: No. The GPU ranks in the 5th percentile among all GPUs, yet the measured FPS in Valorant are far above playable levels at all settings and resolutions. The game is not demanding on the GPU's raw compute, as shown by the 122 FPS average at 4K Ultra.

Q: What is the best preset to use for maximum visual quality?

A: Ultra is the best preset at every resolution, because it is the most demanding and still averages 122 FPS at 3840x2160, 152 FPS at 2560x1440, and 178 FPS at 1920x1080. There is no need to lower settings to maintain playability.