Valorant

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the recorded data shows this combination delivers a strong competitive experience across all presets. Low settings produce an average of 299 FPS, which is the highest figure measured at any resolution or preset in the database. Medium settings average 197 FPS, with a minimum of 167 FPS and a maximum of 226 FPS. High settings average 187 FPS, while Ultra settings average 178 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is substantial, roughly 121 FPS, indicating that the visual preset has a meaningful impact on performance at this resolution. However, even the most demanding preset stays well above the 60 FPS playable threshold, with no recorded dips below that line.

Moving to 2560x1440, the same pattern holds but with lower absolute numbers. Low settings average 255 FPS, a decrease of 44 FPS compared to 1080p. Medium settings average 168 FPS, with a minimum of 143 FPS and a maximum of 193 FPS. High settings average 160 FPS, and Ultra settings average 152 FPS. The resolution scaling from 1080p to 1440p costs roughly 14% to 15% of average performance depending on the preset, which is a moderate hit. The minimum recorded at Medium, 143 FPS, still leaves considerable headroom above the playable threshold. There are no recorded minimums for Low, High, or Ultra at this resolution, but the averages suggest consistent performance.

At 3840x2160, the data shows the most demanding scenario. Low settings average 204 FPS, which remains exceptionally high for a 4K resolution. Medium settings average 134 FPS, with a minimum of 114 FPS and a maximum of 154 FPS. High settings average 128 FPS, and Ultra settings average 122 FPS. The drop from 1440p to 4K is more pronounced: Low loses about 51 FPS, High loses 32 FPS, and Ultra loses 30 FPS. Notably, the minimum recorded at 4K Medium is 114 FPS, which still clears the 60 FPS threshold by a wide margin. The database records no minimums for Low, High, or Ultra at 4K, but the averages indicate that none of these presets approach the playable limit.

Across all three resolutions, the delta between Low and Ultra narrows as resolution increases. At 1080p, Low beats Ultra by 121 FPS. At 1440p, the gap is 103 FPS. At 4K, the gap shrinks to 82 FPS. This suggests that the GPU becomes more of a limiting factor at higher resolutions, compressing the performance range between presets. The Medium preset consistently shows the only recorded minimum and maximum values, providing a reliable window into frame time consistency: at 1080p the spread is 59 FPS, at 1440p it is 50 FPS, and at 4K it is 40 FPS. These spreads are tight enough for a fast-paced FPS, where frame pacing matters for aiming and reaction.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Valorant at 60 FPS or higher?

A: Yes, according to the verdict data, all four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) are playable at every tested resolution. At 1920x1080, the lowest average is 178 FPS on Ultra. At 2560x1440, the lowest average is 152 FPS on Ultra. At 3840x2160, the lowest average is 122 FPS on Ultra. Every recorded average and minimum clears the 60 FPS playable threshold.

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

A: The database identifies Ultra as the best settings at 1080p, with an average of 178 FPS. Since all presets exceed 60 FPS comfortably, the most visually demanding option remains fully playable, so there is no need to drop to lower settings for performance reasons.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 4K?

A: The recorded data shows a consistent scaling penalty. On Low settings, 1080p averages 299 FPS while 4K averages 204 FPS, a loss of 95 FPS. On Medium, the drop is from 197 FPS to 134 FPS, a loss of 63 FPS. On High, it goes from 187 FPS to 128 FPS, a loss of 59 FPS. On Ultra, it goes from 178 FPS to 122 FPS, a loss of 56 FPS. The relative penalty is larger at lower presets, but all 4K figures remain far above 60 FPS.

Q: Is the Intel Core i5-9400 a bottleneck for this game?

A: The data does not indicate a CPU bottleneck. The i5-9400 scores in the 47th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 2254. Its nearest rivals, such as the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 (score 2259, delta -0.2%) and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 (score 2246, delta 0.4%), are within a fraction of a percent in performance. Given that even 4K Ultra averages 122 FPS, the CPU appears sufficient to feed the GPU in this title.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B370 has an average benchmark score of 1184, placing it in the 5th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are very close: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186 (delta -0.2%), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190 (delta -0.5%), and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192 (delta -0.7%). The AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168 (delta 1.4%). These deltas are all under 2%, meaning the Arc B370 performs nearly identically to those older parts in synthetic benchmarks, yet it still delivers high frame rates in Valorant due to the game’s light rendering load.

Q: What are the minimum recorded frame rates?

A: The database only records minimums for the Medium preset. At 1920x1080 Medium, the minimum is 167 FPS. At 2560x1440 Medium, the minimum is 143 FPS. At 3840x2160 Medium, the minimum is 114 FPS. No minimums are recorded for Low, High, or Ultra presets, but the averages for those presets are all well above the playable threshold.

CPU and GPU Roles

The recorded performance data reveals how the balance between CPU and GPU shifts across resolutions. Valorant is a lightly threaded competitive shooter, and the Intel Core i5-9400 provides six cores and six threads with a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. The database shows its average benchmark score at 2254, with a single-core Cinebench R23 score of 935. This level of single-thread performance is adequate for the game’s logic and draw calls. The GPU, Intel Arc B370, is an integrated graphics solution with a 25 W TDP and 1280 shading units, scoring 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, which places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. Its low absolute GPU performance would normally be a concern, but Valorant’s engine is designed to run on modest hardware.

At 1920x1080, the scaling between Low and Ultra shows a 121 FPS difference (299 versus 178). This large gap indicates that the GPU is the primary driver of preset-based performance changes at this resolution. The CPU is likely not saturated, as even the lowest preset produces nearly 300 FPS, which would stress most CPUs in the database. The i5-9400’s 47th percentile ranking suggests it can keep up with the frame rates being generated. The Medium preset records a minimum of 167 FPS, which is far above the 60 FPS threshold, implying that neither component is close to a critical limit.

At 2560x1440, the performance drops across all presets by roughly 14% to 15% compared to 1080p. This consistent proportional decrease points to GPU-bound behavior, as the CPU’s workload does not change with resolution. The gap between Low and Ultra narrows slightly to 103 FPS (255 versus 152), further confirming that the GPU is becoming more stressed. The i5-9400’s role remains stable: it must feed the GPU with frames, and the data shows it does so without bottlenecking, as the GPU is the component that dictates the resolution scaling.

At 3840x2160, the GPU’s dominance becomes even clearer. The low preset averages 204 FPS, while Ultra averages 122 FPS, a gap of 82 FPS. The reduced delta compared to lower resolutions indicates that the GPU is nearing its limits, but the CPU still has headroom. The minimum recorded at 4K Medium is 114 FPS, which is still far above 60 FPS. The i5-9400, with its 6-core, 6-thread configuration and 9 MB of shared L3 cache, appears to be more than sufficient for this game at any resolution. The data suggests that users upgrading from a weaker CPU would not see significant gains in Valorant, as the GPU is the limiting factor at higher resolutions and presets.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the nearest rivals in the database are all within a fraction of a percent of the Intel Core i5-9400’s average score of 2254. The Intel Core i7-1068NG7 scores 2259, which is 0.2% lower in the database’s delta metric, meaning the i5-9400 is effectively identical in performance. The Intel Core i7-10710U scores 2248, a 0.3% advantage for the i5-9400. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 2246, also a 0.3% advantage. The Intel Core i3-10305 scores 2264, which is 0.4% lower than the i5-9400. Any of these CPUs would behave almost exactly the same in Valorant, as the differences are negligible for frame rate purposes. Users with any of these chips can expect the same ability to feed the Arc B370 without creating a CPU-side bottleneck.

For the GPU, the Intel Arc B370’s average score of 1184 places it alongside several older discrete and mobile parts. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186, a 0.2% difference. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190, a 0.5% difference. The AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192, a 0.7% difference. The AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168, a 1.4% difference. In synthetic terms, these GPUs are nearly indistinguishable from the Arc B370. However, the Arc B370 benefits from modern API support, including DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, which may not be fully utilized by older drivers or architectures in all titles. In Valorant specifically, the recorded FPS suggests that any of these rivals would produce similar average frame rates, though the Arc B370’s newer feature set could offer better frame pacing or driver optimizations. The database does not include measured FPS for those rival GPUs, so the comparison is limited to synthetic scores.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, with an average of 178 FPS. Since the verdict data lists all four presets as playable, Ultra is the recommended choice for users who want maximum visual quality without sacrificing competitive performance. The recorded minimum for Medium is 167 FPS, and the averages for High and Ultra are 187 FPS and 178 FPS, respectively, so there is no risk of dropping below the playable threshold.

At 2560x1440, the best settings are also Ultra, with an average of 152 FPS. The Medium preset records a minimum of 143 FPS, and the Ultra average is 152 FPS, meaning even the most demanding preset leaves a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. Users on 1440p displays can run the game at full visual settings and still maintain well over double the playable frame rate.

At 3840x2160, the best settings remain Ultra, with an average of 122 FPS. The Medium minimum is 114 FPS, and the Ultra average is 122 FPS. This is the most demanding configuration in the dataset, yet it still clears the 60 FPS threshold by a wide margin. The data indicates that there is no resolution or preset combination in the recorded measurements where this PC fails to meet the playable standard.

The Verdict

Yes, this PC can run Valorant at high frame rates across all tested resolutions and presets. The verdict data explicitly lists High, Low, Medium, and Ultra as playable settings at 1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160. The best settings at each resolution are Ultra, with average FPS of 178 at 1080p, 152 at 1440p, and 122 at 4K. The lowest recorded minimum in the entire dataset is 114 FPS at 4K Medium, which still nearly doubles the 60 FPS playable threshold. The combination of the Intel Core i5-9400 and Intel Arc B370 ranks 3411 out of 3708 combinations for this game, a position that reflects the GPU’s low synthetic percentile but also underscores that Valorant is not a demanding title. The CPU’s 47th percentile ranking among all CPUs is sufficient for this game’s single-threaded and lightly threaded workloads. The data shows no scenario where frame rates approach the 60 FPS limit, making this configuration suitable for competitive play at any resolution, including 4K with maximum settings. The only caveat is that the Arc B370’s nearest GPU rivals are older parts with similar synthetic scores, so users should not expect this system to handle more graphically intensive titles, but for Valorant specifically, the performance is more than adequate.