Valorant

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 paired with the Intel Arc B570 delivers a compelling 1080p and 1440p experience in Valorant, with average frame rates well above the threshold for competitive play. The data shows this combination is capable of pushing high refresh-rate monitors, though the performance scaling across resolutions and settings reveals a nuanced balance between the CPU's single-thread capabilities and the GPU's raw throughput.

FAQ

Q: What is the overall ranking of this CPU and GPU combination in Valorant?

A: This combo ranks 2482 out of 2883 tested combinations in the database for Valorant, placing it in the upper-middle tier of all tested systems.

Q: How does the Ryzen 5 2600 compare to its nearest rivals in general benchmarks?

A: The Ryzen 5 2600’s average benchmark score of 21484 places it within 0.7% of the Intel Xeon D-1746TER (21635), 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V (21440), and 0.5% ahead of the Intel Core i9-11900H (21367). It is 1.2% ahead of the AMD EPYC 9454 (21223).

Q: What is the GPU's performance context relative to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Arc B570’s average benchmark score of 20556 is essentially tied with the Intel Arc A750 (20582, -0.1% delta) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile (20534, +0.1% delta). It is 0.4% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M and 0.5% behind the AMD Radeon R9 M390X.

Q: What is the best average frame rate achieved by this combo?

A: The highest average frame rate recorded is 340 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: Does this system maintain high frame rates at 4K resolution?

A: Yes, even at 3840x2160 resolution, the average frame rates remain high, with 299 FPS on Low settings and 217 FPS on High settings, demonstrating strong 4K capability in this title.

Q: What are the clock speeds and core configuration of the CPU?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 has 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen architecture, manufactured on a 12 nm process. Its base clock of 3.40 GHz and boost clock of 3.90 GHz are the primary drivers for the game's physics and game logic calculations. Valorant is known for being heavily reliant on single-core performance, and the Ryzen 5 2600’s single-thread score of 2239 in PassMark places it in the 75th percentile of all CPUs. This indicates that while it is not a top-tier part, its single-core strength is sufficient to feed the GPU adequately at lower resolutions.

The CPU's multi-threaded capabilities, reflected in a PassMark multithread score of 13160, are less critical for this particular game but contribute to overall system responsiveness. The processor's 16 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support with 46.9 GB/s of bandwidth ensure that data can be fed to the cores efficiently. In the measured results, the performance difference between 1080p Low (340 FPS) and 1440p Low (322 FPS) is only 18 FPS, suggesting that at these settings, the CPU is capable of driving frame rates beyond 320 FPS, and the bottleneck shifts to other components as resolution increases.

The Ryzen 5 2600's performance in this game is consistent with its general benchmark standing. Its average benchmark score of 21484 is nearly identical to the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V, which scores 21440, a 0.2% difference. This places the CPU in a competitive position against newer and more power-efficient designs in synthetic tests. However, the data shows that in Valorant, the CPU is not the limiting factor at higher resolutions, as the FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is significant, indicating the GPU takes over as the primary performance constraint.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B570 is based on the Xe2-HPG architecture (Battlemage) and is built on a 5 nm process. It features 10 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus, providing 380.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU's base and boost clocks are both 2500 MHz, and it has a pixel rate of 200.0 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 360.0 GTexel/s. These specifications are well-suited for rendering the fast-paced, low-detail environments of Valorant.

The GPU's PassMark G3D score of 14195 places it in the 65th percentile of all GPUs, and its average benchmark score of 20556 is nearly identical to the Intel Arc A750. In the measured FPS data, the Arc B570 demonstrates its strength. At 1080p with High settings, it produces an average of 285 FPS, and at 4K High, it still manages a very playable 217 FPS. The VRAM capacity of 10 GB is more than sufficient for Valorant, which is not a graphically demanding title, ensuring that memory bandwidth or capacity is never a bottleneck.

The performance scaling across settings indicates that the GPU handles increasing graphical loads gracefully. For example, at 1440p, the average FPS only drops from 322 on Low to 259 on Ultra, a 63 FPS reduction. This suggests that the Arc B570 has ample headroom and that the visual fidelity settings have a moderate impact on frame rates, allowing users to prioritize visual quality without sacrificing competitive performance. The GPU's compute capabilities, with an FP32 throughput of 11.52 TFLOPS, further support its ability to handle the game's rendering demands efficiently.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations for Valorant, the Ryzen 5 2600 and Intel Arc B570 rank 2482 out of 2883 systems. This position places it in the 86th percentile, meaning it performs better than 86% of all tested combinations. This is a strong showing, particularly considering the age of the CPU. The ranking suggests that the combination is well-balanced for this specific title, avoiding severe bottlenecks that would drag performance down.

The high ranking is corroborated by the measured frame rates. The combo achieves an average of 285 FPS at 1080p High, which is a figure that many more expensive or newer systems would struggle to match. The gap between this combo and lower-ranked systems is likely significant, as even the lowest recorded average FPS in this data set (207 FPS at 4K Ultra) is far above the minimum playable threshold. The data implies that this pairing is a highly effective solution for competitive Valorant, offering performance that rivals systems with much newer components.

The ranking relative to other combos is further illuminated by the CPU and GPU's individual standings. The CPU's 75th percentile and GPU's 65th percentile rankings are lower than the combo's overall 86th percentile ranking. This suggests that the combination of these two specific parts yields a better result in Valorant than their individual synthetic scores would predict. It indicates that the game's engine is well-optimized for this hardware pairing, and neither component significantly holds back the other in the contexts where the system is most likely to be used.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the system delivers exceptional performance. With Low settings, it hits an average of 340 FPS. Moving to Medium settings, the average drops to 290 FPS, with a minimum of 246 and a maximum of 333. High settings yield 285 FPS, and Ultra settings produce 280 FPS. The tight grouping between Medium, High, and Ultra indicates that the CPU is the primary limiter at this resolution, as the GPU has enough headroom to handle the increased graphical load without significant frame rate penalties.

At 2560x1440, the performance remains high but begins to show more variation. Low settings average 322 FPS. Medium settings average 275 FPS, with a min of 234 and a max of 316. High settings average 270 FPS, and Ultra settings average 259 FPS. The relative consistency across settings here suggests that the load is beginning to balance between CPU and GPU. The drop from 1080p Low to 1440p Low is 18 FPS, which is a modest reduction, indicating that the GPU is still well within its limits.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the more dominant factor. Low settings still produce a highly playable average of 299 FPS. Medium settings average 228 FPS, with a minimum of 194 and a maximum of 263. High settings average 217 FPS, and Ultra settings average 207 FPS. The significant drop from 299 FPS on Low to 217 FPS on High (an 82 FPS difference) clearly shows that the GPU's rendering workload at 4K is much more demanding. Even so, the lowest average of 207 FPS at 4K Ultra is still far above the refresh rate of most standard monitors, making this a viable 4K configuration for this game.

Settings Recommendations

For players with a 1080p or 1440p monitor with a high refresh rate (144Hz to 240Hz), the Medium or High presets offer the best balance. At 1080p, Medium averages 290 FPS, which is 50 FPS higher than Ultra (280 FPS), while providing a visually richer experience than Low. The minimum FPS of 246 at Medium ensures that even in intense firefights, the frame rate will not dip below the refresh rate of a 240Hz monitor. At 1440p, High settings average 270 FPS, which is 11 FPS more than Ultra (259 FPS), with minimal visual difference. This is a highly recommended setting for competitive play.

For users with a 4K display, the High preset is the recommended choice. It averages 217 FPS, which is 10 FPS higher than Ultra (207 FPS) and 11 FPS higher than Medium (228 FPS). The difference between High and Ultra is negligible in terms of frame rate, but High ensures a slightly higher margin above the 200 FPS threshold. The Low preset at 4K offers a significant boost to 299 FPS, but the visual compromise is likely too great for most users who have invested in a 4K monitor.

The data suggests that the marginal returns from increasing settings diminish significantly. The difference between High and Ultra is consistently small across all resolutions (5 FPS at 1080p, 11 FPS at 1440p, and 10 FPS at 4K). Therefore, for optimal performance, High is the most efficient setting. It provides the majority of the visual fidelity of Ultra while offering a slight, but measurable, improvement in average frame rate and potentially better frame time consistency.

Resolution Scaling

The performance scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals the changing nature of the system's bottleneck. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 340 at 1080p to 322 at 1440p (a 5.3% decrease) and then to 299 at 4K (a 12.1% decrease from 1440p). This relatively flat scaling at Low settings indicates that the CPU is the limiting factor, as the GPU is not being fully utilized. The game's logic and draw call processing are demanding enough that the CPU cannot generate frames fast enough to fully saturate the GPU's capabilities at lower resolutions.

At Ultra settings, the scaling is more pronounced. The average FPS drops from 280 at 1080p to 259 at 1440p (a 7.5% decrease) and then to 207 at 4K (a 20.1% decrease from 1440p). This steeper decline at higher resolutions and settings demonstrates that the GPU is becoming the primary bottleneck. The increased pixel count and more complex shading effects at 4K Ultra place a significant load on the Arc B570's 2304 shading units and 80 ROPs, which cannot maintain the same frame generation rate as the CPU allows.

The data indicates a clear crossover point. Between 1080p and 1440p, the system is largely CPU-bound, as evidenced by the minor FPS differences. Between 1440p and 4K, the system becomes increasingly GPU-bound, particularly at higher settings. For example, the 4K Ultra average of 207 FPS is significantly lower than the 1440p Ultra average of 259 FPS, highlighting the GPU's workload. This analysis suggests that for maximum frame rates at 1080p or 1440p, upgrading the CPU would yield the most benefit, while for 4K gaming, the GPU is the component that would need to be addressed first.