Valorant

Settings Recommendations

For Valorant, the measured FPS data shows that the Low preset consistently delivers the highest average frame rates across all resolutions. At 1920x1080, Low produces 403 FPS average, which is 65 FPS higher than High at the same resolution and 71 FPS above Ultra. The performance gap between Low and the other presets narrows as resolution increases, but Low remains the top performer at every step. At 2560x1440, Low achieves 382 FPS, and at 3840x2160, it still manages 354 FPS. This pattern indicates that the game's visual settings have a measurable but not overwhelming impact on this particular CPU-GPU pairing.

The Medium preset offers a balance between visual fidelity and performance, with average FPS of 343 at 1080p, 326 at 1440p, and 302 at 4K. Notably, Medium is the only preset where min and max FPS values are recorded, showing a range of 292-395 at 1080p, 277-374 at 1440p, and 257-347 at 4K. This suggests that Medium exhibits the most consistent frame pacing behavior in the measured data, which can be valuable for competitive play where frame time variance matters as much as raw averages.

High and Ultra presets sit close together in the results. At 1080p, High averages 338 FPS while Ultra averages 332 FPS, a difference of only 6 FPS. At 1440p, the gap is 320 versus 315 FPS, and at 4K it is 297 versus 292 FPS. The small delta between these two presets suggests that the Ultra setting adds visual enhancements that cost relatively little performance in this title. For players who want the best-looking presentation without sacrificing much frame rate, Ultra is a reasonable choice. However, for competitive play where every frame matters, the Low preset's 403 FPS at 1080p represents the best measured performance in this dataset.

The recommendation depends on the player's priorities. For maximum frame rate, Low is the clear winner. For a competitive edge with some visual upgrades, Medium provides the best compromise with its recorded consistency. For those who prioritize image quality over raw speed, Ultra's 332 FPS at 1080p remains well above the refresh rates of most monitors, making it a viable option.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D is a formidable piece of hardware in its own right, but its role in this Valorant pairing is more nuanced than raw rendering power. The GPU carries 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus, delivering 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock runs at 2017 MHz with a boost clock of 2407 MHz, and the memory operates at 1750 MHz with 28 Gbps effective speed. These specifications place the GPU in the 92nd percentile among all GPUs in the benchmark database, with an average benchmark score of 77712.

However, the measured FPS data tells a story of CPU limitation rather than GPU constraint. Valorant is a lightly threaded esports title, and the AMD Ryzen 5 4600G with its 6 cores and 12 threads appears to be the bottleneck in this combination. The evidence lies in the scaling pattern across resolutions. From 1080p Low at 403 FPS to 4K Low at 354 FPS, the drop is only 49 FPS, or roughly 12%. If the GPU were the limiting factor, the resolution scaling would show a much steeper decline, as pixel count quadruples from 1080p to 4K.

The GPU's VRAM capacity is far beyond what Valorant requires. With 32 GB of GDDR7 memory, this card has ample headroom for the game's textures and assets at any resolution and settings combination. The memory bandwidth of 1.79 TB/s ensures that data transfer is never a constraint in this title. The GPU's compute capabilities, including 21760 shading units and 104.8 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, are similarly overprovisioned for Valorant's relatively simple rendering workload.

The GPU's nearest rivals in the benchmark database include the AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT at 76904 average score (1.1% higher), the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT at 78940 (-1.6%), and NVIDIA Tesla P100 variants at 79396 and 79605 (-2.1% and -2.4% respectively). These comparisons show that the RTX 5090 D sits in a performance neighborhood where small percentage differences separate it from other high-end cards. In Valorant specifically, the GPU's extensive headroom means that even a significantly weaker GPU would likely produce similar FPS figures when paired with this CPU, since the CPU is the binding constraint.

FAQ

Q: Why does the Low preset show such a large FPS advantage over Ultra at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, Low averages 403 FPS while Ultra averages 332 FPS, a difference of 71 FPS. This gap narrows at higher resolutions (65 FPS at 1440p, 62 FPS at 4K), which suggests that the CPU is increasingly the limiting factor as resolution rises, reducing the relative impact of GPU-side settings changes.

Q: Is the 32 GB of VRAM on the RTX 5090 D necessary for Valorant?

A: No. The 32 GB GDDR7 memory is far more than Valorant requires at any resolution or settings combination in the measured data. The GPU's memory capacity is not a performance constraint in this title, as evidenced by the high FPS figures across all presets and resolutions.

Q: What is the best resolution to use with this combo for competitive play?

A: Based on the measured data, 1920x1080 with Low settings provides the highest average FPS at 403. The 4K Low preset still achieves 354 FPS, which is above most high-refresh-rate monitors, but 1080p Low gives the maximum frame rate and the lowest latency potential.

Q: How does the RTX 5090 D compare to its nearest GPU rivals in overall benchmark scores?

A: The RTX 5090 D has an average benchmark score of 77712. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT at 76904 (1.1% higher), the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT at 78940 (1.6% lower), and NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB and 16 GB at 79396 and 79605 (2.1% and 2.4% lower respectively).

Q: Does the Medium preset offer better frame consistency than other settings?

A: Yes. Medium is the only preset with recorded min and max FPS values in the dataset. At 1080p, it shows a range of 292-395 FPS, at 1440p 277-374 FPS, and at 4K 257-347 FPS. This indicates the measured data includes frame time variance information for Medium that is not available for other presets.

Q: What does the combo rank of 2029 out of 2883 tell us about this pairing?

A: The combo rank of 2029 out of 2883 placed this CPU-GPU combination in the 70th percentile of tested combos for Valorant. This positioning reflects the CPU bottleneck, as the RTX 5090 D is a top-tier GPU but the Ryzen 5 4600G limits overall performance in this CPU-sensitive title.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 4600G and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D ranks 2029 out of 2883 tested combos in Valorant. This places it in the lower-mid range of all measured configurations, which is surprising given the GPU's hardware capabilities. The ranking reflects the significant CPU bottleneck that this pairing exhibits in Valorant, a game that relies heavily on single-threaded CPU performance for its frame generation.

The CPU component of this combo, the Ryzen 5 4600G, has an average benchmark score of 17507 and sits in the 71st percentile among all CPUs. Its nearest rivals in the benchmark database are the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE at 17482 (0.1% higher), the AMD Ryzen 3 8300GE at 17614 (0.6% lower), the Intel Core 7 150U at 17395 (0.6% higher), and the Intel Core i3-14100T at 17648 (0.8% lower). These deltas are all within 1% of the 4600G's score, indicating that the CPU performs in line with its direct competitors.

The GPU component ranks much higher in its own right, sitting in the 92nd percentile with an average benchmark score of 77712. The mismatch between the CPU's 71st percentile and GPU's 92nd percentile explains the combo's modest overall ranking. In Valorant, the CPU's single-thread performance and memory subsystem play a more critical role than GPU throughput. The 4600G's Zen 2 architecture, with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and boost clock of 4.20 GHz, provides adequate but not exceptional performance for this esports title.

Compared to the combo's overall rank, the individual components perform better in their respective categories. The CPU is comfortably above average, and the GPU is near the top of the heap. The combination rank of 2029 out of 2883 suggests that many other pairings achieve higher FPS in Valorant because they feature CPUs with stronger single-thread performance, even if their GPUs are less capable. The data indicates that for Valorant specifically, the CPU choice matters more than the GPU choice once a certain GPU performance threshold is met.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of CPU limitation when scaling from 1080p to 4K. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 403 at 1920x1080 to 382 at 2560x1440, then to 354 at 3840x2160. This represents a total decline of 49 FPS, or 12.2%, from 1080p to 4K. For comparison, the pixel count increases by a factor of four between these resolutions, so a purely GPU-bound scenario would show a much more dramatic FPS reduction.

The High settings preset shows a similar trend: 338 FPS at 1080p, 320 FPS at 1440p, and 297 FPS at 4K. The total drop is 41 FPS, or 12.1%. Medium settings decline from 343 to 326 to 302, a drop of 41 FPS (12.0%). Ultra settings go from 332 to 315 to 292, a decline of 40 FPS (12.0%). The consistency of these percentage drops across all settings presets strongly indicates that the CPU is the limiting component, as the GPU's workload scaling with resolution has minimal impact on the final frame rate.

This behavior is typical for esports titles like Valorant, where the game's engine is optimized for high frame rates and the CPU's ability to submit draw calls and process game logic determines the ceiling. The Ryzen 5 4600G's 6 cores and 12 threads, while adequate for many games, do not provide the single-thread performance needed to fully unlock the RTX 5090 D's potential in this title. The GPU is effectively idling at these frame rates, as evidenced by the relatively flat performance across resolutions.

For players using this combo, the practical implication is that resolution choice has limited impact on frame rate. Whether playing at 1080p or 4K, the FPS remains well above 290 even at Ultra settings, which exceeds the refresh rate of most monitors. The data suggests that competitive players could comfortably use 1440p or 4K without sacrificing the high frame rates needed for responsive gameplay, since the CPU holds performance relatively steady regardless of resolution.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the Low settings preset delivers the highest average FPS at 403. The Medium preset follows at 343, with a recorded range of 292 to 395 FPS. High settings average 338 FPS, and Ultra settings average 332 FPS. The gap between the fastest and slowest presets at this resolution is 71 FPS, representing a 17.6% difference between Low and Ultra.

Moving to 2560x1440, the pattern remains consistent. Low settings produce 382 FPS average, followed by Medium at 326 (with a range of 277 to 374 FPS), High at 320, and Ultra at 315. The delta between Low and Ultra narrows slightly to 67 FPS, or 17.5%. The Medium preset's min FPS of 277 at this resolution is still well above 240 Hz refresh rates, making it a viable competitive option.

At 3840x2160, the highest resolution tested, Low settings maintain 354 FPS average. Medium averages 302 FPS with a range of 257 to 347 FPS. High settings produce 297 FPS, and Ultra delivers 292 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is 62 FPS, or 17.5%. Even at the lowest measured point (Medium's 257 FPS min at 4K), the frame rate remains above the 240 Hz threshold that competitive players often target.

Across all resolutions and settings, the data shows a consistent hierarchy: Low produces the highest FPS, followed by Medium, then High, with Ultra being the slowest. The relative ordering never changes, and the percentage gap between Low and Ultra remains remarkably stable at roughly 12% for the resolution scaling and 17.5% for the settings scaling. The Medium preset's recorded min and max values provide the only frame time variance data in the dataset, with the widest range observed at 1080p (103 FPS spread between min and max) and the narrowest at 4K (90 FPS spread).

The 4K Low result of 354 FPS is particularly noteworthy because it demonstrates that this combination can deliver high-refresh-rate gaming even at maximum resolution, provided the settings are tuned for performance. The Ultra preset at 4K still achieves 292 FPS, which exceeds the refresh rate of most high-end monitors. For players with 360 Hz displays, the 1080p Low setting at 403 FPS is the only configuration that fully saturates such a display's capabilities, while the 1440p Low at 382 FPS comes close.