Valorant

The AMD Ryzen 5 7500F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti produces exceptional frame rates in Valorant, with every tested configuration exceeding 420 frames per second (FPS) on average. The data reveals a system that is profoundly overqualified for this competitive FPS, shifting the bottleneck almost entirely onto the CPU and exposing interesting scaling behavior across resolutions and presets.

Settings Recommendations

The measured rows provide a clear hierarchy of performance across four presets—Low, Medium, High, and Ultra—at three resolutions. For competitive play, the Low preset at 1920x1080 delivers the highest average frame rate at 582 FPS, which is the maximum measured across the entire dataset. This represents a 21% improvement over the High preset at the same resolution (488 FPS) and a 17% uplift over Ultra (480 FPS). The data strongly suggests that players seeking the absolute highest refresh rate compatibility should select Low settings at 1080p.

However, the Medium preset at 1920x1080 offers a compelling alternative, producing 496 FPS average with a measured minimum of 422 FPS and a maximum of 570 FPS. This is the only configuration in the entire dataset with published minimum and maximum frame values, indicating a degree of frame-time consistency that the other presets do not explicitly document. The delta between Medium (496 FPS) and High (488 FPS) is negligible at just 1.6%, yet Medium likely provides better visual fidelity than Low. For most players, Medium at 1080p appears to be the sweet spot—it stays above 490 FPS while presumably offering improved image quality over the Low preset.

At 2560x1440, the pattern holds: Low produces 552 FPS, Medium 470 FPS, High 463 FPS, and Ultra 455 FPS. The Medium preset again shows a minimum of 400 FPS and a maximum of 541 FPS, which are the only reported min/max values at this resolution. The spread between Medium and High is just 1.5%, suggesting that the High preset is not meaningfully more demanding than Medium in practice, or that the GPU is so far from being saturated that the settings differences barely register.

At 3840x2160, the ranking changes slightly: Low leads with 512 FPS, followed by Medium at 437 FPS, High at 429 FPS, and Ultra at 422 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium widens to 17%, indicating that at 4K the GPU begins to feel the resolution load more substantially. Still, even the Ultra preset at 4K produces 422 FPS, which is far beyond any standard display refresh rate. The recommendation across all resolutions is to prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity, with Low being the choice for maximum FPS and Medium offering a balance—especially at 1080p and 1440p where the FPS penalty from Medium over Low is only 15% and 15% respectively.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti, built on the Ada Lovelace architecture with a 5 nm process, brings 12 GB of GDDR6X memory across a 192-bit bus, yielding a memory bandwidth of 504.2 GB/s. The GPU operates at a base clock of 2310 MHz and boosts to 2610 MHz, with memory running at 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective). These specifications, while potent for modern AAA titles, are almost entirely irrelevant to Valorant’s measured performance profile. The data shows that even at 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 422—a figure that most GPUs could not approach in more demanding games, but which here represents a mere 28% drop from the 1080p Low result of 582 FPS.

The GPU’s percentile ranking sits at 84 among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 44795. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile, scores 45152, a delta of just -0.8%, meaning the RTX 4070 Ti is effectively on par with that mobile flagship in synthetic benchmarks. In Valorant, however, the GPU is never the limiting factor. The evidence lies in the resolution scaling: from 1080p Low (582 FPS) to 4K Low (512 FPS), the drop is only 12%. From 1080p Ultra (480 FPS) to 4K Ultra (422 FPS), the drop is 12% as well. This consistent scaling indicates that the GPU has ample headroom even at 4K, and the workload is dominated by CPU-side game logic and draw calls rather than pixel throughput.

The RTX 4070 Ti’s 7680 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 80 raster output pipelines produce a pixel rate of 208.8 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 626.4 GTexel/s. Its FP32 performance of 40.09 TFLOPS is substantial, yet Valorant’s simple geometry and minimal effects mean most of this capability sits idle. The GPU’s 60 RT cores and 240 tensor cores are similarly unutilized, as Valorant does not employ ray tracing or DLSS in the measured scenarios. The 12 GB VRAM is likewise never a constraint—Valorant’s textures are light, and the data shows no performance cliff at any resolution that would indicate memory pressure. The GPU’s role here is to provide a high enough frame ceiling that the CPU becomes the sole arbiter of performance, which the subsequent sections will clarify.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS achievable with this combo in Valorant?

A: The highest measured average FPS is 582, achieved at 1920x1080 with the Low preset. This is followed by 552 FPS at 2560x1440 Low and 512 FPS at 3840x2160 Low.

Q: Does the Ultra preset provide any meaningful benefit over Medium in terms of frame rate?

A: No. At 1080p, Ultra averages 480 FPS versus 496 FPS for Medium, a difference of 3.2%. At 1440p, Ultra averages 455 FPS versus 470 FPS for Medium (3.2% difference), and at 4K, Ultra averages 422 FPS versus 437 FPS for Medium (3.4% difference). The FPS penalty for Ultra over Medium is consistently around 3%, while High sits between them.

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

A: With the Low preset, moving from 1080p (582 FPS) to 4K (512 FPS) results in a 12% drop. With the Ultra preset, the drop is from 480 FPS to 422 FPS, also a 12% reduction. The relative loss is identical across presets, indicating a uniform scaling pattern.

Q: Is the RTX 4070 Ti the bottleneck at any resolution?

A: The data suggests no. Even at 4K Ultra, the system maintains 422 FPS, and the performance gap between Low and Ultra at any resolution is less than 18%. The consistent ~12% resolution scaling penalty points to CPU limitations rather than GPU saturation.

Q: What are the only measured minimum and maximum FPS values in the dataset?

A: The Medium preset at all three resolutions is the only configuration with published min and max values. At 1080p, the minimum is 422 FPS and maximum is 570 FPS; at 1440p, minimum is 400 FPS and maximum is 541 FPS; at 4K, minimum is 371 FPS and maximum is 502 FPS.

Q: How does this combo rank against other tested combinations in Valorant?

A: This combo ranks 696th out of 3708 tested combos, placing it in the top 18.8% of all configurations tested for this game. This rank reflects the extremely high FPS ceiling, though the CPU’s relative weakness compared to the GPU may prevent a higher placing.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The dataset provides average FPS for every combination of resolution and preset, with min and max values only for the Medium preset. At 1920x1080, the Low preset leads with 582 FPS, followed by Medium at 496 FPS, High at 488 FPS, and Ultra at 480 FPS. The Medium preset’s min/max range is 422 to 570 FPS, a spread of 148 FPS that indicates some frame-time variability even at this high level. The delta between High and Ultra is just 1.6% (488 vs 480 FPS), while the delta between Low and Medium is 17.3% (582 vs 496 FPS). This suggests that the Low preset offers a significant frame rate advantage, while the visual quality steps from Medium to High to Ultra cost very little in performance.

At 2560x1440, the ordering remains identical: Low at 552 FPS, Medium at 470 FPS, High at 463 FPS, and Ultra at 455 FPS. The Medium min/max is 400 to 541 FPS, a spread of 141 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium shrinks slightly to 17.4%, while the gap between High and Ultra is just 1.7% (463 vs 455 FPS). Comparing to 1080p, the FPS drop for each preset is roughly 5-6%: Low drops from 582 to 552 (5.2%), Medium from 496 to 470 (5.2%), High from 488 to 463 (5.1%), and Ultra from 480 to 455 (5.2%). This uniform percentage drop across presets reinforces that the resolution change has a consistent, proportional impact.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset still leads with 512 FPS, but the gap to Medium narrows: Medium is 437 FPS, High is 429 FPS, and Ultra is 422 FPS. The Medium min/max is 371 to 502 FPS, a spread of 131 FPS, which is the tightest range in the dataset. The drop from 1440p to 4K is more pronounced: Low falls from 552 to 512 (7.2%), Medium from 470 to 437 (7.0%), High from 463 to 429 (7.3%), and Ultra from 455 to 422 (7.2%). Across all resolutions, the Low preset consistently outperforms Ultra by 17-18% (582 vs 480 at 1080p, 552 vs 455 at 1440p, 512 vs 422 at 4K). The data shows that FPS decreases monotonically from Low to Ultra at every resolution, with Medium and High always within 2% of each other, while Low holds a decisive 15-17% advantage over both.

Resolution Scaling

The transition from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 quadruples the pixel count, yet the measured FPS does not drop by anything close to a factor of four. At Low settings, FPS falls from 582 at 1080p to 552 at 1440p and then to 512 at 4K—a cumulative drop of 12% from the lowest to highest resolution. At Ultra settings, the drop is from 480 to 455 to 422, also a 12% cumulative reduction. This remarkably shallow scaling curve is the signature of a CPU-bound workload. If the GPU were the limiter, the FPS would roughly halve when going from 1080p to 4K due to the fourfold increase in pixel shading work. Instead, the system loses only about 7% going from 1440p to 4K and 5-6% going from 1080p to 1440p.

The fact that the percentage drop is nearly identical across all presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra all show approximately 12% total reduction from 1080p to 4K) further confirms that the GPU is not the constraint. Different presets change the GPU workload dramatically—Low reduces shader complexity, texture filtering, and effects—yet the scaling pattern does not change. This means the GPU has so much spare capacity that even at 4K Ultra, it can finish its frame work well before the CPU delivers the next frame. The limiting component is the CPU’s single-thread performance, which dictates how quickly it can process game state, input, and draw calls.

The measured min and max values for the Medium preset also support this interpretation. At 1080p, the min is 422 FPS and max is 570 FPS, a range of 148 FPS. At 4K, the min is 371 FPS and max is 502 FPS, a range of 131 FPS. The absolute min drops by 51 FPS (422 to 371) from 1080p to 4K, while the max drops by 68 FPS (570 to 502). The fact that the minimum FPS remains above 370 even at 4K Medium suggests that the CPU’s worst-case frame times are still incredibly fast, and the GPU’s added work at 4K does not cause any catastrophic frame drops. The resolution scaling data points to a system where the CPU is the master, and the GPU merely follows its lead, with the 4K resolution adding just enough GPU work to shave off a small percentage of the already-high frame rate.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 7500F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 4 architecture (codenamed Raphael), manufactured on a 5 nm process by TSMC. It operates at a base clock of 3.70 GHz and boosts to 5.00 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The CPU’s cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. Its benchmark scores are telling: a single-thread score of 974 in 3DMark, 324 in Cinebench R15, 1351 in R20, 3218 in R23, and 2374 in Geekbench. Multi-threaded scores include 6376 in 3DMark (16 threads), 22799 in Cinebench R23 multicore, and 26825 in Passmark multithread.

In Valorant, the CPU’s single-thread performance is paramount, as the game’s engine is notoriously dependent on a few fast cores. The 7500F’s boost clock of 5.00 GHz and strong single-core Cinebench R23 score of 3218 provide the raw speed needed to feed the RTX 4070 Ti. The data shows that even at 1080p Low, where the GPU has the least work, the FPS is 582—this is likely close to the CPU’s ceiling. The fact that increasing resolution to 4K only drops FPS by 12% indicates that the CPU is still producing frames faster than the GPU can render them, even at 4K.

The CPU’s percentile ranking is 77 among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 24964. Its nearest rival is the Intel Core i7-11850H, which scores 24935 (a delta of 0.1%), meaning the 7500F is effectively tied with that mobile H-series chip in aggregate benchmarks. However, the 7500F’s advantage lies in its desktop-class power delivery and high boost clock, which likely translate to better sustained single-thread performance in a real-time game like Valorant. The 12 threads (6 cores) are more than sufficient for Valorant, which typically uses only a handful of threads, so the CPU’s multi-threaded muscle is largely secondary.

The CPU’s memory support includes DDR5 with dual-channel architecture and a bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s, which is ample for a game that does not heavily stress memory bandwidth. The 32 MB of L3 cache is a notable asset—Valorant’s small, frequently accessed data structures can reside in this cache, reducing latency and improving frame consistency. The data suggests that the 7500F is the limiting factor in this combo, but only in the sense that it sets the maximum frame rate. At 582 FPS on 1080p Low, that ceiling is high enough to saturate any current display, and the CPU’s performance is more than adequate for competitive play. The question that arises is whether a higher-clocked CPU, such as a 7800X3D, would push FPS even higher, but the measured data does not include such comparisons.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti ranks 696th out of 3708 tested combos in Valorant, placing it in the 81st percentile of all tested configurations. This rank is surprisingly modest given the astronomical frame rates measured—the average FPS never drops below 422 even at 4K Ultra. The explanation lies in the fact that Valorant’s performance is so CPU-bound that the GPU choice matters little; what matters is the CPU’s single-thread speed. The RTX 4070 Ti, while ranking in the 84th percentile among GPUs with an average benchmark score of 44795, is not the differentiator here.

The combo’s rank of 696 suggests that many other tested combinations—likely featuring CPUs with higher single-thread performance or better memory configurations—manage to achieve even higher FPS. The CPU’s nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks include the Intel Core i7-13620H (scoring 24911, a delta of 0.2%) and the Intel Core 5 210H (scoring 24872, a delta of 0.4%), all of which are within 0.5% of the 7500F’s average score of 24964. This tight clustering indicates that the 7500F is not a standout in aggregate CPU benchmarks, but its 5.00 GHz boost clock likely gives it an edge in lightly-threaded workloads.

Given that the combo ranks in the top 18.8% of all tested combinations, the data implies that most higher-ranked combos feature CPUs with even higher boost clocks or more cache, such as the Ryzen 7 7800X3D with its 3D V-Cache. The RTX 4070 Ti’s GPU rivals—the RTX 5090 Mobile (delta -0.8%), AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT (delta -1.3%), and Intel Arc A730M (delta -1.7%)—are all within 2% of its average score, yet none of these would likely change the Valorant outcome. The rank of 696 versus the CPU’s percentile of 77 and GPU’s percentile of 84 suggests that the combo is slightly underperforming relative to what its individual components might suggest, likely due to the CPU’s 6-core/12-thread configuration being less optimal for Valorant than higher-core-count or cache-enriched alternatives. The data positions this combo as an extremely capable 1080p and 1440p machine for Valorant, but not the absolute top tier, where CPUs with superior single-thread performance or specialized gaming features would claim higher ranks.