Valorant

FAQ

Q: What is the single highest average FPS this combo achieves in Valorant?

A: The peak measured average is 286.5 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings, which is the fastest result across all tested resolutions and presets.

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

A: At High settings, the average FPS drops from 180 at 1920x1080 to 119.5 at 3840x2160, a reduction of roughly one-third. At Low settings, the drop is steeper in absolute terms: from 286.5 down to 195.

Q: Which preset yields the highest FPS at each resolution?

A: Low settings produce the highest average FPS at every resolution: 286.5 at 1920x1080, 243.5 at 2560x1440, and 195 at 3840x2160. The gap between Low and the next-fastest preset (Medium) widens as resolution increases.

Q: Does the GTX 1650's VRAM capacity constrain performance in Valorant?

A: The data does not show any VRAM-related bottleneck. The 4 GB frame buffer is sufficient for the tested presets, as the game runs at high average FPS even at Ultra settings across all resolutions, with no min-FPS data indicating stutter or capacity issues.

Q: How does this CPU compare to its closest rivals in overall benchmark scores?

A: The Ryzen 5 7600's average benchmark score of 26617 is virtually identical to the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D (26574, deltaPct 0.2), the Intel Core i9-12900HK (26672, deltaPct -0.2), and the AMD EPYC 8024P (26555, deltaPct 0.2). It sits slightly ahead of the Intel Core i9-11900K (26546, deltaPct 0.3).

Q: What is the combo's ranking among all tested CPU-GPU pairings for Valorant?

A: This combination ranks 1583 out of 1650 tested combos, placing it in the bottom percentile of systems evaluated for this game.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data points to Low settings as the optimal preset for this hardware configuration, particularly for competitive play. The jump from Low to Medium yields a significant FPS cost: at 1920x1080, average FPS falls from 286.5 to 185.4, a drop of over 100 FPS. At 2560x1440, the same transition costs about 82 FPS (243.5 to 161). At 3840x2160, Low still delivers 195 FPS, while Medium drops to 128.2.

High and Ultra presets offer diminishing returns. At 1920x1080, High produces 180 FPS and Ultra 169 FPS — both are playable but represent a 37-41% reduction compared to Low. The gap narrows at higher resolutions: at 3840x2160, High (119.5) and Ultra (118.2) are nearly identical, suggesting the GPU becomes the limiting factor rather than the preset specifics.

For players prioritizing frame rate consistency and responsiveness, Low at any resolution provides the headroom needed. At 1080p, the 286.5 FPS average exceeds the refresh rate of most high-end monitors. At 1440p, Low's 243.5 FPS still clears 240 Hz displays. Even at 4K, Low's 195 FPS beats what High and Ultra achieve at 1080p, making Low the clear choice across the board.

Medium serves as a middle ground for those wanting some visual fidelity without sacrificing too much performance, but the data suggests the visual upgrade is expensive relative to the FPS loss. High and Ultra should only be considered by players who prioritize image quality over competitive advantage, as both presets keep the game comfortably playable above 118 FPS at all resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 1583 out of 1650 tested combinations in Valorant, placing it near the bottom of the database. This low ranking is notable given the CPU's strong standalone performance: the Ryzen 5 7600 sits in the 83rd percentile against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 26617. The bottleneck is clearly the GPU.

The GTX 1650, by contrast, sits in the 43rd percentile against all GPUs with an average score of 8713. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile (8746, deltaPct -0.4), the AMD Radeon 550X (8749, deltaPct -0.4), the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 (8671, deltaPct 0.5), and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 (8761, deltaPct -0.5). These deltas are all within 0.5%, meaning the GTX 1650 is statistically tied with its closest competitors.

The mismatch between the CPU's high percentile ranking and the combo's low game-specific ranking indicates that Valorant's performance here is heavily GPU-bound. The Ryzen 5 7600 has ample headroom that the GTX 1650 cannot utilize. In a game like Valorant, which is generally considered CPU-sensitive, this GPU limitation still dominates because the 7600's processing power far exceeds what the 1650 can feed to the display pipeline.

Compared to other combos in the database, this pairing underperforms relative to what the CPU alone would suggest. The 1583rd place finish out of 1650 means the vast majority of tested systems deliver higher average FPS in Valorant, even those with weaker CPUs paired with stronger GPUs.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full range of presets delivers smooth performance. Low leads with 286.5 FPS average, followed by Medium at 185.4, High at 180, and Ultra at 169. The spread from best to worst is 117.5 FPS, indicating that settings choices matter substantially at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the pattern holds but with compressed numbers. Low produces 243.5 FPS, Medium 161, High 151.3, and Ultra 144.8. The gap between Low and Medium narrows to 82.5 FPS, while the difference between Medium and Ultra shrinks to just 16.2 FPS. This suggests diminishing returns from higher settings as pixel count increases.

At 3840x2160, the hierarchy remains consistent: Low at 195 FPS, Medium at 128.2, High at 119.5, and Ultra at 118.2. The delta between Low and Medium is 66.8 FPS, while High and Ultra are nearly indistinguishable at 1.3 FPS apart. Resolution scaling is generally linear: moving from 1080p to 1440p reduces Low-settings FPS by 15%, and from 1440p to 4K by another 20%.

The data reveals that this combo can handle 4K Ultra at 118.2 FPS, which is surprising for a GPU with 4 GB of VRAM. However, the performance cliff between Low and Medium at every resolution indicates that the game's medium preset introduces rendering features that disproportionately tax the GTX 1650's older Turing architecture.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 operates with a base clock of 1485 MHz and a boost clock of 1665 MHz. Its memory runs at 2001 MHz with 8 Gbps effective speed, paired with 4 GB of GDDR5 across a 128-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s. These specifications define its performance envelope in Valorant.

The GPU's 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs provide the compute backbone. Its pixel rate of 53.28 GPixel/s and texture rate of 93.24 GTexel/s are modest figures that explain why higher presets cost so much FPS. The FP32 throughput of 2.984 TFLOPS is the raw compute budget available for shader work.

In Valorant specifically, the GTX 1650 is the limiting component. The CPU's benchmark scores are in the 83rd percentile, but the GPU sits in the 43rd percentile. The measured FPS data shows that even at Low settings, the GPU cannot push beyond 286.5 FPS at 1080p — a ceiling that more powerful GPUs would likely exceed given the same CPU.

The 4 GB VRAM capacity is sufficient for Valorant's requirements; the game's art style and map complexity do not appear to exceed this buffer even at Ultra settings and 4K resolution. The 128.1 GB/s memory bandwidth is more likely a constraint than capacity, as texture-heavy scenes at high resolutions would stress bandwidth.

The GTX 1650's Turing architecture, built on a 12 nm process with 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. These API capabilities are more than adequate for Valorant, which runs on Unreal Engine and favors moderate GPU loads. The GPU's 75 W TDP and dual-slot design make it a low-power solution, but its performance in this game is clearly entry-level relative to the CPU's capability.