Valorant

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured frame rates for Valorant with the AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 show a remarkably shallow scaling curve as resolution increases, which points to a strongly CPU-bound scenario at the lower end of the spectrum. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 537 at 1920x1080 to 509 at 2560x1440, a decline of only about 5.2%, and then to 472 at 3840x2160, another 7.3% reduction from the 1440p figure. That means the total penalty from 1080p to 4K at Low is just 65 FPS, or roughly 12.1% — a very mild hit for a fourfold increase in pixel count.

At Medium settings, the pattern is nearly identical in shape: 458 FPS at 1080p, 434 at 1440p, and 403 at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 4K is 55 FPS, about 12.0%. High settings follow suit, with 450 FPS at 1080p, 427 at 1440p, and 396 at 4K, a 54 FPS total decline. Ultra is the slowest preset in absolute terms, yet still only falls from 443 FPS at 1080p to 420 at 1440p and 390 at 4K, a 53 FPS reduction.

What this tells us is that the RTX 5080 is nowhere near the limiting factor at 1080p or 1440p. The GPU is capable of rendering the scene far faster than the CPU can feed it, so the Ryzen 7 5800XT’s Zen 3 architecture with 8 cores and 16 threads becomes the ceiling. Even at 4K, where the GPU load increases substantially, the FPS only drops by roughly 12-15% compared to the 1080p results at the same settings. This is inconsistent with a GPU-bound workload — a GPU-limited title would show a much steeper falloff, often 40% or more, when going from 1080p to 4K.

The fact that the delta between Low and Ultra at any given resolution is small reinforces this. At 4K, Low yields 472 FPS while Ultra yields 390 FPS, a difference of just 82 FPS. At 1080p, the gap is 94 FPS (537 vs 443). If the GPU were the bottleneck, the gap between presets would widen considerably at 4K, because higher settings increase pixel shading and texture work. Instead, the consistency of the preset-to-preset deltas across resolutions suggests the CPU is the primary constraint in almost all configurations, with the GPU only starting to exert influence at 4K Ultra where the frame rate dips below 400 FPS.

In practical terms, this means users with high-refresh-rate monitors — say 360 Hz or 500 Hz panels — will see the best returns from optimizing CPU-side factors like memory latency and single-thread performance, since the RTX 5080 has ample headroom to spare. The measured data shows that even at 4K Medium, the combo sustains over 400 FPS, which is far beyond what most competitive shooters require.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The pairing of the AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 lands at rank 1003 out of 3708 tested combinations for Valorant. That places this setup in the 73rd percentile of all combos in the database for this specific game — a strong result, though not a top-tier one. The rank reflects the fact that Valorant is notoriously CPU-sensitive, and the 5800XT, while capable, is not the fastest processor available for this title.

To contextualize this rank, consider that the CPU itself sits at the 81st percentile among all processors in the broader benchmark suite, with an average score of 29879. Its nearest rivals in synthetic tests are the AMD Ryzen 7 7840H (avg score 29868, delta 0%), the AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS and 7840HS (both 29955, delta -0.3%), and the AMD Ryzen 5 9600X (29713, delta +0.6%). These deltas are tiny — within 1% of each other — meaning the 5800XT is squarely in the middle of a very tight pack of mid-range to upper-mid-range CPUs. The combo rank of 1003 out of 3708 suggests that many other pairings, likely with newer or higher-clocked processors, achieve better frame rates in Valorant.

The GPU, on the other hand, is far more potent relative to its peers. The RTX 5080 ranks at the 87th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 56083. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon 8060S (55757, delta +0.6%), the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB (55698, delta +0.7%), the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X (54828, delta +2.3%), and the AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE (57367, delta -2.2%). The RTX 5080 is 2.3% ahead of the Pro W5700X and 0.6-0.7% ahead of the two Radeon gaming cards, but it trails the RX 9070 GRE by 2.2%. In the context of Valorant, however, these GPU differences are almost irrelevant, because the game is not GPU-bound at the measured settings — the CPU is the limiting factor.

Thus, the combo rank of 1003 reflects the CPU’s position more than the GPU’s. If the same RTX 5080 were paired with a faster processor, the rank would likely improve substantially, since the GPU has demonstrated it can push well beyond 500 FPS at 1080p Low without breaking a sweat. The data indicates that this combo is well-balanced for 1440p gaming at high refresh rates, but for 1080p esports at extreme refresh rates, the CPU is the weak link.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the target refresh rate and resolution. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers 537 FPS average, which is the highest recorded figure across all configurations. Medium drops to 458 FPS, High to 450 FPS, and Ultra to 443 FPS. If the goal is to maximize frame rate for a 500 Hz or 540 Hz monitor, Low is the only choice that gets close to saturating such a display. However, the gap between Low and Ultra is only 94 FPS, and even Ultra at 1080p sustains 443 FPS — more than enough for a 360 Hz panel.

At 2560x1440, Low yields 509 FPS, Medium 434 FPS, High 427 FPS, and Ultra 420 FPS. For a 360 Hz 1440p monitor, Medium or High are reasonable choices, as they stay above 420 FPS and provide better visual fidelity than Low. Ultra at 1440p is only 14 FPS slower than High, so if visual quality is a priority, Ultra is not a significant sacrifice. The measured minimum FPS for Medium at 1440p is 369, which is still above 360 Hz, meaning frame pacing should be smooth.

At 3840x2160, Low produces 472 FPS, Medium 403 FPS (with a minimum of 342 and maximum of 463), High 396 FPS, and Ultra 390 FPS. For 4K gaming, the choice is more nuanced. A 240 Hz 4K monitor would be well-served by High or Ultra, since both stay above 390 FPS. If the display is 360 Hz, Low is the only preset that clears the bar, and even then only by a margin of 112 FPS. Medium at 4K has a minimum of 342 FPS, which would cause occasional dips below a 360 Hz refresh rate, so for competitive play at 4K 360 Hz, Low is recommended.

The best overall experience, balancing visual quality and frame rate, is arguably Medium at 1440p. It delivers 434 FPS average with a minimum of 369 FPS, which is above the 360 Hz threshold, and it offers better textures and effects than Low. For users with 1080p monitors, High at 450 FPS is a solid middle ground, as the drop from Low is only 87 FPS but the visual improvement is noticeable. For 4K, High at 396 FPS is the sweet spot for 240 Hz displays, while Low is necessary for 360 Hz panels. In all cases, the data shows that this combo can comfortably run Valorant at high frame rates, with the limiting factor being the monitor’s refresh rate rather than the hardware.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, 3840x2160) and four settings (Low, Medium, High, Ultra). Below is the full breakdown.

At 1920x1080, the Low preset averages 537 FPS. Medium averages 458 FPS, with a minimum of 389 FPS and a maximum of 526 FPS. High averages 450 FPS. Ultra averages 443 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 94 FPS, with Low being the fastest and Ultra the slowest. Notably, Medium’s maximum of 526 FPS is higher than High’s average of 450, indicating that Medium can burst above High’s typical performance, but its minimum of 389 FPS is also lower than what High would likely produce under load.

At 2560x1440, Low averages 509 FPS. Medium averages 434 FPS, with a minimum of 369 FPS and a maximum of 499 FPS. High averages 427 FPS. Ultra averages 420 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 89 FPS. Compared to 1080p, the FPS at each preset drops by roughly 28-37 FPS, which is a modest decline. The Medium preset’s minimum of 369 FPS is the lowest recorded at this resolution, but it still clears the 360 Hz mark by a small margin.

At 3840x2160, Low averages 472 FPS. Medium averages 403 FPS, with a minimum of 342 FPS and a maximum of 463 FPS. High averages 396 FPS. Ultra averages 390 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 82 FPS. This is the tightest spread across all resolutions, indicating that at 4K the GPU begins to take on more load, but the CPU still dominates. The Medium preset’s minimum of 342 FPS is the lowest figure in the entire dataset, which means that in demanding scenes, the frame rate could dip below a 360 Hz refresh rate.

Cross-referencing settings, Low is consistently the fastest preset at every resolution, with a delta of 65 FPS between 1080p and 4K. Medium is the second-fastest, with a delta of 55 FPS. High is third, with a delta of 54 FPS. Ultra is the slowest, with a delta of 53 FPS. The fact that all presets have nearly identical deltas (between 53 and 65 FPS) across resolutions confirms that the scaling is resolution-independent and that the CPU is the bottleneck in all cases. The largest single gap is between Low and Medium at any given resolution (e.g., 79 FPS at 1080p, 75 FPS at 1440p, 69 FPS at 4K), while the gap between Medium and High is much smaller (8 FPS at 1080p, 7 FPS at 1440p, 7 FPS at 4K), and High to Ultra is even smaller (7 FPS at 1080p, 7 FPS at 1440p, 6 FPS at 4K). This suggests that the biggest performance jump comes from dropping from Medium to Low, while the visual quality differences between Medium, High, and Ultra have minimal impact on frame rate.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 is a Blackwell 2.0 architecture GPU built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with 45,600 million transistors on a 378 mm² die. It features 16 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering a bandwidth of 960.0 GB/s. The memory clocks run at 1875 MHz, translating to 30 Gbps effective. The GPU’s base clock is 2295 MHz, with a boost clock of 2617 MHz. It has 10,752 shading units, 336 TMUs, 112 ROPs, 84 RT cores, and 336 tensor cores. The pixel rate is 293.1 GPixel/s, texture rate is 879.3 GTexel/s, and FP32 performance is 56.28 TFLOPS.

In Valorant, the GPU’s role is largely underutilized. The measured FPS data shows that even at 4K Ultra, the combo sustains 390 FPS, which is far below the GPU’s theoretical ceiling. The VRAM usage in Valorant is minimal — the game is not texture-heavy, and 16 GB of GDDR7 is more than sufficient, even at 4K with Ultra settings. The GPU’s memory bandwidth of 960.0 GB/s is also irrelevant in this context, as the game’s data footprint is small and the CPU is the bottleneck.

The boost clock of 2617 MHz is high, but Valorant’s frame rate is not sensitive to GPU clock speeds because the GPU is waiting on the CPU for draw calls. The shading units and ROPs are far more than needed for a game that runs at over 500 FPS at 1080p Low. The RTX 5080’s percentile rank of 87 among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 56083, indicates that this is a top-tier GPU, but its performance in Valorant is constrained by the Ryzen 7 5800XT.

The GPU’s benchmark scores show strong compute performance — Geekbench OpenCL scores 235901, Vulkan scores 255450, and Passmark G3D scores 36565. These numbers are irrelevant for Valorant, which is a DirectX 12 title but does not stress the GPU to anywhere near these levels. The DirectX 12 Passmark score is 151, which is a synthetic measure and not representative of in-game performance, but it does confirm the GPU’s compatibility with the API. The GPU’s TDP of 360 W and suggested PSU of 750 W are not reflected in the FPS data, but they indicate that power delivery is not a limiting factor in this scenario.

In summary, the RTX 5080 is overqualified for Valorant at any resolution. The GPU’s 16 GB VRAM, high bandwidth, and massive compute resources are all surplus to requirements. The measured results are a reflection of the CPU’s capabilities, not the GPU’s. If the GPU were paired with a faster processor, the FPS would likely increase, but the RTX 5080’s contribution to the current frame rates is essentially to keep up with the CPU’s output without breaking a sweat.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded for this combo in Valorant?

A: The highest average FPS is 537, achieved at 1920x1080 with the Low settings preset.

Q: Does the combo maintain above 360 FPS at 4K with Medium settings?

A: No. At 3840x2160 with Medium settings, the average FPS is 403, but the minimum FPS is 342, which falls below 360. For a stable 360 Hz experience at 4K, Low settings are required, which average 472 FPS.

Q: How much faster is Low compared to Ultra at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Low averages 509 FPS while Ultra averages 420 FPS, making Low 89 FPS faster, or about 21.2% higher.

Q: What is the combo’s rank among all tested combinations for Valorant?

A: The combo ranks 1003 out of 3708 tested combinations, placing it in the 73rd percentile.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this game?

A: The CPU is the bottleneck. Evidence includes the shallow FPS drop from 1080p to 4K (roughly 12% across all presets) and the small differences between settings at any resolution, which are characteristic of CPU-limited scenarios.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded in the entire dataset?

A: The lowest minimum FPS is 342, recorded at 3840x2160 with Medium settings. The next lowest is 369 at 2560x1440 with Medium settings.