Valorant

The AMD Ryzen 9 5950X paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER delivers exceptionally high frame rates in Valorant, with the measured data showing an average of 528 FPS at 1080p Low settings and 383 FPS at 4K Ultra. This combination ranks 1117 out of 3708 tested combos for this game, placing it in the upper third of all systems evaluated. The following analysis breaks down how this pairing behaves across resolutions, settings, and component-specific metrics.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K reveals a clear shift in system bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the combo produces 528 FPS, while at 4K Low it drops to 465 FPS — a difference of 63 FPS, or approximately 12%. Moving from 1080p Ultra (436 FPS) to 4K Ultra (383 FPS) shows a similar absolute drop of 53 FPS, about 12.2%. This relatively modest scaling penalty across a 4x pixel count increase indicates that the system is not heavily GPU-limited at lower resolutions.

At 1080p, the CPU’s single-thread performance becomes the primary constraint. The Ryzen 9 5950X scores 944 in 3dmark_single_thread and 1614 in cinebench_r23_singlecore, which are solid numbers but not class-leading. The measured FPS at 1080p Low (528) versus 4K Low (465) suggests that even at 4K, the GPU still has headroom — the 465 FPS figure is far below what the RTX 4080 SUPER’s raw compute would suggest as a ceiling. The RTX 4080 SUPER’s FP32 throughput of 52.22 TFLOPS and pixel rate of 285.6 GPixel/s are both enormous for a game like Valorant, which is not graphically demanding.

The scaling pattern across all settings — Low to Ultra at each resolution — shows a consistent 15-20% performance penalty for maxing out graphics. At 1080p, Low yields 528 FPS, Medium 450, High 443, and Ultra 436. The gap between Medium and Ultra is only 14 FPS, suggesting diminishing returns beyond Medium. At 4K, the same pattern holds: Low 465, Medium 396, High 390, Ultra 383. The resolution increase from 1440p to 4K costs roughly 30-40 FPS across all settings, while the jump from 1080p to 1440p costs about 25-30 FPS. This relatively flat scaling curve — less than 20% total penalty from 1080p to 4K at any given setting — points to a CPU-bound scenario at all tested resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 1117 out of 3708 total combinations places it in the 70th percentile of all tested systems for Valorant. This is a strong position, but not elite — the top tier of combos likely includes CPUs with higher single-thread scores than the 5950X’s 944 in 3dmark_single_thread. The CPU’s overall percentileVsAllCpus is 91, meaning it outperforms 91% of all processors in aggregate benchmarks, yet its single-thread showing is comparatively weaker.

The nearest CPU rivals in aggregate benchmark scores are telling. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX scores 52073 (deltaPct -0.2 vs the 5950X’s 51947 average), the AMD EPYC 8124P scores 52121 (-0.3), the Intel Core i9-13900F scores 51730 (+0.4), and the Intel Core i7-14700 scores 52301 (-0.7). These deltas are all within 1% of the 5950X’s average benchmark score of 51947, indicating that the 5950X is statistically tied with these rivals in synthetic testing. However, Valorant’s frame rates are more sensitive to single-thread performance than to multi-thread aggregate scores, so the 5950X’s rank of 1117 in this specific game likely reflects its single-thread position rather than its overall CPU standing.

The RTX 4080 SUPER’s GPU percentile is 86, with an average benchmark score of 54209. Its nearest GPU rivals include the RTX 4080 (54247, -0.1 delta), AMD Radeon Pro W5700X (54828, -1.1), AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB (55698, -2.7), and AMD Radeon 8060S (55757, -2.8). The 4080 SUPER is effectively tied with the base RTX 4080, and trails the AMD cards by 1-3% in aggregate GPU benchmarks. In Valorant, this GPU-level difference is negligible because the game’s frame rates are so high that even a 3% variance would be less than 15 FPS.

GPU Role

The RTX 4080 SUPER’s 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus provides 736.3 GB/s of bandwidth — far more than Valorant requires. The game’s texture and geometry loads are minimal, so the GPU’s memory subsystem is never stressed. The measured FPS at 4K Ultra (383) versus 1080p Ultra (436) suggests that the GPU is handling the increased pixel count with only a 12% penalty, which is consistent with a graphics workload that scales well with the 10240 shading units and 320 texture mapping units.

The GPU’s boost clock of 2550 MHz (base 2295 MHz) is high, but the benchmark results show that raw clock speed is not the limiting factor in this pairing. At 1080p Low, the system produces 528 FPS, which is likely near the CPU’s frame generation limit. The GPU’s 52.22 TFLOPS FP32 compute is more than sufficient to render Valorant’s simple scenes at thousands of frames per second; the observed 528 FPS ceiling is a CPU constraint, not a GPU one.

The RTX 4080 SUPER’s 80 RT cores and 320 tensor cores are irrelevant for Valorant, which does not use ray tracing or DLSS in the tested settings. The GPU’s passmark_g3d score of 34245 and 3dmark_steel_nomad_dx12 score of 6600 confirm its high-end positioning, but these metrics do not translate into proportional gains in this title. The GPU’s 112 ROPs and pixel rate of 285.6 GPixel/s handle the 4K output without issue, as evidenced by the still-high 383 FPS at 4K Ultra.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data suggests that the Medium preset offers the best balance of visual quality and performance headroom. At 1080p Medium, the system delivers 450 FPS with a minimum of 383 and maximum of 518 — the only setting at any resolution with recorded min/max values. This min FPS of 383 is still far above any display refresh rate, ensuring no perceptible stutter. At 1440p Medium, the numbers are 427 average (min 363, max 491), and at 4K Medium, 396 average (min 337, max 456).

The Ultra preset costs only 14 FPS over Medium at 1080p (436 vs 450), but the gap widens slightly at 4K (383 vs 396). For competitive play, the Low preset at 1080p (528 FPS) provides the highest frame rate, but the difference between Low and Medium (78 FPS) is unlikely to be perceptible on a 144Hz or even 240Hz monitor. The data indicates that Medium is the sweet spot: it maintains a minimum FPS above 337 at all resolutions, while providing better visual fidelity than Low.

For players with 4K displays, the Medium preset at 4K (396 average) is still exceptionally smooth, and the Low preset at 4K (465 average) offers a 69 FPS advantage. The High preset sits between Medium and Ultra in both quality and performance, but its lack of recorded min/max values makes it less predictable than Medium. The recommendation is Medium for most users, with Low reserved for those seeking absolute maximum frame rates in competitive scenarios.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the lowest tested resolution, the system produces its highest frame rates. Low settings yield 528 FPS average, Medium 450 (min 383, max 518), High 443, and Ultra 436. The progression from Low to Ultra costs 92 FPS total, but the step from Medium to High is just 7 FPS, and from High to Ultra only 7 FPS more. This suggests that the graphical effects enabled at Medium and above have minimal impact on performance, while the jump from Low to Medium (78 FPS) represents the largest single setting change.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates decrease by roughly 5-6% across all settings. Low produces 501 FPS, Medium 427 (min 363, max 491), High 420, and Ultra 413. The min FPS at Medium (363) is still well above any refresh rate, indicating no frame time spikes. The delta between 1080p and 1440p is consistent: 27 FPS for Low, 23 for Medium, 23 for High, and 23 for Ultra. This uniform drop suggests a resolution-dependent GPU cost that is independent of settings.

At 3840x2160, the 4K results show further scaling. Low yields 465 FPS, Medium 396 (min 337, max 456), High 390, and Ultra 383. The penalty from 1440p to 4K is 36 FPS for Low, 31 for Medium, 30 for High, and 30 for Ultra. The Medium preset’s min FPS of 337 at 4K is the lowest recorded value in the entire dataset, but it is still far above any practical display limitation. The overall pattern across all 12 measured rows is one of high, stable performance with no settings combination dropping below 337 FPS at any resolution.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 5950X is a 16-core, 32-thread processor based on Zen 3 architecture (Vermeer codename), built on TSMC’s 7 nm process. Its base clock of 3.40 GHz and boost clock of 4.90 GHz provide strong single-thread performance, as evidenced by the 3dmark_single_thread score of 944 and cinebench_r23_singlecore score of 1614. The 64 MB of L3 cache (8,300 million transistors, dual 74 mm² dies) is ample for Valorant’s map data and game state.

However, the benchmark data reveals that the 5950X’s single-thread performance is not the absolute best available. The 3dmark_2_threads score of 1856 and 4_threads score of 3595 indicate that the CPU’s per-core performance is good but not class-leading. The 16-core, 32-thread configuration is overkill for Valorant, which primarily utilizes 2-4 threads. The 3dmark_16_threads score of 10810 and max_threads score of 11597 show strong multi-thread scaling, but this does not translate into higher FPS in a game that is single-thread bound.

The CPU’s nearest rivals in aggregate benchmark scores — the Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX (-0.2% delta), AMD EPYC 8124P (-0.3%), Intel Core i9-13900F (+0.4%), and Intel Core i7-14700 (-0.7%) — all have similar or better single-thread performance in their respective architectures. The 5950X’s passmark_single_thread score of 3470 is respectable, but the measured Valorant frame rates suggest that a CPU with a higher single-thread score would push the combo’s rank higher than 1117. The CPU’s 91st percentile overall ranking is inflated by its massive multi-thread capabilities, which are irrelevant for this game.

The memory support for DDR4 with dual-channel bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s is sufficient for Valorant’s modest memory demands. The 64 MB L3 cache likely helps maintain frame time consistency, as evidenced by the recorded min FPS values (383 at 1080p Medium, 363 at 1440p Medium, 337 at 4K Medium) being only 15-18% below the average FPS at each resolution. This indicates that the CPU can sustain high frame rates without significant dips, a critical factor for competitive FPS play.

FAQ

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

A: The highest measured average FPS is 528, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. The next highest is 501 FPS at 2560x1440 Low.

Q: How does the combo rank among all tested combinations for Valorant?

A: The combo ranks 1117 out of 3708 total tested combinations, placing it in the top 30% of all systems evaluated for this game.

Q: What is the lowest FPS recorded in any test scenario?

A: The minimum FPS recorded is 337, which occurs at 3840x2160 resolution with Medium settings. This is the only min FPS value below 363 across all tested configurations.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU the limiting factor at 1080p?

A: The data suggests the CPU is the limiting factor at 1080p. The RTX 4080 SUPER’s massive compute capabilities (52.22 TFLOPS FP32) are underutilized, as evidenced by the 528 FPS ceiling at Low settings. A CPU with higher single-thread performance would likely push FPS higher.

Q: How does the RTX 4080 SUPER compare to its nearest GPU rivals in aggregate benchmarks?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER’s average benchmark score is 54209. Its nearest rival, the RTX 4080, scores 54247 (deltaPct -0.1), while the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X scores 54828 (-1.1), the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB scores 55698 (-2.7), and the AMD Radeon 8060S scores 55757 (-2.8).

Q: What is the difference in FPS between Low and Ultra settings at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, Low settings produce 465 FPS average, while Ultra produces 383 FPS — a difference of 82 FPS, or approximately 17.6% lower performance for maxed-out graphics. The Medium preset (396 FPS) sits much closer to Ultra than to Low.