Valorant

The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX paired with the AMD Radeon 880M integrated graphics produces a highly capable Valorant experience, though the data reveals a system that is heavily influenced by the GPU at higher resolutions. The measured frame rates show that this combo is far from a bottleneck at 1080p, but the integrated GPU’s limits become apparent as resolution scales. This analysis breaks down the performance metrics, component roles, and optimal settings based solely on the provided benchmark data.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear and predictable pattern: performance degrades as resolution increases, but the rate of degradation is not uniform across settings. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo achieves an average of 278 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 at Low drops this to 237 FPS, a reduction of 41 FPS. The jump to 3840x2160 at Low yields 190 FPS, another 47 FPS drop. This scaling suggests that at lower settings, the system retains significant headroom even at 4K, though the frame rate is still halved from the 1080p Low result.

The scaling behavior changes dramatically at higher settings. At Medium settings, the average FPS goes from 183 at 1080p, to 156 at 1440p, and finally to 125 at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 4K at Medium is 58 FPS, which is a 31.7% reduction. At High settings, the numbers are 174 FPS at 1080p, 149 FPS at 1440p, and 119 FPS at 4K, a 55 FPS total drop. The Ultra preset shows a similar trend: 166 FPS at 1080p, 142 FPS at 1440p, and 113 FPS at 4K.

The data indicates that the limiting component shifts with resolution. At 1080p, the CPU’s 16 cores and 32 threads are likely capable of feeding the GPU efficiently, allowing the integrated Radeon 880M to push high frame rates. The gap between 1080p Low (278 FPS) and 1080p Ultra (166 FPS) is 112 FPS, showing that the GPU is already strained by the graphics workload. However, the scaling from 1080p to 4K at Low settings (278 to 190 FPS) suggests that even at the lowest visual fidelity, the GPU’s pixel throughput becomes a bottleneck at higher resolutions. The 880M’s 16 ROPs and 48 TMUs are simply not enough to maintain the same performance level when the pixel count quadruples from 1080p to 4K.

The data strongly suggests the GPU is the primary limiter at 4K. The difference between 4K Low (190 FPS) and 4K Ultra (113 FPS) is 77 FPS, which is a substantial performance penalty for increasing visual quality. In contrast, the CPU’s role is more prominent at 1080p High or Ultra, where the frame rates are still high but the gap between presets is smaller. The system is balanced at 1440p, where the scaling from Low to Ultra (237 to 142 FPS) shows a 95 FPS spread, indicating both components are actively engaged.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 880M is the sole graphics processor in this combo, and its specifications dictate the performance ceiling. The GPU is built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture and features 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output pipelines. It also includes 12 ray tracing cores, though Valorant is not a ray tracing title. The boost clock is listed at 2900 MHz, and the memory is "System Shared," meaning the VRAM size, bus width, and bandwidth are all system-dependent rather than fixed. This shared memory configuration is typical for an integrated GPU and explains why performance scales heavily with resolution, as the GPU must compete with the CPU for memory bandwidth.

In the benchmark hierarchy, the 880M sits in the 43rd percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 8436. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX (avg score 8427, deltaPct 0.1) and the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 (avg score 8458, deltaPct -0.3). The data shows the 880M is roughly equivalent to these older discrete mobile GPUs, which confirms the efficiency of the integrated solution. The GPU’s FP32 performance is rated at 4.454 TFLOPS, and its pixel rate is 46.40 GPixel/s. These figures are modest, explaining why the 4K Ultra preset only achieves 113 FPS.

The GPU’s performance is directly reflected in the measured FPS. At 1080p Medium, the average is 183 FPS with a minimum of 156 FPS and a maximum of 211 FPS. This spread of 55 FPS indicates that the GPU is handling the workload but with noticeable variance, likely due to the shared system memory. At 4K Medium, the average drops to 125 FPS with a minimum of 106 FPS and a maximum of 144 FPS. The minimum frame rate of 106 FPS is still playable, but it shows the GPU is under significant stress at this resolution. The data shows that the 880M is a capable GPU for esports titles like Valorant, but it is not designed for high-resolution, high-settings gaming.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX is a high-end mobile processor that provides ample computational power for Valorant. It features 16 cores and 32 threads, based on the Zen 4 architecture, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The CPU has 64 MB of L3 cache and supports DDR5 memory, which is crucial for feeding the integrated GPU. The CPU’s benchmark scores are impressive, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42713 and a single-core score of 6030. It sits in the 95th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 76212.

The CPU’s nearest rivals in the benchmark database include the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX (avg score 76155, deltaPct 0.1) and the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D (avg score 75779, deltaPct 0.6). The data shows the 8945HX is essentially on par with these top-tier processors, meaning it will not bottleneck the integrated GPU in most scenarios. The CPU’s high boost clock of 5.40 GHz is particularly beneficial for Valorant, which is known to be sensitive to single-threaded performance. The PassMark single-thread score of 3907 supports this, indicating strong per-core performance.

In the measured FPS data, the CPU’s influence is most evident at 1080p Low, where the system achieves 278 FPS. This high frame rate is only possible if the CPU can process game logic and draw calls quickly enough. The CPU’s 32 threads ensure that background tasks do not interfere with the game’s main thread. However, the CPU is not the bottleneck in this combo; the GPU is. Evidence for this is the fact that at 1080p, increasing settings from Low to Ultra only reduces FPS by 112 FPS (278 to 166), while at 4K, the same settings change reduces FPS by 77 FPS (190 to 113). If the CPU were the limiter, the FPS would remain relatively constant across resolutions, but the data shows a clear resolution-dependent drop.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo of the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX and AMD Radeon 880M ranks 2814 out of 2883 tested combos for Valorant. This places it in the bottom 2.4% of all combinations in the database. This low ranking is surprising given the high CPU and moderate GPU performance, but it is a direct result of the integrated GPU’s limitations. The ranking is based on the measured FPS data, which shows that while the combo can achieve high frame rates at 1080p, it struggles to maintain competitive performance at higher resolutions compared to systems with discrete GPUs.

The ranking is likely pulled down by the fact that Valorant is a game where high refresh rate monitors are common, and players often target 240 Hz or higher. While the combo achieves 278 FPS at 1080p Low, which is above that target, it drops to 237 FPS at 1440p Low and 190 FPS at 4K Low. Many other combos in the database, which include discrete graphics cards, will have much higher frame rates at 1440p and 4K. The combo’s rank of 2814 out of 2883 suggests that it is outperformed by the vast majority of systems, including those with older, lower-end discrete GPUs.

The data shows a stark contrast between the CPU’s ranking and the combo’s ranking. The CPU is in the 95th percentile of all CPUs, but the combo is in the bottom percentile of combos for this game. This disparity underscores the fact that the GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU is more than capable of handling Valorant, but the integrated GPU holds the system back. In a benchmark database context, this combo is best suited for players who prioritize CPU-heavy workloads or play at 1080p with competitive settings, rather than those seeking high-fidelity 4K gaming.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and frame rate goal. For players with a 1080p display, the Medium preset offers the best balance of visual quality and performance, achieving an average of 183 FPS with a minimum of 156 FPS. This ensures smooth gameplay even in intense firefights. The Low preset at 1080p is the performance king, hitting 278 FPS, which is ideal for players with 240 Hz monitors. The High and Ultra presets at 1080p (174 and 166 FPS respectively) are also playable but offer diminishing returns in visual quality for the performance cost.

At 1440p, the Medium preset is again the sweet spot, delivering 156 FPS with a minimum of 133 FPS. This is sufficient for high refresh rate gaming, though players may need to drop to Low (237 FPS) to take full advantage of a 144 Hz or higher monitor. The High and Ultra presets at 1440p (149 and 142 FPS) are still above 140 FPS, but the minimum frame rates are not listed, so variance is unknown. The data suggests that Medium is the safest choice for consistent performance at 1440p.

At 4K, the situation is more constrained. The Low preset provides 190 FPS, which is the only preset that exceeds 144 Hz. The Medium preset (125 FPS) and High preset (119 FPS) are playable but may not be ideal for competitive play. The Ultra preset (113 FPS) is the least desirable, as it pushes the GPU to its limits. For 4K, the recommendation is to use Low settings for maximum performance, or Medium if visual fidelity is preferred and the player can tolerate a lower frame rate. The data does not include minimum FPS for Low, High, or Ultra at 4K, so the Medium preset’s min of 106 FPS is the only documented floor, indicating that Medium is stable.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of performance across resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the results are as follows: Low averages 278 FPS, Medium averages 183 FPS (min 156, max 211), High averages 174 FPS, and Ultra averages 166 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 112 FPS, showing significant scaling with settings.

At 2560x1440, the performance drops predictably. Low averages 237 FPS, Medium averages 156 FPS (min 133, max 180), High averages 149 FPS, and Ultra averages 142 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 95 FPS, which is slightly less than at 1080p, indicating the GPU is becoming more of a factor.

At 3840x2160, the frame rates are considerably lower. Low averages 190 FPS, Medium averages 125 FPS (min 106, max 144), High averages 119 FPS, and Ultra averages 113 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 77 FPS, which is the smallest of the three resolutions. This suggests that at 4K, even the Low preset is stressing the GPU, and the relative performance difference between presets narrows.

The data shows that the Medium preset is the only one with documented minimum and maximum frame rates. Across all resolutions, the minimum FPS for Medium is 156 at 1080p, 133 at 1440p, and 106 at 4K. These minimums are all above 100 FPS, ensuring a playable experience. The maximum FPS for Medium ranges from 211 at 1080p to 144 at 4K, showing that the GPU can burst higher when scene complexity is low.

FAQ

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

A: The highest average FPS is 278, which is achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: Can this combo maintain 144 FPS at 4K resolution?

A: Yes, at 4K with Low settings, the average FPS is 190. However, at Medium settings, the average drops to 125 FPS, which is below 144.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested combos for Valorant?

A: The combo ranks 2814 out of 2883 tested combos, placing it in the bottom 2.4% of all combinations.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for the Medium preset at 1080p?

A: The minimum FPS for the Medium preset at 1920x1080 is 156 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more responsible for the performance at 1080p?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the limiting factor, as increasing settings from Low to Ultra at 1080p reduces FPS from 278 to 166, while the CPU has high benchmark scores and is in the 95th percentile.

Q: What is the average FPS difference between 1080p and 4K at High settings?

A: At High settings, the average FPS is 174 at 1080p and 119 at 4K, a difference of 55 FPS.