Valorant

The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile combo delivers exceptional performance in Valorant, placing it in the upper half of all tested configurations. Benchmark data shows that this pairing is heavily CPU-bound at lower resolutions, while the GPU becomes a more significant factor at 4K, though the system never drops below a highly playable 256 FPS even at maximum settings.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX is a 16-core, 32-thread processor from the 8000 series, built on the Zen 4 architecture with a 5 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, with a TDP of 55 W. The processor features 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a substantial 64 MB of L3 cache, which is critical for the low-latency, high-frequency demands of a competitive FPS like Valorant.

In synthetic workloads, this CPU achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42713 and a single-core score of 6030cars. The single-core performance is particularly relevant for Valorant, as the game’s engine typically relies on a few primary threads for gameplay logic and rendering commands. The PassMark single-thread score of 3907 corroborates this strength, positioning the chip in the 95th percentile of all CPUs tested. This places it in elite company, with nearest rivals including the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX (average score 76155, delta 0.1%) and the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D (average score 75779, delta 0.6%). The 8945HX’s average benchmark score of 76212 is essentially neck-and-neck with these top-tier parts, indicating that it will not be a bottleneck in frame generation.

The data confirms this CPU’s dominance in gaming scenarios. At 1080p Low settings, the combo produces an average of 593 FPS. This is 42% higher than the 4K High setting (269 FPS), showing that the CPU can feed frames far faster than the GPU can render at higher resolutions. The large L3 cache and high boost clock are the primary drivers here, allowing for rapid cache hits on game assets and quick instruction execution. The CPU’s position is further validated by the fact that the performance gap between 1080p and 1440p at Low settings is only 9.4% (593 to 537 FPS), whereas the gap between 1440p and 4K at Low settings is a much larger 20.1% (537 to 429 FPS). This pattern indicates that the CPU is capable of pushing well beyond 500 FPS, and the GPU begins to limit performance as pixel count increases.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

Within the benchmark database, this specific combination of the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile achieves a rank of 1938 out of 3708 tested combos for Valorant. This places it in the 52.3rd percentile of all systems, meaning it outperforms more than half of the tested configurations. While this might seem modest given the high-end CPU, it is important to contextualize this rank. The database includes many systems with desktop-class GPUs and more powerful mobile variants, so a mid-range mobile GPU like the RTX 4060 Mobile naturally holds a mid-pack position in an absolute ranking.

The combo’s rank is more impressive when considering the GPU’s own standing. The RTX 4060 Mobile sits in the 67th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 22729. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (delta -0.7%), the AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT (delta 0.8%), and the Intel Arc B580 (delta -1.3%). The combo rank of 1938 suggests that while the GPU is strong, the sheer number of configurations with higher-end GPUs pushes this combo down the list. However, the measured FPS data shows that this rank is not indicative of playability; the system delivers frame rates that are far beyond what any competitive monitor can display in most scenarios. The rank is a comparative metric, not a performance ceiling. The data indicates that the combo is well-balanced, with the CPU’s 95th percentile performance compensating for the GPU’s 67th percentile standing in CPU-bound scenarios, but the GPU becomes the limiting factor as resolution scales up.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

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

A: The highest average frame rate recorded is 593 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This represents the peak output for this configuration, leveraging the CPU’s high single-core performance to its fullest extent.

Q: How does the performance change from 1080p to 4K at High settings?

A: At High settings, the average FPS drops from 395 at 1920x1080 to 337 at 2560x1440, and further to 269 at 3840x2160. This represents a 31.9% decrease in performance from 1080p to 4K, indicating a growing GPU bottleneck at higher resolutions.

Q: Is the RTX 4060 Mobile a bottleneck at any resolution?

A: At 1080p Low, the GPU is not a bottleneck, as the CPU pushes 593 FPS. However, at 4K Ultra, the average FPS falls to 256, suggesting the GPU is the primary limiter. The difference between 1080p Low (593 FPS) and 4K Low (429 FPS) shows a 27.7% drop, which is significant and attributable to rendering load.

Q: How does the RTX 4060 Mobile compare to its direct competitor from the same generation?

A: The RTX 4060 Mobile has an average benchmark score of 22729, which is 1.3% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile (score 22435). It is also 0.8% faster than the AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT (score 22549) and 1.3% faster than the Intel Arc B580 (score 23021), though the Arc B580 actually has a higher raw score.

Q: What is the lowest frame rate recorded across all tested settings?

A: The lowest average FPS is 256, recorded at 3840x2160 resolution with Ultra settings. The lowest minimum FPS reported is 240, at 4K Medium settings when the average is 283 FPS dropped to 240. No other min FPS values are provided in the data.

Q: Does the CPU’s benchmark percentile match its in-game performance?

A: The CPU is in the 95th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 76212. Its in-game performance is similarly strong, with the 1080p Low score of 593 FPS being 53% higher than the 4K High score of 269 FPS. This shows the CPU is capable of sustaining high frame rates when not limited by the GPU.

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

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of performance across three resolutions and four quality presets. At 1920x1080, the combo delivers outstanding results. Low settings produce an average of 593 FPS, Medium settings yield 414 FPS (with a minimum of 352 and maximum of 477), High settings reach 395 FPS, and Ultra settings achieve 376 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 36.6%, which is relatively narrow, indicating that the CPU is the dominant factor at this resolution and that even the highest settings do not significantly tax the GPU.

Moving to 2560x1440, performance remains high but shows a noticeable decline. Low settings average 537 FPS, Medium settings average 354 FPS (minimum 301, maximum 407), High settings average 337 FPS, and Ultra settings average 321 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is consistent across settings: 9.4% for Low, 14.5% for Medium, 14.7% for High, and 14.6% for Ultra. This uniformity suggests that the GPU’s workload is scaling predictably with pixel count, while the CPU headroom is being reduced but not exhausted.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the clear limiter. Low settings average 429 FPS, Medium settings average 283 FPS (minimum 240, maximum 325), High settings average 269 FPS, and Ultra settings average 256 FPS. The performance drop from 1440p to 4K is more pronounced: 20.1% for Low, 20.1% for Medium, 20.2% for High, and 20.2% for Ultra. This consistent ~20% reduction across all settings at the 4K step is a classic sign of a GPU bottleneck, as the CPU’s frame generation capability is no longer the constraint. The minimum FPS of 240 at 4K Medium is still far above the 144 Hz refresh rate of most gaming monitors, ensuring a smooth experience. The data shows that the gap between Low and Ultra settings widens with resolution: 36.6% at 1080p, 40.2% at 1440p, and 40.3% at 4K, further confirming the GPU’s increasing influence.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile is a mid-range mobile GPU based on the Ada Lovelace architecture, manufactured on a 5 nm process. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU clock speeds are 1545 MHz base and 1890 MHz boost, with memory running at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). The GPU has 3072 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, delivering 11.61 TFLOPS of FP32 performance.

In Valorant, the GPU’s role is secondary to the CPU at lower resolutions, but becomes more critical as resolution increases. The 8 GB VRAM is more than sufficient for Valorant’s modest texture requirements, even at 4K Ultra, so memory capacity is not a limiting factor. The GDDR6 memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s is also adequate for the game’s asset streaming, as evidenced by the high frame rates at 4K. The GPU’s 67th percentile ranking (average score 22729) places it in the mid-range tier, and its performance is competitive with desktop cards like the RTX 2080 (delta -0.7%) and RX 7700 XT (delta 0.8%).

The measured results show that the GPU is not a bottleneck at 1080p, where the CPU dictates performance. However, at 4K, the GPU’s rendering capabilities are stretched. The 27.7% drop in FPS from 1080p Low to 4K Low (593 to 429) is primarily attributed to the GPU’s fill rate and shader throughput limits. The GPU’s boost clock of 1890 MHz is relatively modest for a modern part, but its efficiency on the 5 nm node allows it to sustain high frame rates without thermal throttling in a mobile chassis. The GPU’s 11.61 TFLOPS of FP32 compute is substantial, and the data indicates it is well-matched to the CPU for this title, providing a balanced experience across all tested settings.

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

For competitive play, the Low preset at 1920x1080 offers the highest average FPS at 593, which is ideal for maximizing refresh rate on high-Hz monitors. This setting minimizes GPU load and leverages the CPU’s immense single-thread performance. The data shows a 43.3% increase in FPS from High to Low at 1080p (395 to 593), which is a significant competitive advantage in a fast-paced FPS. However, the visual quality reduction may be a trade-off for some players.

For a balance of visual fidelity and performance, the Medium preset at 2560x1440 is a strong recommendation. It delivers an average of 354 FPS, which is still far above the 240 Hz threshold for most esports displays, and the visual upgrade from Low is noticeable. The minimum FPS of 301 at this setting ensures no perceptible stutters. At 4K, the Medium preset provides an average of 283 FPS, with a minimum of 240, which remains highly playable even on 240 Hz monitors, though the 20% performance drop from Low to Medium is more pronounced at this resolution.

The Ultra preset is not recommended for competitive play, as it provides the lowest average FPS (256 at 4K, 376 at 1080p) without a substantial visual benefit in a game like Valorant, where clarity and frame rate are prioritized over graphical effects. The data shows that the jump from High to Ultra at 1080p only reduces FPS by 4.8% (395 to 376), so players seeking maximum visual quality without a major FPS hit can consider High. However, for the best experience per the measured rows, Low at 1080p or Medium at 1440p offers the optimal combination of high average FPS, stable minimums, and reasonable visual quality.

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

The resolution scaling analysis reveals a clear shift in the bottleneck from CPU to GPU as pixel count increases. From 1920x1080 to 2560x1440, the average FPS drops by approximately 9.4% at Low settings (593 to 537), 14.5% at Medium (414 to 354), 14.7% at High (395 to 337), and 14.6% at Ultra (376 to 321). This relatively modest decline suggests that the CPU is still capable of feeding the GPU at 1440p, and the GPU’s rendering load is increasing but not overwhelming it.

The transition from 2560x1440 to 3840x2160 tells a different story. Here, the FPS drops by 20.1% at Low (537 to 429), 20.1% at Medium (354 to 283), 20.2% at High (337 to 269), and 20.2% at Ultra (321 to 256). This consistent ~20% reduction across all settings is a textbook indicator of a GPU bottleneck. The CPU is capable of generating far more frames, but the GPU’s pixel fill rate and shading capacity are exhausted at 4K. The fact that the drop is nearly identical across Low and Ultra settings further confirms this, as even at Low settings, the GPU is struggling to render the 8.3 million pixels of 4K.

The overall scaling from 1080p to 4K is 27.7% at Low (593 to 429), 31.6% at Medium (414 to 283), 31.9% at High (395 to 269), and 31.9% at Ultra (376 to 256). This indicates that the GPU is the limiting component at 4K, while the CPU is the primary driver at 1080p. The data shows that this combo is exceptionally well-suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, where it can push frame rates beyond the refresh rate of most monitors. At 4K, it still delivers over 250 FPS at Ultra, which is more than sufficient for smooth gameplay, but the scaling curve makes it clear that the RTX 4060 Mobile is the constraining factor at that resolution. Players seeking the absolute highest frame rates should stick to 1080p, while those prioritizing visual quality can use 4K with minimal performance risk, given the high baseline.