Valorant

# Valorant with AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090

This combination of the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 ranks 464th out of 3,708 tested combinations in Valorant, placing it in the top 12.5% of all systems tested for this game. The data shows a system that delivers exceptionally high frame rates across all resolutions and settings, with the 1080p Low preset reaching 632 FPS average and even the demanding 4K Ultra preset maintaining 417 FPS average.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 464 out of 3,708 tested combinations places this system firmly in the upper echelon of Valorant performance. This ranking reflects the combined capabilities of both components working in tandem, though the measured frame rates suggest that the CPU is the primary driver of performance in this title.

The CPU's average benchmark score of 77,740 places it at the 95th percentile among all CPUs tested. This puts it 1.6% ahead of the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX (76,513) and the AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P (76,492), while sitting 1.7% behind the Intel Core i9-14900K (79,097). The closest rival is the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX at 76,212, which the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 leads by 2.0%.

On the GPU side, the RTX 5090 achieves an average benchmark score of 79,842, ranking at the 92nd percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB (79,605, 0.3% behind), the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB (79,396, 0.6% behind), and the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT (78,940, 1.1% behind). Interestingly, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X scores 80,959, which is 1.4% higher than the RTX 5090 in these aggregate benchmarks.

The combination's rank of 464 suggests that while both components are individually strong, there are 463 other combinations that achieve even higher frame rates in Valorant. Given that the RTX 5090 is one of the most powerful GPUs available, the ranking indicates that Valorant's performance ceiling is heavily influenced by CPU capability rather than GPU raw power, and the mobile-oriented Ryzen AI Max+ 395, despite its strong benchmark scores, may be the limiting factor in reaching the absolute top rankings.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is built on the Zen 5 architecture with the Strix Halo codename, manufactured on a 4nm TSMC process. It features 16 cores and 32 threads, with a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3 cache.

In Valorant, which is known to be CPU-bound at high frame rates, these specifications matter significantly. The single-core performance, as measured by Cinebench R23, is 2,044 points, while the multi-core score reaches 35,314. The Geekbench results show 2,464 single-core and 20,992 multi-core scores. These numbers indicate strong per-thread performance, which is critical for a game like Valorant that relies heavily on a few primary threads for game logic and rendering commands.

The CPU's PassMark single-thread score of 4,147 and multi-thread score of 54,934 further emphasize its capability. The data compression score of 690,650 and floating-point math score of 128,682 suggest robust computational throughput. The CPU sits at the 95th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 77,740, placing it in elite company.

The memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s, delivered through quad-channel LPDDR5X, provides substantial data throughput. For Valorant, this bandwidth helps ensure that texture streaming and asset loading do not create bottlenecks. The 64 MB shared L3 cache is particularly beneficial for a game with relatively small working sets, as frequently accessed data can reside in the cache rather than being fetched from system memory.

The TDP of 55 watts is notably low for a 16-core processor, yet the boost clock of 5.10 GHz demonstrates that the design can achieve high single-thread performance when needed. This efficiency profile is advantageous for sustained gaming sessions where thermal headroom can affect sustained clock speeds.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 represents the flagship of the GeForce 50-series, built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with the GB202 chip. It is manufactured on a 5nm TSMC process with 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 122.9M per mm².

The GPU operates with a base clock of 2017 MHz and a boost clock of 2407 MHz, with memory clocked at 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective). It features 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus, delivering 1.79 TB/s of memory bandwidth. The shading units number 21,760, with 680 texture mapping units and 176 raster operation units. Ray tracing cores total 170, and tensor cores number 680.

Compute performance is substantial: FP32 throughput reaches 104.8 TFLOPS, with FP16 at the same 104.8 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio). The pixel rate is 423.6 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 1,636.8 GTexel/s. The GPU consumes 575 watts under load and requires a 950-watt power supply, connecting via a single 16-pin connector.

In Valorant, the GPU's role is somewhat diminished compared to more graphically demanding titles. The measured frame rates across all resolutions and settings remain above 417 FPS, which means the GPU is never the primary bottleneck. However, the GPU's raw performance ensures that even at 4K Ultra settings, the system maintains high frame rates. The PassMark G3D score of 39,650 and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 18,355 demonstrate strong synthetic performance, though these do not directly translate to Valorant's specific workload.

The GPU's 92nd percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 79,842, places it near the top of the performance hierarchy. The 32 GB VRAM is far more than Valorant requires, but it ensures zero memory pressure in this title and provides headroom for other applications.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080 resolution, the measured average FPS ranges from 521 to 632 depending on settings. The Low preset achieves 632 FPS average, while High reaches 530 FPS, Medium 539 FPS, and Ultra 521 FPS. The Medium preset shows a minimum FPS of 458 and maximum of 619.

Moving to 2560x1440, the average FPS drops slightly but remains exceptionally high. Low preset achieves 599 FPS, High 503 FPS, Medium 511 FPS, and Ultra 494 FPS. The Medium preset at this resolution shows minimum FPS of 434 and maximum of 588.

At 3840x2160, the average FPS continues its gradual decline. Low preset delivers 556 FPS, Medium 460 FPS, High 438 FPS, and Ultra 417 FPS. The Medium preset at 4K shows minimum FPS of 391 and maximum of 529.

The pattern across resolutions shows that even the most demanding configuration tested, 4K Ultra, produces an average of 417 FPS, which is well above the refresh rates of even the most capable gaming monitors. The Low preset at 1080p delivers 632 FPS, indicating that the system has substantial headroom for competitive play at maximum frame rates.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals important information about the system's bottleneck characteristics. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 632 at 1080p to 599 at 1440p and 556 at 4K. This represents a 12.0% decrease from 1080p to 4K, which is relatively modest for such a large resolution increase.

At High settings, the progression is 530 FPS at 1080p, 503 at 1440p, and 438 at 4K, representing a 17.4% drop from 1080p to 4K. Medium settings show 539 FPS at 1080p, 511 at 1440p, and 460 at 4K, a 14.7% decrease. Ultra settings demonstrate the largest scaling effect: 521 FPS at 1080p, 494 at 1440p, and 417 at 4K, a 20.0% reduction.

The relatively small FPS drops across resolutions indicate that the system is not purely GPU-bound even at 4K. In a GPU-bound scenario, the difference between 1080p and 4K would typically be much larger, often exceeding 50%. Here, the maximum drop is 20% at Ultra settings, suggesting that the CPU is providing a significant portion of the performance ceiling.

The fact that Low settings at 1080p achieve 632 FPS while Low at 4K achieves 556 FPS shows that even at the lowest settings, the resolution scaling is moderate. This pattern suggests that Valorant's engine is well-optimized for CPU throughput, and the Ryzen AI Max+ 395's strong single-thread performance maintains high frame rates across all resolutions.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS measured for this combination?

A: The highest average FPS measured is 632, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested combinations in Valorant?

A: This combination ranks 464th out of 3,708 tested combinations, placing it in the top 12.5% of all systems tested.

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

A: At Ultra settings, the average FPS drops from 521 at 1080p to 417 at 4K, representing a 20.0% decrease.

Q: Which component appears to be the primary bottleneck in Valorant?

A: The resolution scaling data indicates the CPU is the primary bottleneck, as FPS drops only modestly from 1080p to 4K even at the same settings.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded across all tested configurations?

A: The lowest minimum FPS recorded is 391, which occurred at 3840x2160 resolution with Medium settings.

Q: How does the CPU compare to the Intel Core i9-14900K in average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 has an average benchmark score of 77,740, which is 1.7% lower than the Intel Core i9-14900K's score of 79,097.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the user's display refresh rate and resolution priorities. For competitive play where maximum frame rate is paramount, the Low preset at 1080p delivers the highest average FPS at 632, providing the greatest headroom above any refresh rate.

At 1440p, the Low preset achieves 599 FPS average, which remains extremely high. The Medium preset at 1440p offers 511 FPS average with a minimum of 434 FPS, providing a balance between visual quality and performance. The Ultra preset at 1440p still delivers 494 FPS average, making it viable if visual fidelity is preferred.

For 4K displays, the Low preset at 556 FPS average is the fastest option, but even the Ultra preset at 417 FPS average exceeds the refresh rate of virtually all current 4K monitors. The Medium preset at 4K provides 460 FPS average with a minimum of 391 FPS, which offers a reasonable visual upgrade over Low settings while maintaining excellent frame rates.

The data suggests that users with 240Hz or 360Hz displays can comfortably use higher settings at 1080p or 1440p without dropping below their display's refresh rate. For 500Hz displays, the Low preset at 1080p is the only configuration that can fully saturate such a high refresh rate. The Ultra preset at 1080p still delivers 521 FPS average, which exceeds the refresh rate of most gaming displays but may not satisfy the most demanding competitive players seeking absolute maximum frame rates.

Given that the minimum FPS recorded across all configurations is 391 (at 4K Medium), the system never drops below the refresh rate of standard 360Hz displays at any resolution or setting tested. This makes the choice of settings primarily a matter of visual preference rather than performance necessity, though users seeking the absolute highest frame rates should select the Low preset at 1080p for 632 FPS average.