Valorant

FAQ

Q: What is the measured average FPS for the Intel Core i3-12100F + AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT combo in Valorant at 1080p with Low settings?

A: The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings is 522, the highest recorded across all tested settings and resolutions in this dataset.

Q: How does the combo rank in Valorant compared to other tested combinations?

A: This combo ranks 1266 out of 3708 tested combos, placing it in the top third (roughly the 66th percentile) of all recorded system pairings for this game.

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

A: At 1080p Medium, the average FPS is 446, while at 4K Medium it drops to 392. This represents a 12% decrease in average FPS when scaling from 1080p to 2160p.

Q: Which settings preset yields the highest minimum FPS recorded in the data?

A: The highest minimum FPS recorded is 379, which occurs at 1920x1080 with Medium settings. At 2560x1440 Medium, the minimum FPS is 359, and at 3840x2160 Medium, it is 333.

Q: What is the boost clock of the Intel Core i3-12100F, and how does it relate to single-thread performance?

A: The boost clock is 4.30 GHz. The CPU scores 893 in 3dmark_single_thread and 1674 in cinebench_r23_singlecore, indicating strong single-thread capability which is critical for Valorant's relatively lightweight per-core workloads.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT have enough VRAM for Valorant at 4K?

A: The GPU has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory with a 256-bit bus and 624.1 GB/s bandwidth. Given that even at 4K Ultra the measured average FPS is 359, the VRAM capacity is more than sufficient for this game's demands.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT is built on RDNA 3.0 architecture with a Navi 32 chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process by TSMC. It features 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die, with a base clock of 1295 MHz, a boost clock of 2430 MHz, and a game clock of 2124 MHz. The GPU comes with 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 624.1 GB/s of bandwidth. Its shading units number 3840, with 240 texture mapping units and 96 raster output units. The pixel rate is 233.3 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 583.2 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance rated at 37.32 TFLOPS.

In Valorant, the GPU's role is somewhat unusual because the game is not traditionally GPU-bound at lower resolutions. The measured data shows that at 1080p Low, the average FPS reaches 522, which is far above typical refresh rates. The RX 7800 XT’s 16 GB VRAM is never a constraint here; even at 4K Ultra, the GPU has plenty of memory headroom. Instead, the limiting factor appears to be elsewhere, as evidenced by the relatively small FPS drops when raising settings.

Looking at the GPU's benchmark scores, the passmark_g3d score is 24176, and the percentileVsAllGpus is 51, meaning it sits just above the median of all GPUs in that benchmark. Interestingly, its nearestRivals include the GeForce GTX 1660 with an avgScore of 11680 and a deltaPct of -0.5, and the Radeon RX 6500 XT with an avgScore of 11842 and a deltaPct of -1.8. These rival scores are similar, suggesting that in synthetic tests, the RX 7800 XT does not dramatically outpace older or lower-tier cards, despite its much larger memory pool and newer architecture.

The data indicates that in Valorant, the GPU is not the primary bottleneck at 1080p or 1440p. At 1080p, going from Low to Ultra only reduces average FPS from 522 to 431, a 17% drop. At 1440p, the drop from Low (495) to Ultra (409) is similar at 17%. At 4K, the drop from Low (460) to Ultra (359) is 22%, which is more pronounced but still modest. This pattern suggests that the GPU's raw power is sufficient to handle even the highest settings without severe penalties, and the game's engine is more limited by CPU performance in most scenarios.

The RX 7800 XT's memory bandwidth of 624.1 GB/s and 16 GB capacity are clearly not limiting factors in Valorant. The game's textures and geometry are relatively simple, so even at 4K Ultra, the GPU can maintain high frame rates. The measured FPS at 4K Ultra is 359, which is still well above any standard 60 Hz display. This implies that players with high-refresh monitors could comfortably use Ultra settings at 4K and still enjoy smooth gameplay.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i3-12100F is a 4-core, 8-thread processor from the Core 12th Gen series, based on Alder Lake architecture. Its base clock is 3.30 GHz, boosting up to 4.30 GHz. It has a 12 MB shared L3 cache, with 1.25 MB L2 per core and 80 KB L1 per core. The CPU supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration and uses an Intel Socket 1700. Its TDP is 58 W, and it is manufactured on a 10 nm process by Intel.

In synthetic benchmarks, the i3-12100F shows notable single-thread strength. Its 3dmark_single_thread score is 893, and cinebench_r23_singlecore is 1674. Multi-threaded scores are 11860 in cinebench_r23_multicore and 4981 in cinebench_r20_multicore. The passmark_single_thread score is 3444. The CPU's percentileVsAllCpus is 68, meaning it outperforms about two-thirds of all CPUs in the database. Its nearestRivals include the Intel Core i5-9500 with an avgScore of 13452 and a deltaPct of 0.3, and the Intel Core 5 120UL with an avgScore of 13594 and a deltaPct of -0.7.

Valorant is known to be a CPU-sensitive game, particularly at high frame rates, because it relies heavily on single-thread performance for game logic and physics. The i3-12100F's boost clock of 4.30 GHz and strong single-core scores suggest it is well-suited for this game. The data supports this: at 1080p Low, the average FPS is 522, which is likely near the CPU's limit for this pairing. Even at 4K Low, the average FPS is 460, only 12% lower than at 1080p Low, indicating that the CPU is still the primary driver of performance when settings are low.

The CPU's 4 cores and 8 threads might seem modest, but Valorant rarely uses more than a few threads. The measured FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K is minimal at Low settings (522 to 460), which suggests that the CPU is not becoming a bottleneck as resolution increases; rather, the GPU is taking on more work but still not hitting its limits. This is an unusual situation where even at 4K, the CPU remains the constraining factor for maximum frame rates.

Looking at the CPU's multi-threaded performance, the cinebench_r23_multicore score of 11860 is respectable for a 4-core part, but it is not exceptional. However, in Valorant, the game's engine does not scale well with many cores, so the i3-12100F's high single-thread performance is more relevant. The passmark_find_prime_numbers score of 60 is low, but that test is not representative of gaming workloads. The data shows that the i3-12100F can push very high frame rates in Valorant, making it a capable pairing with the RX 7800 XT.

How This Combo Ranks

This combination of Intel Core i3-12100F and AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT ranks 1266 out of 3708 tested combos in Valorant. That places it in the 66th percentile of all systems tested, meaning it performs better than about two-thirds of all combinations. This is a solid ranking, but not top-tier, which is expected given that the CPU is a budget quad-core part while the GPU is a high-end model.

The ranking suggests that while the GPU is powerful, the CPU limits the combo's overall standing. If the GPU were paired with a higher-core-count CPU, the rank would likely improve. However, the measured FPS numbers are extremely high—over 500 at 1080p Low—so the rank reflects that many other combos achieve even higher frame rates, likely with faster CPUs.

Interestingly, the combo's rank (1266) is worse than the CPU's percentile (68) but better than the GPU's percentile (51). This implies that the CPU is the stronger component relative to its peers, but the pairing with a GPU that is only average in synthetic benchmarks brings the overall rank down. The GPU's avgBenchmarkScore is 11627, which is similar to its nearest rivals, so in raw compute, the RX 7800 XT is not as dominant as its specs might suggest.

In the context of Valorant, the ranking is still impressive because the game is playable at extremely high frame rates. The combo outperforms many systems that have more powerful CPUs but weaker GPUs, as evidenced by the high FPS numbers. The data shows that for competitive play, this combo can easily drive 240 Hz or 360 Hz monitors, which is the primary use case for Valorant.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the best settings preset depends on the player's resolution and refresh rate. At 1080p, all presets deliver average FPS above 430, with Low at 522, Medium at 446, High at 438, and Ultra at 431. The differences are small, especially between Medium, High, and Ultra, which are within 3% of each other. For players with 144 Hz or 165 Hz monitors, even Ultra settings are viable, as the average FPS of 431 is well above those refresh rates.

At 1440p, the pattern is similar: Low gives 495 FPS, Medium 423, High 416, and Ultra 409. Again, the gap between Medium and Ultra is just 3%, so players can choose Ultra for better visuals without a significant FPS cost. The minimum FPS at 1440p Medium is 359, which is still very high, indicating no stutter issues.

At 4K, the recommendations change slightly. Low gives 460 FPS, Medium 392, High 377, and Ultra 359. While all are playable, the drop from Medium to Ultra is 8%, which is more noticeable. For 4K gaming, Medium or High settings would provide the best balance of visual quality and frame rate, especially if the player has a 240 Hz monitor, which would still be saturated by the average FPS.

The data suggests that for most players, Medium settings offer the best experience because they provide a good balance between FPS and visual fidelity. The measured minimum FPS at Medium settings is 379 at 1080p, 359 at 1440p, and 333 at 4K, all of which are high enough to avoid any perceptible stutter. For competitive players who prioritize frame rate above all else, Low settings at any resolution will provide the highest FPS, but the gains over Medium are modest (around 15-20%).

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS values are:

• Low: 522
• Medium: 446 (min 379, max 512)
• High: 438
• Ultra: 431

The spread from Low to Ultra is 91 FPS, which is a 17% reduction. The minimum FPS at Medium is 379, which is 85% of the average, showing good frame time consistency.

At 2560x1440, the measured average FPS values are:

• Low: 495
• Medium: 423 (min 359, max 486)
• High: 416
• Ultra: 409

The spread from Low to Ultra is 86 FPS, a 17% reduction. The minimum FPS at Medium is 359, which is 85% of the average, again indicating stable performance.

At 3840x2160, the measured average FPS values are:

• Low: 460
• Medium: 392 (min 333, max 451)
• High: 377
• Ultra: 359

The spread from Low to Ultra is 101 FPS, a 22% reduction. The minimum FPS at Medium is 333, which is 85% of the average. This is the largest percentage drop across resolutions, suggesting the GPU is becoming more of a factor at 4K.

Across all resolutions, the Medium settings preset provides the only min/max data, allowing for a closer look at frame pacing. At 1080p Medium, the FPS ranges from 379 to 512, a delta of 133 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the range is 359 to 486, a delta of 127 FPS. At 4K Medium, the range is 333 to 451, a delta of 118 FPS. The narrowing range at higher resolutions indicates more consistent frame times, likely because the GPU is more evenly loaded.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals important insights about the system's bottleneck. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 522 at 1080p to 460 at 4K, a decline of 12%. This relatively small drop suggests that at Low settings, the CPU is the primary limiting factor, as the GPU has plenty of headroom to render at higher resolutions without significant FPS loss.

At Medium settings, the average FPS drops from 446 at 1080p to 392 at 4K, a decline of 12%. This is similar to Low settings, indicating that the CPU remains the bottleneck even as settings increase. The minimum FPS drops from 379 to 333, also a 12% decline, further supporting CPU limitation.

At High settings, the average FPS drops from 438 at 1080p to 377 at 4K, a decline of 14%. This is slightly larger than at Low or Medium, suggesting the GPU is starting to play a more significant role. At Ultra settings, the average FPS drops from 431 at 1080p to 359 at 4K, a decline of 17%. This is the largest percentage drop, indicating that at Ultra settings, the GPU becomes more of a limiting factor, especially at 4K.

The data shows that the CPU is the dominant bottleneck in this system for Valorant, even at 4K. The fact that FPS only drops by 12-17% from 1080p to 4K, despite a 4x increase in pixel count, is unusual. In most games, a 4x resolution increase would halve or quarter the FPS if the GPU were the limiting factor. Here, the GPU's 16 GB VRAM and high bandwidth allow it to handle the increased load without major FPS penalties, while the CPU's single-thread performance caps the maximum frame rate.

This has practical implications: players using this combo with a 1440p or 4K monitor will experience nearly the same frame rates as those at 1080p, making the system highly versatile. The bottleneck is clearly the CPU, so upgrading to a higher-core-count or higher-clock CPU would likely yield higher FPS, especially at 1080p where the CPU is most stressed. However, for most users, the current FPS levels are already so high that any upgrade would be marginal for Valorant.