Valorant

The Intel Core i5-11400F and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT combination delivers exceptional performance in Valorant, a tactical FPS where frame rates are paramount. The data shows this pairing ranks 2079th out of 3708 tested combos, placing it in the top 56% of all configurations. With average frame rates ranging from 305 FPS at 4K Ultra to 453 FPS at 1080p Low, this system proves capable of driving high-refresh-rate monitors at any resolution, though the performance scaling reveals a nuanced relationship between CPU and GPU workloads.

FAQ

Q: What is the maximum average frame rate this combo achieves in Valorant?

A: The highest recorded average FPS is 453 at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This represents the peak performance ceiling for this configuration.

Q: How does the combo rank among all tested configurations?

A: The combination ranks 2079th out of 3708 total combos, placing it in the 56th percentile. This means it outperforms more than half of all tested systems while remaining short of the top tier.

Q: What kind of frame rate can I expect at 1440p with High settings?

A: At 2560x1440 with High settings, the system delivers an average of 360 FPS. This is sufficient for 360Hz monitors and demonstrates that the GPU remains capable at higher resolutions.

Q: Does the CPU become a bottleneck at lower resolutions?

A: The data suggests yes. From 1440p to 1080p at Low settings, FPS increases from 429 to 453, a modest 5.6% gain. This indicates the CPU limits performance before the GPU does at lower resolutions.

Q: What is the biggest FPS drop from 1080p to 4K?

A: At Ultra settings, performance falls from 373 FPS at 1080p to 305 FPS at 4K, a reduction of 68 FPS or 18.2%. This shows the GPU workload increases substantially at higher resolutions.

Q: Is the RX 6750 XT's 12GB VRAM sufficient for Valorant?

A: The data shows no VRAM-related limitations. Even at 4K Ultra, the system maintains 305 FPS average, indicating that the 12GB GDDR6 memory and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth are more than adequate for this title.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT provides the graphical horsepower for this configuration, built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with 2560 shading units. Its base clock runs at 2150 MHz, boosting up to 2600 MHz, with a game clock of 2495 MHz that sustains performance during extended play sessions. The 12GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus delivers 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is substantial overkill for Valorant's stylized visuals.

The GPU's 40 ray tracing cores and 64 ROPs handle the game's rendering pipeline efficiently, though Valorant does not utilize ray tracing. The FP32 throughput of 13.31 TFLOPS provides significant raw compute capability that remains underutilized at lower settings. This becomes evident in the performance scaling: at 1080p Low, the GPU produces 453 FPS, but at 4K Ultra it still manages 305 FPS, a drop that reflects increased pixel shading demands rather than memory constraints.

The RX 6750 XT's percentile ranking sits at 71, meaning it outperforms 71% of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals show a tight cluster: the AMD Radeon R9 M395X scores 0.5% higher, the AMD FirePro W7100 is 0.6% ahead, and the AMD FirePro D700 leads by 0.7%. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile trails by 1.1%. This close grouping indicates the 6750 XT sits at a performance plateau where minor architectural differences define positioning.

The GPU's 250W TDP and dual-slot design suggest it requires adequate cooling, but the benchmark data shows no thermal throttling indicators. The PCIe 4.0 x16 interface provides ample bandwidth for the 432.0 GB/s memory subsystem. At 4K resolution, the GPU's workload increases significantly, yet the frame rates remain above 300 FPS across all settings, demonstrating that the 6750 XT is not the limiting factor in this pairing for Valorant.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-11400F serves as the processing backbone, featuring 6 cores and 12 threads based on the Rocket Lake architecture. Its base clock of 2.60 GHz boosts to 4.40 GHz, providing the single-thread performance that Valorant heavily relies upon. The 12MB of shared L3 cache and 80 KB L1 cache per core help maintain low latency for the game's frame-critical calculations.

The CPU's benchmark scores reveal its strengths: a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 14340 and single-core score of 2024 indicate balanced performance. The 3DMark single-thread score of 868 and 2-thread score of 1691 show strong scaling for lightly threaded workloads. The PassMark single-thread score of 2981 and multithread score of 16908 place this CPU in the 71st percentile of all processors, with an average benchmark score of 17177.

The nearest rivals show interesting dynamics. The AMD EPYC 7H12 scores 0.3% higher, while the Intel Core i5-12450H trails by 0.4%. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G is 0.6% behind, and the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U leads by 0.6%. This tight grouping around the 17100-17280 range demonstrates that the 11400F delivers competitive performance for its class, though not exceptional.

In Valorant specifically, the CPU's role becomes critical at lower resolutions. The frame rate difference between 1080p Low (453 FPS) and 1440p Low (429 FPS) is only 24 FPS, indicating that the CPU is approaching its limit in feeding frames to the GPU. The 4.40 GHz boost clock provides the raw speed needed for the game's physics and entity updates, while the 6-core configuration handles background tasks without interfering with game performance.

The 65W TDP and 14nm process node suggest efficiency limitations compared to newer architectures, but the benchmark data shows no performance penalties in this title. The DDR4 memory support with dual-channel configuration and 51.2 GB/s bandwidth provides sufficient data throughput for the CPU's cache hierarchy.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the i5-11400F and RX 6750 XT achieves a rank of 2079 out of 3708 tested combos in Valorant. This places the system in the 56th percentile, meaning it outperforms 56% of all configurations while remaining behind 44%. The ranking reflects a balanced pairing where neither component severely bottlenecks the other, though the CPU shows signs of limitation at lower resolutions.

This ranking position indicates that while the system delivers excellent absolute performance—with all tested configurations exceeding 300 FPS—many other combinations achieve higher frame rates. The gap between this combo and top-tier systems likely stems from the CPU's mid-range positioning rather than GPU limitations. The RX 6750 XT's 71st percentile GPU ranking exceeds the combo's 56th percentile, suggesting the CPU holds the system back.

The measured FPS data supports this analysis. At 1080p Low, the system produces 453 FPS, but the CPU's single-thread performance of 868 in 3DMark suggests it cannot push significantly higher. In contrast, the GPU's capabilities at 4K Ultra (305 FPS) show it has substantial headroom for more demanding titles.

Compared to the CPU's standalone ranking (71st percentile), the combo's lower percentile indicates that Valorant's specific workload characteristics—particularly its reliance on high single-thread performance—penalize the 11400F more than average benchmarks suggest. The GPU's performance percentile aligns more closely with the combo's ranking at higher resolutions, where the GPU becomes more relevant.

Resolution Scaling

The performance scaling across resolutions reveals the system's bottleneck characteristics. From 1080p to 1440p at Low settings, FPS drops from 453 to 429, a 5.3% reduction. At High settings, the drop from 380 to 360 FPS represents 5.3% as well. At Ultra settings, 373 FPS falls to 354 FPS, again a 5.1% decrease. This consistent 5% decline from 1080p to 1440p indicates the GPU handles the pixel increase without strain.

The transition from 1440p to 4K shows a more pronounced impact. At Low settings, FPS falls from 429 to 398, an 7.2% drop. High settings drop from 360 to 321 FPS, an 10.8% reduction. Medium settings fall from 366 to 337 FPS, an 7.9% decrease. Ultra settings decline from 354 to 305 FPS, a 13.8% drop. These larger reductions at higher resolutions reflect the GPU's increased workload.

The scaling pattern indicates that at 1080p, the CPU limits performance. The small FPS gains when reducing resolution from 1440p to 1080p (5-6%) suggest the processor cannot feed the GPU faster. Conversely, the larger drops from 1440p to 4K (7-14%) show the GPU becoming the primary constraint. The system exhibits a crossover point near 1440p where the balance shifts from CPU-bound to GPU-bound.

The Medium settings data provides additional insight. At 1080p Medium, the system achieves 386 FPS with a minimum of 328 and maximum of 444. At 1440p Medium, 366 FPS with a range of 311-421. At 4K Medium, 337 FPS with 286-387. The minimum frame rates scale consistently with averages, suggesting stable performance without sudden drops.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its highest performance. Low settings produce 453 FPS average, the best result across all configurations. High settings yield 380 FPS, Medium achieves 386 FPS, and Ultra produces 373 FPS. The Medium settings measurement includes a minimum of 328 FPS and maximum of 444 FPS, showing a 116 FPS spread between minimum and maximum.

At 2560x1440, performance remains strong but shows the GPU's increasing role. Low settings deliver 429 FPS, High produces 360 FPS, Medium achieves 366 FPS, and Ultra yields 354 FPS. The Medium setting records a minimum of 311 FPS and maximum of 421 FPS, a 110 FPS range. The narrower spread compared to 1080p suggests more consistent frame pacing at higher resolution.

At 3840x2160, the system maintains playable frame rates but with observable declines. Low settings produce 398 FPS, High delivers 321 FPS, Medium achieves 337 FPS, and Ultra yields 305 FPS. The Medium setting shows a minimum of 286 FPS and maximum of 387 FPS, representing a 101 FPS spread. This remains well above the 240Hz threshold for high-refresh gaming.

The settings scaling at each resolution shows interesting patterns. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 80 FPS (453 vs 373), representing an 17.7% penalty for maximum visual quality. At 1440p, the gap narrows to 75 FPS (429 vs 354), a 17.5% difference. At 4K, the spread reduces to 93 FPS (398 vs 305), a 23.4% penalty. This indicates that Ultra settings impose a proportionally larger cost at 4K due to increased pixel shading demands.

The data confirms this system excels at competitive settings. Even at 4K Ultra, the 305 FPS average exceeds the refresh rate of most gaming monitors. The combination of the i5-11400F's 4.40 GHz boost clock and the RX 6750 XT's 2600 MHz boost clock creates a pairing that never drops below 286 FPS in any tested configuration, making it suitable for high-refresh-rate competitive play.