Valorant

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

The measured FPS data reveals a telling pattern as resolution climbs from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At 1080p Low settings, this combo produces 453.8 FPS, which drops to 417.7 FPS at 1440p and 334.4 FPS at 4K. That is a 26.3% reduction from 1080p to 4K at Low settings — noticeable, but far from catastrophic. The story changes at Ultra settings, where the same resolution climb yields 292.6 FPS at 1080p, 245.5 FPS at 1440p, and 198.2 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 4K at Ultra is 32.3%, a larger relative decline than at Low.

What does this imply about the limiting component? At Low settings, the GPU has less work per frame, so the CPU's capability becomes more prominent. The fact that 4K Low still delivers 334.4 FPS — only 26.3% below 1080p Low — suggests that even at 4K, the frame rate is high enough that the CPU's 6 cores and 12 threads are keeping pace. However, the larger percentage drop at Ultra settings hints that the GPU is starting to become more involved as pixel workload increases. The GTX 1070's 8 GB of GDDR5 memory and 256-bit bus width are being exercised more at 4K, yet the frame rates remain far above typical display refresh rates.

The data indicates a system that is not heavily constrained at any tested resolution. The smallest absolute gap between resolutions occurs at Ultra: 292.6 FPS at 1080p versus 198.2 FPS at 4K, a 94.4 FPS difference. At Low, the gap is 119.4 FPS. This inverted pattern — where higher settings show a smaller absolute FPS drop — suggests that the GPU is not the sole bottleneck at Low settings; the CPU's single-thread performance, evidenced by its 3dmark_single_thread score of 868, likely contributes to the ceiling. As resolution increases, the GPU takes on more of the load, making the system more balanced.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 brings 8 GB of GDDR5 memory running at 2002 MHz with a 256-bit bus, yielding 256.3 GB/s of bandwidth. In Valorant, a competitive FPS with relatively modest texture requirements, this memory configuration proves ample. Even at 4K Ultra, where the highest texture filtering and shadow details are active, the average FPS stays above 198. The GPU's base clock of 1506 MHz and boost clock of 1683 MHz, combined with 1920 shading units, deliver 6.463 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. This is enough headroom for a game that prioritizes responsiveness over photorealistic rendering.

The GTX 1070's percentile ranking of 51 against all GPUs places it in the middle of the pack. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER, which has an average score of 12504, just 1.4% higher, and the NVIDIA Quadro K4200 at 12241, which is 0.7% lower. This positioning explains why the GPU can handle 4K at 198 FPS but cannot push much beyond that. The pixel rate of 107.7 GPixel/s and texture rate of 202.0 GTexel/s are the physical limits that manifest at higher resolutions.

The data shows that the GTX 1070 is not the primary constraint in this pairing. At 1080p Low, the 453.8 FPS figure is likely beyond what the GPU alone can sustain if the CPU were weak. The 6.463 TFLOPS compute capacity is sufficient for Valorant's stylized graphics, which rely more on draw calls and CPU-side game logic than on heavy pixel shading. The GPU's 64 ROPs and 120 TMUs provide balanced throughput for a game that runs at high frame rates. The 8 GB VRAM is never a limiting factor here, as even the most demanding preset does not cause a significant frame rate collapse.

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

The measured rows provide a clear picture of the trade-offs between settings presets. At 1080p, the jump from Low (453.8 FPS) to Medium (319.2 FPS) costs 134.6 FPS, a 29.7% reduction. Moving from Medium to High (305.2 FPS) only costs 14 FPS, a 4.4% drop. The step from High to Ultra (292.6 FPS) costs another 12.6 FPS, a 4.1% decline. This pattern suggests that Medium to High is the efficiency sweet spot at 1080p: the visual improvements from Low to Medium are substantial, while the performance penalty from Medium to High is modest.

At 1440p, the same relative pattern holds. Low delivers 417.7 FPS, Medium drops to 274.9 FPS, High to 261.4 FPS, and Ultra to 245.5 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 142.8 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is just 15.9 FPS. At 4K, Low gives 334.4 FPS, Medium 217.4 FPS, High 204.9 FPS, and Ultra 198.2 FPS. The Medium-to-High delta at 4K is only 12.5 FPS.

The data suggests that Ultra is not worth the performance cost relative to High. Across all three resolutions, the difference between High and Ultra ranges from 12.6 to 15.9 FPS, while the difference between Low and Medium ranges from 117 to 142.8 FPS. For a competitive FPS where frame rate consistency matters, High settings offer the best balance: it captures most of the visual fidelity of Ultra while staying measurably ahead in FPS. Medium is a viable alternative for players who prioritize maximum frame rates without dropping to the lowest visual quality. Low settings remain the choice for pushing the absolute highest FPS, but the 453.8 FPS at 1080p is already far beyond what most displays can show.

FAQ

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

A: The highest measured average FPS is 453.8 at 1920x1080 with Low settings. At 1440p Low, it drops to 417.7, and at 4K Low it is 334.4.

Q: How much FPS is lost when moving from 1080p to 4K at Ultra settings?

A: At Ultra settings, the average FPS goes from 292.6 at 1080p to 245.5 at 1440p and 198.2 at 4K. The total drop from 1080p to 4K is 94.4 FPS.

Q: Does the GTX 1070's 8 GB VRAM ever become a limiting factor in this game?

A: The data shows no evidence of VRAM limitations. Even at 4K Ultra, the average FPS remains at 198.2, indicating that the 8 GB GDDR5 memory is sufficient for Valorant's requirements.

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

A: The combo ranks 1369 out of 1650 tested combinations, placing it in the lower-middle portion of the database.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more likely the bottleneck at 1080p Low?

A: The 1080p Low result of 453.8 FPS, combined with the CPU's 3dmark_single_thread score of 868, suggests the CPU's single-thread performance is a significant factor. The GPU is less stressed at Low settings, so the CPU likely limits the absolute maximum frame rate.

Q: What is the performance difference between Medium and High settings?

A: At 1080p, Medium gives 319.2 FPS and High gives 305.2 FPS, a 14 FPS difference. At 1440p, the gap is 13.5 FPS (274.9 vs 261.4). At 4K, the gap is 12.5 FPS (217.4 vs 204.9).

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

The Intel Core i5-11400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on Rocket Lake architecture, manufactured on Intel's 14 nm process. Its base clock of 2.60 GHz and boost clock of 4.40 GHz provide the single-thread headroom that competitive FPS games demand. The CPU's 3dmark_single_thread score of 868 and 3dmark_2_threads score of 1691 indicate strong per-core performance, which is critical for Valorant's game logic and draw call processing. The 12 MB of shared L3 cache and 512 KB L2 per core help reduce memory latency, which matters in fast-paced scenarios.

The CPU's multithreaded capability is solid but not exceptional. Its cinebench_r23_multicore score of 14372 and passmark_multithread score of 16908 show that the 12 threads can handle background tasks, but Valorant does not heavily scale beyond a few cores. The 3dmark_16_threads score of 5619 and 3dmark_max_threads score of 5652 are nearly identical, indicating that the 12-thread configuration is well-utilized but that additional threads would not yield significant gains. The CPU's percentile ranking of 75 against all CPUs places it ahead of most processors, with its nearest rival being the AMD Ryzen 7 5700U at an average score of 17189, essentially tied at 0% delta.

The data reveals that the CPU is the more capable component in this pairing relative to the GPU. The GTX 1070 ranks at the 51st percentile among GPUs, while the i5-11400F ranks at the 75th percentile among CPUs. This imbalance explains the measured FPS behavior: at 1080p Low, where the GPU has less work, the CPU's 4.40 GHz boost clock allows the system to reach 453.8 FPS. At 4K Ultra, the GPU's lower relative performance becomes the limiting factor, capping FPS at 198.2. The CPU's 65 W TDP and 14 nm process are modest by modern standards, but they are sufficient for a game that responds well to high clock speeds rather than sheer core counts.

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

At 1920x1080, the full settings sweep shows: Low 453.8 FPS, Medium 319.2 FPS, High 305.2 FPS, and Ultra 292.6 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 161.2 FPS, which represents a 35.5% reduction. The step from Medium to High is the smallest increment at 14 FPS, while the step from Low to Medium is the largest at 134.6 FPS. This suggests that Low is in a different performance tier entirely, while Medium, High, and Ultra are clustered together.

At 2560x1440, the results are: Low 417.7 FPS, Medium 274.9 FPS, High 261.4 FPS, and Ultra 245.5 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 172.2 FPS, a 41.2% reduction. The Medium-to-High gap narrows to 13.5 FPS. Compared to 1080p, every setting loses roughly 70-90 FPS, with the largest absolute loss at Low (36.1 FPS) and the smallest at Ultra (47.1 FPS). The relative ordering remains consistent, showing that resolution scaling does not change the performance hierarchy of settings.

At 3840x2160, the results are: Low 334.4 FPS, Medium 217.4 FPS, High 204.9 FPS, and Ultra 198.2 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 136.2 FPS, a 40.7% reduction. The Medium-to-High gap is 12.5 FPS, and the High-to-Ultra gap is 6.7 FPS, the smallest in the entire dataset. At 4K, the diminishing returns of higher settings become more apparent: pushing from High to Ultra yields less than 7 FPS, while the Low-to-Medium jump still costs 117 FPS. This pattern indicates that the GPU's pixel throughput becomes the limiting factor at 4K, making the CPU's role less significant at this resolution.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific pairing of the Intel Core i5-11400F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 ranks 1369 out of 1650 tested combinations in Valorant. That places it in the 83rd percentile of the performance distribution — meaning roughly 83% of tested combos outperform it. Given that the CPU ranks at the 75th percentile and the GPU at the 51st percentile, the combo's overall ranking is dragged down by the GPU's middling position. The data shows that the CPU is capable of driving higher frame rates, but the GPU's 6.463 TFLOPS compute and 256.3 GB/s bandwidth set the ceiling.

The ranking implies that while this combo delivers excellent absolute FPS — never dropping below 198.2 in any tested configuration — it is not competitive with higher-end pairings. The GTX 1070's nearest rivals include the GTX 1650 SUPER at 12504 average score (1.4% higher) and the Quadro K4200 at 12241 (0.7% lower), which helps contextualize the GPU's position. For Valorant specifically, the game's low system requirements mean that even a mid-pack GPU can produce high frame rates, but the combo ranking shows that many other CPUs and GPUs can achieve even higher numbers.

The rank of 1369 out of 1650 suggests that users of this combo will experience smooth gameplay, but they will not be at the top of the leaderboard in terms of raw performance. The 4K Ultra result of 198.2 FPS is still above the refresh rate of most mainstream monitors, while the 1080p Low result of 453.8 FPS is exceptional. The bottleneck is clearly the GPU, as the CPU's 75th percentile ranking indicates it has more headroom than the 51st percentile GPU can utilize. Upgrading the GPU would likely improve the combo's rank significantly, while upgrading the CPU would yield diminishing returns given the current GPU's limitations.