Valorant

The Intel Core i5-12400 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT delivers exceptionally high frame rates in Valorant, with average FPS figures that remain above 300 even at 4K Ultra settings. This combination of a 6-core/12-thread Alder Lake processor and a 12 GB RDNA 2 graphics card produces a result that is far beyond the refresh rate capabilities of most displays, indicating a massive performance headroom for competitive play.

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

The Intel Core i5-12400 is a 6-core, 12-thread processor from the Alder Lake-S generation, featuring a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. Its benchmark profile places it in the 77th percentile among all tested CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 19850. The data shows that this processor sits within a tight competitive cluster: it is 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i7-9700, 0.4% ahead of the Intel Core i5-11600K, and trails the Intel Core i7-8700 by 0.2% and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX by 0.4%. These negligible deltas suggest that the i5-12400's raw compute capability is essentially on par with those older or more specialized parts, but its modern architecture and high single-thread performance are what matter for Valorant's engine.

The measured FPS data reveals that the CPU is the primary driver of performance at lower resolutions. At 1080p Low settings, the combo reaches 526.1 FPS, which is the highest measured average across all tested configurations. This is a clear indicator that the game's frame rate is being dictated by the processor's ability to feed the GPU with draw calls and physics updates. The i5-12400's 18 MB of shared L3 cache and 3dmark single-thread score of 910 are particularly relevant, as Valorant is known to be heavily dependent on single-core throughput. The 12 threads provide ample parallelism for background tasks and game logic, but the single-thread score is what allows the frame rate to scale to such extreme heights. The data implies that even with a more powerful GPU, this processor would not become the bottleneck until well past the 500 FPS mark in this title.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT is a RDNA 2.0 architecture GPU with 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its boost clock is rated at 2600 MHz, with a game clock of 2495 MHz. The GPU's benchmark results place it in the 79th percentile among all GPUs, with an average score of 35327. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 5600M (0.2% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Mobile (0.3% behind), the AMD Radeon 880M (0.9% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 (1.3% behind). These comparisons show that the RX 6750 XT is a strong performer in synthetic tests, but in Valorant, its role is secondary to the CPU.

The GPU's contribution becomes more apparent as resolution and settings increase. While the CPU handles the low-resolution extremes, the GPU's 12 GB VRAM and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth are more than sufficient for Valorant's modest texture and shader requirements. The data shows that at 4K Ultra, the average FPS drops to 301.4, which is still exceptionally high but represents a 42.7% decrease from the 1080p Low result. This indicates that the GPU is taking on more of the rendering workload at higher resolutions, though it never becomes a limiting factor in a way that would cause frame rates to fall below the 300 FPS threshold. The GPU's FP32 performance of 13.31 TFLOPS and pixel rate of 166.4 GPixel/s are far more than this game requires, and the data suggests that the RX 6750 XT is effectively operating well below its maximum capacity, even at 4K Ultra.

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

The measured FPS rows provide a clear picture of how settings impact performance. At 1080p, the difference between Low (526.1 FPS) and Ultra (433.7 FPS) is 92.4 FPS, which is a 17.6% drop for maximum visual fidelity. The Medium preset at 1080p yields 448.1 FPS, which is only 14.6% lower than Low but offers noticeably better visuals. At 1440p, the gap narrows slightly: Low produces 502.6 FPS, while Ultra drops to 379.0 FPS, a 24.6% reduction. The Medium preset at 1440p (418.7 FPS) provides a balanced compromise, being 16.7% slower than Low but retaining higher texture quality.

For competitive play, the data suggests that the Low preset is the optimal choice, as it maximizes frame rate and minimizes input latency. However, for players with high-refresh-rate monitors capped at 360 Hz or 480 Hz, the Medium or High presets (440.6 FPS and 448.1 FPS at 1080p, respectively) still exceed those refresh rates, allowing for improved visual clarity without sacrificing the ability to hit the display's maximum refresh. At 4K, the High preset (315.8 FPS) is the most interesting option, as it delivers a 4.8% improvement over Ultra (301.4 FPS) while still maintaining over 300 FPS, making it the recommended choice for users with 4K displays seeking both quality and performance. The Ultra preset at 4K (301.4 FPS) is only marginally slower and could be used if visual consistency is prioritized over the small FPS gain.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific combination of the Intel Core i5-12400 and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT ranks 670th out of 1650 tested combos in Valorant. This places it in the 59.4th percentile of all tested configurations, meaning it is faster than roughly 59% of the combos in the database. Given the absolutely massive FPS figures observed (lowest average is 301.4 FPS at 4K Ultra), this rank might seem surprisingly low. The explanation lies in the fact that many higher-ranked combos likely feature even more powerful CPUs, such as flagship Intel Core i9 or AMD Ryzen 9 processors, which can push frame rates even higher in this CPU-bound title.

The rank of 670 indicates that while this combo is exceptionally fast in absolute terms, there is still a significant population of test configurations that achieve higher frame rates. The data implies that the i5-12400's position in the 77th CPU percentile, combined with the RX 6750 XT's 79th GPU percentile, yields a mid-to-high-tier overall result. The combo's performance is not limited by the GPU, as evidenced by the huge FPS numbers, but rather by the CPU's single-thread ceiling compared to more expensive processors. For the vast majority of users, the difference between 526 FPS and, say, 600 FPS is imperceptible, but the database ranking reflects the raw numerical hierarchy.

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

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

A: The highest average FPS is 526.1, measured at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: Does the GPU become a bottleneck at 4K resolution?

A: No. The lowest average FPS at 4K is 301.4 (Ultra settings), which is still above 300 FPS, indicating the GPU handles the load without becoming a limiting factor.

Q: How does the i5-12400 compare to the Intel Core i7-9700 in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The i5-12400 has an average benchmark score of 19850, which is 0.1% higher than the Intel Core i7-9700's score of 19831.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Low settings produce 502.6 FPS while Ultra produces 379.0 FPS, a difference of 123.6 FPS.

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

A: Yes, the data shows the combo achieves 301.4 FPS at 4K Ultra, demonstrating that the 12 GB GDDR6 memory and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth are more than adequate for the game.

Q: What percentile does this GPU rank in among all GPUs, and who is its closest rival?

A: The RX 6750 XT ranks in the 79th percentile, and its closest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 5600M, which is 0.2% ahead in average benchmark score.

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

The complete dataset of measured average FPS values provides a detailed view of performance scaling:

At 1920x1080, the results are: Low at 526.1 FPS, Medium at 448.1 FPS, High at 440.6 FPS, and Ultra at 433.7 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a steady decline, with the largest single-step drop occurring between Low and Medium (78.0 FPS), while the difference between High and Ultra is a mere 6.9 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the values are: Low at 502.6 FPS, Medium at 418.7 FPS, High at 396.0 FPS, and Ultra at 379.0 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 83.9 FPS, while the High to Ultra gap narrows to 17.0 FPS. This pattern suggests diminishing returns on visual quality for the FPS cost at higher settings.

At 3840x2160, the numbers are: Low at 465.8 FPS, Medium at 330.8 FPS, High at 315.8 FPS, and Ultra at 301.4 FPS. The most significant drop occurs between Low and Medium (135.0 FPS), which is a 29.0% reduction. From Medium to Ultra, the decline is more gradual, totaling 29.4 FPS.

The data reveals that the Low preset is consistently the fastest, with a 12.0% advantage over Medium at 4K, but only a 17.4% advantage at 1080p. The High preset is nearly identical to Ultra at 1080p (only 1.6% faster) but becomes more distinct at 4K, where it is 4.8% faster than Ultra.

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

The resolution scaling behavior provides critical insight into which component is limiting performance. From 1080p Low (526.1 FPS) to 4K Low (465.8 FPS), the frame rate drops by 60.3 FPS, or 11.5%. This relatively small decrease indicates that even at Low settings, the GPU is not being stressed heavily, and the CPU continues to be the primary driver. In contrast, from 1080p Ultra (433.7 FPS) to 4K Ultra (301.4 FPS), the drop is 132.3 FPS, or 30.5%. This larger percentage decline at Ultra settings shows that the GPU is taking on much more work as both resolution and settings increase.

The data suggests that at Low settings, the i5-12400's single-thread performance is the limiting factor, as the GPU can easily keep up even at 4K. The 11.5% drop from 1080p to 4K at Low is attributed to the increased pixel count that the GPU must process, but the CPU remains the bottleneck. At Ultra settings, the GPU's workload increases significantly, and the 30.5% drop from 1080p to 4K indicates that the RX 6750 XT is now contributing more to the overall frame time. However, even at 4K Ultra, the 301.4 FPS result proves that the GPU is not fully saturated, as its 79th percentile ranking and 12 GB VRAM are far beyond what Valorant demands.

The resolution scaling pattern points to a system where the CPU is the dominant factor at all tested settings. The fact that 4K Low (465.8 FPS) is still faster than 1080p Ultra (433.7 FPS) is a clear indication that settings changes have a more significant impact on the GPU load than resolution changes. This is typical for a CPU-bound game like Valorant, where the render thread is the primary bottleneck. The data implies that users upgrading from a 1080p display to a 4K display would see a modest FPS reduction at the same settings, but the system would still deliver frame rates far above any mainstream monitor's refresh rate, making this an excellent combo for high-refresh-rate gaming at any resolution.