Valorant

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

The Intel Core i5-12400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Alder Lake architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process. It carries a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. Its cache layout includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The chip supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory through a dual-channel bus, and it connects via PCIe Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes.

In Valorant, the CPU's single-thread performance is the dominant factor, and the data reflects that. The 3DMark single-thread score of 909 and the Cinebench R23 single-core result of 2332 indicate strong per-core capability. The passmark single-thread score of 3481 reinforces this picture. The chip's boost clock of 4.40 GHz is what matters most in a game where frame rates can exceed 500 FPS at lower settings.

The multi-threaded results are also relevant, though less critical. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 16518 and the 3DMark max-threads score of 5912 show that the 6-core design handles parallel workloads well, but Valorant's engine is primarily latency-sensitive. The 12 threads provide headroom for background tasks and anti-cheat software, which can otherwise cause frame-time spikes.

The CPU's percentile ranking of 77 versus all processors places it in the upper tier of desktop chips. Its average benchmark score of 19221 is nearly identical to the Intel Core i7-8700K, which scores 19210 — a delta of just 0.1%. This means the 12400F delivers roughly the same overall compute capability as that older flagship, but with a more modern architecture and higher boost clock. The AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS scores 19364, a -0.7% delta, so the 12400F trails that mobile chip by a hair. The AMD EPYC 7773X scores 18979, putting the 12400F 1.3% ahead.

What does this mean for Valorant? At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 532 FPS average. That number is so high that the CPU's single-core speed is clearly the bottleneck — the RTX 2060 could likely render even more frames if the processor allowed it. The fact that dropping from Ultra to Low settings at 1080p increases FPS by 209.4 (from 322.6 to 532) suggests the CPU can push well beyond what the GPU can draw at higher settings, but at Low settings the game becomes almost purely CPU-bound.

FAQ

Q: How does the Core i5-12400F compare to its nearest CPU rival, the Intel Core i7-8700K?

A: The two processors have nearly identical average benchmark scores: the 12400F scores 19221 while the 8700K scores 19210, a delta of 0.1%. This means in overall compute, they are effectively tied, despite the 12400F being a newer 6-core/12-thread design with a 4.40 GHz boost clock.

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

A: The highest measured average is 532 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The next highest is 462 FPS at 2560x1440 Low, and 370.8 FPS at 3840x2160 Low.

Q: Does the RTX 2060's VRAM capacity affect performance in Valorant?

A: The GPU has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory with a 192-bit bus and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth. In Valorant, the data shows no VRAM-related bottlenecks — even at 4K Ultra, the combo maintains 219.4 FPS, suggesting that 6 GB is sufficient for this game's texture and geometry demands.

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

A: The combo ranks 1231 out of 1650 tested combos in Valorant. This places it in the lower-middle portion of the database, which is notable given the high absolute FPS numbers — it suggests that many other CPUs and GPUs achieve even higher frame rates.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, Low settings produce 532 FPS while Ultra produces 322.6 FPS — a difference of 209.4 FPS. This indicates that settings have a substantial impact on the frame rate, but even at Ultra the combo exceeds 300 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more limiting in this game?

A: The data suggests the CPU is the primary limiter. At 1080p Low, the combo hits 532 FPS, but at 4K Low it still reaches 370.8 FPS — a drop of only 161.2 FPS despite a 4x increase in pixel count. This indicates the GPU has ample headroom and the CPU's single-thread speed caps performance.

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

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern: resolution scaling has a relatively modest impact on frame rates in Valorant, which is characteristic of a CPU-bound game. At Low settings, the combo delivers 532 FPS at 1080p, 462 FPS at 1440p, and 370.8 FPS at 4K. That's a drop of 70 FPS from 1080p to 1440p (a 13.2% reduction) and a further 91.2 FPS from 1440p to 4K (a 19.7% reduction). Across the full 1080p-to-4K range, the frame rate drops by 161.2 FPS, or 30.3%.

At Ultra settings, the pattern is similar but with lower absolute numbers. The combo achieves 322.6 FPS at 1080p, 275.2 FPS at 1440p, and 219.4 FPS at 4K. That's a 47.4 FPS drop from 1080p to 1440p (14.7%) and a 55.8 FPS drop from 1440p to 4K (20.3%). The total drop from 1080p Ultra to 4K Ultra is 103.2 FPS, or 32.0%.

The percentage drops are remarkably consistent across settings — around 30-32% from 1080p to 4K. This consistency is telling. If the GPU were the primary bottleneck, we would expect a much larger percentage drop when moving to 4K, because the pixel fill rate requirement quadruples. Instead, the frame rate only drops by about a third, which indicates that both the CPU and GPU are contributing to performance, but the CPU's frame-generation limit is the ceiling.

Consider the Medium settings: 355.2 FPS at 1080p, 305.7 FPS at 1440p, and 245.2 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 4K is 110 FPS, or 31.0%. High settings show 336.9 FPS at 1080p, 287.8 FPS at 1440p, and 229.1 FPS at 4K — a 107.8 FPS drop, or 32.0%. The uniformity of these percentages — never falling below 30% or exceeding 32% — strongly suggests that the CPU's rendering thread is the limiting factor, with the GPU able to keep pace even at 4K.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Intel Core i5-12400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 ranks 1231 out of 1650 tested combos in Valorant. This is a surprisingly low ranking given the absolute FPS numbers — the combo produces over 500 FPS at 1080p Low, which would be considered exceptional in almost any other game. The data implies that Valorant's benchmark database is dominated by extremely high-end configurations, likely with flagship CPUs and GPUs that push frame rates even higher.

The rank of 1231 out of 1650 places this combo in the 25th percentile of tested configurations. This means roughly 75% of tested combos perform better in this game. The delta between this combo and the top performers is not visible in the provided data, but the rank itself tells a story: in a competitive FPS where frame rates above 500 are common, the 12400F's single-thread performance, while strong, is not elite. The RTX 2060's role is secondary, as the CPU's boost clock of 4.40 GHz and passmark single-thread score of 3481 place it in a capable but not top-tier position.

Given that the combo's CPU has a percentile of 77 versus all CPUs and the GPU has a percentile of 58 versus all GPUs, the Valorant ranking of 1231/1650 suggests that this game disproportionately rewards CPU performance. The CPU is well above average in the broader market, yet the combo still ranks in the bottom quarter for this game — meaning the top quartile of Valorant configurations likely feature CPUs with even higher single-thread scores. The GPU percentile of 58 is less relevant here, as the RTX 2060's 6 GB VRAM and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth are more than sufficient for Valorant's modest graphical demands.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 is built on the Turing architecture using the TU106 chip, manufactured on TSMC's 12 nm process. It has 1920 shading units, 120 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, along with 30 RT cores and 240 tensor cores. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1365 MHz and a boost clock of 1680 MHz. Memory consists of 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth with an effective memory speed of 14 Gbps.

In Valorant, the GPU's role is to render a relatively simple scene at very high frame rates. The measured FPS data shows that the RTX 2060 is rarely the bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the combo hits 532 FPS — a figure that approaches the limits of the CPU's frame generation capability. The GPU's DirectX 11 passmark score of 110 and DirectX 12 score of 53 indicate solid but not outstanding API performance, yet Valorant's engine favors lower-overhead rendering paths.

The GPU's 6 GB VRAM capacity is not a limiting factor in this game. Even at 4K Ultra, the combo maintains 219.4 FPS, and there is no evidence in the data of texture thrashing or memory pressure. The bandwidth of 336.0 GB/s is also ample, as Valorant's art assets are relatively lightweight compared to modern AAA titles. The pixel rate of 80.64 GPixel/s and texture rate of 201.6 GTexel/s are sufficient to handle 4K resolution at over 200 FPS.

The RTX 2060's percentile ranking of 58 versus all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 16074, puts it in the middle of the pack. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 7600S, scores 15996 (a 0.5% delta), while the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M and Pro 5700 both score 16351 (a -1.7% delta). This means the RTX 2060 sits slightly below those AMD professional chips in raw compute, but in Valorant, the differences are likely masked by the CPU limit. The GPU's FP32 performance of 6.451 TFLOPS is more than adequate for this game's shader complexity.

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

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions and four settings levels, providing a comprehensive picture of performance. At 1920x1080, the combo achieves 532 FPS on Low, 355.2 FPS on Medium, 336.9 FPS on High, and 322.6 FPS on Ultra. The gap between Low and Medium is substantial — 176.8 FPS — while the gap between Medium and High is only 18.3 FPS, and High to Ultra is 14.3 FPS. This suggests that the Low preset disables certain rendering features that have an outsized impact on frame rate, while the difference between Medium and Ultra is comparatively small.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates are 462 FPS on Low, 305.7 FPS on Medium, 287.8 FPS on High, and 275.2 FPS on Ultra. The Low-to-Medium gap narrows to 156.3 FPS, while Medium-to-High is 17.9 FPS and High-to-Ultra is 12.6 FPS. The pattern is consistent: Low settings provide a significant boost, while the higher presets cluster together.

At 3840x2160, the combo delivers 370.8 FPS on Low, 245.2 FPS on Medium, 229.1 FPS on High, and 219.4 FPS on Ultra. The Low-to-Medium gap is 125.6 FPS, Medium-to-High is 16.1 FPS, and High-to-Ultra is 9.7 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra at 4K is 151.4 FPS, narrower than at 1080p (209.4 FPS) or 1440p (186.8 FPS). This indicates that at higher resolutions, the GPU becomes more of a factor, compressing the differences between settings.

Looking at resolution scaling within each setting: Low settings drop from 532 to 462 to 370.8 FPS as resolution increases. Medium drops from 355.2 to 305.7 to 245.2. High drops from 336.9 to 287.8 to 229.1. Ultra drops from 322.6 to 275.2 to 219.4. In every case, the frame rate remains above 200 FPS even at 4K Ultra, which is remarkable for a mid-range GPU from 2019.

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

The measured data provides clear guidance on settings selection for this combo in Valorant. The primary question is whether the massive FPS gain from Low settings is worth the visual trade-off. At 1080p, Low delivers 532 FPS versus 355.2 on Medium — a 176.8 FPS advantage. In a competitive FPS where higher frame rates can reduce input latency, this difference is meaningful. However, the jump from Low to Medium likely includes visual improvements that some players may prefer.

For competitive play, the Low preset at 1080p is the clear choice. The 532 FPS average exceeds the refresh rate of virtually all gaming monitors, ensuring that the display is never the bottleneck. Even at 1440p, Low delivers 462 FPS, which is still above the 360 Hz ceiling of the fastest esports displays. The data suggests that players using 1080p or 1440p monitors with high refresh rates should select Low to maximize frame rate headroom.

For players who prioritize visual quality over raw frame rate, the Medium preset offers a balanced experience. At 1080p, Medium produces 355.2 FPS — still well above 240 Hz — while likely providing better shadow quality, texture filtering, and anti-aliasing than Low. The drop from Medium to High is only 18.3 FPS at 1080p, so High is nearly as fast while offering additional graphical fidelity. Ultra provides the best visuals at 322.6 FPS (1080p), 275.2 FPS (1440p), and 219.4 FPS (4K), all of which are playable but may not fully saturate the fastest monitors.

The data shows that the Low preset provides a disproportionate FPS benefit compared to the other presets. The gap between Low and Medium (176.8 FPS at 1080p) is over nine times larger than the gap between High and Ultra (14.3 FPS). This suggests that the Low preset disables expensive effects like dynamic shadows or post-processing that have a significant performance cost. For most players, the Medium preset is likely the sweet spot, offering a 355.2 FPS average at 1080p while retaining enough visual features to maintain situational awareness. At 4K, all presets deliver above 200 FPS, so Ultra is viable for players with 4K displays who prefer visual polish over maximum frame rates.