Valorant

# Valorant on Intel Core i5-12600KF + Intel Arc B570

The Intel Core i5-12600KF paired with the Intel Arc B570 delivers exceptional frame rates in Valorant, with measured results showing average FPS ranging from 207 at 4K Ultra to 508 at 1080p Low. The data indicates this combination ranks 2227th out of 2883 tested combos in this game, placing it in the lower-middle portion of the database despite the raw numbers being very high. This suggests that while the absolute performance is strong, many other hardware combinations achieve even higher frame rates in this highly optimized title.

Resolution Scaling

Examining the measured FPS across resolutions reveals how this system responds to increasing pixel counts. At 1080p High, the combo produces 319 average FPS. Moving to 1440p High drops that to 272 FPS, a reduction of approximately 15%. At 4K High, the average falls to 217 FPS, representing a 32% decrease from the 1080p figure. The pattern across all settings shows consistent scaling — for instance, Low settings yield 508 FPS at 1080p, 434 FPS at 1440p, and 347 FPS at 4K. That translates to a 14.6% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 31.7% drop from 1080p to 4K.

The scaling behavior suggests that at lower resolutions, the CPU and GPU are both contributing to the frame rate ceiling, but the gap between 1440p and 4K is wider than between 1080p and 1440p. Specifically, from 1440p to 4K at High settings, the drop is 55 FPS (272 to 217), which is a 20.2% reduction. From 1080p to 1440p, the drop is 47 FPS (319 to 272), a 14.7% reduction. This widening gap at higher resolutions indicates the GPU becomes progressively more limiting as pixel count increases, though even at 4K the system never drops below 207 FPS in any tested preset.

The data implies that for competitive play at 1080p, this system has abundant headroom — the 508 FPS Low result is nearly double the 4K Ultra figure. At 1440p, the performance remains excellent, with even Ultra settings holding 259 FPS. The 4K results, while still high by most standards, show the Arc B570 starting to feel the load, with the gap between Low (347 FPS) and Ultra (207 FPS) at 4K being 140 FPS, compared to a 204 FPS gap at 1080p between Low and Ultra (508 vs 304).

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B570 brings specific hardware characteristics that shape these results. The GPU has 10 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus, delivering 380.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base and boost clocks are both set at 2500 MHz, which is unusual in that there is no clock boost headroom — the card runs at a flat 2500 MHz across the board. The memory clock is 2375 MHz, or 19 Gbps effective. With 2304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 80 raster output units, the GPU's compute capacity is rated at 11.52 TFLOPS FP32 and 23.04 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio).

For Valorant specifically, the game is known to be lightweight on GPU resources, and the measured data confirms this. Even at 4K Ultra, the system maintains 207 FPS, which is far above the refresh rate of most monitors. The GPU's pixel rate of 200.0 GPixel/s and texture rate of 360.0 GTexel/s help explain why higher resolutions do not cause catastrophic drops. The 80 ROPs are sufficient for the fill-rate demands of a game like Valorant, which uses relatively simple geometry and effects compared to AAA titles.

The VRAM capacity of 10 GB is more than adequate for Valorant's needs, even at 4K with Ultra settings. The fact that the minimum FPS recorded at Medium settings is 194 at 4K, 243 at 1440p, and 285 at 1080p suggests the GPU is never starved for memory bandwidth or capacity. The 380 GB/s bandwidth appears sufficient, as the frame time consistency (implied by the min-max ranges) remains tight. The GPU's 65th percentile ranking among all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 20556, places it in the mid-range tier, yet its performance in Valorant is disproportionately high compared to its synthetic benchmark standing.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides clear guidance on settings optimization. At 1080p, the difference between Low (508 FPS) and Ultra (304 FPS) is 204 FPS, meaning the user sacrifices about 40% of the frame rate for maximum visual quality. The Medium preset at 1080p yields 335 FPS, which is only 16 FPS less than High (319 FPS) — interestingly, High actually delivers slightly fewer frames than Medium, suggesting the High preset may enable specific visual features that cost more performance than the step from Medium to High would imply.

For competitive play, Low settings at any resolution provide the highest frame rates, with 508 FPS at 1080p being the peak measured result. However, the Medium preset offers a compelling balance — at 1080p it produces 335 FPS with a minimum of 285 FPS, which still exceeds 240 Hz refresh rates. At 1440p, Medium delivers 286 FPS (minimum 243), and at 4K, Medium holds 228 FPS (minimum 194). The Ultra preset, while visually superior, drops below 300 FPS at 1080p (304 FPS) and below 250 FPS at 1440p (259 FPS), which may be noticeable on high-refresh-rate displays.

The data suggests that for most players, Medium is the sweet spot — it maintains high frame rates while presumably offering better visual fidelity than Low. The minimum FPS values at Medium (194 at 4K, 243 at 1440p, 285 at 1080p) indicate that even in demanding scenes, the frame rate stays above 144 Hz at all tested resolutions. High settings are only marginally worse than Medium at 1080p (319 vs 335) but show a larger gap at 4K (217 vs 228), making Medium the more consistent choice across the board.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete dataset shows 12 measured configurations. At 1920x1080, the results are: Low 508 FPS, Medium 335 FPS (min 285, max 385), High 319 FPS, and Ultra 304 FPS. This creates a spread of 204 FPS between the lowest and highest presets. Notably, the step from Low to Medium costs 173 FPS, while Medium to High costs only 16 FPS, and High to Ultra costs just 15 FPS. This indicates that the first quality tier above Low carries the heaviest performance penalty.

At 2560x1440, the results are: Low 434 FPS, Medium 286 FPS (min 243, max 329), High 272 FPS, and Ultra 259 FPS. The spread narrows to 175 FPS. The Low to Medium penalty is 148 FPS, Medium to High is 14 FPS, and High to Ultra is 13 FPS. The relative performance between settings remains similar to 1080p, but the absolute frame rates drop by roughly 15-17% across all presets.

At 3840x2160, the results are: Low 347 FPS, Medium 228 FPS (min 194, max 263), High 217 FPS, and Ultra 207 FPS. The spread is 140 FPS. Low to Medium costs 119 FPS, Medium to High costs 11 FPS, and High to Ultra costs 10 FPS. The diminishing returns from Medium upward become even more pronounced at 4K. The minimum FPS at 4K Medium (194) is the lowest recorded value in the entire dataset, but it still clears 190 FPS, which is above most display refresh rates.

Comparing resolutions at the same settings: Low goes from 508 (1080p) to 434 (1440p) to 347 (4K). Medium goes from 335 to 286 to 228. High goes from 319 to 272 to 217. Ultra goes from 304 to 259 to 207. The performance degradation from 1080p to 4K ranges from 31.7% (Low) to 31.9% (Ultra), showing that the resolution impact is consistent regardless of quality preset.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS achievable with this combination?

A: The highest measured average FPS is 508, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only configuration that exceeds 500 FPS in the dataset.

Q: Does this system maintain 240 FPS at 4K resolution?

A: No. At 4K, only the Low preset (347 FPS) exceeds 240 FPS. Medium averages 228 FPS, High averages 217 FPS, and Ultra averages 207 FPS. The minimum FPS at 4K Medium is 194, which falls below the 240 FPS threshold.

Q: How does the Medium preset compare to High at 1440p?

A: Medium at 1440p averages 286 FPS with a minimum of 243 FPS and maximum of 329 FPS. High at 1440p averages 272 FPS. Medium is 14 FPS faster on average, suggesting the Medium preset offers better performance with potentially similar visual quality in this title.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between 1080p and 4K at Ultra settings?

A: At 1080p Ultra, the average is 304 FPS. At 4K Ultra, the average is 207 FPS. This represents a 97 FPS difference, or approximately a 32% reduction when moving from 1080p to 4K.

Q: Is the Intel Arc B570 the limiting factor in this setup for Valorant?

A: The data suggests the GPU becomes more limiting at higher resolutions, but even at 4K Ultra, the system produces 207 FPS. The CPU's single-thread performance (3dmark_single_thread score of 1016) and the game's known CPU sensitivity suggest both components contribute, but the GPU handles the resolution scaling well given the 65th percentile ranking.

Q: What is the lowest minimum FPS recorded in the dataset?

A: The lowest minimum FPS is 194, recorded at 3840x2160 with Medium settings. The next lowest is 243 at 1440p Medium. All other configurations either have no recorded minimum or have higher minimum values.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12600KF is a 10-core, 16-thread processor based on the Alder Lake architecture, manufactured on Intel's 10 nm process. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, with a 125 W TDP. The cache layout includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. Its synthetic benchmarks show a 3dmark_single_thread score of 1016, a geekbench_singlecore score of 2157, and a cinebench_r23_singlecore score of 3302. The multi-threaded scores include cinebench_r23_multicore at 23391 and passmark_multithread at 27575.

For Valorant, the single-thread performance is critical, and the data reflects this. The 3dmark_2_threads score of 1995 indicates strong dual-core performance, which matters for a game that typically uses 2-4 threads. The processor's 79th percentile ranking among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 27799, places it above most processors. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-10900K (avg score 27872, delta of -0.3%), AMD Ryzen 5 8500GE (avg score 27712, delta of 0.3%), AMD Ryzen 7 6800U (avg score 27887, delta of -0.3%), and AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D (avg score 27896, delta of -0.3%). The i5-12600KF's average score is within 0.3% of these rivals, indicating comparable CPU capabilities.

The CPU's role in Valorant becomes apparent when examining the frame rates at 1080p Low. The 508 FPS result is likely near the CPU's limit for this game, as the GPU at such a low resolution and quality setting would not be heavily taxed. The fact that 4K Low (347 FPS) is substantially lower than 1080p Low (508 FPS) suggests the GPU does begin to matter even at Low settings when resolution increases. However, the relatively small gaps between Medium, High, and Ultra at any given resolution (e.g., 16 FPS between Medium and High at 1080p) point to the CPU maintaining high frame rates regardless of GPU load. The core count of 10 with 16 threads provides ample headroom for background tasks while gaming, and the 20 MB L3 cache aids in keeping frequently accessed data close to the cores.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination ranks 2227th out of 2883 tested combos in Valorant, placing it in the 22.7th percentile of all tested systems. This ranking might seem counterintuitive given the high absolute frame rates, but it reflects that Valorant is an extremely well-optimized game where even modest hardware can achieve very high FPS. The top 2226 combos include processors with higher single-thread scores and GPUs that may not necessarily be faster in real-world gaming but score higher in synthetic benchmarks.

The combo rank of 2227 suggests that while this system delivers excellent playable performance — never dropping below 194 FPS even at 4K Medium — the database includes many combinations that push even higher. The CPU's 79th percentile ranking and the GPU's 65th percentile ranking both indicate mid-to-upper-tier hardware, yet the combination lands in the lower half of the Valorant-specific ranking. This discrepancy highlights that Valorant's performance ceiling is extremely high, and the difference between 2227th and 1st place may be a matter of 100-200 FPS at 1080p Low, not a fundamental playability gap.

The data implies that for competitive esports, frame rates beyond 500 FPS are achievable with this system, but the database shows other combos reaching even higher. The GPU's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile (avg score 20534, delta 0.1%), Intel Arc A750 (avg score 20582, delta -0.1%), NVIDIA Quadro M4000M (avg score 20480, delta 0.4%), and AMD Radeon R9 M390X (avg score 20662, delta -0.5%). These rival GPUs are within 0.5% of the Arc B570's average benchmark score, yet their in-game performance in Valorant may differ due to driver optimizations and architectural differences. The Arc B570's position in the combo ranking suggests that its performance in Valorant is competitive but not class-leading, and the CPU's 10 cores and 16 threads are sufficient to feed the GPU without bottlenecking at any tested resolution or setting.