Valorant

Valorant is a competitive FPS where frame rate consistency and high averages directly impact input latency and aiming fluidity. The pairing of the Intel Core i5-14400F with the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT produces a dataset that is heavily CPU-bound at lower resolutions, while the GPU begins to assert its role only at 4K. The measured results across the 12 tested configurations show a 10-core, 16-thread Raptor Lake processor with a 2.50 GHz base and 4.70 GHz boost clock, paired with a RDNA 2.0 GPU featuring 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus and a 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. This combination sits at rank 543 out of 1650 tested combos in this game, placing it in the upper third of all systems cataloged.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K is modest in absolute terms but reveals a clear shift in bottleneck behavior. At 1080p Low, the system produces 567.9 FPS; at 1440p Low, it delivers 538.2 FPS; and at 4K Low, it still manages 499 FPS. This represents a 12.1% reduction from 1080p to 4K at Low settings, which is remarkably small for a resolution change of that magnitude. The scaling pattern suggests that at Low settings, the Intel Core i5-14400F’s single-thread performance — evidenced by its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3093 and Passmark single-thread score of 3723 — is the limiting factor, as the GPU has ample headroom to render frames without breaking a sweat.

Moving to High settings, the drop becomes more pronounced: 468.9 FPS at 1080p, 396.7 FPS at 1440p, and 316.9 FPS at 4K. The 1080p-to-4K reduction here is 32.4%, which is still unusually low for most games but indicates that the Radeon RX 6750 XT’s 2560 shading units and 40 ray accelerators are starting to engage with the higher-quality textures and effects. The gap between Low and High at 4K is 182.1 FPS, whereas at 1080p that gap is only 99 FPS. This widening differential confirms that the GPU’s compute resources — 13.31 TFLOPS FP32 and a texture rate of 416.0 GTexel/s — become progressively more relevant as pixel count rises.

Ultra settings show the steepest scaling curve: 444.9 FPS at 1080p, 378.5 FPS at 1440p, and 303.8 FPS at 4K. The 1080p-to-4K drop of 31.7% is nearly identical to High, suggesting that the additional overhead of Ultra over High is modest in this engine. The data indicates that even at 4K Ultra, the system never dips below 300 FPS, which is an extraordinary result for a competitive shooter. The limiting component at 1080p is unequivocally the CPU, as the 567.9 FPS ceiling at Low settings is far below what the GPU’s pixel rate of 166.4 GPixel/s could theoretically sustain.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT operates with a base clock of 2150 MHz, a game clock of 2495 MHz, and a boost clock of 2600 MHz. In Valorant, these clocks are rarely the bottleneck at 1080p; instead, the GPU’s 12 GB VRAM and 192-bit memory bus are more than sufficient for the game’s modest texture requirements. The memory runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective throughput, delivering that 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. At 4K Ultra, the GPU’s 64 ROPs and 160 TMUs are tasked with more work, yet the 303.8 FPS result shows that even this demanding setting leaves the card far from maxed out.

The GPU’s architecture is RDNA 2.0 on a 7 nm process from TSMC, with 17,200 million transistors on a 335 mm² die. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate support and Vulkan 1.4 API compatibility align well with Valorant’s engine, which leans on draw-call efficiency rather than raw pixel throughput. The benchmark data shows that the GPU’s percentile rank against all GPUs is 79, with an average benchmark 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), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 (1.3% behind), indicating that this card sits in a well-populated performance tier.

In this game, the GPU role is best described as a safety net. At 1080p, the CPU dictates the pace, and the GPU merely keeps up. At 4K, the GPU’s memory bandwidth and shading throughput become the primary drivers of the performance delta between settings. The fact that the 4K Low result (499 FPS) is higher than the 1080p Ultra result (444.9 FPS) is telling: resolution scaling is nearly free until the GPU is forced to process additional shading work, which only happens at higher presets.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-14400F and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT combination holds rank 543 out of 1650 tested combos in Valorant, placing it in the 67th percentile of all systems. This ranking is strong but not elite, reflecting the fact that Valorant rewards CPU single-thread performance above all else. The i5-14400F’s percentile versus all CPUs is 88, with an average benchmark score of 32508; its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-12800H (0% delta), the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 7645 (0.2% ahead), and the AMD Ryzen 7 250 (0.2% behind). This clustering indicates that the CPU is performance-competitive with a wide swath of modern processors.

The GPU’s percentile versus all GPUs is 79, with an average benchmark score of 35327. Its nearest rivals show a tight grouping: the AMD Radeon RX 5600M is 0.2% ahead, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Mobile is 0.3% behind, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is 1.3% behind. The delta between the CPU and GPU percentiles (88 vs. 79) suggests a slight CPU bias in this pairing, which is appropriate for Valorant. Combos ranked above 543 likely feature CPUs with higher single-core scores, such as those in the 90th percentile or above, but the data shows that this setup outperforms the majority of systems tested, making it a viable choice for high-refresh-rate monitors.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture across three resolutions and four settings tiers. At 1920x1080, the system delivers 567.9 FPS on Low, 480 FPS on Medium, 468.9 FPS on High, and 444.9 FPS on Ultra. The spread from Low to Ultra is 123 FPS, which is a 21.7% reduction in headroom. At 2560x1440, the results are 538.2 FPS on Low, 419.2 FPS on Medium, 396.7 FPS on High, and 378.5 FPS on Ultra. The Low-to-Ultra gap here is 159.7 FPS, or 29.7%. At 3840x2160, the numbers are 499 FPS on Low, 331.2 FPS on Medium, 316.9 FPS on High, and 303.8 FPS on Ultra.

The most striking observation is that the Low preset at 4K (499 FPS) outperforms the Ultra preset at 1080p (444.9 FPS) by 54.1 FPS. This indicates that the game’s Ultra settings impose a more significant per-pixel cost than a 4X resolution increase, which is unusual for modern titles. The Medium preset shows a consistent pattern of being roughly 10-15% faster than High across all resolutions, suggesting that the transition from Medium to High introduces a disproportionate amount of render work for minimal visual gain in this engine.

The delta between 1440p and 4K at Ultra is 74.7 FPS (378.5 to 303.8), while the delta between 1080p and 1440p at Ultra is 66.4 FPS (444.9 to 378.5). This near-linear scaling indicates that the GPU is not hitting a memory bandwidth wall, as the 432.0 GB/s figure is sufficient for the game’s data flow. The minimum FPS values are not recorded in this dataset, but the average FPS figures are all well above the 240 Hz threshold that competitive players typically target.

Settings Recommendations

The data strongly favors the Low preset for pure performance, but the High preset offers a better balance for competitive play. At 1080p, the Low preset’s 567.9 FPS is 99 FPS higher than High’s 468.9 FPS, but both are far beyond the refresh rate of any current monitor. The Medium preset at 480 FPS is a middle ground, but the 11.1 FPS difference between Medium and High at 1080p is negligible in practice. For players using a 240 Hz or 360 Hz display, the High preset at 1080p (468.9 FPS) provides more than enough headroom while delivering better visual clarity for spotting enemies at range.

At 1440p, the High preset’s 396.7 FPS remains above the 360 Hz threshold, making it the recommended choice for high-refresh-rate 1440p panels. The Ultra preset at 378.5 FPS is still playable but offers no meaningful competitive advantage over High. At 4K, the situation changes: the Low preset (499 FPS) is the only option that keeps the frame rate above 400 FPS, while High (316.9 FPS) and Ultra (303.8 FPS) are better suited for 240 Hz displays. The Medium preset at 4K (331.2 FPS) is a reasonable compromise, but the visual upgrade from Low to Medium is unlikely to be worth the 167.8 FPS loss.

For the optimal experience, the High preset at 1080p or 1440p is the data-driven recommendation. It delivers 468.9 FPS and 396.7 FPS respectively, both of which are far above the point of diminishing returns for any commercially available monitor. The Ultra preset is the least efficient choice, as it offers only a marginal visual improvement over High while costing 24 FPS at 1080p and 18.2 FPS at 1440p. The Low preset is best reserved for players who prioritize absolute frame rate over visual fidelity, but the benchmark results confirm that this hardware combination is overqualified for Valorant at any resolution and setting.