Valorant

FAQ

Q: Is the Intel Core i5-9400 + Intel Arc B370 combo capable of running Valorant at high refresh rates?

A: Yes. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, this combo produces an average of 299 FPS. Even at the most demanding tested preset (Ultra at 4K), it maintains an average of 122 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its closest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Core i5-9400 has an average benchmark score of 2254. It sits within 0.4% of the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 (2246) and is 0.3% behind the Intel Core i7-10710U (2248). Its closest rival, the Intel Core i7-1068NG7, scores 2259, which is 0.2% higher.

Q: What kind of memory configuration does this CPU support?

A: The Core i5-9400 supports DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration, providing a memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. It does not support ECC memory.

Q: What is the GPU's memory situation?

A: The Intel Arc B370 uses system-shared memory. Its memory type, bus width, and bandwidth are all listed as "System Shared" or "System Dependent," meaning the VRAM allocation depends on the system's RAM.

Q: How does the GPU's raw 3DMark score compare to similar graphics solutions?

A: The Arc B370 scores 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad (DX12). This is 0.2% higher than the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186) and 0.5% higher than the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190). It is 1.4% ahead of the AMD FirePro M2000 (1168).

Q: At which resolution does the combo cross the 240 FPS threshold?

A: The measured data shows that only at 1920x1080 with Low settings does the average FPS (299) exceed 240. At 2560x1440 with Low settings, the average FPS is 255, which also crosses this threshold.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-9400 and the Intel Arc B370 ranks 2645 out of 2883 tested combos in Valorant. This places it in the lower percentile of all possible pairings, indicating that while it is far from the top-tier performance ceiling, it is not at the very bottom either. The rank suggests that there are over 2600 combinations that deliver higher average frame rates in this specific title.

This ranking is consistent with the individual component standings. The CPU sits in the 47th percentile when compared to all CPUs, and the GPU is in the 5th percentile when compared to all GPUs. The GPU's low percentile is a significant drag on the combo's overall position. The CPU is a mid-pack performer, but the GPU is clearly a limiting factor for high-end play. The data shows that this pairing is not designed for maximum competitive advantage in Valorant; it is a combination that provides playable frame rates without being a leaderboard-topping performer.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-9400 is a 6-core, 6-thread processor based on the Coffee Lake architecture. It has a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. This is a desktop processor with a 65 W TDP, fitting into the Intel Socket 1151. It features 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and a shared 9 MB L3 cache. The processor is manufactured on Intel's 14 nm process node.

In the context of Valorant, a game that is often considered CPU-sensitive, the i5-9400's six physical cores are a relevant asset. With six threads, it can handle the game's primary game logic and render thread duties without being overwhelmed. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 6629, and its single-core score is 935, which gives an indication of its processing power. The Geekbench results are 5141 (multi-core) and 1389 (single-core). The combined average benchmark score is 2254, placing it in the 47th percentile of all CPUs.

The CPU's performance relative to its nearest rivals is very tight. It is within 0.4% of the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 and the Intel Core i7-10710U. This suggests that in CPU-bound scenarios, swapping between these processors would yield nearly identical frame rates. The data indicates that the i5-9400 provides a solid foundation for Valorant, but its performance is not exceptional. The boost clock of 4.10 GHz is sufficient for the game's single-threaded demands, while the six cores provide enough headroom for background tasks and game overhead. The 9 MB of shared L3 cache is another factor that helps with the game's data access patterns.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of how this combo scales across resolutions and settings. The results are consistent: lower settings and lower resolutions yield higher frame rates, as expected.

1920x1080 (Full HD):

• Low: 299 FPS average
• Medium: 197 FPS average (167 min, 226 max)
• High: 187 FPS average
• Ultra: 178 FPS average

At 1080p, the combo is clearly capable of high-refresh-rate gaming. The jump from Low to Medium is a significant 102 FPS drop, but the Medium preset still delivers nearly 200 FPS. The difference between Medium, High, and Ultra is more modest, with a 19 FPS gap between Medium and Ultra. This suggests that the GPU is not heavily stressed at this resolution, and the CPU is able to feed it sufficient data.

2560x1440 (Quad HD):

• Low: 255 FPS average
• Medium: 168 FPS average (143 min, 193 max)
• High: 160 FPS average
• Ultra: 152 FPS average

Moving to 1440p shows a similar pattern. The Low preset still provides a very high 255 FPS average. The drop from Low to Medium is again substantial (87 FPS). The scaling from Medium to Ultra is less severe, with a 16 FPS difference. The minimum FPS recorded at Medium settings (143) suggests that the frame rate can dip, but it remains well above the 100 FPS mark.

3840x2160 (4K Ultra HD):

• Low: 204 FPS average
• Medium: 134 FPS average (114 min, 154 max)
• High: 128 FPS average
• Ultra: 122 FPS average

At 4K, the GPU's limitations become more apparent. The Low preset still manages an average of 204 FPS, which is impressive, but the higher presets drop to the 122-134 FPS range. The minimum FPS at Medium is 114, which is still playable but shows the system is working harder. The data shows a clear plateau at 4K for the higher settings, indicating that the Arc B370's compute resources are the primary constraint here.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is a graphics solution based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on a 3 nm process node. It has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The GPU features 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 render output units. It also includes 10 ray tracing cores. The pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 6.144 TFLOPS, and FP16 performance is 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1). The TDP is a very low 25 W, and it uses no power connectors.

The most notable aspect of this GPU is its memory configuration. It uses system-shared memory, with a bandwidth that is "System Dependent." This means its performance is directly tied to the speed and architecture of the system's main RAM. This is a departure from dedicated VRAM solutions and can impact performance, especially at higher resolutions where memory bandwidth demands increase.

The GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad score is 1184, which places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. This is a very low ranking, suggesting it is a low-power integrated-class part. Its nearest rivals are older discrete cards like the ATI Radeon HD 5770 and the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, which are within 0.5% of its score. This context is important: while the Arc B370 is a modern part, its raw performance is comparable to graphics hardware from over a decade ago.

In Valorant, the GPU's role becomes more pronounced as resolution increases. At 1080p, the CPU is likely the primary bottleneck, as the FPS differences between settings are relatively small. However, at 4K, the GPU's pixel throughput and memory bandwidth become limiting factors. The data shows that the difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is 82 FPS, which is a much larger relative drop than at 1080p (121 FPS). The system-shared memory design means that the GPU competes with the CPU for memory bandwidth, which can cause frame time spikes in demanding scenes.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the target refresh rate and resolution.

For 1080p gaming, the Medium preset is the sweet spot. It delivers an average of 197 FPS, which is sufficient for most 144Hz monitors, while providing better visual fidelity than Low. The High and Ultra presets offer only marginal FPS reductions (187 and 178 FPS respectively), so if a 240Hz monitor is the target, dropping to Low (299 FPS) is the only way to fully utilize it. For a balanced experience, Medium is recommended as it provides nearly double the FPS of the High preset's minimum frame rate.

For 1440p gaming, the Low preset is the clear choice for high-refresh-rate monitors, with an average of 255 FPS. If visual quality is more important than raw FPS, the Medium preset (168 FPS) is still viable for 144Hz displays. The High (160 FPS) and Ultra (152 FPS) presets are close, but they do not offer a significant visual upgrade over Medium based on the performance data. The minimum FPS at Medium is 143, which means the system can occasionally dip below 144 FPS.

For 4K gaming, the Low preset is the only option that provides a high refresh rate experience, with an average of 204 FPS. The Medium preset (134 FPS) is adequate for 120Hz displays, but its minimum FPS of 114 means it can drop below that threshold. The High (128 FPS) and Ultra (122 FPS) presets are best reserved for content consumption rather than competitive play, as they hover around the 120 FPS mark. The data shows that the system is not strong enough at 4K to maintain high FPS with enhanced visual settings.

In summary, this combination is best utilized with lower settings at higher resolutions, or medium settings at 1080p. The data shows that the GPU's performance ceiling is reached quickly when visual fidelity is increased, making it a system best suited for esports-level settings rather than AAA-quality graphics.