Valorant

The Intel Core i5-9400 is a 6-core, 6-thread processor based on the Coffee Lake architecture, built on a 14 nm process. It has a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz, with 9 MB of shared L3 cache. In the context of Valorant, a game that is heavily dependent on single-thread performance for frame generation, this CPU’s specifications are directly relevant. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1125 places it in the 50th percentile among all CPUs, which is a mid-pack result. Its multi-core score of 7969 in Cinebench R23 is significantly stronger relative to its single-core showing, but Valorant’s engine typically does not scale perfectly with all six threads. The data indicates that this processor is capable of pushing high frame rates, but it may be the limiting factor in this pairing when settings are lowered and the GPU has more headroom.

The Core i5-9400’s nearest rivals in the benchmark database include the Intel Core i3-10305, which scores 2300 on average, a 0.2% difference. The Intel Core i3-1125G4 also scores 2299, another 0.2% difference. Interestingly, the Intel Xeon E-2134 scores 2295, showing a 0.4% delta, while the Intel Core i7-8809G scores 2319, which is 0.6% higher. These deltas are minimal, indicating that the i5-9400 sits in a tightly packed performance band. For Valorant, this means that the CPU’s 6 physical cores without hyper-threading provide a solid foundation, but it does not have the clock speed or architectural advantages of newer or higher-tier parts. The measured FPS data shows that even at 4K resolution, the system averages above 265 FPS on Ultra settings, which suggests the CPU is not a bottleneck at these frame rates in this specific game.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data for this combo provides a clear picture of how settings impact performance across resolutions. The data shows that the Low preset consistently delivers the highest average frame rates. At 1920x1080, the Low preset yields 368.1 FPS, which is 54 FPS higher than the High preset’s 311.4 FPS and 64 FPS higher than the Ultra preset’s 304.1 FPS. This pattern holds at every resolution. At 2560x1440, Low produces 349.9 FPS, while High and Ultra produce 293 and 289.4 FPS respectively. At 3840x2160, Low still leads with 323.2 FPS, compared to 272 for High and 265.2 for Ultra.

The Medium preset offers a middle ground, but it is much closer to High than to Low. At 1080p, Medium averages 314.7 FPS, which is only 3.3 FPS higher than High’s 311.4 FPS. The gap between Medium and Low is 53.4 FPS at 1080p. This suggests that the Medium preset is not providing a significant visual benefit over High for the performance cost, and that Low is the only setting that delivers a substantial frame rate advantage. For players seeking the absolute highest refresh rate compatibility, the Low preset is the clear choice. However, the High preset still delivers over 300 FPS at 1080p and 293 FPS at 1440p, which is more than sufficient for most high-refresh-rate monitors. The Ultra preset provides the most visual fidelity but costs about 64 FPS compared to Low at 1080p. Given that the lowest average FPS recorded across all tests is 265.2 (4K Ultra), every preset remains highly playable, so the choice depends on whether the user prioritizes maximum frame rates or visual quality.

FAQ

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

A: The highest measured average FPS is 368.1, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with the Low preset.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from Low to Ultra at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 349.9 FPS, while Ultra averages 289.4 FPS, representing a drop of 60.5 FPS or approximately 17.3%.

Q: Does the resolution have a significant impact on frame rates at the High preset?

A: Yes. At the High preset, the average FPS drops from 311.4 at 1080p to 293 at 1440p, and further down to 272 at 4K. The difference between 1080p and 4K is 39.4 FPS.

Q: Is the difference between Medium and High settings meaningful in this game?

A: The data shows that at 1080p, Medium averages 314.7 FPS, which is only 3.3 FPS higher than High’s 311.4 FPS. The performance difference is negligible, suggesting that High is a better choice than Medium for a similar performance cost.

Q: Can this system run Valorant at 4K with playable frame rates?

A: Yes. All measured 4K settings produce average frame rates above 265 FPS, with the Low preset reaching 323.2 FPS. The lowest result, 265.2 FPS on Ultra, is still well above typical 144Hz refresh rates.

Q: How does the CPU’s single-core performance compare to its rivals?

A: The Core i5-9400’s Cinebench R23 single-core score is 1125. Its nearest rivals in the database have average scores within 0.6% of its own average benchmark score, indicating comparable single-threaded capability.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-9400 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 holds the rank of 1319 out of 1650 tested combos in Valorant, placing it in the 80th percentile of all tested systems. This is a surprisingly low rank given the absolute frame rates measured, which are all above 265 FPS. To contextualize this rank, consider that the GPU alone sits in the 66th percentile of all GPUs, and the CPU sits in the 50th percentile of all CPUs. The combination of two mid-to-high-tier components should theoretically produce a higher rank, but the database suggests that many other combos achieve even higher frame rates in this specific title.

The rank indicates that while this system is certainly capable, there are 331 other tested combinations that outperform it. This is likely due to the CPU’s limitations. Valorant is known to be highly sensitive to CPU clock speed and memory latency. The i5-9400’s boost clock of 4.10 GHz is decent, but not exceptional by modern standards. The RTX 4060, with its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 272.0 GB/s bandwidth, is more than capable of handling this game at any resolution, as evidenced by the fact that frame rates remain above 265 FPS even at 4K Ultra. The bottleneck is therefore not the GPU, but the CPU’s ability to feed the GPU with draw calls and game logic updates. The measured FPS at 1080p Low is only 45 FPS higher than at 4K Low, which is a relatively small gap, further suggesting that the CPU is capping performance before the GPU can fully stretch its legs.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture and fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It has a base clock of 1830 MHz and a boost clock of 2460 MHz. The GPU features 3072 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, and 48 raster output units. Its memory subsystem consists of 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, providing 272.0 GB/s of bandwidth. With an FP32 compute throughput of 15.11 TFLOPS and a pixel rate of 118.1 GPixel/s, the RTX 4060 is a capable mid-range GPU. Its PassMark G3D score is 19545, placing it in the 66th percentile of all GPUs. The nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Radeon RX 6600M, which scores 23321 on average (0.6% higher), and the Intel Arc B580, which scores 23021 (0.7% lower). This shows the RTX 4060 is competitively positioned.

In Valorant, the GPU’s role is secondary to the CPU at lower resolutions, but it becomes more relevant as resolution increases. The data shows that at 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 265.2, which is only 38.9 FPS lower than at 1080p Ultra. This indicates that the GPU is still able to maintain high frame rates even at high resolutions. The RTX 4060’s boost clock of 2460 MHz is a key factor in maintaining these frame rates, as Valorant’s rendering workload is relatively light. The 8 GB VRAM is more than sufficient for this game, as Valorant’s texture requirements are modest. The GPU’s 272.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is also adequate, as the game does not require massive data throughput. Overall, the RTX 4060 provides ample graphics horsepower for Valorant, ensuring that the CPU is the primary determinant of final frame rates.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data is organized by resolution and settings, providing a complete picture of performance. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves the highest average of 368.1 FPS. The Medium preset follows with 314.7 FPS, which is 53.4 FPS lower than Low. High is nearly identical to Medium at 311.4 FPS, just 3.3 FPS slower. Ultra is the slowest at 1080p with 304.1 FPS, a 64 FPS deficit compared to Low. The spread between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 64 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the same hierarchy is maintained. Low produces 349.9 FPS, which is 18.2 FPS lower than its 1080p result. Medium averages 299.5 FPS, a 15.2 FPS drop from 1080p Medium. High averages 293 FPS, an 18.4 FPS drop from 1080p High. Ultra averages 289.4 FPS, a 14.7 FPS drop from its 1080p counterpart. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 60.5 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the resolution tax becomes more apparent but remains manageable. Low still leads with 323.2 FPS, which is 26.7 FPS lower than at 1440p. Medium achieves 278.7 FPS, a 20.8 FPS drop from 1440p. High achieves 272 FPS, a 21 FPS drop. Ultra achieves 265.2 FPS, a 24.2 FPS drop from 1440p. The gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is 58 FPS. Across all resolutions, the Low preset consistently provides a 15-20% performance uplift over the High preset, while the difference between Medium and High is consistently under 4 FPS, making High the more sensible choice for visual quality without a meaningful performance penalty.