Valorant

Valorant is a competitive FPS that often behaves differently from heavy AAA titles, and the measured data for the Intel Core i5-9400 + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER combination clearly illustrates this dynamic. The RTX 4080 SUPER is an exceptionally powerful GPU, while the i5-9400 is a six-core processor from an older generation, and the benchmark results show how this pairing performs across resolutions and settings. The data indicates that the CPU is the primary factor limiting frame rates in this specific title, as the GPU is rarely pushed to its full potential.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows that resolution scaling has a surprisingly muted effect on performance when moving from 1080p to 4K. At High settings, the average frame rate drops from 309 FPS at 1920x1080 to 293 FPS at 2560x1440, and then to 272 FPS at 3840x2160. This represents a decline of only approximately 12% from 1080p to 4K, which is a minimal reduction for such a significant increase in pixel count. The pattern is consistent across other settings, with Low settings showing a drop from 368 FPS at 1080p to 324 FPS at 4K, and Medium settings falling from 314 FPS to 276 FPS over the same range.

This shallow scaling curve is a strong indicator that the system is not GPU-bound at these resolutions. For most discrete graphics cards, the transition from 1080p to 4K typically results in a much larger performance penalty, often exceeding 30-40% as the rendering load quadruples. The fact that the RTX 4080 SUPER only sees a modest frame rate decrease suggests that it is not the bottleneck; instead, the processor is likely limiting the maximum achievable frame rate. The gap between the lowest and highest resolution at any given setting is only about 40-50 FPS, which is a relatively small absolute difference when frame rates are already above 260 FPS in every scenario.

The most telling aspect of the resolution scaling is that the performance headroom of the GPU is not being utilized. At 1080p, the GPU is being asked to render far fewer pixels than at 4K, yet the frame rate only improves by a fraction of what would be expected. This indicates that the CPU is unable to feed the GPU with enough frames to keep it fully occupied, a classic sign of a processor bottleneck. The data suggests that the limiting component is the processor regardless of resolution, meaning that users could potentially lower the resolution without seeing a massive frame rate increase, as the CPU remains the constraint.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER features 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 736.3 GB/s. Its boost clock is rated at 2550 MHz, and its FP32 compute throughput is 52.22 TFLOPS. These specifications make it a high-end card designed for demanding 4K gaming, but the benchmark results in Valorant show that its immense capabilities are largely underutilized. The GPU’s percentile rank is 86 among all GPUs, placing it in the top tier of available hardware, yet the frame rates observed are not indicative of a system that is being stressed by the GPU.

The card’s memory configuration and bandwidth are more than sufficient for a game like Valorant, which is not known for requiring massive amounts of video memory or bandwidth. With 16 GB of VRAM, the card has ample storage for textures and assets, even at 4K resolution. The measured frame rates show that the GPU can easily handle the rendering workload at all tested settings, as the average FPS remains above 260 even at the most demanding 4K Ultra preset. The GPU’s Passmark G3D score of 34245 further confirms its high level of performance, and its average benchmark score of 54209 places it in the 86th percentile, indicating it is faster than the vast majority of graphics cards.

The data suggests that the GPU role is to provide a stable and high frame rate ceiling, but this ceiling is never reached because the processor cannot keep up. The GPU’s performance is so far ahead of what the CPU can deliver that it essentially becomes secondary in this pairing. The differences between its nearest rivals, such as the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 which scores a deltaPct of -0.1% compared to the 4080 SUPER, are negligible, meaning the GPU itself is not a differentiating factor in these results. The frame rates are nearly identical across all settings because the GPU is not the limiting factor; it is waiting for instructions from the CPU.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-9400 is a six-core, six-thread processor based on the Coffee Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. Its L3 cache is 9 MB shared, and it has a TDP of 65 W. The processor’s benchmark scores place it in the 47th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 2254. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 6629, and its single-core score is 935, which are modest figures by modern standards. In Valorant, this processor’s role is critical, as the game is known to be sensitive to single-core performance, and the data shows that the CPU is the primary bottleneck in this configuration.

The evidence for the CPU bottleneck is clear when examining the frame rates across different settings. At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 368, which drops to 304 FPS at 1080p Ultra. This is a relatively small change of about 17%, indicating that the game’s graphical settings have little impact on the final frame rate. In a system where the GPU is the limiting factor, we would expect to see a much larger variance between Low and Ultra settings, often exceeding 50%. The fact that the frame rate is so consistent across settings suggests that the processor is reaching its limit in terms of how many frames it can prepare for the GPU to render.

The CPU’s performance is also reflected in its nearest rivals, which show it is closely matched with processors like the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 (deltaPct -0.2%) and the Intel Core i3-10305 (deltaPct -0.4%). This indicates that the i5-9400 is not a top-tier processor, and its age is showing in this test. The game’s engine likely relies heavily on the CPU for game logic and draw call preparation, and with only six threads, the i5-9400 can be saturated. The boost clock of 4.10 GHz helps in single-threaded scenarios, but the overall throughput is not sufficient to push the RTX 4080 SUPER to its limits. The data suggests that the CPU is the limiting component, and any performance gains from the GPU are capped by what the processor can deliver.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the recommended settings for this combination depend on the user’s priorities, but the data shows that the frame rate is relatively insensitive to graphical settings. At 1920x1080, the difference between Low (368 FPS) and Ultra (304 FPS) is 64 FPS, which is a noticeable gap but not a dramatic one. The Medium setting at 1080p yields 314 FPS, which is nearly identical to the High setting at 309 FPS. For users who prioritize competitive performance and higher frame rates, the Low preset offers the highest average FPS at all resolutions, with 368 FPS at 1080p, 349 FPS at 1440p, and 324 FPS at 4K.

However, the data also suggests that the visual quality can be increased with minimal performance cost. At 1080p, the High setting (309 FPS) is only about 16% slower than Low (368 FPS), but it likely provides a significantly better visual experience. Similarly, at 4K, the High setting (272 FPS) is only 19% slower than Low (324 FPS), which is a modest trade-off for improved graphics. The Ultra preset at 4K (267 FPS) is the most demanding, but it still maintains an average frame rate above 260 FPS, which is well above the refresh rate of most standard monitors.

Given that the CPU is the bottleneck, the best experience per the measured rows would be to use the High or Ultra preset, as the frame rate penalty is relatively small compared to the visual benefits. The Medium preset at 1080p (314 FPS) and 1440p (298 FPS) offers a balanced compromise, but the High preset is only slightly slower and likely looks better. For users with high-refresh-rate displays, the Low preset ensures the maximum frame rate, but the GPU is so capable that even the Ultra settings provide excellent performance. The data indicates that the user can afford to play at High or Ultra without sacrificing competitiveness, as the frame rates remain exceptionally high.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 1920x1080 with High settings?

A: The average FPS is 309, which is a high frame rate suitable for competitive play.

Q: Does the resolution significantly impact performance in Valorant?

A: No, the data shows a minimal impact. From 1080p to 4K at High settings, the average FPS drops from 309 to 272, a decrease of only about 12%.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU the limiting factor in this system?

A: The CPU is the limiting factor. The frame rates are similar across different settings and resolutions, indicating the processor cannot keep up with the GPU.

Q: Which preset provides the highest average FPS at 3840x2160?

A: The Low preset provides the highest average FPS at 324, compared to 267 FPS on Ultra.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded at 2560x1440 with Medium settings?

A: The minimum FPS is 253, with an average of 298 FPS.

Q: How does the Intel Core i5-9400 compare to its nearest rival, the Intel Core i7-1068NG7?

A: The i5-9400 has an average benchmark score of 2254, while the i7-1068NG7 has a score of 2259, making the i5-9400 about 0.2% slower.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of performance across all tested configurations. At 1920x1080, the average FPS ranges from 368 on Low to 304 on Ultra. The Medium preset shows an average of 314 FPS with a minimum of 267 and a maximum of 361. At 2560x1440, the frame rates are slightly lower, with Low averaging 349 FPS, High at 293 FPS, and Ultra at 288 FPS. The Medium preset at this resolution averages 298 FPS, with a minimum of 253 and a maximum of 342. At 3840x2160, the performance remains strong, with Low averaging 324 FPS and Ultra averaging 267 FPS. The Medium preset at 4K shows an average of 276 FPS, with a minimum of 235 and a maximum of 318.

The highest average FPS recorded is 368 at 1080p Low, while the lowest is 267 at 4K Ultra. The data shows that the frame rate variance between settings is generally consistent across resolutions, with Low always being the fastest and Ultra the slowest. The minimum FPS values are only provided for the Medium preset, which shows that even the lowest recorded frame rates (235 at 4K) are well above the refresh rate of most monitors. The average FPS for all configurations remains above 260, indicating that this system can handle Valorant at high performance levels regardless of the settings chosen.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-9400 + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER combination has a rank of 2939 out of 3708 tested combos in Valorant. This places it in the bottom 21% of all configurations, which is a surprising result given the high-end GPU. The ranking suggests that while the GPU is top-tier, the overall system performance is heavily dragged down by the older CPU. The data indicates that the combo’s performance is not representative of what the GPU alone could achieve, and the rank reflects the CPU bottleneck.

This rank is particularly notable because the RTX 4080 SUPER is in the 86th percentile of all GPUs, while the CPU is only in the 47th percentile. The disparity between the two components is the primary reason for the low ranking. The combo’s performance is likely similar to systems with much weaker GPUs but stronger CPUs, as the frame rate is limited by the processor. The data suggests that for Valorant specifically, the CPU is more important than the GPU, and this combo’s ranking highlights the importance of balancing components for this game. The rank of 2939 out of 3708 means there are 769 other combinations that perform better, which is a significant number, and it indicates that the i5-9400 is not a good match for the RTX 4080 SUPER in this title.