Valorant

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i7-13700K paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 occupies the 1591st position out of 1650 tested combinations for Valorant. This places the combo in the bottom 4% of all tested systems, a surprisingly low standing for a processor that itself ranks in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs. The disconnect is telling: the CPU is a top-tier part, but the pairing with the GTX 1650 drags the entire system down to near the bottom of the database.

Benchmark results indicate the data is measured, not estimated, which makes the ranking more meaningful. The combo's position suggests that while the processor can push extremely high frame rates, the graphics card becomes the decisive factor in determining overall performance class. The i7-13700K's nearest rivals show how close the CPU competition is at the top — the Core i7-13700KF scores 47334, a negligible 0.1% delta, while the AMD EPYC 4364P trails by 0.3% and the Intel Core i9-12900F sits 0.4% behind. The AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 5945 leads by 0.5%. These tiny margins confirm the CPU is performing at its expected level; the ranking problem lies elsewhere.

For the GPU, the GTX 1650 sits in the 43rd percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 8713. Its nearest rivals include the RTX 3050 A Mobile at 8746 (0.4% ahead), the AMD Radeon 550X at 8749 (0.4% ahead), the Quadro P2200 at 8671 (0.5% behind), and the Radeon Pro WX 5100 at 8761 (0.5% ahead). These deltas are all within half a percent, meaning the GTX 1650 is performing right at its expected level. The combination of a top-7% CPU with a mid-pack GPU produces a system that ranks far lower than the processor alone would suggest.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 brings 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock runs at 1485 MHz, boosting to 1665 MHz, with memory clocked at 2001 MHz (8 Gbps effective). The card's 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs provide a pixel rate of 53.28 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 93.24 GTexel/s. FP32 performance sits at 2.984 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 5.967 TFLOPS.

In Valorant, the GPU's memory capacity and bandwidth become relevant at higher resolutions. The 4 GB frame buffer is adequate for the game's art style, which is not texture-heavy compared to modern AAA titles. The card's 12 nm Turing architecture, built by TSMC with 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The lack of RT cores and tensor cores is irrelevant for Valorant, which does not use ray tracing or DLSS.

The GTX 1650's percentile ranking of 43 means it outperforms fewer than half of all GPUs in the database. Its average benchmark score of 8713, with a PassMark G3D score of 7880 and a GeekBench OpenCL score of 39112, confirms it is a modest performer. The card's 75 W TDP and lack of power connectors make it an efficient, low-power solution, but efficiency does not translate to high frame rates in competitive shooters. The measured FPS data shows the GPU can handle Valorant at playable speeds, but the margins between settings presets reveal where its limits lie.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i7-13700K is a 16-core, 24-thread processor based on Raptor Lake architecture, manufactured on Intel's 10 nm process. It runs at a 3.40 GHz base clock, boosting to 5.40 GHz, with a 125 W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The processor supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration, with ECC support, and connects via PCIe Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes.

The CPU's benchmark scores are exceptional. Cinebench R23 multicore reaches 39000, with a single-core score of 5505. Geekbench multicore hits 17731, and single-core 2850. PassMark multithread scores 45887, with single-thread at 4333. The 3DMark scores show strong scaling: 10717 with 16 threads, 8193 with 8 threads, 4469 with 4 threads, and 2262 with 2 threads, plus 1136 single-thread. The processor's 93rd percentile ranking among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 47282, confirms its position near the top of the stack.

For Valorant, the CPU's single-thread performance is particularly relevant. The game is known to be sensitive to single-core speed, and the i7-13700K's 5.40 GHz boost clock, combined with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 5505, provides a strong foundation. The 24 threads are more than sufficient for a game that typically uses fewer than 8 threads. The processor's nearest rivals all score within 0.5% of each other, meaning any of these CPUs would deliver nearly identical performance in CPU-bound scenarios. The data shows the CPU is not the bottleneck in this combo — the measured FPS across resolutions indicates the GPU limits frame rates well before the processor's headroom is exhausted.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its highest frame rates. Low settings produce an average of 286 FPS, Medium 190 FPS, High 179 FPS, and Ultra 170.8 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is substantial at 96 FPS, while the difference between Medium and High is only 11 FPS, and High to Ultra is 8.2 FPS. This pattern suggests diminishing returns as settings increase, with the GPU becoming more heavily utilized at each step.

Moving to 2560x1440, average FPS drops across all presets. Low settings yield 242.1 FPS, a 15.3% decrease from 1080p. Medium falls to 157.3 FPS (17.2% lower), High to 150.9 FPS (15.7% lower), and Ultra to 143.1 FPS (16.2% lower). The relative consistency of these percentage drops indicates a balanced scaling pattern, though the absolute numbers remain high enough for competitive play at all settings.

At 3840x2160, the frame rates decrease further but remain playable. Low settings average 196.9 FPS, a 31.2% drop from 1080p. Medium averages 130.1 FPS (31.5% lower), High 120.2 FPS (32.8% lower), and Ultra 112.9 FPS (33.9% lower). The 4K Low result of 196.9 FPS is still well above the 144 Hz refresh rate common in gaming monitors, while 4K Ultra at 112.9 FPS approaches but does not reach that threshold.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K reveals the limiting component. At Low settings, 1080p produces 286 FPS, 1440p produces 242.1 FPS, and 4K produces 196.9 FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p is a 15.3% reduction, and from 1440p to 4K is an 18.7% reduction. This gradual decline suggests the GPU is the primary constraint, as the CPU has sufficient headroom to maintain high frame rates even at lower resolutions.

At Ultra settings, the pattern is similar but steeper. 1080p Ultra averages 170.8 FPS, 1440p Ultra 143.1 FPS (16.2% lower), and 4K Ultra 112.9 FPS (21.1% lower from 1440p). The increasing percentage drop at higher settings and resolutions indicates the GPU is working progressively harder as pixel count and graphical load increase. The GTX 1650's 4 GB VRAM and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth are likely becoming limiting factors at 4K, particularly at Ultra settings where texture detail and effects demand more memory bandwidth.

The data shows that resolution scaling is not linear. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 115.2 FPS (40.3%), while at 4K the difference is 84 FPS (42.7%). This consistency suggests the GPU's performance ceiling is being approached at higher settings, with the CPU providing ample headroom throughout. For players targeting 144 Hz displays, the combo can achieve this at 1080p Low (286 FPS), 1080p Medium (190 FPS), 1080p High (179 FPS), 1080p Ultra (170.8 FPS), and 1440p Low (242.1 FPS). At 1440p Medium, the 157.3 FPS average still exceeds 144 Hz, but 1440p High (150.9 FPS) and Ultra (143.1 FPS) fall just short.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured rows, the optimal preset depends on the target refresh rate and resolution. For 1080p displays, all settings presets deliver playable frame rates, with even Ultra averaging 170.8 FPS. The best experience per the data is High settings at 1080p, which yields 179 FPS — sufficient for 144 Hz displays while retaining better visual quality than Low or Medium. The jump from Low to Medium costs 96 FPS (a 33.6% reduction), while Medium to High costs only 11 FPS (5.8% reduction). The High preset provides a good balance between visual fidelity and performance.

For 1440p, the data suggests Low or Medium settings for competitive play. Low averages 242.1 FPS, which exceeds even 240 Hz displays, while Medium at 157.3 FPS supports 144 Hz monitors. High at 150.9 FPS barely misses the 144 Hz mark, and Ultra at 143.1 FPS falls below it. Players with 144 Hz 1440p monitors should choose Medium, as it provides a comfortable margin above the refresh rate while offering better visuals than Low. Those with 240 Hz displays would need to drop to Low.

At 4K, the combo becomes more constrained. Low settings average 196.9 FPS, which supports 144 Hz displays. Medium averages 130.1 FPS, which is playable but below 144 Hz. High and Ultra at 120.2 FPS and 112.9 FPS respectively are playable for casual gaming but not ideal for competitive play at high refresh rates. For 4K, Low settings provide the best experience per the measured data, delivering the highest frame rate and maintaining a large margin over the 144 Hz threshold. Medium is acceptable for players who prioritize visuals over frame rate, but the 66.8 FPS drop from Low to Medium is significant.

The overall recommendation is to match settings to the display's refresh rate. For 1080p, High provides the best balance. For 1440p, Medium is optimal for 144 Hz displays. For 4K, Low is the only preset that maintains high refresh rates. The combo's strength lies in its ability to deliver competitive frame rates at lower settings, while higher settings at higher resolutions push the GTX 1650 toward its limits.