Valorant

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS rows for Valorant with this Intel Core i7-14700F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER combination reveal a clear pattern: the game is overwhelmingly GPU-bound at every settings preset, but the margin between presets is surprisingly narrow. The data shows that the Low preset delivers the highest average frame rates across all three resolutions, but the gains over Medium are modest. At 1920x1080, Low averages 647 FPS versus 552 FPS on Medium—a 95 FPS delta that represents roughly a 17% improvement. At 2560x1440, Low hits 614 FPS while Medium sits at 524 FPS, a 90 FPS gap. At 3840x2160, Low achieves 570 FPS against Medium's 486 FPS, an 84 FPS difference.

The Ultra preset, by contrast, produces the lowest average frame rates at every resolution: 534 FPS at 1080p, 507 FPS at 1440p, and 442 FPS at 4K. High sits between Medium and Ultra, with 543 FPS at 1080p, 515 FPS at 1440p, and 464 FPS at 4K. The spread from Low to Ultra at 1080p is 113 FPS (647 down to 534), which is substantial but does not represent a playability cliff—even the worst-case Ultra at 4K averages 442 FPS, far above any competitive threshold.

For competitive play, the data suggests Medium is the optimal balance. It delivers 552 FPS at 1080p and 524 FPS at 1440p—both well above 500 FPS—while providing the min FPS data point that Low and High lack. The Medium preset records a minimum of 469 FPS at 1080p, 445 FPS at 1440p, and 413 FPS at 4K, giving a clearer picture of worst-case performance. Low has no min FPS recorded, which makes its average less informative for frame-time consistency. Given that the delta between Low and Medium averages is 95 FPS at 1080p but the min FPS on Medium is still 469, the Medium preset offers the best combination of high average performance and documented floor stability. For players prioritizing absolute maximum frame rate above all else, Low is the choice, but the measured data indicates Medium provides nearly the same experience with better consistency metrics.

GPU Role

The RTX 4070 SUPER brings 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock runs at 1313 MHz, translating to 21 Gbps effective. The GPU's base clock is 1980 MHz with a boost clock of 2475 MHz. These specifications position the card with 7168 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 80 ROPs. The FP32 compute rating is 35.48 TFLOPS, with matching FP16 performance at a 1:1 ratio.

In Valorant, the GPU's role is paradoxical: the game is not graphically demanding by modern standards, yet the measured FPS scales noticeably with GPU settings. At 1080p, moving from Low to Ultra drops the average from 647 FPS to 534 FPS—a 17.5% reduction. At 4K, the same settings change drops from 570 FPS to 442 FPS, a 22.5% reduction. This scaling indicates the GPU's shading and rasterization throughput directly influences the frame rate, even though the absolute numbers remain extremely high.

The VRAM capacity of 12 GB is more than sufficient for Valorant at any resolution and settings combination. The game's texture and geometry requirements are modest, and the measured data shows no signs of memory capacity throttling—the FPS drops from Low to Ultra are consistent across resolutions, suggesting the bottleneck is compute-bound rather than memory-bound. The 504.2 GB/s bandwidth is ample for the game's data transfer needs, and the 192-bit bus width does not appear to constrain performance at any tested setting. The GPU's pixel rate of 198.0 GPixel/s and texture rate of 554.4 GTexel/s are the likely drivers of the settings-based FPS scaling, as higher presets increase both pixel shading and texture fetch workloads.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank for this specific CPU-GPU pairing in Valorant is 362 out of 3708 tested combinations. This places the system in the top 9.8% of all combos in the database, which is a strong showing given the game's competitive nature and the hardware's specifications. The rank reflects the balance between the 20-core, 28-thread i7-14700F and the RTX 4070 SUPER, where neither component acts as a severe bottleneck in this title.

The CPU's percentile ranking against all processors is 91, meaning it outperforms 91% of all CPUs in the database. The GPU's percentile against all GPUs is 83. The combination of a top-decile CPU with a top-quintile GPU yields a combo rank of 362nd, which indicates that Valorant is sensitive to both components but benefits more from the CPU's single-thread performance. The GPU's nearest rivals in aggregate benchmarks—the Quadro M6000 24 GB, RTX 5050 Mobile, and RTX 4090 Mobile—are within 1% average score, showing the 4070 SUPER sits in a dense performance cluster, but in Valorant specifically, the measured FPS results demonstrate the card's real-world advantage in a lightly-threaded, high-refresh-rate title.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS achievable with this combo?

A: The Low preset at 1920x1080 delivers the highest measured average at 647 FPS, followed by 614 FPS at 2560x1440 Low and 570 FPS at 3840x2160 Low.

Q: Does the Ultra preset provide any benefit over Medium?

A: No—the data shows Ultra produces lower average FPS than Medium at every resolution. At 1080p, Ultra averages 534 FPS versus Medium's 552 FPS; at 1440p, 507 versus 524; at 4K, 442 versus 486. There is no fidelity improvement that compensates for the consistent FPS loss.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded in the dataset?

A: The lowest documented minimum is 413 FPS, measured at 3840x2160 on the Medium preset. The Medium preset is the only setting with recorded min FPS values across all resolutions, showing 469 FPS at 1080p and 445 FPS at 1440p.

Q: How does the combo rank compare to other tested systems?

A: The combination ranks 362nd out of 3708 tested combos in Valorant, placing it in the top 9.8% of all systems in the database for this game.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU more influential in this game's results?

A: The data shows settings-based FPS scaling, which indicates GPU influence, but the CPU's 91st percentile ranking and the game's low graphical load suggest the CPU's single-thread performance is the primary enabler of the high frame rates. The i7-14700F's 5.40 GHz boost clock is critical.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 4K?

A: Low averages 570 FPS while Ultra averages 442 FPS at 3840x2160, a difference of 128 FPS or approximately 29% higher performance on Low.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear but moderate resolution scaling pattern. Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440, the average FPS on Low drops from 647 to 614, a 5.1% decrease. From 1440p to 4K, Low drops from 614 to 570, a 7.2% decrease. The total drop from 1080p to 4K on Low is 77 FPS, or 11.9%. This relatively small scaling factor—less than 12% total from 1080p to 4K—indicates that the GPU is not the primary limiting component at lower resolutions.

The Medium preset shows a similar pattern: 552 FPS at 1080p, 524 FPS at 1440p, and 486 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 4K is 66 FPS, or 12%. The High preset drops from 543 to 515 to 464, a total of 79 FPS, or 14.5%. The Ultra preset shows the largest relative scaling: 534 to 507 to 442, a total of 92 FPS, or 17.2%.

The modest resolution scaling—especially on Low and Medium—reveals that the CPU is heavily involved in maintaining frame rates. At 1080p Low, the system is likely CPU-limited, as the GPU has ample headroom to render frames faster but the CPU's per-thread performance caps the output. As resolution increases, the GPU workload grows, but even at 4K Ultra, the system still averages 442 FPS, suggesting the GPU has significant reserves. The i7-14700F's 5.40 GHz boost clock and 20-core/28-thread configuration are clearly sufficient to feed the GPU at 4K, but the FPS floor at 4K Ultra is still 442—far above any competitive display's refresh rate.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i7-14700F is a 20-core, 28-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake-R architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process with a 257 mm² die. Its base clock is 2.10 GHz with a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 33 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, and it carries an ECC memory capability. The processor's TDP is 65 W, and it launched with an MSRP of $359.

In Valorant, the CPU's role is critical. The game is known for being CPU-bound at high frame rates, and the measured data confirms this. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 647 FPS, but the fact that this is only 12% higher than 4K Low (570 FPS) indicates the CPU is the limiting factor at 1080p. The CPU's single-core performance, reflected in its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4958 and Geekbench single-core score of 2429, is what enables such high frame rates. The boost clock of 5.40 GHz provides the raw per-thread throughput needed for Valorant's game logic and physics calculations.

The CPU's multicore capabilities—35,122 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 41,317 in Passmark multithread—are less relevant for this title but ensure there is no system-level bottleneck from background tasks or other processes. The 28 threads provide ample headroom for streaming, voice chat, or recording software running concurrently without impacting game performance. The CPU's 91st percentile ranking among all CPUs and its proximity to rivals like the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X (0.6% higher average score) and AMD EPYC 7313P (0.8% higher) confirm that this is a top-tier processor, and the Valorant results reflect that positioning.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured FPS dataset for this combo across all resolutions and settings is as follows:

1920x1080:

• Low: average 647 FPS, no min/max recorded
• Medium: average 552 FPS, min 469 FPS, max 635 FPS
• High: average 543 FPS, no min/max recorded
• Ultra: average 534 FPS, no min/max recorded

2560x1440:

• Low: average 614 FPS, no min/max recorded
• Medium: average 524 FPS, min 445 FPS, max 602 FPS
• High: average 515 FPS, no min/max recorded
• Ultra: average 507 FPS, no min/max recorded

3840x2160:

• Low: average 570 FPS, no min/max recorded
• Medium: average 486 FPS, min 413 FPS, max 559 FPS
• High: average 464 FPS, no min/max recorded
• Ultra: average 442 FPS, no min/max recorded

The Medium preset is the only one with complete min/max data, providing the most detailed view of frame-time behavior. At 1080p Medium, the range from min to max is 166 FPS (469 to 635), representing a 35% spread. At 1440p, the range is 157 FPS (445 to 602), a 35% spread. At 4K, the range narrows to 146 FPS (413 to 559), a 35% spread. This consistent relative spread across resolutions suggests frame-time variance scales proportionally with average FPS, indicating a stable performance profile without unexpected spikes or drops.

The settings-based scaling at each resolution shows a consistent ordering: Low > Medium > High > Ultra. The delta between Low and Ultra grows with resolution: 113 FPS at 1080p, 107 FPS at 1440p, and 128 FPS at 4K. The delta between Medium and Ultra is smaller: 18 FPS at 1080p, 17 FPS at 1440p, and 44 FPS at 4K. The data indicates that the graphical settings have a more pronounced effect at 4K, where the GPU's workload increases more substantially, but even the worst-case scenario—Ultra at 4K—delivers 442 FPS average, ensuring a smooth experience on any display. The measured results show a system capable of far exceeding refresh rate requirements at all tested configurations, with the primary differentiation being the margin of headroom rather than playability.