Valorant

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data for Valorant with the Intel Core i7-14700KF and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 shows a remarkably flat performance curve as resolution increases. At Low settings, the average frame rate moves from 679 FPS at 1920x1080 to 644 FPS at 2560x1440, then to 598 FPS at 3840x2160. That represents a total drop of 81 FPS, or roughly 12% from the 1080p baseline. The pattern is consistent across all settings presets. At High settings, the average goes from 570 FPS at 1080p to 540 FPS at 1440p, then to 502 FPS at 4K — a 68 FPS total decline, about 12% as well. The Medium preset shows a similar trajectory: 579 FPS at 1080p, 549 FPS at 1440p, and 510 FPS at 4K. Ultra settings produce 560 FPS at 1080p, 532 FPS at 1440p, and 493 FPS at 4K.

The fact that frame rates remain above 490 FPS even at 4K Ultra tells us something important about the limiting component in this configuration. If the GPU were the primary bottleneck, we would expect a much steeper drop when pixel count quadruples from 1080p to 4K. A 4x increase in rendering load would typically halve or worse the frame rate on a GPU-bound scenario. Here, the worst case is only a 12% reduction. This indicates the CPU is heavily involved in setting the performance ceiling. Valorant is a competitive FPS that relies on rapid input response and consistent frame pacing, and the data strongly suggests the Intel Core i7-14700KF with its high boost clock of 5.60 GHz is the component keeping these frame rates elevated.

The delta between Low and Ultra settings at the same resolution further confirms the CPU-bound nature. At 1080p, the spread from Low at 679 FPS to Ultra at 560 FPS is 119 FPS — a 17.5% gap. At 4K, the same spread is 105 FPS, from 598 FPS to 493 FPS. The fact that this gap narrows only slightly as resolution increases suggests the GPU does start to take on more work at 4K, but the CPU remains the dominant factor. In a purely GPU-bound scenario, the gap between Low and Ultra would widen dramatically at higher resolutions because the GPU would be struggling with the added pixel load. Instead, the gap remains relatively stable, reinforcing the conclusion that the RTX 4080 has ample headroom in this title.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core i7-14700KF is a 20-core, 28-thread processor using the Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm process node. Its base clock is 3.40 GHz and its boost clock reaches 5.60 GHz. For a game like Valorant, which is known to be sensitive to single-thread performance, the boost clock is particularly relevant. The benchmark data supports this — in Cinebench R23 single-core, the CPU scores 6235 points, and in Geekbench single-core it scores 2578 points. These are strong raw single-thread numbers, and they translate directly into the high frame rates measured in this game.

The CPU's percentile ranking of 94 among all CPUs indicates it outperforms the vast majority of processors in general benchmark workloads. Its average benchmark score of 70163 places it within 0.2% of the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F (which scores 69996), and 0.4% above the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX (69875). It is also 0.9% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X (69515) in average score, and 1% behind the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K (70879). These narrow deltas suggest the i7-14700KF is competitively positioned at the top of the desktop CPU market, and the measured Valorant frame rates reflect that standing.

The multi-core performance is equally substantial. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44167 and the Geekbench multi-core score of 21462 show that this processor handles heavy threaded workloads easily. However, Valorant's frame rate results are more directly tied to the single-core performance. The fact that the CPU maintains over 490 FPS even at 4K Ultra, where the GPU is doing more work, indicates that the processor's clock speed and per-core efficiency are sufficient to feed the RTX 4080 without creating a bottleneck. The L3 cache is 33 MB shared, which helps with game data locality — a factor that can reduce memory latency in fast-paced FPS titles.

The 125 W TDP and unlocked multiplier (the part number SRN3Y supports overclocking) suggest headroom for enthusiasts, though the measured results already show near-elite performance. The CPU supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, which gives system builders flexibility, though the game's performance here is already at a level where memory bandwidth is unlikely to be the limiting factor.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 uses the AD103 chip on the Ada Lovelace architecture, built on a 5 nm process by TSMC. It has 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 716.8 GB/s. The base clock is 2205 MHz and the boost clock is 2505 MHz. For Valorant, the GPU's role is secondary to the CPU, but the data shows it is more than capable of handling the load. The GPU's percentile ranking of 86 among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 54247, places it just 0.1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER (54209), and 1.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X (54828, which is actually a higher score, making the delta -1.1% from the 4080's perspective). It trails the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB (55698) by 2.6% and the AMD Radeon 8060S (55757) by 2.7% in average benchmark score, though these differences are small in real-world terms.

The 16 GB VRAM is far more than Valorant requires, and the memory bandwidth of 716.8 GB/s ensures that texture streaming and frame buffer operations are never a constraint. The GPU's 9728 shading units and 304 TMUs provide massive raw compute throughput, and the 112 ROPs handle pixel output efficiently. In the measured FPS data, the GPU's influence is most visible at 4K resolution, where the frame rates drop from the 1080p levels but still remain exceptionally high. The fact that Low settings at 4K produce 598 FPS versus 679 FPS at 1080p Low shows the GPU is doing more work, but the RTX 4080 has so much headroom that it barely notices the difference.

The GPU's 2205 MHz base and 2505 MHz boost clocks are moderate for this class of hardware, but the Ada Lovelace architecture's efficiency ensures high frame rates even at these speeds. The 320 W TDP and triple-slot design indicate it is a power-hungry card, but for a game like Valorant, the GPU is rarely the limiting factor. The measured frame rates at 4K Ultra (493 FPS) are still far above any competitive display's refresh rate, meaning the GPU is effectively never a bottleneck in this title. The RTX 4080's 76 RT cores and 304 tensor cores are not directly relevant to Valorant's rendering workload, but they contribute to the card's overall benchmark scores.

FAQ

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

A: The highest measured average is 679 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The lowest measured average is 493 FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings.

Q: How does the CPU's performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core i7-14700KF has an average benchmark score of 70163, which is 0.2% higher than the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F (69996), 0.4% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX (69875), and 0.9% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X (69515). It is 1% lower than the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K (70879).

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

A: The data indicates the CPU is the primary limiting factor. Frame rates drop only about 12% when going from 1080p to 4K, which is far less than would be expected if the GPU were the bottleneck. The CPU's high boost clock of 5.60 GHz is key to maintaining high frame rates.

Q: What is the GPU's closest competitor in benchmark scores?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER has an average score of 54209, which is 0.1% lower than the RTX 4080's 54247. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X scores 54828 (1.1% higher), the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB scores 55698 (2.6% higher), and the AMD Radeon 8060S scores 55757 (2.7% higher).

Q: Does resolution affect the frame rate significantly?

A: No, the impact is modest. At Low settings, the frame rate drops from 679 FPS at 1080p to 598 FPS at 4K. At Ultra settings, it drops from 560 FPS at 1080p to 493 FPS at 4K. The percentage drop is roughly 12% in both cases.

Q: What is the combo's rank among all tested combinations?

A: This combo ranks 184th out of 3708 tested combinations for Valorant, placing it in the top 5% of all tested systems.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i7-14700KF combined with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 achieves a combo rank of 184 out of 3708 tested combinations in Valorant. This places the configuration in the 95th percentile of all tested systems, meaning it outperforms approximately 95% of other combos in this specific game. The rank is a composite measure that factors in both the CPU and GPU performance in the context of Valorant's specific workload demands.

Given that the CPU has a percentile ranking of 94 among all CPUs and the GPU has a percentile of 86 among all GPUs, the combo rank of 184/3708 is consistent with expectations. The CPU's strong single-thread performance, evidenced by its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 6235 and Geekbench single-core score of 2578, is the primary driver of this high rank in a CPU-bound title like Valorant. The GPU, while not the limiting factor, contributes enough headroom to ensure the CPU is never starved for rendering resources.

The narrow benchmark deltas between this CPU and its nearest rivals (all within 1% in average score) mean that the combo rank could shift slightly with different hardware pairings, but the overall position in the top 5% is likely stable. For context, the GPU's nearest rival is the RTX 4080 SUPER (0.1% difference in score), which would likely produce nearly identical frame rates in this game. The key takeaway is that this combo sits at the upper echelon of tested systems for Valorant, and the rank reflects a balanced yet CPU-leaning configuration.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings preset depends on the user's refresh rate and preference for visual fidelity. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers the highest average at 679 FPS, while Ultra delivers 560 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 119 FPS, which could matter for users with very high refresh rate monitors. However, even at Ultra, the frame rate of 560 FPS exceeds any commercially available display's refresh rate. For competitive play, Low settings minimize visual clutter and maximize frame rate, giving a 679 FPS average. For users who prefer better visual quality, Ultra at 560 FPS is still far above any practical refresh rate ceiling.

At 2560x1440, the pattern is similar. Low produces 644 FPS, Medium produces 549 FPS, and Ultra produces 532 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra narrows to 112 FPS. The Medium preset offers a balanced middle ground with 549 FPS average and a reported minimum of 467 FPS and maximum of 632 FPS. For users with 1440p displays, Medium or Ultra are both viable, as even the Ultra average of 532 FPS is well above typical 240 Hz or 360 Hz refresh rates. At 3840x2160, the Low preset yields 598 FPS, Medium yields 510 FPS, and Ultra yields 493 FPS. The spread is 105 FPS between Low and Ultra. For 4K displays, Ultra is recommended because the visual improvement is substantial and the 493 FPS average is still far above any display's refresh rate.

The data suggests that the best experience per the measured rows is achieved by using the Ultra preset at any resolution, because the FPS cost is minimal relative to the visual gain. The only scenario where Low makes sense is for users with esports-focused displays running at 1080p with refresh rates above 560 Hz, which is not a common configuration. For all practical purposes, Ultra at 4K (493 FPS) or Ultra at 1440p (532 FPS) provides an excellent experience. The Medium preset's reported minimum FPS values (433 at 4K, 467 at 1440p, 492 at 1080p) suggest it has the best worst-case frame pacing, which could matter for competitive consistency.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following is the complete set of measured FPS data for this combo, organized by resolution and settings.

1920x1080:

• Low: average 679 FPS
• Medium: average 579 FPS, minimum 492 FPS, maximum 666 FPS
• High: average 570 FPS
• Ultra: average 560 FPS

2560x1440:

• Low: average 644 FPS
• Medium: average 549 FPS, minimum 467 FPS, maximum 632 FPS
• High: average 540 FPS
• Ultra: average 532 FPS

3840x2160:

• Low: average 598 FPS
• Medium: average 510 FPS, minimum 433 FPS, maximum 586 FPS
• High: average 502 FPS
• Ultra: average 493 FPS

The Medium preset is the only one with reported minimum and maximum values. At 1080p Medium, the minimum is 492 FPS and the maximum is 666 FPS, giving a range of 174 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the minimum is 467 FPS and the maximum is 632 FPS, a range of 165 FPS. At 4K Medium, the minimum is 433 FPS and the maximum is 586 FPS, a range of 153 FPS. These ranges suggest that frame pacing is consistent, with the minimums staying above 430 FPS even at 4K.

The resolution scaling from 1080p to 4K shows a consistent pattern across all settings: the drop from 1080p to 1440p is smaller than the drop from 1440p to 4K. For example, at Low settings, 1080p to 1440p drops 35 FPS (679 to 644), while 1440p to 4K drops 46 FPS (644 to 598). At Ultra settings, 1080p to 1440p drops 28 FPS (560 to 532), and 1440p to 4K drops 39 FPS (532 to 493). This is consistent with the GPU taking on more work as resolution increases, but the effect remains modest. The data as a whole shows that this combo delivers playable frame rates far above any competitive threshold, regardless of resolution or settings.