Valorant

The Intel Core Ultra 7 155H paired with the AMD Radeon 760M integrated graphics produces a highly capable Valorant setup, though the data reveals a system that is distinctly GPU-bound at higher resolutions. Across the measured resolutions, the combination delivers playable frame rates even at 4K, but the performance curve shows that the Radeon 760M’s compute limits become the primary constraint as pixel count increases. The benchmark results indicate a platform that excels at 1080p competitive play, maintains solid performance at 1440p, and begins to show strain only at 2160p.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and predictable decline as resolution scales from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 203 FPS at 1080p to 173 FPS at 1440p, then falls further to 138 FPS at 4K. This represents a 32% reduction in average FPS when moving from 1080p to 4K on Low settings. The scaling pattern suggests that the AMD Radeon 760M’s 512 shading units and 16 ROPs are being pushed harder as pixel count increases, with the integrated GPU’s fill rate becoming a limiting factor.

The High settings curve shows a similar trend, with average FPS declining from 127 at 1080p to 109 at 1440p, and finally to 87 at 4K. This 31.5% drop from 1080p to 4K on High settings is nearly identical to the Low settings scaling, indicating that the resolution penalty is consistent regardless of quality preset. The Medium settings data, which includes min and max FPS values, reinforces this pattern: 134 FPS average at 1080p, 114 FPS at 1440p, and 91 FPS at 4K. The scaling from 1080p to 4K on Medium settings results in a 32.1% performance loss.

Ultra settings exhibit the most significant resolution scaling penalty. The average FPS drops from 121 at 1080p to 103 at 1440p, then to 83 at 4K — a 31.4% reduction across the full resolution range. The consistency of this ~31-32% performance drop across all four quality presets strongly suggests that resolution scaling in Valorant is primarily limited by the GPU’s pixel throughput capabilities, not by CPU or memory bandwidth constraints. The Intel Core Ultra 7 155H, with its 16 cores and 22 threads, appears to have ample headroom to feed the GPU at all tested resolutions.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 155H serves as a robust foundation for Valorant’s CPU demands. With 16 cores, 22 threads, a base clock of 3.80 GHz, and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz, this Meteor Lake processor provides substantial processing power. The CPU’s benchmark results confirm its capability: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 15028 and a single-core score of 1743 indicate strong performance for a mobile part. The PassMark single-thread score of 3468 is particularly relevant for Valorant, which is known to be sensitive to single-thread performance in CPU-bound scenarios.

At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves 203 FPS average, which is well above the refresh rate of most competitive monitors. This high frame rate at low resolution indicates that the CPU is not the bottleneck in this configuration. The CPU’s 83rd percentile ranking among all tested processors, with an average benchmark score of 32697, places it ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H (which it beats by 0.4%) and roughly on par with the Intel Core i5-14600T (0% delta) and AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 (0.1% delta). This level of CPU performance provides sufficient headroom for Valorant’s game logic, physics, and network code.

The CPU’s 24 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel memory support with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth contribute to its ability to maintain high frame rates. The fact that the system only drops from 203 FPS at 1080p Low to 138 FPS at 4K Low — a 32% reduction — while the GPU’s workload increases fourfold in pixel count, confirms that the CPU is not the limiting factor even at the lowest resolution tested. The CPU’s role appears to be that of a stable, high-throughput platform that never starves the GPU of draw calls or physics updates.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 760M is the clear performance limiter in this configuration, particularly at higher resolutions. This integrated GPU, based on RDNA 3.0 architecture with a Phoenix chip, features 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Its boost clock of 2599 MHz provides a peak compute capability of 5.323 TFLOPS FP32, which is modest by discrete GPU standards but respectable for an IGP. The GPU’s 35th percentile ranking among all tested GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 6019, places it near the AMD Radeon RX 6400 (0.3% delta) and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M (0.3% delta).

The 760M’s memory configuration is system-shared, meaning its bandwidth is system-dependent and it has no dedicated VRAM. This architectural choice affects performance at higher resolutions, where the GPU must contend for memory bandwidth with the CPU. The system’s 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth provides a reasonable baseline, but the shared nature of the memory pool introduces potential contention that manifests as the resolution scaling penalty observed in the data.

In Valorant specifically, the 760M demonstrates its capability to handle the game’s relatively light graphical demands. At 1080p Medium, the system averages 134 FPS with a minimum of 114 FPS and maximum of 154 FPS. The 760M’s performance at 4K, while lower, remains playable: 91 FPS on Medium and 87 FPS on High. The GPU’s compute capabilities, while limited, are sufficient for Valorant’s cel-shaded art style and relatively simple geometry. The GPU’s 8 RT cores, while not directly beneficial for Valorant (which does not use ray tracing), indicate a modern architecture with headroom for other workloads.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive picture of this system’s performance across resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the system delivers its highest frame rates: 203 FPS on Low, 134 FPS on Medium, 127 FPS on High, and 121 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset at 1080p shows a minimum FPS of 114 and maximum of 154, indicating stable frame times with only a 29.9% variance between min and max. This consistency is crucial for competitive play where frame pacing matters as much as average FPS.

At 2560x1440, the performance remains strong but shows the expected decline. Low settings produce 173 FPS average, Medium achieves 114 FPS (with min 97 and max 131), High reaches 109 FPS, and Ultra settles at 103 FPS. The Medium preset at 1440p shows a slightly wider variance of 35.1% between min and max, suggesting the GPU is beginning to struggle with maintaining consistent frame delivery as resolution increases.

The 3840x2160 results reveal the system’s limits. Low settings still manage 138 FPS average, but Medium drops to 91 FPS (min 77, max 105), High to 87 FPS, and Ultra to 83 FPS. The Medium preset at 4K shows a variance of 36.4% between min and max, indicating increased frame time instability at this resolution. Despite these declines, all 4K results remain above 60 FPS, making the configuration viable for 4K play, albeit with reduced competitive advantage compared to the 1080p experience.

The data reveals a consistent pattern: the gap between Low and Ultra settings narrows as resolution increases. At 1080p, the difference between Low (203 FPS) and Ultra (121 FPS) is 82 FPS (40.4%). At 4K, the difference narrows to 55 FPS (39.9%). This suggests that at higher resolutions, the GPU’s pixel throughput becomes the dominant constraint, reducing the relative impact of graphics settings on overall performance.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 7 155H + AMD Radeon 760M combination ranks 2872 out of 2883 tested combos in Valorant, placing it in the bottom 0.4% of all configurations. This ranking, while seemingly poor, must be contextualized by the fact that this is an integrated graphics solution competing against systems with discrete GPUs. The combo’s ranking reflects the GPU’s modest absolute performance rather than any deficiency in the CPU, which ranks in the 83rd percentile among all processors.

The GPU’s 35th percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 6019, is the primary driver of this low combo ranking. The Radeon 760M’s closest rivals in the GPU benchmark database include the AMD Radeon RX 6400 (0.3% faster), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M (0.3% faster), and NVIDIA Quadro P2000 (0.5% slower). These comparisons illustrate that the 760M’s performance is on par with entry-level discrete GPUs from several generations ago, which explains its position near the bottom of the Valorant combo rankings.

Despite the low combo rank, the measured FPS data tells a more nuanced story. In actual Valorant gameplay, this combo delivers frame rates that are competitive for most players. The 1080p Low result of 203 FPS exceeds the refresh rate of most monitors, and even the 4K Ultra result of 83 FPS remains playable. The combo ranking of 2872 out of 2883 reflects the presence of thousands of systems with discrete graphics cards in the database, but for an integrated solution, the 760M’s performance is respectable within the context of Valorant’s specific requirements.

FAQ

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

A: Yes. The measured data shows 87 FPS average at 4K High settings and 83 FPS average at 4K Ultra, both of which are above the 60 FPS threshold typically considered playable. Even the most demanding 4K preset tested remains above this threshold.

Q: What is the best resolution for competitive play with this hardware?

A: The data indicates 1920x1080 is optimal for competitive play. At Low settings, the system achieves 203 FPS average, and even at Ultra settings it maintains 121 FPS. This provides the highest frame rates and lowest input latency for competitive advantage.

Q: How does the Radeon 760M compare to discrete GPUs?

A: The GPU’s average benchmark score of 6019 places it in the 35th percentile of all GPUs. Its closest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 6400 (0.3% faster), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M (0.3% faster), and NVIDIA Quadro P2000 (0.5% slower), indicating performance comparable to entry-level discrete solutions.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H sufficient for Valorant?

A: Yes. The CPU’s 16 cores, 22 threads, and boost clock of 4.80 GHz provide ample processing power. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1743 and PassMark single-thread score of 3468 indicate strong performance for Valorant’s CPU demands, and the CPU ranks in the 83rd percentile among all processors.

Q: What is the CPU’s performance relative to its nearest rivals?

A: The Core Ultra 7 155H has an average benchmark score of 32697, which is essentially tied with the Intel Core i5-14600T (0% delta) and AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 (0.1% delta). It beats the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H by 0.4% but trails the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F by 0.2%.

Q: Does the system maintain stable frame rates, or are there significant drops?

A: The Medium preset data, which includes min and max FPS, shows reasonable stability. At 1080p, the range is 114-154 FPS (35.1% variance), at 1440p it’s 97-131 FPS (35.1% variance), and at 4K it’s 77-105 FPS (36.4% variance). While variance increases slightly with resolution, the frame pacing remains consistent enough for playable experiences.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data suggests that the Medium preset offers the best balance of visual quality and performance for most users. At 1920x1080, Medium delivers 134 FPS average with a minimum of 114 FPS, providing a comfortable margin above 60 FPS while maintaining better visual fidelity than Low. The Medium preset at 1080p also shows the most consistent frame delivery among the quality presets, with the data indicating it is the sweet spot for this hardware.

For competitive play where maximum frame rate is paramount, the Low preset at 1080p is the clear choice. The 203 FPS average provides the highest possible refresh rate support and lowest input latency, which is critical in a fast-paced FPS like Valorant. Players with 144Hz or 240Hz monitors should prioritize this setting to take full advantage of their display’s capabilities.

For users who prioritize visual quality over frame rate, the Ultra preset at 1080p delivers 121 FPS average, which remains above the 60 FPS threshold and is suitable for less competitive play. However, the data shows that the jump from Medium to Ultra at 1080p only costs 13 FPS (from 134 to 121), making Ultra a viable option for those who want maximum visual fidelity without sacrificing playability.

At 1440p, the Medium preset (114 FPS average) is recommended for most users, as it provides a good balance between quality and performance. The Low preset at 1440p (173 FPS) is ideal for competitive play on higher refresh rate monitors. At 4K, the Low preset (138 FPS) is the only setting that maintains frame rates above 120 FPS, while Medium (91 FPS) and High (87 FPS) remain playable for less demanding scenarios. The Ultra preset at 4K (83 FPS) is the least recommended, as it offers marginal visual improvements over High while sacrificing frame rate stability.