Valorant

Valorant is a competitive FPS that scales dramatically across resolutions and settings, and the data for the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER shows a combination that delivers exceptionally high frame rates at every tested configuration. The measured results indicate that this pairing is overwhelmingly GPU-limited at lower resolutions, while the CPU's capability becomes the defining factor for peak performance. This analysis walks through the measured FPS data, component roles, and ranking to provide a methodical breakdown of what the benchmark results show.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K is steep but consistent with a system that is heavily CPU-bound at lower resolutions. At Low settings, the average FPS falls from 596 at 1920x1080 to 508 at 2560x1440, a reduction of 88 FPS (approximately 14.8%), and then to 406 at 3840x2160, another drop of 102 FPS (approximately 20.1%). Moving from 1440p to 4K at Low settings sees a 20% performance penalty, which is a substantial hit but still leaves the system far above the refresh rate of typical high-end monitors.

At High settings, the scaling pattern is similar but with slightly smaller absolute drops. The average FPS goes from 374 at 1080p to 319 at 1440p (a 55 FPS decline) and then to 255 at 4K (a 64 FPS decline). The percentage drop from 1080p to 4K at High settings is approximately 31.8%, which is less severe than the Low settings percentage drop of 31.9% in absolute terms, but the relative scaling is comparable. This suggests that as resolution increases, the GPU workload grows, but the CPU remains the primary bottleneck even at 4K, given that the lowest 4K average (243 FPS at Ultra) still exceeds the frame rates of most competitive titles.

The Medium settings data provides min and max FPS figures, offering insight into frame time consistency. At 3840x2160 Medium, the average is 268 FPS with a min of 227 and max of 308, indicating a spread of 81 FPS. At 2560x1440 Medium, the average is 335 with a min of 285 and max of 385, a spread of 100 FPS. At 1920x1080 Medium, the average is 392 with a min of 334 and max of 451, a spread of 117 FPS. The increasing spread at lower resolutions is a classic sign of CPU limitation, where frame pacing becomes less consistent as the GPU finishes its work faster and waits on the processor. The data shows that resolution scaling is smooth but not linear; the step from 1440p to 4K at Low settings costs over 100 FPS, while the step from 1080p to 1440p costs only 88 FPS, suggesting the GPU is becoming more of a factor at 4K but is still not the sole bottleneck.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER, built on the 12 nm Turing architecture with the TU106 chip, is an end-of-life product that still delivers strong results in this title. Its memory configuration includes 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s. The memory clock is listed at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective speed. These specifications are relevant because Valorant is not a memory-intensive game at these settings, but the bandwidth helps maintain consistent frame delivery at higher resolutions.

The GPU’s clock speeds are a base of 1470 MHz and a boost of 1650 MHz, with a pixel rate of 105.6 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 224.4 GTexel/s. The shading units number 2176, with 136 TMUs and 64 ROPs. The FP32 performance is 7.181 TFLOPS, and the GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. In the benchmark database, this GPU holds a percentile rank of 62 among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 18093. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile with a deltaPct of -0.4, the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 at -0.5, the AMD Radeon RX 460 at -1.5, and the Intel Arc A770M at -1.6. This places the RTX 2060 SUPER in a competitive mid-range position, but the measured FPS in Valorant suggests it is far more capable than its overall percentile might imply.

The GPU's role in these results is to provide enough raw throughput to avoid becoming the limiting factor until the resolution and settings push its workload higher. At 1080p Low, the GPU is barely stressed, as evidenced by the 596 FPS average, which is likely near the CPU's maximum frame generation capability. As resolution increases to 4K, the GPU's workload grows, and the frame rate drops, but even at 4K Ultra, the 243 FPS average indicates the GPU is still not overwhelmed. The data shows that the RTX 2060 SUPER is a capable air cooler for this game, and its 8 GB VRAM is sufficient for all tested settings, as no VRAM-related stutters or frame drops are evident in the min FPS figures.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER ranks at position 1702 out of 2883 tested combos in this game, placing it in the 59th percentile of all pairings. This ranking is somewhat surprising given the high frame rates, but it reflects the fact that many other combos likely feature more powerful GPUs that can push even higher FPS at lower resolutions. The combo’s rank is likely held back by the GPU's mid-range standing rather than the CPU, which is a top-tier processor.

The CPU itself ranks in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 64640. Its nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 4464P with a deltaPct of -0.3, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F at +0.3, the AMD EPYC 7343 at +0.7, and the AMD EPYC 9124 at -0.7. This indicates the CPU is performing as expected for its class, with negligible performance differences from its closest competitors. The GPU, by contrast, ranks in the 62nd percentile, with an average benchmark score of 18093, and its nearest rivals are all within -1.6% to -0.4% of its score, showing it is a solid mid-pack performer.

Given this ranking, the combo is positioned in the upper half of tested configurations, but it is not a top-tier pairing for Valorant specifically. The data suggests that the CPU is capable of much higher frame rates than the GPU can deliver at lower resolutions, but the GPU is still sufficient to provide an excellent competitive experience. The combo rank of 1702 out of 2883 means that about 59% of tested combos outperform it, which is likely due to those systems having newer or higher-end GPUs that can sustain higher FPS at 1080p where the CPU is the bottleneck.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, 3840x2160) and four settings (Low, Medium, High, Ultra). At 1920x1080, the average FPS ranges from 596 at Low to 356 at Ultra. The Medium setting yields an average of 392 FPS with a min of 334 and max of 451. The High setting yields 374 FPS. The step from Low to Medium is a drop of 204 FPS, which is substantial, while the step from Medium to High is only 18 FPS, and from High to Ultra is another 18 FPS. This indicates that the Low setting removes significant rendering work, allowing the CPU to stretch its legs, while the differences between Medium, High, and Ultra are comparatively minor.

At 2560x1440, the average FPS ranges from 508 at Low to 304 at Ultra. The Medium setting yields 335 FPS with a min of 285 and max of 385. The High setting yields 319 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 173 FPS, from Medium to High is 16 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 15 FPS. The pattern is consistent with 1080p, but the absolute FPS is lower across the board, showing the GPU's increasing workload.

At 3840x2160, the average FPS ranges from 406 at Low to 243 at Ultra. The Medium setting yields 268 FPS with a min of 227 and max of 308. The High setting yields 255 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 138 FPS, from Medium to High is 13 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 12 FPS. At 4K, the differences between Medium, High, and Ultra are very small, suggesting that the GPU is becoming the limiting factor, but the frame rates remain well above 240 FPS even at the highest settings.

The data shows that the Low setting is the outlier, offering significantly higher FPS than the other three settings at every resolution. The Medium, High, and Ultra settings are clustered together, with differences of less than 20 FPS between them. This suggests that the rendering pipeline for Valorant has a distinct low-detail path that the CPU can exploit, while the higher settings impose a similar GPU load.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, with a TDP of 65 W. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. It features integrated graphics in the form of Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 32EU, but this is irrelevant for gaming with a discrete GPU.

In benchmark tests, the CPU scores 42216 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 5960 in single-core, with a Passmark multithread score of 49682 and a single-thread score of 4689. The single-core performance is critical for Valorant, which is known to be sensitive to per-core speed. The boost clock of 5.30 GHz is high, and the single-thread scores are strong, which explains why the system can achieve 596 FPS at 1080p Low. The CPU's percentile rank of 93 indicates it is in the top 7% of all CPUs, and its average benchmark score of 64640 places it near rivals like the AMD EPYC 4464P and EPYC 9124, which are server-class parts.

The CPU's role in these results is to provide the raw single-thread performance needed to drive high frame rates. The data shows that at 1080p Low, the system hits 596 FPS, which is likely near the CPU's limit, as increasing resolution does not increase FPS. At 4K Low, the FPS drops to 406, which is still very high, but the drop indicates that the GPU is starting to matter. The CPU's 20 cores and 20 threads are not fully utilized by Valorant, but the high boost clock and strong single-core performance are what matter. The data suggests that this CPU is not a bottleneck at any resolution, but it is the primary driver of the ultra-high FPS at lower settings.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the best experience per the measured rows depends on the target refresh rate and resolution. At 1920x1080, the Low setting offers the highest average FPS at 596, but the Medium setting provides a more balanced experience at 392 FPS with a min of 334, which is still well above 240 Hz. The High setting at 374 FPS and Ultra at 356 FPS are also viable, but the marginal FPS gain from dropping from Medium to Low is enormous (204 FPS), while the visual quality difference is likely significant. For competitive play at 1080p, the Low setting is the clear choice if maximizing FPS is the goal, but the Medium setting offers a good balance of visual fidelity and performance, as the min FPS of 334 is still very high.

At 2560x1440, the Low setting yields 508 FPS, while Medium yields 335 FPS with a min of 285. The High setting at 319 FPS and Ultra at 304 FPS are close. For 1440p gaming, the Medium setting is recommended because it provides a min FPS of 285, which is above the 240 Hz threshold, and the average of 335 is strong. The Low setting's 508 FPS is excessive for most monitors and may introduce visual artifacts that hinder target acquisition. The Ultra setting at 304 FPS is also viable, but the difference between Medium and Ultra is only 31 FPS, so the visual quality gain may be worth it for some players.

At 3840x2160, the Low setting yields 406 FPS, Medium yields 268 FPS with a min of 227, High yields 255 FPS, and Ultra yields 243 FPS. At 4K, the Medium setting is the best choice because it has a min FPS of 227, which is just below the 240 Hz threshold, but the average of 268 is solid. The High and Ultra settings have averages of 255 and 243, respectively, which are still playable but may dip below 240 FPS in demanding scenes. The Low setting at 406 FPS is an option, but the visual quality at 4K Low is likely too poor for a competitive title. Overall, the Medium preset provides the best experience across all resolutions, offering a high average FPS with a min FPS that remains above 227, ensuring smooth gameplay.

FAQ

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

A: The maximum average FPS is 596, measured at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

Q: How does the combo rank among all tested combinations?

A: The combo ranks 1702 out of 2883 tested combos, placing it in the top 59% of all configurations.

Q: What is the lowest average FPS recorded?

A: The lowest average FPS is 243, measured at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more likely to be the bottleneck at 1080p?

A: At 1080p Low, the system achieves 596 FPS, which is likely CPU-limited, as the GPU has minimal workload at that resolution and settings.

Q: What are the min and max FPS at 2560x1440 Medium?

A: At 2560x1440 Medium, the min FPS is 285 and the max FPS is 385, with an average of 335.

Q: How does the GPU's percentile rank compare to the CPU's?

A: The GPU ranks in the 62nd percentile among all GPUs, while the CPU ranks in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, indicating the CPU is a stronger performer relative to its peers.