Valorant

Valorant is a competitive FPS that leans heavily on CPU performance, and the data for the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus paired with the Intel Arc B390 reflects this dynamic. The measured frame rates across resolutions and settings show a system that is capable of high refresh rate play, but the scaling patterns reveal a clear bottleneck that dictates how you should configure the game. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS data to explain what the numbers mean for your actual gameplay experience.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate data shows a significant drop as resolution increases, which is the expected behavior for a system where the graphics processor is the limiting factor. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo produces an average of 331 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops that average to 282 FPS, and at 4K Low, the average falls to 225 FPS. This is a 32% reduction in average FPS from 1080p to 4K at Low settings, which indicates that the Intel Arc B390 is being tasked with more work per frame as pixel count rises.

The scaling pattern is consistent across all quality presets. At Medium settings, the average FPS goes from 218 at 1080p to 186 at 1440p, and then down to 149 at 4K. High settings show a similar trajectory: 207 FPS at 1080p, 177 at 1440p, and 141 at 4K. The Ultra preset follows the same trend with 198 FPS at 1080p, 169 at 1440p, and 135 at 4K. The consistent percentage drops across the board strongly suggest that the CPU, the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus with its 24 cores and 5.80 GHz boost clock, is not the primary constraint at any resolution. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS would remain relatively flat regardless of resolution.

The fact that the 4K Ultra average of 135 FPS is still well above the 4K Low average of other weaker combinations suggests the CPU has enough headroom to push high frame rates, but the GPU's rendering limits cap the maximum output. The data reveals that the gap between Low and Ultra settings narrows as resolution increases. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 133 FPS (331 vs 198). At 4K, that difference shrinks to 90 FPS (225 vs 135). This compression of the settings gap at higher resolutions is a classic sign that the GPU is becoming the limiting component, as its raw throughput for pixel shading and fill rate is the deciding factor.

Settings Recommendations

For players targeting the highest possible frame rates, the Low preset is the clear choice. The data shows 331 FPS at 1080p, which is a 60% improvement over the Ultra preset's 198 FPS at the same resolution. This is the only preset that pushes the combo beyond the 300 FPS mark at 1080p. At 1440p, Low still achieves 282 FPS, which is a substantial 67% higher than the Ultra preset's 169 FPS. Even at 4K, Low delivers 225 FPS, which is 90 FPS higher than Ultra.

The Medium preset offers a balanced middle ground for users who want some visual fidelity without sacrificing too much performance. At 1080p, Medium averages 218 FPS, which is only 10 FPS less than High and 20 FPS more than Ultra. The measured minimum FPS for Medium is also the only preset with recorded minimums: 185 FPS at 1080p, 158 FPS at 1440p, and 126 FPS at 4K. These minimums are still comfortably above the 144 Hz refresh rate threshold, suggesting that Medium provides a stable experience.

High settings are an option for those who prioritize image quality, but the data shows diminishing returns. High at 1080p averages 207 FPS, which is 11 FPS less than Medium but 9 FPS more than Ultra. The performance difference between High and Ultra is minimal, with High being 9 FPS faster at 1080p, 8 FPS faster at 1440p, and 6 FPS faster at 4K. Given that High and Ultra are so close in the measured results, the Ultra preset does not appear to offer a meaningful performance penalty for its maximum visual quality. For competitive play, Low is the recommended preset due to the substantial FPS advantage. For a more visually rich experience, Medium provides the best combination of high average FPS and recorded minimums that stay well above 120 FPS at all tested resolutions.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, with 36 MB of shared L3 cache. Its benchmark scores are exceptional, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 51731 and a single-core score of 7303. The PassMark single-thread score of 4823 and multithread score of 60860 place this CPU in the 96th percentile of all CPUs.

In Valorant, which is known for being sensitive to single-thread performance, these numbers are highly relevant. The game's engine typically relies on a few primary threads for game logic and rendering commands. The high single-core boost clock of 5.80 GHz is likely a major contributor to the high frame rates observed in the data. The measured FPS at 1080p Low, 331 FPS, is a direct result of the CPU's ability to rapidly feed frames to the GPU.

However, the CPU's massive multi-threaded headroom appears to be underutilized in this title. The fact that the FPS drops consistently from 1080p to 4K indicates that the CPU is not the limiting factor even at the lowest resolution. The data suggests that the CPU is capable of producing far more frames than the Intel Arc B390 can render. The nearest rival to this CPU is the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, which has an average benchmark score of 83807, a mere 0.2% difference. The AMD EPYC 4584PX and EPYC 9135 are also close, with scores of 83090 and 82980, being 1.1% and 1.2% slower, respectively. The AMD EPYC 7F72 is 1.3% faster with a score of 85072. These narrow margins indicate that the 290K Plus is at the top of the performance tier, and in Valorant, this strength translates to a guaranteed high FPS ceiling that is only capped by the GPU.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo achieve 240 FPS at 1440p?

A: Yes, but only with the Low preset. The data shows an average of 282 FPS at 1440p Low. The Medium, High, and Ultra presets all fall below 200 FPS at this resolution, with averages of 186, 177, and 169 FPS respectively.

Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded for this system?

A: The highest average FPS is 331, which is achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This is the only measured setting that exceeds the 300 FPS mark.

Q: Is the Intel Arc B390 strong enough for 4K gaming in Valorant?

A: The data indicates it can run the game at 4K, but not at high refresh rates. At 4K Low, the average FPS is 225. At 4K Ultra, the average drops to 135 FPS. These are playable but fall short of the high refresh rates seen at lower resolutions.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its closest rival in overall benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has an average benchmark score of 84003. Its closest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, scores 83807, which is 0.2% slower. The AMD EPYC 7F72 is the only rival in the list that is faster, with a score of 85072, which is 1.3% ahead.

Q: Which settings provide the most stable frame pacing based on the data?

A: The Medium preset is the only one with recorded minimum FPS values. At 1080p, the minimum is 185 FPS; at 1440p, it is 158 FPS; and at 4K, it is 126 FPS. This data suggests Medium maintains a consistent frame rate without major dips.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck the GPU at 1080p Low settings?

A: No, the data suggests the opposite. The FPS drops significantly when moving from 1080p to 1440p (from 331 to 282 FPS) at Low settings, indicating that the GPU is the limiting factor. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS would remain similar across resolutions.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is an integrated graphics processor based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on a 3 nm process. It has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz. Its memory configuration is "System Shared," meaning it uses a portion of the system's DDR5 memory, and its bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent." The GPU has 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. Its raw compute performance is rated at 7.680 TFLOPS for FP32 operations.

The benchmark data for this GPU is sparse, with only a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482. This score places the GPU in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, which is very low. Its nearest rivals in the database are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, which scores 1463 (1.3% slower), the GeForce 800M at 1460 (1.5% slower), and the GeForce GT 625 OEM at 1446 (2.5% slower). The GeForce GT 710 is the closest competitor from the list, scoring 1443, which is 2.7% slower.

These rival comparisons paint a clear picture of the GPU's standing. It is positioned at the very low end of the performance spectrum in general compute tasks. However, in Valorant, the measured performance is surprisingly playable. The discrepancy between the low percentile ranking and the playable frame rates is due to the game's low graphical requirements. The GPU's boost clock of 2500 MHz and its ability to leverage system memory bandwidth are sufficient for a game that is not graphically demanding. The data shows that the GPU is the primary factor limiting the frame rate, as evidenced by the resolution scaling discussed earlier. The 3DMark score of 1482 is a general indicator of low raw power, but the measured FPS in Valorant shows that this specific workload is handled adequately.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following data is directly from the measured results for this specific CPU and GPU combination in Valorant.

1920x1080:

• Low: Average FPS 331.
• Medium: Average FPS 218, with a minimum of 185 and a maximum of 250.
• High: Average FPS 207.
• Ultra: Average FPS 198.

2560x1440:

• Low: Average FPS 282.
• Medium: Average FPS 186, with a minimum of 158 and a maximum of 214.
• High: Average FPS 177.
• Ultra: Average FPS 169.

3840x2160:

• Low: Average FPS 225.
• Medium: Average FPS 149, with a minimum of 126 and a maximum of 171.
• High: Average FPS 141.
• Ultra: Average FPS 135.

The overall combo rank for this system in Valorant is 2534 out of 2883 tested combinations. This rank, coupled with the 9th percentile GPU score, suggests that while the system is not competitive for high-end graphics, it is more than sufficient for competitive Valorant play at lower settings. The data shows that the Low preset at 1080p is the only configuration that breaks the 300 FPS barrier, and it remains the best option for maximizing refresh rate potential. The Medium preset offers a stable alternative with recorded minimums that stay above 120 FPS even at 4K, making it the most balanced choice for users who want a mix of performance and visual quality.