Downfall

Measured FPS Breakdown

Starting at 1920x1080, the recorded data shows this combination delivers very high frame rates across all tested presets. Low settings average 228.9 FPS, Medium averages 187.3 FPS, High averages 152.2 FPS, and even the most demanding Ultra preset stays well above triple digits at 96.5 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is roughly 132 FPS, which indicates that the graphics settings have a significant influence on performance at this resolution, but every preset remains far above the 60 FPS playability threshold.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain strong but begin to show the expected scaling penalty from the higher pixel count. Low settings average 161.4 FPS, a drop of about 67 FPS compared to the same preset at 1080p. Medium follows at 132.9 FPS, High at 108.6 FPS, and Ultra at exactly 68 FPS. The Ultra preset at this resolution is the first point in the data where the combination dips close to the playability line, but it still clears it with a small margin. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p is consistent across every preset, with the largest absolute loss occurring at Low settings.

At 3840x2160, the picture changes more dramatically. Low settings still average 103.1 FPS, which is comfortably playable. Medium averages 82.3 FPS, and High averages 68.6 FPS. Ultra, however, falls to 39.9 FPS, which is well below the 60 FPS threshold. The data shows a clear breakpoint at 4K: the three lower presets remain playable, but Ultra becomes too demanding for this hardware combination. The difference between Medium and Ultra at 4K is 42.4 FPS, a much larger step than the difference between Low and Medium, which is 20.8 FPS. This suggests that the Ultra preset introduces a disproportionately heavy workload at 4K.

Across all resolutions, the average FPS figures follow a predictable pattern: higher resolution and higher settings both reduce performance, and their combined effect is most visible at 4K Ultra. The recorded data contains no minimum or maximum frame time information, so the analysis relies solely on average FPS, but the averages themselves are consistent and show no anomalies that would indicate stuttering or frame pacing problems.

How This Combo Ranks

The database ranks this pairing at 1986 out of 3716 tested combinations for Downfall. That places it in the lower middle of the overall distribution, roughly the 53rd percentile. This might surprise readers who focus only on the high frame rates at 1080p, but the rank reflects the entire tested field, which includes many newer and more powerful CPUs and GPUs. For a horror title like Downfall, the gameplay demands are moderate, so the absolute frame rates are high, but the rank is dragged down by the CPU's age and the GPU's mid-range positioning.

The processor itself sits at the 75th percentile against all CPUs in the database, which is respectable for a six-core, twelve-thread part. Its average benchmark score of 21484 places it within 2% of several nearby rivals. The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V scores 21440, a delta of 0.2%, which is effectively a statistical tie. The Intel Core i9-11900H scores 21367, 0.5% behind. The Intel Xeon D-1746TER scores 21635, 0.7% ahead. The AMD EPYC 9454 scores 21223, 1.2% behind. None of these deltas are large enough to matter in real-world gaming, especially in a game like Downfall where the GPU carries most of the load.

The GPU ranks at the 61st percentile against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 17639. Its nearest rivals are all surprisingly close in raw compute terms. The AMD Radeon HD 7790 scores 17666, just 0.2% higher. The AMD Radeon 780M scores 17588, 0.3% lower. The AMD Radeon Pro 560 scores 17551, 0.5% lower. The AMD Radeon Pro 460 scores 17509, 0.7% lower. The closeness of these scores is notable because the RTX 4060 is a much newer architecture with features like ray tracing and DLSS that these older or integrated parts lack, but in pure benchmark averages, the gap is tiny.

The combined rank of 1986 out of 3716 tells a more complete story than either component's individual percentile. The CPU is above average, the GPU is slightly above average, but the pairing does not push into the upper quartile of tested combinations for this specific game. In practical terms, this rank means the system will handle Downfall smoothly at most settings, but it is not a top-tier combination by database standards.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, which averages 96.5 FPS. Since all four presets clear the threshold at this resolution, the recommendation is simply to run Ultra and enjoy the maximum visual quality. The margin over the 60 FPS line is 36.5 FPS, which provides enough headroom for scene-to-scene variation without dropping below playable levels.

At 2560x1440, the best settings also resolve to Ultra, averaging 68 FPS. This is a narrower margin, only 8 FPS above the threshold, but the data shows it is still playable. For players who prefer a larger safety margin, High at 108.6 FPS or Medium at 132.9 FPS are both strong alternatives, but the database's verdict is that Ultra meets the playability requirement.

At 3840x2160, the best settings are High, averaging 68.6 FPS. Ultra falls to 39.9 FPS, which is not playable under the 60 FPS standard. Medium at 82.3 FPS and Low at 103.1 FPS are both viable, but High is the highest preset that remains above the threshold. The data shows a clear recommendation hierarchy at 4K: High for maximum quality, Medium for extra headroom, and Low for very high refresh rates if the display supports them.

These recommendations are based entirely on the average FPS figures in the recorded data. The absence of minimum FPS values means the analysis cannot account for worst-case drops, but the averages at the recommended presets are high enough that even a substantial dip would still likely remain playable.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the CPU's nearest rivals, the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 is effectively interchangeable with several other processors in synthetic benchmarks. The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V, Intel Core i9-11900H, Intel Xeon D-1746TER, and AMD EPYC 9454 all fall within 1.2% of the Ryzen 5 2600's average score. In a game like Downfall, which does not appear to be heavily CPU-bound based on the high frame rates even at low resolutions, swapping to any of these CPUs would produce nearly identical results. The Xeon D-1746TER is the fastest of the group at 21635, but the advantage over the Ryzen is only 0.7%, which would be imperceptible in actual gameplay.

On the GPU side, the nearest rivals are more diverse. The AMD Radeon HD 7790 is a much older discrete card that matches the RTX 4060's average benchmark score within 0.2%. The AMD Radeon 780M is an integrated graphics solution in modern AMD processors, and it sits just 0.3% behind. The AMD Radeon Pro 560 and Pro 460 are mobile workstation parts that trail by 0.5% and 0.7% respectively. What this means in practice is that for a game like Downfall, which is not particularly demanding by modern standards, the RTX 4060's performance is comparable to a wide range of hardware. However, the RTX 4060 brings additional capabilities beyond raw FPS, such as hardware ray tracing and DLSS support, which these rivals do not offer. In Downfall specifically, where the measured FPS comes from non-ray-traced presets, the benchmark scores are a fair comparison, but the RTX 4060 would pull ahead in any title that uses those features.

For a builder considering this combination, the practical takeaway is that the CPU is the component with more headroom to upgrade, since its rivals are all close in score. The GPU, despite its low rank among rivals, is the component that determines the playable settings at 4K, and its alternatives would behave similarly only in games that do not use modern rendering features.

CPU and GPU Roles

The scaling between resolutions and presets in the recorded data reveals how the workload shifts between the CPU and GPU. At 1920x1080, the frame rates are extremely high across all presets, which suggests the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU without bottlenecking. The jump from Low at 228.9 FPS to Ultra at 96.5 FPS is entirely attributable to GPU workload, since the CPU is not likely to be the limiting factor at such high frame rates.

At 2560x1440, the same pattern holds but with lower absolute numbers. The fact that even Ultra stays above 60 FPS indicates that the GPU still has enough headroom to handle the higher pixel count. The CPU's role remains secondary, as the frame rates are still high enough that CPU-bound scenarios would only appear if the GPU were much faster.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the clear bottleneck. The Ultra preset drops to 39.9 FPS, which is a classic sign of GPU saturation. The CPU is likely still capable of more work, but the GPU cannot render the frame fast enough to use it. The large gap between Medium at 82.3 FPS and Ultra at 39.9 FPS further confirms this, as the Ultra preset appears to add a significant GPU-side cost that the RTX 4060 cannot sustain at 4K.

Comparing the same preset across resolutions shows the scaling penalty. High settings go from 152.2 FPS at 1080p to 108.6 FPS at 1440p to 68.6 FPS at 4K. That is a 71% drop in frame rate from 1080p to 4K, which is consistent with the GPU being the limiting factor. Low settings go from 228.9 to 161.4 to 103.1, a 55% drop, showing that lower settings reduce the GPU load and therefore the resolution penalty is also reduced.

The Ryzen 5 2600's six cores and twelve threads are sufficient for this game. Its benchmark scores, such as 1248 in Cinebench R15 multicore and 157.3 in single core, are modest by current standards, but Downfall does not appear to demand high single-thread performance. The GPU, with its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 272.0 GB/s bandwidth, is the component that determines the ceiling at higher resolutions and presets.

The Verdict

This combination can run Downfall successfully at all tested resolutions, but with an important caveat at 4K. At 1920x1080, every preset is playable, and Ultra averages 96.5 FPS, which is the best visual experience available. At 2560x1440, Ultra also clears the 60 FPS threshold with an average of 68 FPS, making it the recommended choice for players who want maximum quality at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the verdict is more nuanced. The playable settings are High, Low, and Medium, with High being the best at 68.6 FPS. Ultra is not playable, averaging 39.9 FPS, which falls well short of the 60 FPS standard. Players with 4K displays should use High settings and expect a smooth experience, or drop to Medium for additional headroom.

The database's overall ranking of 1986 out of 3716 combinations reflects a system that is above average but not exceptional. The CPU's 75th percentile ranking and the GPU's 61st percentile ranking combine to produce a pairing that handles this particular horror game with ease at 1080p and 1440p, and with reasonable settings at 4K. The RTX 4060's 8 GB of memory is not a limiting factor in this game, as the measured FPS values show no signs of memory-related stutters or drops.

For a builder who already owns this hardware or is considering it for Downfall specifically, the data supports a confident recommendation. The game runs well on this system, with the only compromise being the need to avoid Ultra settings at 4K. Every other combination of resolution and preset delivers at least 60 FPS on average, and most deliver far more. This is a practical, capable pairing for the game, even if it does not rank among the top combinations in the database.