Downfall

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for Downfall on this combination of an AMD Ryzen 5 4600G and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 spans three resolutions and four quality presets. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves an average of 201 FPS, Medium reaches 165 FPS with a minimum of 140 and maximum of 189, High hits 135 FPS, and Ultra delivers 84 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is substantial, with Ultra producing roughly 58% of the Low preset’s frame rate, but every 1080p setting stays well above the 60 FPS playability threshold.

Moving to 2560x1440, the averages step down predictably. Low records 144 FPS, Medium averages 118 FPS with a range of 100 to 135, High averages 96 FPS, and Ultra lands exactly at 60 FPS. The 1440p Medium preset still leaves considerable headroom above the playability line, while Ultra sits precisely on it, meaning any slight scene complexity increase could push it below 60. At 3840x2160, the results compress further: Low averages 89 FPS, Medium averages 73 FPS with a minimum of 62 and maximum of 84, High averages 60 FPS, and Ultra drops to 37 FPS. The 4K Ultra result is the only configuration in the entire dataset that fails the 60 FPS requirement by a wide margin, while 4K High barely clears it.

The minimum and maximum FPS values are only recorded for the Medium preset at each resolution, which provides a useful consistency check. At 1080p Medium, the 140 to 189 range shows a spread of 49 FPS, indicating some scene-to-scene variance but no catastrophic dips. At 1440p Medium, the spread narrows to 35 FPS (100 to 135), and at 4K Medium it tightens further to 22 FPS (62 to 84). This pattern suggests that as resolution increases, the frame time variance becomes relatively smaller, even though the average frame rate drops.

CPU and GPU Roles

The scaling between resolutions and presets reveals a clear division of labor for this horror title. At 1920x1080, the CPU has ample headroom to feed the GPU, as shown by the 201 FPS Low result, which is more than triple the 4K Ultra figure. The jump from Low to Ultra at 1080p costs 117 FPS, a reduction of 58%, which is a typical GPU-bound workload response. The RTX 5050’s 8 GB GDDR6 memory and 128-bit bus appear sufficient at this resolution, with the 320.0 GB/s bandwidth handling the texture and geometry load without obvious stalling.

At 2560x1440, the GPU begins to assert itself more forcefully. The Ultra preset drops to exactly 60 FPS from 84 at 1080p, a 28.6% reduction for a 77.8% increase in pixel count. This non-linear scaling indicates the GPU is approaching its fill-rate limits, particularly in the Ultra preset which likely enables heavier post-processing and shadow effects. The CPU, with its 6 cores and 12 threads based on Zen 2 architecture, still has enough single-thread performance to avoid bottlenecking, as evidenced by the 144 FPS Low result at 1440p.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is the dominant constraint. The 4K Low preset (89 FPS) is still playable, but the gap between Low and Ultra (37 FPS) is a 58.4% drop, mirroring the 1080p pattern but at a lower absolute level. The RTX 5050’s 13.17 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 82.30 GPixel/s pixel rate are the limiting factors here, not the Ryzen 5 4600G’s 3.70 GHz base and 4.20 GHz boost clocks. The CPU’s 8 MB shared L3 cache and DDR4 dual-channel memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s are adequate for feeding the GPU at 4K, since the frame rate collapses on the Ultra preset regardless of CPU capability.

The data indicates that for this game, the GPU is responsible for the majority of performance scaling across resolutions, while the CPU matters most at low-resolution, high-refresh scenarios. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 201 FPS, which is likely near the CPU’s practical limit for frame generation in this title. At 4K Ultra, the CPU is almost certainly idle-waiting on the GPU, given the 37 FPS result.

Best Settings per Resolution

For 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, which averages 84 FPS. This leaves a comfortable 24 FPS buffer above the playability threshold, so even demanding scenes with multiple enemies or heavy particle effects should remain fluid. The 1080p Ultra result is the strongest showing for this combo, suggesting that users with 1080p displays can max out the game without concern.

At 2560x1440, the best playable setting is also Ultra, but it sits exactly at 60 FPS. This is a razor-thin margin with no recorded minimum FPS for the Ultra preset, so the average could hide occasional dips below 60 in busy sequences. The Medium preset at 1440p averages 118 FPS with a minimum of 100, which is a safer choice for consistent frame pacing, but strictly by the data, Ultra qualifies as playable.

For 3840x2160, the most demanding playable preset is High, which averages exactly 60 FPS. The Medium preset at 4K averages 73 FPS with a minimum of 62, providing a more reliable experience, but High is the highest setting that still clears the threshold. The 4K Ultra preset at 37 FPS is not playable by the database’s 60 FPS standard, so users with 4K displays should avoid it entirely.

The Verdict

This PC can run Downfall, but the answer varies significantly by resolution and preset. According to the verdict data, the system clears 60 FPS at 1920x1080 on all four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra), with the weakest result being 84 FPS on Ultra. At 2560x1440, all four presets also clear 60 FPS, including Ultra at exactly 60 FPS. At 3840x2160, three of four presets are playable (Low at 89 FPS, Medium at 73 FPS, High at 60 FPS), but Ultra fails at 37 FPS.

The practical interpretation is that this combo is a solid 1080p and 1440p performer for Downfall, capable of maximum settings at both resolutions. At 4K, the system is playable only up to High settings, and even that result has no margin for error. The Ultra preset at 4K is the sole unplayable configuration, producing less than two-thirds of the required frame rate. Users targeting 4K should dial back to High or Medium, with Medium offering the best balance of visual quality and frame time consistency given its recorded 62 FPS minimum.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU’s nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE, which scores 0.1% higher on average, the Intel Core 7 150U at 0.6% higher, the AMD Ryzen 3 8300GE at 0.6% lower, and the Intel Core i3-14100T at 0.8% lower. These processors would produce nearly identical frame rates in Downfall, with differences of less than 1% in synthetic benchmarks. In practice, swapping the Ryzen 5 4600G for any of these chips would change the measured FPS by only a few frames at most, and only in CPU-bound scenarios like 1080p Low.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL (0.6% lower average score), the AMD Radeon HD 8970M (1.0% lower), the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (1.6% higher), and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile (1.6% lower). The RX 5600 XT would offer a marginal performance improvement, potentially pushing the 4K High preset from 60 FPS to around 61-62 FPS, while the RTX A4000 Mobile would likely produce nearly identical results. The RX Vega M GL and HD 8970M are older mobile parts that would perform within 1% of the RTX 5050 in this title, making them suitable substitutes if availability is a concern.

None of these alternatives represent a meaningful upgrade or downgrade for Downfall specifically. The performance envelope is tightly clustered, with the largest delta being 1.6% between the RTX 5050 and RX 5600 XT. Users considering any of these combinations should expect essentially the same experience: excellent at 1080p, fully playable at 1440p, and playable at 4K only up to High settings.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest preset that maintains at least 60 FPS at 1920x1080?

A: The Ultra preset averages 84 FPS at 1080p, making it the most demanding playable setting at that resolution.

Q: Can this system handle 4K Ultra in Downfall?

A: No. The 4K Ultra preset averages 37 FPS, which is well below the 60 FPS playability threshold. The highest playable 4K preset is High at exactly 60 FPS.

Q: How does the RTX 5050 compare to the RX 5600 XT in the database?

A: The RX 5600 XT scores 1.6% higher in average GPU benchmarks, meaning it would deliver roughly 1-2 FPS more in Downfall at the same settings.

Q: Is the Ryzen 5 4600G a bottleneck for the RTX 5050?

A: At 1080p Low, the system reaches 201 FPS, which suggests the CPU is nearing its limit. At higher resolutions and presets, the GPU becomes the primary constraint, so the CPU is not a bottleneck in GPU-bound scenarios.

Q: What is the safest 1440p preset for consistent frame times?

A: Medium at 1440p averages 118 FPS with a minimum of 100 FPS, providing a substantial buffer. Ultra also averages 60 FPS but has no recorded minimum, so it carries more risk of dips.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested configurations for Downfall?

A: It ranks 2281 out of 3716 tested combos, placing it in the lower-middle portion of the database for this game.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 4600G and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 ranks 2281 out of 3716 tested combos for Downfall, placing it in the 38.6th percentile of all configurations. This is a below-median result, which aligns with the measured data: the system is fully capable at 1080p and 1440p, but struggles at 4K Ultra and has no headroom at 4K High. The CPU’s percentile rank of 71 among all CPUs is respectable for a budget part, but the GPU’s percentile rank of 66 among all GPUs is slightly lower, indicating that the graphics card is the limiting factor in this pairing.

The rank suggests that while this combo handles Downfall well at mainstream resolutions, many other tested systems achieve higher frame rates, particularly at 4K. The 4K Ultra result of 37 FPS is the primary drag on the ranking, as it fails the playability threshold by a wide margin. Systems ranked above this combo likely feature stronger GPUs that can maintain 60 FPS at 4K Ultra or achieve higher averages across all presets.

For users whose target is 1080p or 1440p gaming, this rank is not a concern, since the system maxes out both resolutions. For 4K enthusiasts, however, the 2281st position reflects the GPU’s limitations at that resolution. The data shows a capable mid-range setup that is well-suited to its intended resolutions, but not a top-tier performer in the broader database context.