Downfall

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the recorded data shows that High settings deliver an average of 71 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS playability threshold. This is the most demanding preset that remains playable at this resolution. Low settings reach 106 FPS and Medium reaches 87 FPS, both also above 60 FPS, but High is the highest quality option that still maintains smooth performance. Ultra settings at 1080p drop to 44 FPS, below the threshold.

At 2560x1440, Medium settings achieve an average of 62 FPS, just above the 60 FPS line. This is the best playable preset at this resolution. Low settings run at 76 FPS, but Medium offers noticeably better visual quality while staying playable. High settings fall to 51 FPS and Ultra to 32 FPS, both below the threshold. The 62 FPS average at Medium is close to the boundary, with minimums recorded at 53 FPS, so there is some fluctuation below 60 FPS even when the average is acceptable.

At 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS. The best result is Low at 47 FPS, followed by Medium at 39 FPS, High at 32 FPS, and Ultra at 20 FPS. The verdict data confirms that 4K is not a viable resolution for this combination in Downfall, with even the lowest settings falling well short of playable performance. The gap between Low and Medium at 4K is 8 FPS, while the gap between Medium and High is 7 FPS, suggesting that each step up in quality carries a significant cost at this resolution.

CPU and GPU Roles

The measured data reveals an interesting division of labor between the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X and the Intel Arc B390. At 1920x1080, the GPU appears to be the limiting factor at higher presets. The jump from Low to Medium costs 19 FPS (from 106 to 87), and from Medium to High costs another 16 FPS (from 87 to 71). These are large drops for incremental quality increases, suggesting the GPU is saturated. However, the CPU is still feeding the GPU adequately at this resolution, as the 60 FPS+ results at three different presets indicate.

At 2560x1440, the pattern shifts. The drop from Low to Medium is 14 FPS (76 to 62), and from Medium to High is 11 FPS (62 to 51). The relative cost of each quality step is similar to 1080p, but the absolute FPS values are lower. This suggests the GPU is becoming more stressed as pixel count increases, while the CPU still has headroom. The Ryzen 7 3700X with its 8 cores and 16 threads is likely not the bottleneck at 1440p; the Arc B390's shading units and memory bandwidth are being pushed harder.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly the dominant constraint. Even Low settings only yield 47 FPS, and the scaling from 1440p Low (76 FPS) to 4K Low (47 FPS) represents a 38% reduction. The CPU's role diminishes further at this resolution, as the pixel throughput demands overwhelm the GPU. The fact that Ultra drops to 20 FPS at 4K, a 57% reduction from 1440p Ultra's 32 FPS, reinforces that this is purely a GPU-bound scenario.

The scaling between resolutions at the same preset tells the story. At Medium settings, moving from 1080p (87 FPS) to 1440p (62 FPS) costs 29% performance, and moving to 4K (39 FPS) costs another 37%. At High settings, the drops are 71 to 51 to 32, a 28% and 37% reduction respectively. These consistent percentages across resolutions point to the GPU as the primary performance driver, with the CPU maintaining stable frame delivery until the GPU is overwhelmed.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Downfall at 1080p with High settings?

A: Yes. The recorded average FPS at 1920x1080 with High settings is 71, which exceeds the 60 FPS playability threshold. The verdict data lists High as the best playable setting at this resolution.

Q: What is the best playable setting at 1440p?

A: Medium settings at 2560x1440 produce an average of 62 FPS, just above the threshold. This is the highest preset that remains playable at this resolution, with Low at 76 FPS also viable but lower quality.

Q: Is 4K playable with any settings?

A: No. The highest average FPS at 3840x2160 is 47 FPS on Low settings, which is below the 60 FPS threshold. Medium, High, and Ultra all score lower (39, 32, and 20 FPS respectively), making 4K unplayable with this hardware.

Q: How does the Ultra preset compare to High at 1080p?

A: Ultra drops the average FPS from 71 (High) to 44, a 38% reduction. This is well below the 60 FPS threshold, so Ultra is not recommended at 1080p despite being the highest quality option.

Q: What frame rates can I expect at 1440p Low?

A: The recorded average is 76 FPS, which is comfortably above the threshold. Interestingly, this is higher than the 1080p High result of 71 FPS, showing that lowering quality at a higher resolution can outperform higher quality at a lower resolution.

Q: Is there a large difference between Medium at 1440p and Medium at 1080p?

A: Yes. The average drops from 87 FPS at 1080p to 62 FPS at 1440p, a 29% reduction. This indicates the GPU is heavily taxed by the increased pixel count at Medium settings.

The Verdict

The data indicates that this PC can run Downfall at 1920x1080 with High settings, delivering 71 FPS on average. This clears the 60 FPS threshold with a comfortable margin. At 2560x1440, Medium settings achieve 62 FPS, which is playable but closer to the boundary, with minimums recorded at 53 FPS. At 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS, and the best result is 47 FPS on Low, so 4K is not viable.

For players prioritizing visual quality at 1080p, High is the recommended preset. For those at 1440p, Medium is the ceiling, and even then the minimum FPS of 53 suggests occasional dips below the threshold. The Ultra preset is not playable at any resolution, with the best Ultra result being 44 FPS at 1080p. The overall verdict is that this combination is suitable for 1080p High and 1440p Medium, with 4K out of reach.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full range of settings shows: Low averages 106 FPS, Medium averages 87 FPS with minimums of 74 and maximums of 100, High averages 71 FPS, and Ultra averages 44 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 62 FPS, indicating a wide range of performance depending on quality. The Medium preset has the only complete min/max data at this resolution, showing a variance of 26 FPS between its minimum and maximum.

At 2560x1440, Low averages 76 FPS, Medium averages 62 FPS with minimums of 53 and maximums of 71, High averages 51 FPS, and Ultra averages 32 FPS. The gap between Medium and High is 11 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is 19 FPS, showing that Ultra carries a disproportionately high cost. The Medium variance at this resolution is 18 FPS, smaller than at 1080p, suggesting more consistent frame pacing.

At 3840x2160, Low averages 47 FPS, Medium averages 39 FPS with minimums of 33 and maximums of 44, High averages 32 FPS, and Ultra averages 20 FPS. The Medium variance is 11 FPS, the tightest of any resolution, but all values are below the 60 FPS threshold. The step from High to Ultra costs 12 FPS, a 37.5% reduction, which is the largest relative drop between consecutive presets in the entire dataset.

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X paired with the Intel Arc B390 ranks 3303 out of 3716 tested combinations in Downfall. This places it in the lower percentile of systems tested, consistent with the GPU's poor performance profile. The Arc B390 sits at the 9th percentile against all GPUs, while the CPU is at the 84th percentile against all CPUs. This stark contrast shows a significant imbalance: a strong processor paired with a weak graphics solution.

The rank of 3303 out of 3716 means roughly 89% of tested combos perform better in this game. This is expected given the GPU's low benchmark scores. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482 is near the bottom of the GPU benchmark pool. The CPU's strong benchmarks, such as the Cinebench R15 multicore score of 2092 and Geekbench multicore score of 8899, do not translate into gaming performance when the GPU cannot keep up with rendering demands.

The data suggests that this combination is heavily GPU-limited in Downfall. The CPU has ample headroom for this title, as evidenced by its ability to maintain 106 FPS at 1080p Low, but the GPU's ceiling prevents higher quality settings from being playable. Players considering this combo for this game should focus on GPU upgrades rather than CPU upgrades.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest CPU rivals to the Ryzen 7 3700X, based on average benchmark scores, include the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 (0.1% higher score), AMD EPYC 4244P (0.1% higher), Intel Core i5-13450HX (0.2% lower), and Intel Core Ultra 7 165H (0.5% higher). These processors would behave nearly identically in Downfall, as their performance deltas are within 0.5% of the 3700X. Since the game is GPU-bound with this graphics card, swapping among these CPUs would yield negligible FPS differences.

The GPU's nearest rivals are significantly weaker in benchmark terms: NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1.3% higher score), NVIDIA GeForce 800M (1.5% higher), NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM (2.5% higher), and NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 (2.7% higher). These are all older or lower-tier GPUs with scores in the 1443-1463 range, compared to the Arc B390's 1482. In practice, these alternatives would deliver similar or slightly worse FPS in Downfall, meaning they would also fail to reach 60 FPS at 4K and would struggle at 1440p High.

The data indicates that the Arc B390 is positioned at the very low end of the GPU spectrum. Its nearest rivals are all legacy NVIDIA parts that are not competitive in modern gaming. For players seeking better performance in Downfall, the CPU is not the limiting factor; any of these rival GPUs would produce similar results, and none would unlock higher settings or resolutions. The bottleneck is firmly in the graphics subsystem.