Downfall

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700X paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 delivers a robust performance profile in Downfall, with measured frame rates that vary significantly across resolutions and presets. The dataset provides average FPS figures for 3840x2160, 2560x1440, and 1920x1080 at Low, Medium, High, and Ultra settings, with no minimum or maximum frame time data recorded. The playable threshold for this analysis is set at 60 FPS, and the data indicates that this combination clears that bar at every resolution tested, though the margin of headroom narrows considerably at 4K Ultra.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the RTX 3080 and Ryzen 7 7700X produce a spread of results that starts strong but tapers off at the highest preset. Low settings yield an average of 134.1 FPS, which is more than double the playable threshold and suggests substantial headroom for less demanding scenes. Medium settings drop to 106.6 FPS, still comfortably above 60 FPS, while High settings deliver 87.2 FPS. The Ultra preset, however, pulls the average down to 57.3 FPS, which falls below the 60 FPS playable threshold. This represents a 29.9 FPS drop from High to Ultra, a steeper decline than the 19.5 FPS difference between Medium and High, indicating that the Ultra preset introduces a disproportionately heavy load at 4K.

Moving to 2560x1440, the same combination shows significantly more headroom. Low settings average 212.7 FPS, which is nearly 3.5 times the playable threshold. Medium settings produce 176 FPS, High settings reach 142.4 FPS, and Ultra settings manage 90.1 FPS. The scaling here is more linear than at 4K: the gap between Low and Medium is 36.7 FPS, between Medium and High is 33.6 FPS, and between High and Ultra is 52.3 FPS. The Ultra preset still exacts a noticeable toll, but the absolute value remains well above 60 FPS, making this resolution the sweet spot for maximum visual fidelity without compromising fluidity.

At 1920x1080, the results are consistently high across all settings. Low settings peak at 300.4 FPS, which is an exceptional figure that suggests the CPU and GPU are far from saturated. Medium settings produce 248 FPS, High settings reach 199.4 FPS, and Ultra settings deliver 125 FPS. The relative drops are proportionally similar to 1440p: Low to Medium is a 52.4 FPS decrease, Medium to High is 48.6 FPS, and High to Ultra is 74.4 FPS. Even at Ultra, the average FPS is more than double the playable threshold, indicating that this resolution is largely GPU-bound only at the most demanding moments, if at all.

The absence of min and max FPS data means the analysis relies solely on averages, but the consistency of the scaling pattern across resolutions suggests that frame pacing is likely stable. The data indicates that the largest performance cliff occurs at 4K Ultra, where the average drops below 60 FPS, while all other tested configurations remain playable.

Best Settings per Resolution

The most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS varies by resolution, and the data provides a clear hierarchy.

At 3840x2160, the best settings are High, which achieves an average of 87.2 FPS. Low and Medium also clear the threshold, but High is the most visually demanding option that remains playable. Ultra falls short at 57.3 FPS, so it is excluded from playable settings. The 30.1 FPS margin between High and the 60 FPS threshold provides a buffer, but it is not enormous, so users should expect occasional dips in complex scenes.

At 2560x1440, all four presets are playable, and the best settings are Ultra with an average of 90.1 FPS. This is 30.1 FPS above the threshold, which is a comfortable margin. The gap between Ultra and the next highest preset, High at 142.4 FPS, is substantial, but the absolute value at Ultra is sufficient for smooth gameplay. This resolution offers the best balance between visual quality and performance in the dataset.

At 1920x1080, Ultra is also the best settings, delivering an average of 125 FPS. This is 65 FPS above the playable threshold, representing a very large safety margin. The data shows that this resolution can handle the highest preset with significant headroom, making it the most forgiving environment for this hardware combination.

The verdictByResolution field confirms these findings: 4K lists High, Low, and Medium as playable; 1440p lists all four settings; and 1080p lists all four settings. The best settings at each resolution are High, Ultra, and Ultra respectively, with corresponding average FPS of 87.2, 90.1, and 125.

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 combination holds a combo rank of 1056 out of 3716 tested combos in Downfall. This places the combo in the upper third of all tested configurations, specifically at roughly the 28th percentile of the distribution. The rank reflects the aggregate performance across all resolutions and presets, and it indicates that a substantial number of other hardware pairings outperform this one, while a larger majority underperform it.

The CPU percentileVsAllCpus is 85, meaning the Ryzen 7 7700X outperforms 85% of all CPUs in the benchmark database. Its average benchmark score is 35909, with the nearest rival being the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 at an average score of 35802, a delta of 0.3%. The Intel Core 7 250H (35728, 0.5% delta), AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 (35719, 0.5%), and Intel Core Ultra 9 185H (35670, 0.7%) follow closely. These deltas are all under 1%, meaning the CPU is effectively in a tight cluster of similarly performing parts.

The GPU percentileVsAllGpus is 68, indicating the RTX 3080 outperforms 68% of all GPUs. Its average benchmark score is 23172, with the nearest rivals being the NVIDIA P106-100 (23249, -0.3% delta), AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 (23250, -0.3%), AMD Radeon RX 6600M (23273, -0.4%), and AMD Radeon R9 M290X (23276, -0.4%). All deltas are negative, meaning these rivals score slightly higher, but the differences are within a fraction of a percent, making them functionally equivalent in average benchmark terms.

The combo rank of 1056 out of 3716 suggests that while the individual components are strong, the pairing does not achieve the top tier in Downfall specifically. This is likely because the game's engine scales more efficiently with certain hardware configurations, but the data does not specify which combos rank higher. The measured FPS figures, however, show that this combo is more than adequate for playable frame rates at most settings.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Downfall at 4K Ultra settings?

A: No. At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the average FPS is 57.3, which falls below the 60 FPS playable threshold. The best playable settings at 4K are High, which averages 87.2 FPS.

Q: What is the highest preset that maintains 60 FPS at 1440p?

A: Ultra settings at 2560x1440 average 90.1 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold. All four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) are playable at this resolution.

Q: How much headroom is there at 1080p Ultra?

A: At 1920x1080 with Ultra settings, the average FPS is 125, which is 65 FPS above the playable threshold. This provides a very large buffer for frame rate drops in demanding scenes.

Q: Which resolution shows the largest performance drop from High to Ultra?

A: The drop from High to Ultra is largest at 3840x2160, where the average FPS falls from 87.2 to 57.3, a decrease of 29.9 FPS. At 2560x1440, the drop is 52.3 FPS (from 142.4 to 90.1), and at 1920x1080, it is 74.4 FPS (from 199.4 to 125).

Q: How does this combo rank compared to other tested systems?

A: This combo ranks 1056 out of 3716 tested combos in Downfall, placing it in the upper third of all configurations. The CPU ranks in the 85th percentile among all CPUs, and the GPU ranks in the 68th percentile among all GPUs.

Q: Are the nearest rival CPUs significantly different in performance?

A: No. The closest CPU rival, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845, has an average score of 35802 versus 35909 for the Ryzen 7 7700X, a delta of only 0.3%. All nearest rivals are within 0.7% of the CPU's average score.

CPU and GPU Roles

The measured FPS data reveals how the CPU and GPU each contribute to Downfall's performance across resolutions. The scaling between presets and resolutions indicates that the GPU becomes the dominant bottleneck at higher resolutions, while the CPU's role is more prominent at lower resolutions.

At 1920x1080, the average FPS ranges from 300.4 at Low to 125 at Ultra. The high frame rates at Low settings suggest that the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU with enough data to sustain over 300 FPS, and the drop to 125 FPS at Ultra points to the GPU becoming more heavily utilized. The 175.4 FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p is the largest absolute gap in the dataset, indicating that the GPU's workload scales dramatically with preset quality even at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the range narrows slightly, from 212.7 FPS at Low to 90.1 FPS at Ultra, a difference of 122.6 FPS. This indicates that the GPU is handling a greater share of the workload as resolution increases, but the CPU still has enough headroom to keep average frame rates above 200 FPS at Low settings. The Ultra preset at 1440p delivers 90.1 FPS, which is 35.9 FPS lower than the same preset at 1080p, showing that resolution alone imposes a measurable cost.

At 3840x2160, the range compresses further, from 134.1 FPS at Low to 57.3 FPS at Ultra, a difference of 76.8 FPS. The fact that Low settings at 4K produce fewer frames than Ultra at 1080p (134.1 vs 125) underscores how much the GPU is stressed by pixel count. The Ultra preset at 4K falls below the 60 FPS threshold, which is the only configuration in the dataset to do so, confirming that the GPU is the limiting factor at this resolution.

The CPU's influence is most visible in the Low preset results. At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 300.4, which is likely near the engine's frame rate cap or the CPU's practical limit. At 1440p Low, it drops to 212.7, and at 4K Low, it falls to 134.1. These figures suggest that the CPU can sustain high frame rates but that the GPU's rendering load at higher resolutions reduces the overall throughput. Conversely, the GPU's influence is most visible in the Ultra preset results, where the frame rate drops by 67.7 FPS from 1080p to 4K (125 to 57.3), a 54.2% reduction.

The data indicates that for this combo, the GPU is the primary determinant of performance at 4K and 1440p Ultra, while the CPU is more relevant at 1080p and lower presets. The verdictByResolution field supports this interpretation: 4K Ultra is not playable, 1440p Ultra is playable with a 30.1 FPS margin, and 1080p Ultra is playable with a 65 FPS margin. Users aiming for maximum visual quality should target 1440p Ultra, while those with 4K displays should stick to High settings or lower.

The Verdict

This PC can run Downfall at playable frame rates across most configurations, but the margin of success depends on the resolution and preset.

At 3840x2160, the system is playable at High, Low, and Medium settings. The best playable settings are High with an average of 87.2 FPS, which is 27.2 FPS above the 60 FPS threshold. Ultra is not playable, averaging only 57.3 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the system is playable at all four presets. The best settings are Ultra with an average of 90.1 FPS, providing a 30.1 FPS margin above the threshold. This is the highest preset that remains fully playable across the tested resolutions.

At 1920x1080, the system is playable at all four presets. The best settings are Ultra with an average of 125 FPS, which is 65 FPS above the threshold. This is the most comfortable configuration in the dataset.

The verdict is clear: for 4K displays, users should select High settings or lower to maintain 60 FPS. For 1440p and 1080p displays, Ultra settings are viable, with 1440p offering a modest margin and 1080p offering a generous one. The only configuration that fails the playable threshold is 4K Ultra.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the CPU and GPU provide a reference for what other hardware would perform similarly in Downfall.

For the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X, the closest alternatives are the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845, Intel Core 7 250H, AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350, and Intel Core Ultra 9 185H. The Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 has an average score of 35802, which is 0.3% lower than the 7700X's 35909. The Intel Core 7 250H scores 35728 (0.5% lower), the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 scores 35719 (0.5% lower), and the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H scores 35670 (0.7% lower). All of these CPUs are within a 0.7% performance band, so swapping the 7700X for any of them would result in virtually identical frame rates in CPU-bound scenarios, such as the Low preset at 1080p.

For the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080, the nearest rivals are the NVIDIA P106-100, AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16, AMD Radeon RX 6600M, and AMD Radeon R9 M290X. The P106-100 has an average score of 23249, which is 0.3% higher than the RTX 3080's 23172. The Radeon Pro Vega 16 scores 23250 (0.3% higher), the RX 6600M scores 23273 (0.4% higher), and the R9 M290X scores 23276 (0.4% higher). These deltas are all negative from the RTX 3080's perspective, meaning each rival scores slightly higher on average, but the differences are negligible. In practice, any of these GPUs would produce nearly identical frame rates in Downfall, with differences of less than 1% translating to less than 1 FPS at most settings.

The combo rank of 1056 out of 3716 suggests that this pairing sits in the upper third of tested systems. Users considering alternatives should note that the CPU and GPU are both near the top of their respective performance tiers, as indicated by the 85th and 68th percentiles. The nearest rivals do not represent meaningful upgrades or downgrades; they are functionally equivalent within the margins of benchmark variance.