Downfall

# FAQ

Q: What is the highest playable setting for Downfall at 1920x1080 with this hardware?

A: The recorded data shows that High settings run at an average of 71 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold. Medium runs at 87 FPS average, and Low at 106 FPS average. Ultra drops below the threshold at 44 FPS average.

Q: Can this system handle 2560x1440 in Downfall?

A: Yes, but only up to Medium settings. The database shows Medium at 62 FPS average, which is above the 60 FPS threshold. High falls to 51 FPS average, and Ultra drops to 32 FPS average.

Q: Is 3840x2160 playable at any setting?

A: No. The measurements show that even at Low settings, the average FPS is 47, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold. Medium averages 39 FPS, High averages 32 FPS, and Ultra averages 20 FPS.

Q: What is the performance gap between Low and Ultra at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, Low averages 106 FPS while Ultra averages 44 FPS. This represents a drop of 62 FPS, meaning Ultra delivers roughly 58% lower average performance compared to Low.

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

A: The combo ranks 3303 out of 3716 tested combinations. This places it in the lower percentile of tested systems, which is consistent with the GPU's overall benchmark percentile of 9 compared to all GPUs.

Q: Does the CPU or GPU bottleneck Downfall performance at 1080p?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the limiting factor. The Intel Arc B390 sits at the 9th percentile among all GPUs, while the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D sits at the 87th percentile among all CPUs. The frame rates scale primarily with resolution and settings, indicating the GPU is the constraining component.

# Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that maintains at least 60 FPS average is High, producing 71 FPS average. This is the highest visual quality setting that remains playable at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the most demanding playable preset is Medium, delivering 62 FPS average. High settings drop to 51 FPS average, so Medium represents the best balance of visual quality and playability at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, no settings preset reaches the 60 FPS threshold. The closest is Low at 47 FPS average, but this still falls short of playable. The database records no playable settings for this resolution with this hardware combination.

# CPU and GPU Roles

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern: the GPU is the dominant factor in Downfall performance for this system. The Intel Arc B390 has a benchmark percentile of 9 among all GPUs, while the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D has a percentile of 87 among all CPUs. This massive disparity indicates the graphics card is the bottleneck.

Looking at resolution scaling, the frame rate drops as resolution increases, which is typical of GPU-bound scenarios. At 1920x1080 Low, the system achieves 106 FPS average. Moving to 2560x1440 Low, it drops to 76 FPS average, a reduction of 30 FPS. At 3840x2160 Low, it falls to 47 FPS average, another 29 FPS reduction. This consistent decline with resolution scaling points directly at the GPU's limited rasterization throughput.

The settings scaling reinforces this conclusion. At 1920x1080, going from Low to Ultra changes the average FPS from 106 to 44, a 62 FPS swing. At 2560x1440, the same settings change moves from 76 to 32 FPS, a 44 FPS difference. At 3840x2160, Low to Ultra spans 47 to 20 FPS, a 27 FPS gap. The diminishing absolute differences at higher resolutions suggest the GPU is increasingly saturated.

The CPU's role is secondary here. With 8 cores, 16 threads, and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D provides ample processing headroom. Its multicore Cinebench R23 score of 23230 and single-core score of 2080 indicate strong performance, but Downfall's frame rates do not appear to be limited by processor throughput. The game's horror genre typically involves limited on-screen entities, and the data shows no signs of CPU-related frame pacing issues.

At 1080p, where CPU load is typically highest relative to GPU load, the system still delivers 106 FPS at Low settings. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see diminishing returns when lowering resolution or settings, but the frame rates continue to scale with both. This confirms the GPU as the primary performance constraint across all tested resolutions.

# Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the nearest rivals in the database are all AMD processors with similar average benchmark scores. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS scores 39603, which is 0.4% lower than the Ryzen 7 9800X3D's 39768 average. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 scores 40048, 0.7% higher. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450 scores 39485, 0.7% lower. The AMD Ryzen 7 7700 scores 40081, 0.8% higher. Any of these processors would deliver nearly identical CPU performance in Downfall, though the Ryzen 7 9800X3D's 96 MB of shared L3 cache and Zen 5 architecture may offer different characteristics in other workloads.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals are all NVIDIA parts with very low benchmark scores. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX scores 1463, which is 1.3% lower than the Arc B390's 1482. The NVIDIA GeForce 800M scores 1460, 1.5% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446, 2.5% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 scores 1443, 2.7% lower. These are all entry-level or legacy GPUs, and the data suggests they would produce similar frame rates in Downfall. However, the Arc B390 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, which may affect feature support even if raw frame rates are comparable.

The combination of a top-tier CPU with a low-tier GPU creates an unusual pairing. The CPU's nearest rivals would not change the gaming outcome, as the GPU remains the limiting factor. Swapping the GPU for any of its nearest rivals would likely produce similar sub-60 FPS results at 1440p and 4K, and only marginal differences at 1080p.

# The Verdict

This system can run Downfall, but with significant caveats depending on the target resolution.

At 1920x1080, the system is playable at High, Low, and Medium settings. High delivers 71 FPS average, which clears the 60 FPS threshold with a reasonable margin. Medium runs at 87 FPS average, and Low at 106 FPS average. Ultra is not playable at 44 FPS average. The verdict is clear: 1080p gaming works well up to High settings.

At 2560x1440, playability is limited to Low and Medium settings. Medium averages 62 FPS, just above the threshold. Low runs at 76 FPS average. High drops to 51 FPS, and Ultra to 32 FPS. The verdict is conditional: 1440p is playable only at Medium or lower.

At 3840x2160, no settings achieve 60 FPS average. Low runs at 47 FPS, Medium at 39 FPS, High at 32 FPS, and Ultra at 20 FPS. The verdict is negative: 4K is not viable for playable frame rates with this hardware.

The overall assessment is that this combo serves as a 1080p gaming system for Downfall, with limited 1440p capability at medium quality. The GPU's low benchmark percentile (9) relative to the CPU's high percentile (87) means the graphics card is the decisive factor in determining playability.

# How This Combo Ranks

The database ranks this CPU and GPU combination at 3303 out of 3716 tested combos for Downfall. This places it in the bottom 11% of tested systems, which is consistent with the GPU's low benchmark percentile.

The ranking reflects the GPU's performance class more than the CPU's capabilities. The Ryzen 7 9800X3D is a high-end processor, but the Arc B390's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482 puts it near the bottom of the GPU performance distribution. The combo rank of 3303 indicates that most other tested systems deliver higher frame rates in this game.

Systems ranked below this combo would include those with even weaker GPUs, such as the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 or GT 625 OEM, which score 1443 and 1446 respectively in the database. Systems ranked above would include those with mid-range or high-end GPUs paired with any reasonably capable CPU.

For context, the combo's rank means that roughly 413 tested configurations perform worse in Downfall. This is a small fraction of the 3716 total, confirming that this system sits near the low end of gaming performance for this title.

# Measured FPS Breakdown

1920x1080:

• Low: 106 FPS average, no min/max recorded
• Medium: 87 FPS average, minimum 74 FPS, maximum 100 FPS
• High: 71 FPS average, no min/max recorded
• Ultra: 44 FPS average, no min/max recorded

2560x1440:

• Low: 76 FPS average, no min/max recorded
• Medium: 62 FPS average, minimum 53 FPS, maximum 71 FPS
• High: 51 FPS average, no min/max recorded
• Ultra: 32 FPS average, no min/max recorded

3840x2160:

• Low: 47 FPS average, no min/max recorded
• Medium: 39 FPS average, minimum 33 FPS, maximum 44 FPS
• High: 32 FPS average, no min/max recorded
• Ultra: 20 FPS average, no min/max recorded

The medium settings measurements include full min and max data. At 1080p Medium, the frame rate ranges from 74 to 100 FPS, showing a 26 FPS variance. At 1440p Medium, the range is 53 to 71 FPS, a 18 FPS variance. At 4K Medium, the range narrows to 33 to 44 FPS, an 11 FPS variance. This decreasing variance at higher resolutions suggests the GPU is operating closer to its limits, with less headroom for frame rate fluctuations.

The pattern across all resolutions shows consistent scaling: each step down in settings yields roughly 15 to 20 FPS improvement at 1080p, 10 to 14 FPS at 1440p, and 7 to 8 FPS at 4K. The diminishing returns at higher resolutions reflect the GPU's fixed pixel throughput limits.