Downfall

Downfall is a horror title from 2016, and the pairing of AMD's Ryzen 9 9900X3D with Intel's Arc B370 is an unusual one: a flagship-tier desktop CPU attached to a modest integrated graphics solution. The recorded measurements show exactly the imbalance you would expect. The processor sits in the 91st percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the GPU lands in the 5th percentile among graphics solutions. That gap defines every result below.

Measured FPS Breakdown

All figures come from measured runs recorded in the database, with 60 FPS treated as the playable threshold.

At 1920x1080, the combo produces its strongest numbers. Low settings average 96 FPS. Medium averages 78 FPS, with a recorded minimum of 67 and a maximum of 90, meaning even the slowest frames stay comfortably above the threshold. High settings average 64 FPS, still clearing 60. Ultra drops to an average of 40 FPS, the only 1080p preset that falls short.

At 2560x1440, performance steps down a full tier. Low averages 68 FPS, the only preset at this resolution that stays at or above the threshold. Medium averages 56 FPS with a minimum of 48 and a maximum of 64, so frame times dip below 60 for much of the run even though the peak touches it. High averages 46 FPS, and Ultra falls to 29 FPS.

At 3840x2160, nothing is playable. Low averages 43 FPS, Medium 35 FPS with a minimum of 30 and a maximum of 40, High 29 FPS, and Ultra just 18 FPS. Four times the pixel count of 1080p roughly halves throughput compared to the equivalent 1080p presets, which is consistent with a GPU-bound configuration: the Arc B370's 1280 shading units, 20 ROPs, and 48 GPixel/s pixel rate saturate long before the CPU becomes a factor.

The scaling pattern across presets is informative. Going from Low to Ultra at 1080p costs 56 FPS, from 96 down to 40. At 4K the same jump costs 25 FPS, from 43 to 18. The GPU is the bottleneck at every resolution and every preset tested, which is unsurprising given the B370 is a 25 W integrated part on Intel's 3 nm Panther Lake silicon with system-shared memory, bandwidth that depends entirely on host RAM.

On the CPU side, there is no evidence of a processor limitation anywhere in the data. The Ryzen 9 9900X3D brings 12 cores and 24 threads on the Zen 5 architecture, boosting to 5.50 GHz, with a single-thread Passmark score of 4646 and a Cinebench R23 single-core result of 6739. A horror game from 2016 simply does not draw on that kind of throughput, and the perfectly regular resolution-driven FPS decline confirms the graphics side is the ceiling.

Best Settings per Resolution

Working from the recorded verdict data, the most demanding preset that holds at or above 60 FPS at each resolution is:

• 1920x1080: High, averaging 64 FPS. Medium is safer at 78 FPS with a 67 FPS minimum, but High is the highest preset that clears the bar.
• 2560x1440: Low, averaging 68 FPS. Medium at 56 FPS average misses the threshold, so Low is the ceiling here.
• 3840x2160: no playable settings. The best result is Low at 43 FPS average, well short of 60. The database records no best settings for this resolution.

The practical takeaway: 1080p High is the sweet spot for this configuration, and 1440p is achievable only with the visual fidelity dropped to the floor.

FAQ

Q: Can the Ryzen 9 9900X3D + Arc B370 run Downfall at 1080p?

A: Yes. High settings average 64 FPS, Medium averages 78 FPS with a 67 FPS minimum, and Low averages 96 FPS. Only Ultra, at 40 FPS, falls below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Can this combo handle 1440p?

A: Barely. Low settings average 68 FPS, which clears the threshold, but Medium drops to a 56 FPS average with dips to 48, and High and Ultra sit at 46 and 29 FPS respectively.

Q: Is 4K playability realistic?

A: No. The best 4K result is 43 FPS on Low, and Ultra averages just 18 FPS. No preset at 3840x2160 reaches 60 FPS in the recorded data.

Q: Is the CPU holding this configuration back?

A: No. The Ryzen 9 9900X3D ranks in the 91st percentile of all CPUs in the database with an average benchmark score of 54762, while the Arc B370 sits in the 5th percentile of GPUs. The FPS scaling with resolution confirms the graphics solution is the bottleneck.

Q: How does the 9900X3D compare to rival CPUs?

A: Its average score is essentially matched by the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF (0.6 percent apart), and it sits 1.3 percent ahead of the Core Ultra 5 245K, 2 percent ahead of the Xeon 6505P, and 2.1 percent ahead of the Core i7-14700F.

Q: How does this pairing rank against other tested combinations in Downfall?

A: It ranks 3429 out of 3716 tested combos, placing it near the bottom of the field despite the strong CPU, because the integrated GPU caps frame rates.

The Verdict

Yes, this PC can run Downfall, but only in a narrow window. At 1920x1080 it is genuinely playable: Low, Medium, and High all clear 60 FPS, with High at 64 FPS marking the top of the playable range and Medium offering the smoothest experience at 78 FPS average with a 67 FPS floor. At 2560x1440 the verdict narrows to a single playable preset, Low at 68 FPS. At 3840x2160 the verdict is a flat no, with every preset below the threshold and the best result (Low, 43 FPS) trailing the target by a wide margin.

The context matters here. Downfall is a 2016 horror game, and even a 5th-percentile GPU can push it past 60 FPS at 1080p High. What this configuration cannot do is combine high resolutions with high presets. The Ryzen 9 9900X3D, with 128 MB of L3 cache, DDR5 support, and 89.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth on a dual-channel bus, is massively overqualified for the task, which means every frame-rate limitation in the data traces back to the 25 W integrated graphics.

Similar Performance Alternatives

On the graphics side, the Arc B370's nearest rivals in the database are telling: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (0.2 percent apart), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (0.5 percent apart), AMD Radeon HD 7650M (0.7 percent apart), and AMD FirePro M2000 (1.4 percent apart on the other side). Anyone running one of those graphics solutions should expect Downfall behavior nearly identical to the numbers above: playable at 1080p on modest presets, marginal at 1440p, and out of reach at 4K. The B370's sole recorded graphics benchmark, a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184, sits within a point or two of all four.

On the CPU side, the 9900X3D's rivals are all effectively equivalent for this game: the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF, Core Ultra 5 245K, Xeon 6505P, and Core i7-14700F all fall within roughly 2 percent of its average score. Since Downfall is GPU-bound on this configuration, any of those processors paired with similar graphics would produce indistinguishable frame rates. The lesson from the rival data is that swapping CPUs in this performance band changes nothing for this title; only the graphics solution moves the needle.

How This Combo Ranks

Against the 3716 hardware combinations tested in Downfall, this pairing ranks 3429. That is a bottom-tier placement, and it is entirely attributable to the GPU. A processor in the 91st CPU percentile attached to a graphics solution in the 5th GPU percentile produces a combo that ranks below the vast majority of tested systems in this specific game. The rank is not a statement about the 9900X3D, which posts a Geekbench multicore score of 22884 and a Passmark multithread score of 56154, but about the ceiling imposed by integrated graphics with system-shared memory. For Downfall specifically, the database positions this configuration as a 1080p machine, full stop.