Instant compatibility check with FPS benchmarks and optimization tips
Downfall
Performance
1080p (Full HD)
1440p (2K / QHD)
4K (Ultra HD)
Requirements Check
Recommendations
Your hardware doesn't meet minimum requirements for this game.
Your GPU supports ray tracing.
Average FPS: resolution vs quality settings
| Ultra | High | Medium | Low | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4K Ultra HD | 35 | 57 | 69 | 88 |
| 1440p QHD | 61 | 93 | 112 | 140 |
| 1080p Full HD | 81 | 131 | 157 | 190 |
Cell color: green is 120+ FPS, teal is 60+, amber is 30+, red is below 30. Cards marked Estimated above have no measured row and are scaled from your GPU benchmark percentile.
Performance Analysis: Downfall on Your System
Best Settings per Resolution
At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Medium, which delivers an average of 69.1 FPS. High settings fall short of the 60 FPS threshold with 57 FPS average, while Low runs at 87.6 FPS and Ultra drops to 35.1 FPS.
At 2560x1440, the entire settings range clears 60 FPS. Ultra is the most demanding playable preset, averaging 60.8 FPS. High reaches 92.9 FPS, Medium hits 112.4 FPS, and Low tops out at 139.7 FPS.
At 1920x1080, Ultra is fully playable with an average of 81.3 FPS. High runs at 131.1 FPS, Medium at 156.7 FPS, and Low at 190.4 FPS. This resolution gives the combo enough headroom to max out the game's settings while staying comfortably above the 60 FPS playable threshold.
FAQ
Q: Can this PC run Downfall at 4K resolution?
A: Yes, but not at the highest presets. The data shows Medium settings at 3840x2160 produce 69.1 FPS average, while High drops to 57 FPS and Ultra falls to 35.1 FPS. Low settings run at 87.6 FPS.
Q: What is the best settings preset at 1440p?
A: Ultra is the best playable preset at 2560x1440, averaging 60.8 FPS. All four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) exceed 60 FPS at this resolution, with Low reaching 139.7 FPS, Medium 112.4 FPS, and High 92.9 FPS.
Q: How does the combo perform at 1080p?
A: Exceptionally well. Every preset exceeds 60 FPS, with Ultra averaging 81.3 FPS, High 131.1 FPS, Medium 156.7 FPS, and Low 190.4 FPS. This is the resolution where the hardware has the most headroom.
Q: Is the game playable at Ultra settings anywhere?
A: Yes. Ultra clears 60 FPS at both 1920x1080 (81.3 FPS) and 2560x1440 (60.8 FPS). At 3840x2160, Ultra is not playable, averaging only 35.1 FPS.
Q: What is the playable threshold for this game?
A: The database uses 60 FPS as the playable threshold. At 4K, only Low and Medium settings meet this criterion. At 1440p and 1080p, all four settings presets meet or exceed it.
Q: How big is the performance gap between Low and Ultra at each resolution?
A: At 3840x2160, Low averages 87.6 FPS versus Ultra's 35.1 FPS, a difference of 52.5 FPS. At 2560x1440, Low hits 139.7 FPS versus Ultra's 60.8 FPS, a 78.9 FPS gap. At 1920x1080, Low reaches 190.4 FPS versus Ultra's 81.3 FPS, a 109.1 FPS difference.
Measured FPS Breakdown
3840x2160 (4K):
- Low: 87.6 FPS average
- Medium: 69.1 FPS average
- High: 57 FPS average
- Ultra: 35.1 FPS average
2560x1440 (1440p):
- Low: 139.7 FPS average
- Medium: 112.4 FPS average
- High: 92.9 FPS average
- Ultra: 60.8 FPS average
1920x1080 (1080p):
- Low: 190.4 FPS average
- Medium: 156.7 FPS average
- High: 131.1 FPS average
- Ultra: 81.3 FPS average
The recorded data shows no minimum or maximum FPS values, only averages. The scaling pattern is consistent across resolutions: each step from Low to Medium to High to Ultra reduces average FPS by a meaningful margin. At 4K, the drop from Medium to High is 12.1 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 21.9 FPS. At 1440p, the corresponding drops are 19.5 FPS and 32.1 FPS. At 1080p, they are 25.6 FPS and 49.8 FPS.
The resolution scaling is steep. Moving from 1080p to 1440p at Ultra costs 20.5 FPS (81.3 to 60.8). Moving from 1440p to 4K at Ultra costs 25.7 FPS (60.8 to 35.1). At Low settings, the same resolution steps cost 50.7 FPS (190.4 to 139.7) and 52.1 FPS (139.7 to 87.6), respectively.
The Verdict
This combo can run Downfall, but the experience depends heavily on resolution and settings. At 1920x1080, the system clears 60 FPS on every preset, including Ultra at 81.3 FPS. This is the resolution where the hardware performs best, with a comfortable margin above the playable threshold.
At 2560x1440, all four presets also clear 60 FPS, but Ultra is right at the edge with 60.8 FPS. This means 1440p gaming is viable across the board, though Ultra leaves little room for frame rate fluctuations.
At 3840x2160, the verdict is mixed. Low and Medium settings are playable, with Medium averaging 69.1 FPS. High settings fall just below 60 FPS at 57 FPS, and Ultra is not playable at 35.1 FPS. For 4K play, users should stick to Medium or Low.
The verdict by resolution confirms: 1080p and 1440p support all settings, while 4K supports only Low and Medium. The best settings at 4K are Medium, at 1440p are Ultra, and at 1080p are Ultra.
CPU and GPU Roles
The data reveals how the balance shifts across resolutions. At 1920x1080, the GPU is clearly the limiting factor at higher presets. The jump from Low to Ultra costs 109.1 FPS (190.4 to 81.3), showing that the Radeon RX 7600's rendering load scales dramatically with settings. The i5-10400F has enough headroom at this resolution to feed the GPU, as evidenced by the very high Low preset average of 190.4 FPS.
At 2560x1440, the GPU load increases further. Ultra drops to 60.8 FPS, a 20.5 FPS decline from 1080p Ultra. The CPU still appears sufficient, since Low settings still reach 139.7 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra grows to 78.9 FPS, indicating that GPU rasterization work dominates the frame time at higher settings.
At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the overwhelming bottleneck. Even Low settings only reach 87.6 FPS, down from 190.4 FPS at 1080p Low. The setting spread narrows in relative terms: Ultra at 35.1 FPS versus Low at 87.6 FPS. The CPU's role diminishes as pixel throughput becomes the primary constraint. The i5-10400F's six cores and twelve threads are not the limiting factor here; the Radeon RX 7600's 8 GB memory and 128-bit bus are working much harder.
The scaling between resolutions suggests this game is GPU-bound in most configurations. The CPU's 3DMark scores, including 4,748 on the 16-thread test and 688 on single-thread, indicate adequate processing power for a horror title of this era. The GPU's PassMark G3D score of 16,634 and DirectX 12 score of 58 point to a mid-range card that handles 1080p and 1440p well but struggles at 4K Ultra.
How This Combo Ranks
The Intel Core i5-10400F and AMD Radeon RX 7600 combination ranks 2,511 out of 3,716 tested combos in Downfall. This places it in the lower-middle portion of the database, meaning 1,205 other combinations perform better in this specific game.
Given that this combo clears 60 FPS at 1080p and 1440p on all presets, the rank reflects the game's demanding 4K Ultra preset rather than overall inadequacy. Many higher-ranked combos likely achieve playable 4K Ultra frame rates, which this system cannot match.
The rank also reflects the GPU's position. The Radeon RX 7600 sits at the 57th percentile among all GPUs, while the i5-10400F sits at the 68th percentile among all CPUs. The combo rank of 2,511 out of 3,716 (67.6th percentile among combos) suggests the pairing performs slightly below what the individual component percentiles might imply, likely due to the game's heavy GPU demands at high resolutions.
Similar Performance Alternatives
For the CPU, the nearest rivals by average benchmark score are the Intel Xeon 6756E, the Intel Core 7 160UL, the AMD EPYC 7552, and the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C. The Xeon 6756E scores 14,163, which is 0.2% higher than the i5-10400F's 14,185 average. The Core 7 160UL scores 14,232, 0.3% lower. The EPYC 7552 scores 14,115, 0.5% higher. The Ryzen 3 7320C scores 14,277, 0.6% lower. These deltas are all within one percent, meaning any of these processors would deliver nearly identical frame rates in Downfall when paired with the same GPU.
For the GPU, the nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM, the AMD Radeon Pro 560X, the AMD Radeon 680M, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti. The RTX 3050 OEM scores 15,199, 0.2% lower than the RX 7600's 15,171 average. The Radeon Pro 560X scores 15,082, 0.6% higher. The Radeon 680M scores 15,270, 0.7% lower. The GTX 660 Ti scores 15,063, 0.7% higher. Again, all rivals are within one percent, so swapping the GPU for any of these would produce essentially the same FPS results in this game.
In practical terms, a system with the i5-10400F and any of these rival GPUs would match the measured FPS closely. The RTX 3050 OEM is the closest GPU rival, and the Ryzen 3 7320C is the closest CPU rival, but all four alternatives in each category fall within a narrow performance band. Users with these nearby components should expect similar playable settings: 1080p and 1440p Ultra, and 4K Medium.