Downfall

Similar Performance Alternatives

The recorded data places the Intel Core i5-11400F in a specific performance tier based on its average benchmark score of 17,177. The nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 7H12, scores 17,120, which is only 0.3% lower. This means the i5-11400F holds a marginal lead over that server-class chip in the database's aggregate measurements. The Intel Core i5-12450H scores 17,239, putting it 0.4% ahead of the i5-11400F, a difference small enough that most workloads would show no meaningful distinction. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G sits at 17,278, 0.6% ahead, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U trails at 17,074, 0.6% behind. For gaming scenarios, any of these four processors would deliver effectively interchangeable CPU-driven performance, assuming the graphics solution is identical.

The GPU side tells a very different story. The Intel Arc B370 has an average benchmark score of 1,184, which is remarkably low. Its nearest rival, the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, scores 1,186, a 0.2% gap, meaning the Arc B370 is essentially tied with a legacy mobile graphics part. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1,190, 0.5% higher, and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1,192, 0.7% higher. The AMD FirePro M2000 trails at 1,168, 1.4% lower. The Arc B370's percentile ranking of 5 among all GPUs confirms that it is positioned near the very bottom of the database's graphics hierarchy. Users seeking similar frame rates in Downfall should expect behavior comparable to these older discrete and mobile GPUs, which means the Arc B370 will be the limiting factor in almost every scenario.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark data for Downfall shows a clear pattern: the GPU is the dominant constraint at nearly every resolution and preset. At 3840x2160, the frame rates are low across the board, ranging from 18 FPS on Ultra to 43 FPS on Low. The CPU, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, has plenty of headroom for a horror title of this era, but the Arc B370 cannot feed frames fast enough to utilize it. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 4K shows a drop of 25 FPS, from 43 down to 18, which is entirely consistent with GPU-bound rendering.

At 2560x1440, the same pattern holds. Low delivers 68 FPS, Medium drops to 56 FPS, High to 46 FPS, and Ultra to 29 FPS. The 39 FPS spread between the lowest and highest presets demonstrates that graphical settings have a massive impact on the Arc B370's output. The CPU's role here is secondary; even at the lowest settings, the GPU is still the bottleneck, as evidenced by the fact that frame rates scale predictably with preset quality rather than showing a plateau that would indicate CPU limitation.

At 1920x1080, the GPU remains the primary factor, but the CPU starts to matter more at the low end. Low settings produce 96 FPS, Medium 78 FPS, and High 64 FPS, all of which are comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold. The Ultra preset falls to 40 FPS. The data suggests that at 1080p Low, the i5-11400F can keep up with the Arc B370's output, since the frame rate is high enough that CPU overhead would become relevant. However, the CPU's 3DMark single-thread score of 868 and multi-thread score of 5,652 indicate it is more than adequate for this game's demands. The bottleneck is overwhelmingly the GPU, particularly at higher resolutions and presets.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the recorded data shows the Arc B370 struggling. The Ultra preset averages 18 FPS, which is far below playable. High averages 29 FPS, Medium averages 35 FPS with a minimum of 30 and a maximum of 40, and Low averages 43 FPS. None of these settings approach the 60 FPS playable threshold, and even the Low preset falls 17 FPS short. The min/max data for Medium shows a narrow band, 30 to 40 FPS, indicating consistent performance without severe spikes, but the overall level is too low for smooth gameplay.

At 2560x1440, the situation improves but remains limited. Low is the only preset that clears 60 FPS, averaging 68 FPS. Medium averages 56 FPS with a minimum of 48 and a maximum of 64, which means it occasionally dips below the threshold but also occasionally exceeds it. High averages 46 FPS, and Ultra drops to 29 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 39 FPS, showing that the Arc B370 cannot sustain high-quality rendering at this resolution.

At 1920x1080, the Arc B370 finally shows usable performance. Low averages 96 FPS, Medium averages 78 FPS with a minimum of 67 and a maximum of 90, and High averages 64 FPS. All three of these presets stay at or above 60 FPS on average. Ultra averages 40 FPS, which is not playable. The Medium preset's minimum of 67 FPS is particularly notable, as it means even the worst-case frame rate stays above the 60 FPS threshold. The High preset's average of 64 FPS is just barely above playable, so users who want a safety margin might prefer Medium.

The Verdict

The recorded verdict data is unambiguous. At 3840x2160, no settings preset is playable. The playable settings list is empty, and there is no best settings recommendation. The highest average FPS at this resolution is 43 on Low, which is 17 FPS below the 60 FPS threshold. This combination cannot run Downfall at 4K with acceptable smoothness, regardless of how far the settings are lowered.

At 2560x1440, the verdict is that Low is the only playable preset, with an average of 68 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra all fail to reach 60 FPS. Users who want to play at 1440p must accept Low settings, and even then, the 68 FPS average leaves only 8 FPS of headroom above the threshold. The Medium preset's average of 56 FPS is close, but the minimum of 48 FPS indicates that demanding scenes could cause noticeable stutter.

At 1920x1080, the verdict is much more favorable. High, Low, and Medium are all listed as playable, with High being the best setting at 64 FPS. This means users can run the game at 1080p with High presets and stay above 60 FPS on average. The Ultra preset remains unplayable at 40 FPS. For a horror game where atmosphere and visual fidelity matter, 1080p High at 64 FPS is a reasonable outcome, though the margin above 60 FPS is slim.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Downfall at 4K?

A: No. At 3840x2160, none of the four presets reach 60 FPS. The best result is Low at 43 FPS, which is 17 FPS below the playable threshold.

Q: What is the highest playable setting at 2560x1440?

A: Low is the only playable preset at 1440p, averaging 68 FPS. Medium averages 56 FPS, High averages 46 FPS, and Ultra averages 29 FPS.

Q: Is the Intel Arc B370 the bottleneck in this system?

A: Yes. The GPU's average benchmark score is 1,184, placing it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. The CPU has a 71st percentile ranking, so the GPU is clearly the limiting component.

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 1080p High settings?

A: The recorded average is 64 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS playable threshold. The Medium preset averages 78 FPS with a minimum of 67 FPS.

Q: How does the Intel Core i5-11400F compare to its nearest rivals?

A: It is 0.3% faster than the AMD EPYC 7H12, 0.4% slower than the Intel Core i5-12450H, 0.6% slower than the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G, and 0.6% faster than the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U.

Q: Can the Medium preset at 1080p stay above 60 FPS at all times?

A: Yes. The Medium preset at 1920x1080 has a minimum recorded frame rate of 67 FPS and a maximum of 90 FPS, so it never dips below the threshold.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-11400F and Intel Arc B370 ranks 3,429 out of 3,716 tested combos in Downfall. This places it in the bottom 8% of all systems in the database. The ranking reflects the severe GPU limitation: the Arc B370's 5th percentile standing drags down what would otherwise be a capable mid-range CPU. The i5-11400F itself is in the 71st percentile of all CPUs, but the pairing with the Arc B370 produces a result that is near the bottom of the overall distribution. Users should interpret this ranking as a warning that the GPU is the critical weakness, and any upgrade path would need to start with the graphics solution rather than the processor.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, there is no recommended preset. The database lists no playable settings and no best settings, because every preset fails to reach 60 FPS. The closest option is Low at 43 FPS, but that is not sufficient for smooth gameplay.

At 2560x1440, the best settings are Low, with an average frame rate of 68 FPS. This is the only preset that clears the 60 FPS threshold. The next option, Medium, averages 56 FPS, which is below the threshold and has a minimum of 48 FPS, so it is not recommended for consistent playability.

At 1920x1080, the best settings are High, with an average frame rate of 64 FPS. This is the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS. The Medium preset offers a higher average of 78 FPS and a minimum of 67 FPS, so users who prioritize frame rate stability over visual quality may prefer it. The High preset's average of 64 FPS is only 4 FPS above the threshold, so demanding scenes could potentially cause dips, although the recorded data does not include a minimum for High.