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 | 74 | 119 | 145 | 178 |
| 1440p QHD | 120 | 191 | 233 | 285 |
| 1080p Full HD | 168 | 268 | 310 | 333 |
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
The data shows this combination clears the 60 FPS playability threshold at every tested preset, including the most demanding option at each resolution. At 3840x2160 (4K), the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, with an average of 74 FPS. This is a comfortable margin above the threshold, leaving headroom for momentary dips without falling below playability. At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset delivers an average of 120 FPS, exactly doubling the 60 FPS threshold. At 1920x1080, Ultra runs at an average of 168 FPS, nearly three times the minimum playable rate.
For users who prioritize maximum visual fidelity, Ultra is viable at all three resolutions. The 4K Ultra result of 74 FPS is the only setting that approaches the threshold, but it still clears it by 14 FPS. At lower resolutions, the headroom becomes substantial. The 1440p Ultra figure of 120 FPS allows for high-refresh-rate displays, while 1080p Ultra at 168 FPS is well within the range of fast gaming panels. The measured data does not record minimum or maximum FPS for the Ultra presets, so the analysis relies on averages, but those averages are strong across the board.
CPU and GPU Roles
The scaling pattern across resolutions and presets reveals that the GPU is the dominant performance driver in Downfall for this pairing. Consider the progression from 1080p to 4K at the same preset. At Medium settings, the average FPS drops from 310 at 1920x1080 to 233 at 2560x1440, a decline of 77 FPS, then to 145 at 3840x2160, another decline of 88 FPS. Similarly, at High settings, the averages drop from 268 at 1080p to 191 at 1440p to 119 at 4K. This steep, consistent decline as resolution increases is characteristic of GPU-bound rendering: the CPU can feed frames quickly at lower resolutions, but the GPU takes progressively longer to rasterize each frame as pixel count rises.
The CPU's role becomes more apparent when looking at preset scaling at a fixed resolution. At 1920x1080, the jump from Low to Medium is modest (333 to 310 FPS), but the jump from Medium to High is a larger drop (310 to 268 FPS), and High to Ultra drops further to 168 FPS. The same pattern holds at 1440p: Low at 285, Medium at 233, High at 191, Ultra at 120. At 4K, the preset scaling is compressed: Low at 178, Medium at 145, High at 119, Ultra at 74. The fact that Ultra at 1080p (168 FPS) is lower than Low at 4K (178 FPS) suggests that the game's Ultra preset introduces effects that stress the GPU heavily, while the CPU remains capable of sustaining high frame rates even at the lowest resolution.
The Intel Core i5-11400F, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, does not appear to bottleneck this workload. Its benchmark scores, such as 14,340 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 2,024 in single-core, indicate solid mid-range performance. The GPU, an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080, sits in the 86th percentile among all GPUs, and its PassMark G3D score of 34,457 confirms its high-end positioning. In Downfall, a horror title that appears to be GPU-bound even at 1080p, the RTX 4080's capabilities dictate the frame rates. The CPU's influence is secondary, mainly manifesting as the ability to maintain high FPS at low resolutions, which this processor does without issue.
Measured FPS Breakdown
At 1920x1080, the recorded averages are as follows: Low delivers 333 FPS, Medium delivers 310 FPS with a minimum of 264 and a maximum of 357, High delivers 268 FPS, and Ultra delivers 168 FPS. The Medium preset's min-max range of 264 to 357 shows some variance, but even the minimum is far above the 60 FPS threshold. High and Ultra have no recorded min or max values, so only averages are available, but those averages are strong.
At 2560x1440, Low averages 285 FPS, Medium averages 233 FPS with a minimum of 198 and a maximum of 268, High averages 191 FPS, and Ultra averages 120 FPS. The Medium preset's minimum of 198 FPS is notably high, indicating that the GPU handles this resolution with ease. The step from High to Ultra at 1440p is a drop of 71 FPS, the largest relative jump among the 1440p presets, which suggests Ultra enables heavy visual effects.
At 3840x2160, Low averages 178 FPS, Medium averages 145 FPS with a minimum of 123 and a maximum of 167, High averages 119 FPS, and Ultra averages 74 FPS. The Medium preset's minimum of 123 FPS is still double the playability threshold. High at 119 FPS is close to the Medium figure, but Ultra at 74 FPS is a significant step down. The gap between High and Ultra at 4K is 45 FPS, which indicates that the Ultra preset imposes a substantial load on the GPU at this resolution.
The data shows no recorded min or max for most presets, which limits the analysis of frame-time consistency. However, the Medium presets, which do have min and max values, show healthy ranges: 264 to 357 at 1080p, 198 to 268 at 1440p, and 123 to 167 at 4K. These ranges suggest that the GPU maintains steady performance without severe spikes or drops.
Similar Performance Alternatives
The Intel Core i5-11400F's nearest rivals, based on average benchmark scores, provide context for its CPU performance. The AMD EPYC 7H12 scores 17,120, a delta of 0.3% from the i5-11400F's 17,177 average. The Intel Core i5-12450H scores 17,239, a delta of -0.4%. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G scores 17,278, a delta of -0.6%. The Intel Core Ultra 7 164U scores 17,074, a delta of 0.6%. These four processors are all within a percentage point of the i5-11400F in aggregate benchmark terms, meaning any of them would likely produce nearly identical frame rates in Downfall when paired with the RTX 4080. The EPYC 7H12 is a server-class part, while the i5-12450H and Core Ultra 7 164U are mobile chips, but their compute performance is close enough that the game's GPU-bound nature would mask any differences.
For the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080, the nearest rivals are the RTX 4080 SUPER with an average score of 54,209 (delta 0.1%), the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X at 54,828 (delta -1.1%), the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB at 55,698 (delta -2.6%), and the AMD Radeon 8060S at 55,757 (delta -2.7%). The RTX 4080's own average score is 54,247, so the RTX 4080 SUPER is essentially a twin in performance, just 0.1% ahead. The Radeon Pro W5700X is a workstation card that scores within 1.1%, meaning it would deliver nearly identical FPS in Downfall. The RX 6750 GRE and Radeon 8060S score slightly higher in aggregate benchmarks, but the deltas of -2.6% and -2.7% are small enough that real-world game performance would be comparable. Users with any of these GPUs paired with a similar CPU should expect frame rates within a few percent of what this combo achieves.
How This Combo Ranks
In the database of tested combinations, this pairing of the Intel Core i5-11400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 ranks 342nd out of 3,716 combos. That places it in the top 9.2% of all tested configurations, which is a strong showing. The high rank is driven primarily by the RTX 4080's position in the 86th percentile among all GPUs, while the i5-11400F sits in the 71st percentile among all CPUs. The combination of a high-end GPU with a mid-range CPU is effective in Downfall because the game is GPU-bound, so the CPU's lower percentile does not drag down the overall result. The rank of 342 out of 3,716 means the vast majority of tested systems (3,374 of them) produce lower performance, while only 341 combos perform better. This is a comfortable position for a system that does not rely on a top-tier CPU.
The Verdict
The recorded data indicates that this PC can run Downfall at or above 60 FPS at every resolution and preset tested. At 3840x2160, the verdict is that all four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) are playable, with Ultra achieving an average of 74 FPS. The best settings at this resolution are Ultra, which provides the highest visual quality while still clearing the threshold by 14 FPS. At 2560x1440, all presets are playable, with Ultra averaging 120 FPS, exactly double the threshold. The best settings at 1440p are also Ultra. At 1920x1080, all presets are playable, with Ultra averaging 168 FPS, nearly three times the threshold. The best settings at 1080p are Ultra.
The minimum recorded FPS across all measurements is 123 FPS, which occurs at 4K Medium. No measured average falls below 74 FPS, and no minimum falls below 123 FPS. This means the system never approaches the 60 FPS playability threshold in any tested configuration. The verdict is unambiguous: this combo runs Downfall with maximum settings at 4K, and at lower resolutions it delivers frame rates high enough for smooth gameplay on high-refresh-rate monitors. The only caveat is that Ultra at 4K has no recorded minimum FPS, so transient dips below the 74 FPS average cannot be ruled out, but the average itself is solid. For a horror game where atmosphere and smoothness matter, this system provides ample performance headroom.