Downfall

The Intel Core i5-13400F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6600 delivers a playable experience in Downfall across all three tested resolutions, though the margin of comfort varies significantly. At 1920x1080, the combo clears the 60 FPS threshold at every preset, while at 3840x2160, only Low and Medium settings remain fluid. The data shows a horror title that is far more demanding at 4K Ultra than at lower resolutions, making preset selection critical for maintaining a smooth framerate.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, with an average of 71 FPS. This is the highest quality setting available, and the system maintains a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS playability threshold. The benchmark results indicate that the GPU has sufficient headroom at 1080p to handle the full visual feature set without compromising fluidity.

Moving to 2560x1440, the best playable setting shifts to High, delivering an average of 83.6 FPS. While Ultra at this resolution drops to 50.6 FPS—below the 60 FPS threshold—High remains well above it. The step from High to Ultra at 1440p costs roughly 33 FPS, which is a substantial penalty for the extra visual fidelity. Medium at 102.1 FPS and Low at 127.9 FPS also remain playable, but High offers the best balance of quality and performance.

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that maintains at least 60 FPS is Medium, with an average of 65.3 FPS. Low runs at 76.4 FPS, while High falls to 50.7 FPS and Ultra drops sharply to 33.4 FPS. The data suggests that 4K requires significant compromises: players must choose between Medium quality at 65.3 FPS or High quality at 50.7 FPS, which fails the playability threshold. The difference between Medium and High at 4K is a 14.6 FPS reduction, indicating that the extra settings carry a heavy cost at this resolution.

CPU and GPU Roles

The scaling patterns across resolutions reveal that the GPU becomes the dominant constraint as resolution increases. At 1920x1080, the difference between Low and Ultra is 103.6 FPS (from 174.6 to 71), which is a 59.3% reduction. This wide spread indicates that the GPU is heavily utilized even at lower resolutions, but the CPU still has enough headroom to feed it.

At 2560x1440, the same Low-to-Ultra comparison shows a drop from 127.9 to 50.6 FPS, a 77.3 FPS gap. The relative performance loss from 1080p to 1440p at the same settings is notable: Low drops by 46.7 FPS, Medium by 43.2 FPS, High by 30.9 FPS, and Ultra by 20.4 FPS. The shrinking absolute gaps at higher presets suggest that the GPU is becoming the limiting factor, as the CPU has less influence on the final framerate when the pixel workload increases.

At 3840x2160, the situation becomes even clearer. Low runs at 76.4 FPS, Medium at 65.3 FPS, High at 50.7 FPS, and Ultra at 33.4 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is 43 FPS, which is smaller than the 103.6 FPS gap at 1080p. This compression of performance across presets indicates that the GPU is saturated at 4K, and the CPU is no longer contributing to higher framerates. The CPU's role is most evident at 1080p Low, where the 174.6 FPS result shows that the i5-13400F can push well beyond typical display refresh rates when the GPU workload is light.

The Intel Core i5-13400F, with its 10 cores and 16 threads, is clearly not the bottleneck in this configuration. Its multi-threaded benchmark scores—22,604 in Cinebench R23 and 25,032 in PassMark—indicate strong headroom for gaming workloads. The GPU, however, shows its limits at 4K Ultra, where the RX 6600's 8.928 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is insufficient to maintain fluidity.

FAQ

*Q: Can this PC run Downfall at 60 FPS on a 4K monitor?*

A: Yes, but only at Medium settings or lower. The measured average FPS at 3840x2160 is 65.3 on Medium and 76.4 on Low, while High drops to 50.7 and Ultra to 33.4. The best playable setting at 4K is Medium.

Q: What is the highest preset that maintains 60 FPS at 2560x1440?

A: High settings, which average 83.6 FPS. Ultra at this resolution falls to 50.6 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS playability threshold. Medium and Low also remain playable at 102.1 and 127.9 FPS respectively.

Q: Is the RX 6600 powerful enough for Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: Yes. The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 Ultra is 71, which clears the 60 FPS threshold by 11 FPS. The GPU also delivers 114.5 FPS at High, 145.3 at Medium, and 174.6 at Low.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 4K at the same settings?

A: At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 174.6 at 1080p to 76.4 at 4K, a 98.2 FPS reduction. At Medium, the drop is from 145.3 to 65.3 FPS (80 FPS), and at High from 114.5 to 50.7 FPS (63.8 FPS). Ultra falls from 71 to 33.4 FPS (37.6 FPS).

Q: Does the CPU or GPU limit performance more in this game?

A: The GPU becomes the primary limiter at higher resolutions. At 1080p Low, the CPU can drive 174.6 FPS, but at 4K Ultra, the GPU only manages 33.4 FPS. The compression of FPS differences across presets at 4K indicates GPU saturation, while the wider spread at 1080p shows more CPU headroom.

Q: What are the playable settings at each resolution?

A: At 1920x1080, all four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) are playable. At 2560x1440, Low, Medium, and High are playable, but Ultra is not. At 3840x2160, only Low and Medium are playable.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 sits in a tight performance cluster according to benchmark averages. Its nearest rival is the NVIDIA Quadro K6000, with a delta of 0%, meaning essentially identical average benchmark scores. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile is 0.1% behind, while the NVIDIA Tesla K20m trails by 0.3%. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation is 0.4% ahead. These four GPUs would deliver nearly interchangeable frame rates in Downfall, assuming other system components remain equal. The Quadro K6000, despite being a workstation card, matches the RX 6600's average score of 19,036, suggesting similar raw compute throughput for this title.

On the CPU side, the Intel Core i5-13400F shows a similar clustering pattern. The AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS has a delta of 0%, with an average score of 25,284 versus the i5's 25,292. The Intel Core 5 120 trails by 0.3% at 25,362, and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D also trails by 0.3% at 25,365. The AMD Ryzen 7 6800H is 0.4% ahead at 25,201. These four processors would produce nearly identical CPU-bound performance in Downfall, meaning that swapping the i5-13400F for any of them would not materially change the framerate results observed in the measured data. The percentile rankings reinforce this: the i5-13400F sits at the 77th percentile among all CPUs, while the RX 6600 sits at the 63rd percentile among all GPUs.

The Verdict

This PC can run Downfall, and the verdict depends on the target resolution. At 1920x1080, the system clears 60 FPS at every preset, including Ultra at 71 FPS average. This is the ideal resolution for this combo, offering full visual quality with a comfortable margin. At 2560x1440, High settings run at 83.6 FPS, which is well above the playability threshold, but Ultra fails at 50.6 FPS. Players at 1440p should stick to High or below for a fluid experience. At 3840x2160, the system remains playable but requires compromise: Medium at 65.3 FPS is the best option, while High drops to 50.7 FPS. The data shows that 4K Ultra is not viable, with an average of only 33.4 FPS. Overall, the combo is best suited for 1080p gaming, fully capable at 1440p with moderate settings, and usable at 4K only with reduced quality presets.

How This Combo Ranks

Out of 3,716 tested combinations in the benchmark database, this Intel Core i5-13400F and AMD Radeon RX 6600 pairing ranks 2,926th for Downfall. This places it in the lower portion of the overall distribution, around the 21st percentile of all tested systems. The rank reflects the GPU's mid-range positioning more than the CPU's, given that the i5-13400F performs at the 77th percentile among CPUs while the RX 6600 sits at the 63rd percentile among GPUs. The relatively low combo rank indicates that many other systems—likely those with higher-end GPUs—deliver better frame rates in this title. However, the measured data shows that this combination still achieves playable performance at 1080p and 1440p for the majority of settings, so the rank should be interpreted as a measure of overall competitiveness rather than a statement of inadequacy.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS values are as follows: Low runs at 174.6 FPS, Medium at 145.3 FPS, High at 114.5 FPS, and Ultra at 71 FPS. All four presets exceed the 60 FPS threshold. The scaling from Low to Ultra shows a gradual decline, with the largest single-step drop between High and Ultra at 43.5 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the results are: Low at 127.9 FPS, Medium at 102.1 FPS, High at 83.6 FPS, and Ultra at 50.6 FPS. The step from High to Ultra costs 33 FPS, which is the only transition that crosses below the 60 FPS playability line. The gap between Medium and High is 18.5 FPS, while the gap between Low and Medium is 25.8 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the data shows: Low at 76.4 FPS, Medium at 65.3 FPS, High at 50.7 FPS, and Ultra at 33.4 FPS. Only Low and Medium remain above 60 FPS. The difference between Medium and High is 14.6 FPS, and the difference between High and Ultra is 17.3 FPS. The overall pattern across resolutions indicates that the GPU's performance ceiling is reached at 4K Ultra, where the frame rate drops to nearly half of the 60 FPS threshold. The minimum and maximum FPS values were not recorded in the data, so the analysis relies on average frame rates, which represent the central tendency of performance across the benchmark run.