Downfall

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus paired with the Intel Arc B580 delivers a clear, resolution-dependent performance story in Downfall. At 1080p, the combo is overwhelmingly capable, pushing every preset past 60 FPS. At 4K, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, and only Low and Medium settings remain fluid. The measured data shows a system that scales predictably: resolution and preset drops yield large FPS gains, while the CPU's substantial multi-threaded headroom keeps lower resolutions from becoming bottlenecked.

FAQ

Q: What is the best preset at 1920x1080 that stays above 60 FPS?

A: Ultra settings run at an average of 77 FPS, which is the most demanding preset tested at this resolution and remains comfortably above the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: Can this PC handle 4K at High settings?

A: No. At 3840x2160 with High settings, the average FPS drops to 55, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold. Medium settings at this resolution average 67 FPS, making it the highest playable preset.

Q: How much faster is 1080p Low compared to 4K Ultra?

A: The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 Low is 185, while at 3840x2160 Ultra it is 34. That represents a 5.4x difference in raw frame rate between the least and most demanding tested configurations.

Q: Which component is more responsible for the performance gap between 1440p and 4K?

A: The scaling suggests the GPU. Moving from 2560x1440 High (88 FPS) to 3840x2160 High (55 FPS) is a 37.5% drop in average FPS from just a resolution increase, while the CPU's role remains constant across resolutions.

Q: Does the combo rank highly among all tested systems for this game?

A: The combo ranks 2802 out of 3716 tested combinations, placing it in the middle of the pack. Its percentile position is driven by the GPU's mid-range standing rather than the CPU's top-tier performance.

Q: Is there any preset at 1440p that fails to hit 60 FPS?

A: Yes, Ultra settings at 2560x1440 average 55 FPS, which is below the threshold. High, Medium, and Low all exceed 60 FPS, with High averaging 88 FPS.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data indicates that the GPU is the primary performance arbiter for this game at higher resolutions, while the CPU provides ample headroom that becomes more relevant at lower resolutions. At 3840x2160, the average FPS drops from 82 on Low to 34 on Ultra—a 58.5% reduction—which is a classic sign of GPU-bound rendering. The GPU's 12 GB memory and 456.0 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for the asset loads, but the 13.67 TFLOPS FP32 throughput limits pixel pushing at 4K. The CPU, with 24 cores and a 36 MB shared L3 cache, does not appear to be a constraint here, as even the most demanding 4K preset still produces playable frame times on Medium.

At 2560x1440, the balance shifts slightly. The jump from Low (132 FPS) to High (88 FPS) is a 33.3% decrease, which is less severe than at 4K, suggesting the GPU still dominates but with more breathing room. The CPU's single-thread performance (7303 in Cinebench R23) ensures that draw calls and game logic are handled without introducing frame pacing issues, as evidenced by the stable minimum FPS of 92 on Medium settings. This resolution is where the combo feels balanced; the GPU is challenged but not overwhelmed, and the CPU never becomes the bottleneck.

At 1920x1080, the CPU's role becomes more apparent. The gap between Medium (151 FPS) and Low (185 FPS) is 22.5%, which is smaller than the resolution-based scaling seen elsewhere, indicating that the GPU is still the primary limiter but the CPU's headroom allows for very high frame rates. The 185 FPS average at Low settings suggests that the CPU can feed the GPU efficiently, as the 24-thread design handles the game's multi-threaded workload without issue. The data shows that resolution scaling has a larger impact on FPS than preset scaling, which reinforces that the GPU is the component to watch when pushing higher resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 2802 out of 3716 tested combinations for Downfall, which places it in the 75th percentile of all tested systems. This is a mid-pack result that reflects the GPU's standing more than the CPU's. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus sits in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 84003, but the Intel Arc B580 is in the 68th percentile of GPUs, with an average score of 23021. The rank disparity shows that this pairing is CPU-heavy, meaning the processor has far more headroom than the graphics card can utilize in this game.

Within the context of Downfall's measured data, the combo's rank is consistent with its 4K performance, where it falls below 60 FPS on High and Ultra presets. At 1440p and 1080p, the rank would likely be higher if isolated, but the overall ranking is dragged down by the 4K results. The data shows a system that is excellent for 1080p and good for 1440p, but merely adequate for 4K on lower presets. This is not a high-end 4K pairing, and the rank reflects that reality.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU's nearest rivals show that the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is closely matched by several other high-end processors. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has an average score of 83807, just 0.2% lower, making it a near-identical performer for tasks like Cinebench R23 multi-core (51731 for the 290K Plus). The AMD EPYC 4584PX (83090, 1.1% lower) and AMD EPYC 9135 (82980, 1.2% lower) are also within a small margin, though these are server-class parts. The AMD EPYC 7F72 is slightly faster at 85072, a 1.3% delta, which means any of these CPUs would deliver essentially the same frame rates in Downfall when paired with the same GPU.

For the GPU, the Intel Arc B580's nearest rivals are a mixed bag. The AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP has an average score of 23061, a 0.2% delta, which is effectively identical in raw compute. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (22895, 0.6% higher) and RTX 3080 (23172, 0.7% lower) also fall within a 1% margin, meaning any of these cards would produce similar FPS numbers in Downfall at the same settings. The NVIDIA P106-100 (23249, 1.0% delta) rounds out the group. This suggests that swapping the Arc B580 for any of these rivals would change the measured FPS by only a few frames, keeping the same playability thresholds across resolutions.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that clears 60 FPS is Ultra, which averages 77 FPS. This is the best visual quality available while maintaining fluid performance, and the data shows no min FPS data for this preset, but the average is well above the threshold.

At 2560x1440, the best playable preset is High, averaging 88 FPS. Ultra settings drop to 55 FPS, which is not playable, so High offers the best balance of visual fidelity and performance. The Medium preset averages 108 FPS with a minimum of 92, showing that there is headroom to spare if the user prefers smoother motion over visual detail.

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that stays above 60 FPS is Medium, averaging 67 FPS. High settings fall to 55 FPS, so Medium is the ceiling for 4K. Low settings average 82 FPS, providing a smoother alternative if the user prioritizes frame rate over visuals.

The Verdict

Yes, this PC can run Downfall, but the experience varies sharply by resolution and preset. The verdict data shows that 1920x1080 is fully playable at every tested preset, including Ultra at 77 FPS. At 2560x1440, High, Medium, and Low all exceed 60 FPS, with High being the best visual option at 88 FPS. At 3840x2160, only Low and Medium are playable, with Medium at 67 FPS being the best choice. The system fails to hit 60 FPS at 4K High (55 FPS) and 4K Ultra (34 FPS), as well as 1440p Ultra (55 FPS). For users targeting 60 FPS as a baseline, the sweet spot is 1440p High or 1080p Ultra, both of which deliver strong performance without compromising visual quality.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the data shows a steep performance cliff as settings increase. Low settings average 82 FPS, which is the only 4K preset with significant headroom above 60. Medium averages 67 FPS, with a minimum of 57 and a maximum of 77, indicating occasional dips below the playable threshold despite the solid average. High drops to 55 FPS, and Ultra falls to 34 FPS, both clearly unplayable for smooth gameplay.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates are more consistent. Low averages 132 FPS, Medium averages 108 FPS with a minimum of 92 and maximum of 124, and High averages 88 FPS. Ultra is the outlier at 55 FPS, breaking the otherwise playable pattern. The min FPS data for Medium shows that even the worst-case frame times stay above 90, making this resolution the most stable overall.

At 1920x1080, performance is strong across the board. Low averages 185 FPS, Medium averages 151 FPS with a minimum of 128 and maximum of 174, and High averages 124 FPS. Ultra averages 77 FPS, which is the lowest 1080p result but still comfortably above 60. The data shows that even at the most demanding preset, the system maintains a playable frame rate, and the minimum FPS at Medium confirms that stutter is not a concern at this resolution.