Can I Run It?

Instant compatibility check with FPS benchmarks and optimization tips

Greedfall
Action RPG 2019

Greedfall

20%
Not Recommended Your system may struggle with this game.

Performance

1080p (Full HD)

Low 1080p Measured
76 FPS
Ultra 1080p Measured
35 FPS

1440p (2K / QHD)

Low 1440p Measured
53 FPS
Ultra 1440p Measured
24 FPS

4K (Ultra HD)

Low 4K Measured
31 FPS
Ultra 4K Measured
14 FPS
18.5ms Frame Time
28ms Input Latency
1440p Best Resolution

Requirements Check

Processor
Required 37,496
Your CPU 13,494
Graphics Card
Required 27,800
Your GPU 1,184

Recommendations

Upgrade Needed

Your hardware doesn't meet minimum requirements for this game.

Average FPS: resolution vs quality settings

UltraHighMediumLow
4K Ultra HD 14 22 25 31
1440p QHD 24 38 41 53
1080p Full HD 35 54 60 76

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.

Every measured configuration

1920x1080 High 54
1920x1080 Low 76
1920x1080 Medium 60
1920x1080 Ultra 35
2560x1440 High 38
2560x1440 Low 53
2560x1440 Medium 41
2560x1440 Ultra 24
3840x2160 High 22
3840x2160 Low 31
3840x2160 Medium 25
3840x2160 Ultra 14

Performance Analysis: Greedfall on Your System

The Intel Core i3-12100F paired with the Intel Arc B370 presents a constrained picture for Greedfall. The database measurements show this combination struggling to maintain fluid frame rates at higher resolutions, though it finds a clear operating window at 1080p. This is a system defined by its limits, and the data below outlines exactly where those limits lie.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the recorded average frame rates are consistently low across all presets. The High preset averages 22 FPS, while Low improves to 31 FPS. Medium sits between them at 25 FPS, with a minimum of 21 FPS and a maximum of 28 FPS. The Ultra preset is the most demanding, dropping the average to 14 FPS. None of these figures approach the 60 FPS playable threshold, and even the best result at this resolution, Low at 31 FPS, remains well below a smooth experience.

Stepping down to 2560x1440 shows a noticeable improvement but still falls short of playability. The High preset averages 38 FPS, and Low reaches 53 FPS. Medium records an average of 41 FPS, with a minimum of 35 FPS and a maximum of 48 FPS. Ultra averages 24 FPS. While Low at 53 FPS is the closest result to the 60 FPS target, the verdict in the database lists no playable settings at this resolution, meaning even the best average is insufficient for the defined playable threshold.

At 1920x1080, the combination finally achieves acceptable performance. The Low preset averages 76 FPS, which is a solid margin above the 60 FPS threshold. The Medium preset averages exactly 60 FPS, with a minimum of 51 FPS and a maximum of 69 FPS. High averages 54 FPS, just below the target, and Ultra drops to 35 FPS. The data shows that Medium is the highest setting that maintains at least 60 FPS on average, while Low provides a more comfortable cushion against frame rate dips.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the database records no playable settings. The highest average FPS achieved at this resolution is 31 FPS on Low, but this is still far below the 60 FPS playable threshold. The verdictByResolution field confirms this with an empty playableSettings list and no best settings.

Similarly, at 2560x1440, there are no playable settings. The Low preset reaches 53 FPS, which is the best result, but it misses the 60 FPS mark. The database lists no best settings for this resolution either, indicating that the hardware cannot deliver a consistent 60 FPS experience here.

At 1920x1080, the situation changes. The playable settings are Low and Medium. The best settings choice is Medium, which yields an average FPS of exactly 60. This is the most demanding preset that stays at or above the playable threshold. Low is also viable with a higher average of 76 FPS, but Medium offers better visual quality while still meeting the performance target.

CPU and GPU Roles

The scaling between resolutions and presets reveals a system heavily constrained by the graphics processor. At 3840x2160, the difference between Low and High is only 9 FPS (31 versus 22), and the jump to Ultra costs another 8 FPS. This pattern indicates that the GPU is saturated at this resolution, and the CPU has little influence on the outcome. The Arc B370, with its low percentile ranking among all GPUs (5th percentile), is the primary bottleneck.

At 2560x1440, the same trend continues. Low averages 53 FPS, High averages 38 FPS, and Ultra averages 24 FPS. The spread of 29 FPS across presets shows that the GPU is still the dominant factor. The CPU, a 4-core 8-thread part with a boost clock of 4.30 GHz, is not the limiting component here; the rendering load is simply too heavy for the Arc B370.

At 1920x1080, the balance shifts slightly. Low hits 76 FPS, while Medium holds at 60 FPS. The fact that High drops to 54 FPS and Ultra to 35 FPS shows that the GPU remains the main constraint, but the CPU is now capable of feeding the GPU more effectively at lower resolutions. The 16 FPS gap between Low and High, and the 25 FPS drop from High to Ultra, still point to the graphics card as the decisive element. The CPU's benchmark scores, such as a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 11860 and a single-core score of 1674, are adequate for this game, but they do not compensate for the GPU's limited throughput.

The low resolution results confirm that the Arc B370 is the limiting factor. Performance scales more with preset changes than with resolution changes, which is typical of a GPU-bound scenario. The CPU's role is secondary, providing enough processing power to avoid becoming a bottleneck at 1080p, but unable to overcome the GPU's raw performance ceiling at higher settings.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the nearest rivals in the database show that the Intel Core i3-12100F performs very close to several other processors. The Intel Core 3 N355 has an average score of 13492, a delta of 0% compared to the i3-12100F's average score of 13494. The Intel Core i5-9500 scores 13452, which is 0.3% lower. The Intel Core 5 120UL is slightly faster at 13594, a delta of -0.7% (meaning the i3-12100F is 0.7% behind). The Intel Core i7-1250U scores 13351, putting it 1.1% behind the i3-12100F. These four CPUs would behave nearly identically in Greedfall, as their average benchmark scores are within a narrow band of roughly 2%.

For the GPU, the Intel Arc B370 is an outlier in the data, with an average 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1184 and a percentile rank of only 5 among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are all older or lower-end parts. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186, a delta of -0.2% (meaning the Arc B370 is 0.2% behind). The ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190, putting the Arc B370 0.5% behind. The AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192, a 0.7% deficit. The AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168, which is 1.4% lower than the Arc B370. This cluster of results indicates that the Arc B370's performance in this benchmark is comparable to these legacy parts, which explains its difficulty running Greedfall at high settings.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Greedfall at 4K resolution?

A: No. At 3840x2160, the highest average FPS recorded is 31 on Low settings. Medium averages 25 FPS, and Ultra averages 14 FPS. None of these reach the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: What is the best settings preset at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the best settings preset is Medium, which achieves an average of exactly 60 FPS, with a minimum of 51 FPS and a maximum of 69 FPS. Low also plays at 76 FPS average.

Q: Is 1440p playable with this hardware?

A: No. At 2560x1440, the database lists no playable settings. The Low preset comes closest at 53 FPS average, but this is below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Which component is the bottleneck for this game?

A: The GPU is the primary constraint. The Intel Arc B370 ranks in the 5th percentile among all GPUs, and frame rates scale more with preset changes than with resolution changes, indicating the graphics card is saturated. The CPU, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 11860, is sufficient at 1080p.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core i3-12100F has an average benchmark score of 13494. The Intel Core 3 N355 scores 13492 (0% delta), the Intel Core i5-9500 scores 13452 (0.3% lower), the Intel Core 5 120UL scores 13594 (0.7% higher), and the Intel Core i7-1250U scores 13351 (1.1% lower). All are within a close performance band.

Q: What frame rate can be expected at 1080p on Ultra settings?

A: At 1920x1080 with Ultra settings, the average FPS is 35. This is not playable according to the 60 FPS threshold, and it is significantly lower than the Medium preset's 60 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the database, this specific combination of the Intel Core i3-12100F and Intel Arc B370 is ranked 3416 out of 3703 tested combos for Greedfall. This places it in the lower percentile of all tested systems, roughly in the bottom 8% of the database. The ranking reflects the overall poor performance at higher resolutions and the limited playability window at 1080p. While the CPU is a mid-range part (68th percentile among all CPUs), the GPU's very low standing (5th percentile) drags the entire combo down. The result is a system that can play Greedfall at Medium settings at 1080p, but nothing more demanding. The data shows that this pairing is functional for 1080p gaming at moderate presets, but it is far from a high-performance configuration for this title.