Greedfall

Similar Performance Alternatives

The recorded data places the Intel Core i5-9400 at the 47th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 2254. The nearest rivals in the database show a tightly clustered group: the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 scores 2259, just 0.2% ahead of the i5-9400, while the Intel Core i3-10305 sits 0.4% ahead at 2264. On the other side, the Intel Core i7-10710U trails by a mere 0.3% at 2248, and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 is 0.4% behind at 2246. What this cluster implies is that in CPU-bound scenarios, swapping between these four processors would produce nearly indistinguishable frame pacing. The i5-9400's six cores and six threads, with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and boost clock of 4.10 GHz, position it as a solid mid-pack performer, but the data shows it is neither a standout nor a laggard among its immediate peers.

For the GPU side, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 sits at the 81st percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 37648. Its nearest rivals are equally tight: the NVIDIA Tesla P4 scores 37628, a 0.1% gap, and the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 scores 37507, 0.4% behind. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile leads the RTX 4070 by 1.3% at 38135, while the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 trails by 1.3% at 37157. This clustering means that in GPU-bound scenarios, the RTX 4070's performance envelope is nearly identical to these alternatives, despite the RTX 4070's Ada Lovelace architecture and 12 GB of GDDR6X memory. The practical takeaway for a user pairing the i5-9400 with the RTX 4070 is that the CPU's closest substitutes would behave the same in CPU-limited sections, while the GPU's closest substitutes would behave the same in GPU-limited sections. However, the database's measured FPS values for this specific combo reflect the actual pairing, not hypothetical swaps, so the results below are specific to this i5-9400 and RTX 4070 combination.

CPU and GPU Roles

The measured FPS data reveals how the CPU and GPU share the workload across resolutions and presets. At 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the combo hits 247.8 FPS on Low settings, 197.2 FPS on Medium, 179.8 FPS on High, and 114.8 FPS on Ultra. The jump from Low to Medium is a 20.4% drop, while Medium to High is an 8.8% drop, and High to Ultra is a 36.2% drop. These steep declines at higher presets indicate the GPU is the primary bottleneck at 1080p, since the CPU has ample headroom to feed frames at such high rates. The i5-9400's six threads, scoring 935 in Cinebench R23 single-core, are sufficient to drive these frame rates without capping the GPU.

Moving to 2560x1440, the pattern shifts. Low settings produce 170.7 FPS, Medium drops to 133.6 FPS, High to 126.2 FPS, and Ultra to 77.4 FPS. The percentage drops from Low to Medium (21.7%) and Medium to High (5.5%) are similar to 1080p, but the High to Ultra drop is 38.7%, slightly larger. This suggests the GPU is still the dominant factor, but the CPU's role becomes more visible as resolution increases, since the GPU has to work harder per frame, giving the CPU more time to feed it. At 3840x2160, the data shows 100.5 FPS on Low, 83.4 FPS on Medium, 72.2 FPS on High, and 44.7 FPS on Ultra. The Low to Medium drop is 17.0%, Medium to High is 13.4%, and High to Ultra is 38.1%. At 4K, the GPU is clearly the limiting factor, especially at Ultra where the frame rate falls below the 60 FPS playable threshold.

The scaling between resolutions tells a clear story. At 1080p Low, the combo produces 247.8 FPS; at 1440p Low, it drops to 170.7 FPS (a 31.1% reduction); at 4K Low, it falls to 100.5 FPS (a 41.1% reduction from 1440p). This is classic GPU-bound scaling. Meanwhile, the CPU's benchmark scores, such as a Geekbench multicore score of 5141, suggest it would not bottleneck until frame rates exceed roughly 200 FPS in this game, which only happens at 1080p Low and Medium. The data implies that for this combo, the GPU dictates performance at 1440p and 4K, while at 1080p, the CPU still has headroom but the GPU's workload dominates the preset scaling.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Greedfall at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings?

A: Yes. The measured average FPS at 1080p Ultra is 114.8, which is well above the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: What is the best setting at 2560x1440 for this combo?

A: The database lists Ultra as the best playable setting at 1440p, with an average FPS of 77.4, which clears the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Is 3840x2160 playable with this combo?

A: Yes, but not at Ultra. At 4K, High settings yield 72.2 FPS, Medium yields 83.4 FPS, and Low yields 100.5 FPS. Ultra drops to 44.7 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in terms of benchmark scores?

A: The i5-9400 has an average benchmark score of 2254. The Intel Core i7-1068NG7 scores 2259 (0.2% higher), the Intel Core i3-10305 scores 2264 (0.4% higher), the Intel Core i7-10710U scores 2248 (0.3% lower), and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 2246 (0.4% lower).

Q: What is the GPU's percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The RTX 4070 sits at the 81st percentile, with an average benchmark score of 37648. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA Tesla P4, scores 37628, a 0.1% difference.

Q: Does the combo maintain 60 FPS at all resolutions?

A: No. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 44.7, which is below the threshold. At 4K High, Medium, and Low, and at 1440p and 1080p for all presets, the combo stays above 60 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

The database ranks this i5-9400 and RTX 4070 combination at 890 out of 3703 tested combos for Greedfall. That puts it in the top 24.0% of all recorded pairings. The rank reflects the combo's ability to maintain high frame rates across most settings, with the notable exception of 4K Ultra. The 890th position suggests that while this pairing is strong, there are 889 combos that perform better, likely featuring higher-end CPUs or GPUs that can handle 4K Ultra above 60 FPS. However, the combo's performance at 1440p Ultra (77.4 FPS) and 1080p Ultra (114.8 FPS) indicates that it handles the majority of gaming scenarios with ease. The rank also implies that the i5-9400, despite being at the 47th CPU percentile, does not drag down the RTX 4070, which is at the 81st GPU percentile, in most cases. The data suggests the CPU becomes a limiting factor only when frame rates exceed roughly 200 FPS, which is rare in this game at higher presets.

The Verdict

Based on the measured data, this PC can run Greedfall, but with a caveat at 4K Ultra. The verdict by resolution is as follows: at 3840x2160, the playable settings are High, Low, and Medium, with the best playable setting being High at 72.2 FPS. Ultra is not playable because it drops to 44.7 FPS, below the 60 FPS threshold. At 2560x1440, all four presets (High, Low, Medium, Ultra) are playable, with Ultra being the best at 77.4 FPS. At 1920x1080, all four presets are playable, with Ultra at 114.8 FPS as the best. The data confirms that for the vast majority of gaming scenarios, this combo delivers smooth performance above 60 FPS. The only setting that fails the threshold is 4K Ultra, which requires a more powerful GPU to maintain 60 FPS. For users with 1080p or 1440p monitors, this combo offers excellent headroom, and even 4K users can enjoy High settings with a comfortable margin above 60 FPS.

Best Settings per Resolution

The most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS at each resolution, based on the measured average FPS, is as follows:

• 3840x2160: High settings, with an average FPS of 72.2. Medium (83.4 FPS) and Low (100.5 FPS) also work, but High is the highest preset that clears the threshold.
• 2560x1440: Ultra settings, with an average FPS of 77.4. This is the most demanding preset available, and it stays above 60 FPS.
• 1920x1080: Ultra settings, with an average FPS of 114.8. This is the most demanding preset available, and it provides a large margin above the 60 FPS threshold.

These settings represent the best visual quality that maintains playable frame rates. At 4K, users should avoid Ultra, as the 44.7 FPS average is below the playable threshold. At 1440p and 1080p, Ultra is the best choice for maximum visual fidelity without sacrificing smoothness.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded measurements provide average FPS values for each resolution and settings combination. The data does not include minimum or maximum FPS values, so the analysis relies on averages.

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 100.5 FPS average
• Medium: 83.4 FPS average
• High: 72.2 FPS average
• Ultra: 44.7 FPS average

The gap between Medium and High is 11.2 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is 27.5 FPS. This indicates a steep performance cliff at Ultra, likely due to the GPU's resource limits at 4K with maximum settings.

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 170.7 FPS average
• Medium: 133.6 FPS average
• High: 126.2 FPS average
• Ultra: 77.4 FPS average

The difference between Low and Medium is 37.1 FPS, between Medium and High is 7.4 FPS, and between High and Ultra is 48.8 FPS. The Ultra preset is the largest drop, but it still stays above 60 FPS.

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 247.8 FPS average
• Medium: 197.2 FPS average
• High: 179.8 FPS average
• Ultra: 114.8 FPS average

The scaling here shows Low to Medium dropping 50.6 FPS, Medium to High dropping 17.4 FPS, and High to Ultra dropping 65.0 FPS. The Ultra preset remains well above 60 FPS, making this resolution the most forgiving for high settings.

These numbers indicate that the combo is most comfortable at 1080p and 1440p, where even Ultra settings provide a significant buffer above the 60 FPS threshold. At 4K, the user must compromise by selecting High or lower settings to maintain playability. The data also reveals that the largest FPS drops occur when moving from High to Ultra, which is consistent across all three resolutions, suggesting that Ultra settings impose a disproportionate load on the GPU.