Greedfall

FAQ

Q: What is the highest playable setting for this combo at 1920x1080?

A: High preset is the most demanding setting that stays at or above 60 FPS, averaging exactly 60 FPS. Medium averages 66 FPS and Low averages 84 FPS, but High offers the best visual quality while still clearing the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Can this system handle 2560x1440?

A: No. At 1440p, even the Low preset averages only 58 FPS, which falls below the 60 FPS playable threshold. Medium averages 46 FPS, High averages 42 FPS, and Ultra drops to 27 FPS.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B390 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Arc B390 scores 1482 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark. It is 1.3% ahead of the GeForce GT 520MX, 1.5% ahead of the GeForce 800M, 2.5% ahead of the GeForce GT 625 OEM, and 2.7% ahead of the GeForce GT 710. These are very small deltas, indicating near-identical GPU performance.

Q: What is the weakest point of this system for Greedfall?

A: The GPU. Its benchmark percentile sits at only 9 versus all GPUs, while the CPU sits at 85 versus all CPUs. The Arc B390's nearest rivals are all entry-level NVIDIA GPUs from a much older generation, and the measured FPS shows the GPU as the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

Q: What resolution shows the largest FPS drop from Low to Ultra?

A: At 3840x2160, Low averages 35 FPS while Ultra averages 16 FPS, a drop of 19 FPS (54%). At 2560x1440, the drop is 31 FPS (from 58 to 27), and at 1920x1080, the drop is 46 FPS (from 84 to 38).

Q: What is the combo's overall rank among tested systems?

A: This CPU and GPU combination ranks 3291 out of 3703 tested combos for Greedfall, placing it in the lower 11th percentile of all tested systems.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark data for Greedfall reveals a clear division of labor: the CPU is a high-end part, while the GPU is an entry-level part. The Intel Core i7-12700KF sits in the 85th percentile among all CPUs, scoring 35365 on average across its benchmark suite. Its nearest rivals, the Intel Core i7-13700T (35403, -0.1%) and Intel Core i5-13600T (35305, +0.2%), show that it performs essentially at parity with those parts. The GPU, the Intel Arc B390, sits in the 9th percentile among all GPUs with an average score of 1482. Its nearest rivals are all within a 2.7% delta, meaning it performs nearly identically to the NVIDIA GT 710 class of hardware.

The scaling between resolutions confirms that the GPU dominates performance. At 1920x1080 Low, the system averages 84 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 Low drops that to 58 FPS (a 31% reduction), and at 3840x2160 Low, it falls to 35 FPS (a further 40% reduction). This steep decline with resolution is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario. The CPU is not the bottleneck here; if it were, the FPS would remain roughly flat across resolutions because the CPU workload per frame does not scale with pixel count.

The preset scaling at each resolution further illustrates the GPU's role. At 1080p, going from Low to Medium costs 18 FPS (84 to 66), and from Medium to High costs another 6 FPS (66 to 60). The jump from High to Ultra costs 22 FPS (60 to 38), which is a 37% penalty for the highest preset. At 1440p, the same preset progression yields 58, 46, 42, and 27 FPS. The Ultra preset at 1440p is only 27 FPS, which is below the 30 FPS minimum for smooth gameplay. At 4K, even Low averages only 35 FPS, and Ultra drops to 16 FPS, which is barely interactive.

The data shows that the CPU's 12 cores and 20 threads are more than sufficient for this Action RPG. The 3DMark multi-threaded scores (9983 at max threads, 9282 at 16 threads) and Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 28838 indicate a strong processor that will not hold back the GPU in most scenarios. The recorded data shows no evidence of CPU-related frame pacing issues; the min FPS values that are available (e.g., 23 FPS at 4K Medium, 39 FPS at 1440p Medium, 56 FPS at 1080p Medium) are consistent with GPU-limited performance. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the min FPS would be much closer to the average FPS at all resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: average 35 FPS, no min/max recorded
• Medium: average 27 FPS, min 23 FPS, max 32 FPS
• High: average 25 FPS, no min/max recorded
• Ultra: average 16 FPS, no min/max recorded

At 4K, the system cannot reach 60 FPS on any preset. The best case is Low at 35 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold. The Medium preset shows a narrow range of 23 to 32 FPS, indicating consistent but sub-60 performance. The gap from Low to Ultra is 19 FPS, and the High preset is only 2 FPS faster than Medium, suggesting diminishing returns above Low settings.

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: average 58 FPS, no min/max recorded
• Medium: average 46 FPS, min 39 FPS, max 53 FPS
• High: average 42 FPS, no min/max recorded
• Ultra: average 27 FPS, no min/max recorded

At 1440p, the Low preset nearly hits 60 FPS with an average of 58 FPS, but it falls just short. The Medium preset ranges from 39 to 53 FPS, and High averages 42 FPS. Ultra drops to 27 FPS, which is a 54% reduction from Low. None of the presets at this resolution clear the 60 FPS threshold.

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: average 84 FPS, no min/max recorded
• Medium: average 66 FPS, min 56 FPS, max 76 FPS
• High: average 60 FPS, no min/max recorded
• Ultra: average 38 FPS, no min/max recorded

At 1080p, the system performs well. Low averages 84 FPS, Medium averages 66 FPS with a range of 56 to 76 FPS, and High averages exactly 60 FPS. Ultra drops significantly to 38 FPS, which is a 37% penalty versus High. The Medium preset's min FPS of 56 is close to the 60 FPS target, but the average of 66 FPS provides a comfortable margin. High at 60 FPS is the highest playable preset, but it has no recorded min/max data, so frame consistency at that setting is not documented.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the nearest rivals in the database are all within a 0.2% performance delta. The Intel Core i7-13700T scores 35403 (-0.1% versus the i7-12700KF), the Intel Core 5 213PE scores 35428 (-0.2%), the Intel Core i5-13600T scores 35305 (+0.2%), and the Intel Core i7-12700K scores 35287 (+0.2%). Any of these processors would deliver virtually identical CPU-bound performance in Greedfall. The i7-12700K is the most direct alternative, as it shares the same chip design with only a slightly different factory configuration.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals are all NVIDIA parts from a much older era, and the deltas are small. The GeForce GT 520MX scores 1463 (+1.3% versus the Arc B390), the GeForce 800M scores 1460 (+1.5%), the GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446 (+2.5%), and the GeForce GT 710 scores 1443 (+2.7%). These GPUs would behave nearly identically to the Arc B390 in Greedfall, meaning they would also fail to hit 60 FPS at 1440p and would only manage 60 FPS at 1080p on High settings. The small deltas (all under 3%) mean that swapping the Arc B390 for any of these GPUs would not change the playability verdict at any resolution.

The CPU and GPU are mismatched in class. The i7-12700KF is a high-end desktop processor, while the Arc B390 is an integrated-class GPU (noted as "IGP" in the database). The recorded data shows that the GPU is the limiting factor across all resolutions, and the CPU's performance headroom is not being utilized.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of 3703 tested CPU and GPU combinations for Greedfall, this pairing ranks 3291. That places it in the bottom 11% of all tested systems. The rank is driven almost entirely by the GPU, which is in the 9th percentile among all GPUs. The CPU, by contrast, is in the 85th percentile, so the combination's low rank cannot be attributed to the processor.

The rank of 3291 out of 3703 means that 412 tested combos perform worse, and 3290 perform better. This is a below-average result for the game. The bottleneck is unambiguous: the Arc B390's performance is close to that of a GeForce GT 710, which is a passive-cooled entry-level card from over a decade ago. Even with a top-tier CPU like the i7-12700KF, the GPU prevents the system from reaching playable frame rates at 1440p or 4K.

The database shows that this combo is only viable at 1080p, and even then only up to High settings. The rank reflects this: it is not a system for high-refresh-rate or high-resolution gaming in Greedfall.

The Verdict

Can this PC run Greedfall? The answer depends on the target resolution. According to the verdict by resolution data, the system is playable only at 1920x1080. At that resolution, the High, Medium, and Low presets all average at or above 60 FPS. High averages exactly 60 FPS, which meets the playable threshold. Medium averages 66 FPS, and Low averages 84 FPS. The Ultra preset at 1080p averages 38 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold and therefore not playable.

At 2560x1440, no preset is playable. The best average is 58 FPS on Low, which falls 2 FPS short of the 60 FPS threshold. Medium averages 46 FPS, High averages 42 FPS, and Ultra averages 27 FPS. The recorded data shows that even the lowest settings cannot sustain 60 FPS at 1440p.

At 3840x2160, the situation is worse. Low averages 35 FPS, Medium averages 27 FPS, High averages 25 FPS, and Ultra averages 16 FPS. None of these come close to 60 FPS. The verdict by resolution lists no playable settings for either 4K or 1440p.

The system meets the 60 FPS playable threshold only at 1080p, and only up to High settings. Users who want to play Greedfall with this hardware should target 1080p and select High or lower presets for a smooth experience.

Best Settings per Resolution

3840x2160: No preset is playable. The best average FPS is 35 on Low, but that is far below the 60 FPS threshold. The database records no playable settings at this resolution.

2560x1440: No preset is playable. Low averages 58 FPS, which is 2 FPS short of the threshold. Medium, High, and Ultra all average below 60 FPS. The database records no playable settings at this resolution.

1920x1080: The most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is High, with an average of exactly 60 FPS. This is the recommended setting for the best visual quality while maintaining playability. Medium also works (66 FPS average), and Low provides the highest headroom (84 FPS average), but High is the optimal balance. The Ultra preset at 38 FPS is not recommended, as it falls below the playable threshold.

For users seeking a consistent frame rate above 60 FPS, Medium is the safer choice, as its recorded range (56 to 76 FPS) shows that the minimum stays close to the threshold. High has no recorded min/max data, so its frame consistency is unknown, but the average of 60 FPS meets the minimum playability requirement.