Downfall

Downfall is a supernatural horror game that released in 2016, and the measured dataset covers a rigorous test of the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D CPU paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti GPU. The frame rates were recorded at three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, 3840x2160) and four quality presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra), producing twelve average-FPS entries. The dataset also includes the system's overall rank among 3716 tested combinations, as well as detailed CPU and GPU benchmark scores. The following sections dissect the performance data to reveal how this pairing handles Downfall at each setting and resolution, which presets are most practical for a responsive experience, and exactly how the GPU and CPU contribute to the measured results.

Resolution Scaling

The measured frame rates follow a clear, predictable pattern as resolution increases. At the 1920x1080 test, the average FPS across presets ranges from 311 (Low) down to 130 (Ultra). Moving to 2560x1440 reduces these values to a range of 222 (Low) to 93 (Ultra). At 3840x2160, the averages drop further to 138 (Low), 113 (Medium), 93 (High), and 58 (Ultra). For example, the High preset's average is exactly 208 at 1080p, 149 at 1440p, and 93 at 4K. This is not a uniform decline; the 1080p to 1440p step removes roughly a quarter of the frame rate at some presets, while the 1440p to 4K step removes a similar proportion. This indicates that the workload is scaling with pixel count, which is typical of games where fill-rate and memory bandwidth become more important at higher resolutions.

The CPU's contribution can be inferred from the fact that even at 4K Ultra, the average is 58 FPS, while the 1080p Ultra yields 130 FPS. The RTX 3080 Ti has 12GB of GDDR6X memory on a 384-bit bus with 912.4 GB/s bandwidth, and it does not appear to be starved for data at 4K because the frame rate remains playable at many settings. The Ryzen 5 5500X3D, with 6 cores and 12 threads, a base clock of 3.00 GHz and boost of 4.00 GHz, and a 96 MB L3 cache, can keep up with the GPU at 1080p where the scorelists indicate a maximum of 311 FPS at the Low setting. As resolution rises, the GPU's load scales up, and the CPU headroom becomes less of a constraint, as evidenced by the relatively sharper drop in FPS compared to the GPU-bound expectations.

Settings Recommendations

The dataset provides four preset levels, and the observed averages suggest that High is the best balance between visual quality and performance across all three resolutions. At 1080p, High preserves 208 FPS, which is more than enough for fast-paced horror action, and it drops to 149 FPS at 1440p, still exceptionally smooth. Even at 4K, High holds 93 FPS, which is well above the minimum for any typical display technology. The Ultra preset, however, brings a significant penalty: at 1080p it gives 130 FPS, at 1440p it gives 93 FPS, and at 2160p it drops to 58 FPS. While 1080p Ultra is playable, 4K Ultra falls under the standard 60 FPS target. Medium, on the other hand, offers a steppingstone with 113 FPS at 4K, 182 at 1440p, and 254 at 1080p, but High delivers the same frame quality with the advantage of more visual detail, since Medium and High share the same 4K average of 93 FPS.

Low is less suitable for most users because it yields excessively high FPS that no current monitor can display—at 1080p Low, the average is 311 FPS, and even at 4K Low is 138 FPS. A player aiming for consistent fluidity at 4K would be better served by High or Medium, which both surpass 90 FPS. Given that High on 4K also exactly matches the Medium rate, it is the superior choice based on the measured output. The Ultra preset, while offering the maximum visual fidelity, results in a drop below the typical smoothness threshold at 4K, and even 1080p Ultra loses about 70 FPS compared to High. Thus the data point to High as the sweet spot for this particular CPU+GPU combination, with Medium as a secondary alternative for those who want slightly better frame times at high resolutions.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti sits at the top of the GeForce 30-series with 12 GB of GDDR6X memory, a 384-bit interface, and a memory bandwidth of 912.4 GB/s. Its core clocks are base 1365 MHz and boost 1665 MHz, with an effective memory speed of 19 Gbps. The GPU carries 10240 shading units, 320 texture mapping units, and 112 render output units. It also holds 80 RT cores and 320 tensor cores. These hardware features directly affect the horror game’s graphics pipeline: the high shading unit count enables fast pixel shader execution, while the memory width ensures that 4K textures and shadow maps stay on-chip, reducing stuttering.

The measured frame rates reflect the GPU's capability, as the averages remain above 115 at 1080p Medium, above 190 at 1440p Medium, and above 96 at 4K Medium. The dataset does not report GPU utilization, but the FPS pattern is consistent with a GPU that is reachable. The fact that 4K Ultra yields only 58 FPS suggests that the most extreme settings place a KT515GPU. Interestingly, the RTX 3080 Ti's average benchmark of 87.7 (Passmark G3D) sits in the 83rd percentile of all GPUs, and it is 2% faster than the GeForce RTX 5060, but 1.7% slower than the Tesla M40 (without the 24 GB variant) according to the deltaPct of the benchmark average. In the context of Downfall, the GPU's render capacity is kept in use by the engine's demands, but the data indicates that at 1080p Low the GPU is not the limiting factor, because the FPS reaches 311—far beyond what any 1080p display shows. The 120 Hz class boundaries are bypassed, confirming that the RTX 3080 Ti is more than ample for this title.

A particular note is that the frame times at Medium are reported with minimum and maximum values—the spread between the average and the minimum values ranges from 254 (av) to 216 (min) at 1080p, and from 113 to 96 at 4K. This shows that the GPU handles the scene at a constant level, with no severe dips. The base and boost clocks of the GPU are within typical limits, but the lack of locked FPS suggests that the CPU occasionally drops below the frame target, which is common with horror game environments where AI and dynamic shadows are present.

Measured FPS Breakdown

| Resolution | Settings | Average FPS | Minimum FPS | Maximum FPS |

|------------|----------|-------------|-------------|-------------|

| 1920x1080 | Low | 311 | – | – |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 254 | 96 | 292 |

| 1920x1080 | High | 208 | – | – |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 130 | – | – |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 144 | – | – |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 182 | 154 | 209 |

| 2560x1440 | High | 149 | – | – |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 93 | – | – |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 138 | – | – |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 113 | 96 | 130 |

| 3840x2160 | High | 93 | – | – |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 58 | – | – |

At 1080p Low, the average dominates at 311 FPS, which is the highest surprised in the dataset. The Medium preset drops to 254 FPS with an min-max window of 216 to 292 FPS, showing a stable flow persistent. High 1080p returns 208 FPS, and Ultra cuts to 130 FPS. The 1440p values follow the same order: Low 222 FPS, Medium 182 FPS (min 154, max 209), High 149, and Ultra 93. At 4K the slope becomes steeper: Low 138, Medium 113 (min 96, max 130), High 93, and Ultra 58. The gap between 1440p and 4K is most visible at the Ultra tier, where the frame rate drops from 93 to 58, which is a near halving at the top preset. In contrast, the Medium tier only falls from 182 to 113, indicating that visual complexity modulates the resolution scaling.

These precise numbers allow for direct comparison: at 2560x1440 High, the average of 149 FPS is practically identical to 1920x1080 Ultra's 130, and 4K High's 93 is exactly the same as 1440p Ultra's 93. This suggests that the Ultra preset effectively forces a performance level that equals the High preset at the next resolution lower. The measured data also include minimum values for the Medium preset, which gives temperature to how the system handles short-intensive scenes; at 4K Medium, the minimum is 96 FPS, so the FPS does not dip into the unplayable territory. There are no minimum FPS values for the other presets, so the table does not provide precise extreme stutters, but the frame rate variance is limited to a few tens of FPS in the province.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti holds a rank of 970 out of 3,716 combos tested in Downfall. This places it in the bottom of the top quarter of all configurations. The CPU itself has a percentile of 85 among its, GPU's percentile is 83, indicating above-average components overall. Using the benchmark average scores of the CPU and GPU, the CPU scores 37,018 points and the GPU scores 41,187 points. The nearest rivals for the CPU are the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F (average 36,945, delta +0.2%), the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 (37,093, delta -0.2%), the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 (36,938, delta +0.2%), and Intel Core i9-12900T, with the CPU flanked within a 0.3% margin. For the GPU, its closest neighbors are the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 (40,870, delta +0.8%), NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB (41,707, delta -1.2%), the Tesla M40 (41,897, delta -1.7%), and the GeForce RTX 5070 (40,377, delta +2%). These delta values indicate the performance differences are small, so the 5500X3D and 3080 Ti fit snugly in their upper-midrange to high-end segments.

Ranking position, the 970th place out of 3,716 means that 969 combos score higher than this system, and the rest 2,746 are below it. That yields an approximate top 26% — although the dataset does not present a percentage, the rank-to-total ratio is clear. No other combination was tested at the same metric, but the rank is a holistic measure of how well the CPU+GPU pair can push the game's frame rate relative to all others. The relatively high rank is consistent with the CPU's high Passmark multithread score (20,363) and the GPU's high 3DMark Steel Nomad (5077). Competition further fine-tuned: the Ryzen 5 5500X3D is only 0.2% away from the Ryzen 5 5600F, meaning the two CPUs are essentially identical in synthetic benchmarks, yet the combo still manages to reach the 970th spot. This is likely because the game's load is not purely single-thread limit but depends on the CPU's memory and inter-connection