Downfall

# Downfall with AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080

The AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 produces a striking set of measured frame rates in Downfall, a horror title from 2016. This combination sits at rank 270 out of 3,716 tested combos, placing it comfortably in the top 7.3% of all configurations. The data reveals a system that delivers triple-digit average FPS at nearly every resolution and settings tier, with the only exception being 4K Ultra, which still holds at 74 FPS. What stands out immediately is how the CPU's 3D V-Cache architecture interacts with this older game engine, and how the GPU's 16 GB of VRAM prevents memory-related bottlenecks even at maximum settings.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D is a 6-core, 12-thread processor from the 7000 series, built on the Zen 4 Raphael architecture using a 5 nm process at TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 4.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz, drawing a TDP of 65 W on the AMD Socket AM5 platform. The cache hierarchy is particularly noteworthy: 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a substantial 96 MB of shared L3 cache. This large L3 pool is the defining feature of the X3D lineup, and it appears to matter for Downfall's frame pacing.

The CPU's benchmark profile shows a PassMark single-thread score of 3,494 and a multithread score of 25,047, with an average benchmark score of 44,573. Its percentile ranking versus all CPUs is 89, meaning it outperforms 89% of processors in the database. The nearest rivals in average score include the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H at 44,466 (0.2% faster), the Intel Core i9-13950HX at 44,342 (0.5% faster), and the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 at 44,309 (0.6% faster), while the Intel Core i5-14600 sits just behind at 44,889 (-0.7% slower). These deltas are all within 1%, indicating the 7500X3D's raw throughput is tightly clustered with several high-end laptop and desktop parts.

For Downfall, the measured FPS data suggests the CPU is not the limiting factor at any resolution. At 1080p Low, the combination reaches 391 FPS average, which is an extreme workload for the CPU to feed. The fact that this system sustains such high frame rates indicates the 6-core/12-thread configuration with the 96 MB L3 cache is more than sufficient for this 2016 horror title. The game likely benefits from the large cache because it can keep more of the scene's assets and AI routines resident on-die, reducing memory latency spikes. The 83.2 GB/s dual-channel DDR5 memory bandwidth further supports this, ensuring the CPU's cache misses are serviced quickly.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD103 chip, manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC with 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die. It features a base clock of 2205 MHz and a boost clock of 2505 MHz, with memory running at 1400 MHz (22.4 Gbps effective). The 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus provides 716.8 GB/s of bandwidth, which is a critical resource for high-resolution textures. The GPU has 9,728 shading units, 304 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, along with 76 RT cores and 304 tensor cores. Its compute capabilities include 48.74 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16, a pixel rate of 280.6 GPixel/s, and a texture rate of 761.5 GTexel/s.

The GPU's benchmark results show a PassMark G3D score of 34,457 and a PassMark GPU compute score of 20,671. It ranks in the 86th percentile versus all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 54,247. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER at 54,209 (0.1% faster), the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X at 54,828 (-1.1% slower), the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB at 55,698 (-2.6% slower), and the AMD Radeon 8060S at 55,757 (-2.7% slower). The RTX 4080's performance is essentially tied with the 4080 SUPER, which suggests the standard model is delivering near-flagship levels of rasterization throughput.

In Downfall, the GPU's 16 GB VRAM is almost certainly the reason why Ultra settings at 4K remain playable. The measured 74 FPS average at 3840x2160 Ultra indicates the game is not running out of memory, as that would typically cause severe stuttering or frame drops well below 60 FPS. The 716.8 GB/s memory bandwidth also helps maintain consistent frame times when the camera moves through dense horror environments with dynamic lighting. The GPU's 2205 MHz base and 2505 MHz boost clocks provide the raw shader throughput needed to push frame rates above 100 FPS at 1440p High, which the data confirms at 191 FPS average.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific pairing of the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 achieves a combo rank of 270 out of 3,716 tested combinations in Downfall. That places it in the 92.7th percentile, meaning it outperforms the vast majority of all systems in the database for this particular game. The rank reflects the synergy between the CPU's large cache and the GPU's high memory bandwidth, both of which are advantageous for a horror title that likely relies on loading many unique textures and maintaining high draw distances.

The top 270 position is notable because it indicates there are 269 combos that deliver higher average FPS across the tested settings and resolutions. Given the data, those higher-ranked combos would need to exceed the 391 FPS ceiling seen at 1080p Low, which is an exceptionally high bar. The 4K Ultra result of 74 FPS is also strong, suggesting that even the most demanding preset is handled without compromise. This combo's rank is a direct consequence of the measured FPS values, which show no weak points across the entire resolution and settings matrix.

When compared to the CPU's and GPU's individual percentile rankings (89 and 86 respectively), the combo rank of 270/3716 is actually stronger than either component's standalone percentile. This suggests the pairing extracts more performance than the sum of its parts, likely because the 7500X3D's 96 MB L3 cache reduces CPU bottlenecking at high frame rates, allowing the RTX 4080 to operate closer to its full potential. The data implies that this is a balanced combination where neither component consistently starves the other.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The measured FPS data covers four resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, 3840x2160) and four settings tiers (Low, Medium, High, Ultra), with average FPS recorded for all combinations and min/max FPS provided for Medium settings.

At 1920x1080, the results are remarkable. Low settings produce an average of 391 FPS. Medium settings yield 327 FPS average, with a minimum of 278 FPS and a maximum of 376 FPS. High settings drop to 268 FPS average. Ultra settings still deliver a substantial 168 FPS average. The spread from Low to Ultra at 1080p is 223 FPS, indicating that the GPU has significant headroom even at the highest preset.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain very high. Low settings average 285 FPS. Medium settings average 233 FPS, with a minimum of 198 FPS and a maximum of 268 FPS. High settings produce 191 FPS average. Ultra settings fall to 120 FPS average. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is consistent across settings, roughly a 27-29% reduction in average FPS, which aligns with the increased pixel count.

At 3840x2160, the performance is still strong for a 4K resolution. Low settings average 178 FPS. Medium settings average 145 FPS, with a minimum of 123 FPS and a maximum of 167 FPS. High settings produce 119 FPS average. Ultra settings drop to 74 FPS average. The 4K Ultra result is the only sub-100 FPS average in the entire dataset, but it remains comfortably above 60 FPS for smooth gameplay.

The Medium settings rows are the only ones with min/max data, and they show tight frame time consistency. At 1080p Medium, the spread between min and max is 98 FPS (278 to 376). At 1440p Medium, the spread is 70 FPS (198 to 268). At 4K Medium, the spread narrows to 44 FPS (123 to 167). This narrowing spread at higher resolutions suggests the GPU becomes the primary limiter, which typically results in more stable frame pacing than CPU-bound scenarios.

FAQ

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D sufficient for high frame rates in Downfall?

A: Yes, the data shows the CPU supports average FPS up to 391 at 1080p Low and 285 at 1440p Low, indicating it is not a bottleneck at any tested resolution or setting. Its 6 cores, 12 threads, and 96 MB L3 cache provide ample headroom for this game's engine.

Q: How does the RTX 4080 handle 4K Ultra settings in this game?

A: The RTX 4080 delivers an average of 74 FPS at 3840x2160 Ultra, which is above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth play. The 16 GB of VRAM and 716.8 GB/s memory bandwidth are sufficient to prevent memory-related performance drops at this demanding preset.

Q: What is the best resolution to play at for a 144 Hz monitor?

A: According to the measured data, 2560x1440 High produces 191 FPS average, which exceeds 144 Hz. Even 4K High at 119 FPS is close, but 1440p High is the safest choice for consistently hitting 144 FPS.

Q: How much performance is lost when going from Low to Ultra settings?

A: The performance drop varies by resolution. At 1080p, Ultra is 57% slower than Low (168 vs 391 FPS). At 1440p, Ultra is 58% slower than Low (120 vs 285 FPS). At 4K, Ultra is 58% slower than Low (74 vs 178 FPS). The relative loss is remarkably consistent across resolutions.

Q: Does the combo rank in the top 10% of all tested systems?

A: Yes, the combo ranks 270 out of 3,716 tested combinations, placing it in the top 7.3% of all systems in the database for Downfall performance.

Q: Are frame times stable at Medium settings?

A: The min/max data for Medium settings shows a spread of 98 FPS at 1080p, 70 FPS at 1440p, and 44 FPS at 4K. The narrowing spread at higher resolutions indicates increasingly stable frame times as the GPU becomes the primary workload driver.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings tier depends on the target refresh rate and resolution. For 1080p displays, High settings at 268 FPS average offer the best balance of visual quality and performance, as the jump from High to Ultra costs 100 FPS (268 to 168) with likely diminishing visual returns. For 1440p, High settings at 191 FPS are the clear choice for 144 Hz displays, while Ultra at 120 FPS still supports 120 Hz panels. For 4K, High settings at 119 FPS are excellent for 120 Hz displays, but Ultra at 74 FPS remains playable for 60 Hz monitors.

The Low settings presets at each resolution produce exceptionally high frame rates (391, 285, and 178 FPS for 1080p, 1440p, and 4K respectively), but these are likely unnecessary for most users given that Medium settings at 4K still achieve 145 FPS average. Medium settings offer the most balanced experience across all resolutions, with min FPS values of 278 at 1080p, 198 at 1440p, and 123 at 4K, ensuring no drops below 60 FPS even in the worst-case scenes.

If maximizing visual fidelity is the priority, Ultra settings provide 168 FPS at 1080p, 120 FPS at 1440p, and 74 FPS at 4K, all of which are above 60 FPS. The data shows that this combo can handle Ultra at every resolution, making it a viable choice for users with high-refresh-rate 4K displays who are willing to accept frame rates in the 70-120 FPS range.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of performance scaling as resolution increases. For Low settings, the average FPS drops from 391 at 1080p to 285 at 1440p to 178 at 4K. This represents a 27% decrease from 1080p to 1440p and a 54% decrease from 1080p to 4K. For High settings, the progression is 268 to 191 to 119 FPS, which is a 29% drop to 1440p and a 56% drop to 4K. For Ultra settings, the numbers are 168 to 120 to 74 FPS, showing a 29% drop to 1440p and a 56% drop to 4K.

The consistency of these percentage drops across all settings tiers is informative. The fact that Low, High, and Ultra all exhibit nearly identical scaling (roughly 27-29% for 1440p and 54-56% for 4K) indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting factor at all resolutions. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see a smaller FPS drop from 1080p to 1440p, because the GPU would have headroom to render more pixels while the CPU remains maxed out. Instead, the uniform scaling suggests that the RTX 4080's rendering throughput is directly proportional to pixel count, which is typical of GPU-bound scenarios.

The 4K Ultra result of 74 FPS is the most telling data point. At this setting, the GPU is clearly working at its limits, but the CPU still has enough headroom to feed it. The 16 GB VRAM capacity is also confirmed as sufficient, since a memory shortage would cause a more severe FPS drop at 4K Ultra compared to lower settings. The scaling data implies that upgrading to a more powerful GPU would yield proportional FPS gains at every resolution, while upgrading the CPU would likely produce minimal improvements given the current GPU's dominance in this workload.