Downfall

The data for Downfall on the AMD Ryzen 5 7600 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER reveals a system that is fundamentally constrained by its graphics card, but with enough CPU headroom to make resolution and settings choices highly impactful. The measured results show a clear narrative of GPU-bound performance across the board, where the scaling between presets is steep and the processor's role is primarily to ensure consistent frame delivery.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate deltas between 1080p and 4K are substantial, confirming that the GTX 1660 SUPER is the primary bottleneck in this configuration. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 147 at 1920x1080 to 65 at 3840x2160, representing a 55.8% reduction in performance. This steep decline is characteristic of a GPU struggling with pixel throughput, as the 6 GB memory buffer and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth are increasingly taxed at higher resolutions.

The scaling becomes even more pronounced when examining the Ultra preset. The system delivers 62 FPS at 1080p, but this plummets to 27 FPS at 4K—a 56.5% decrease. This pattern indicates that the GPU's compute resources, specifically its 5.027 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, are being saturated by the increased fragment processing workload. The 1530 MHz base and 1785 MHz boost clocks do not provide enough raw shading power to maintain playable rates at 4K with maximum quality settings.

Interestingly, the Medium preset shows the most moderate scaling curve. From 120 FPS at 1080p to 54 FPS at 4K, the performance reduction is 55.0%, which is consistent with the other presets. This uniformity across all settings strongly suggests that the limiting factor is the GPU's overall rasterization capability rather than a specific feature like memory capacity or texture fill rate. The 85.68 GPixel/s pixel rate and 157.1 GTexel/s texture rate are the likely ceilings here.

At 2560x1440, the system behaves more predictably. High settings yield 71 FPS, which is a 28.2% drop from the 99 FPS at 1080p. This resolution appears to be the sweet spot where the GPU can still deliver smooth gameplay on High, but the 44 FPS at Ultra confirms that 1440p is near the practical limit for maximum quality. The data suggests that players targeting 4K will need to compromise heavily on visual fidelity, as even Low settings only manage 65 FPS.

The frame time consistency, where available, reinforces this analysis. At 1440p Medium, the min FPS of 73 and max of 99 show a reasonable variance of 26 FPS, while at 4K Medium the spread widens to 17 FPS (45 min, 62 max). This increased variance at higher resolutions is typical of a GPU that is more frequently hitting its execution limits, causing occasional frame hitches.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data indicates that the Medium preset offers the most balanced experience across all tested resolutions, though the optimal choice depends heavily on the target display. At 1920x1080, Medium delivers 120 FPS with a minimum of 102 FPS, which is exceptionally smooth for a horror game where frame consistency matters for immersion. The jump to High (99 FPS) is modest, but the drop to Ultra (62 FPS) is significant, suggesting that the transition from High to Ultra imposes a disproportionate cost.

For 2560x1440 users, the Medium preset at 86 FPS (min 73, max 99) is clearly the best option. It provides a 21.1% improvement over High's 71 FPS while maintaining a minimum above 70 FPS, which is generally considered the threshold for fluid gameplay. The Ultra preset at 44 FPS is likely too choppy for the horror genre's atmospheric pacing, where sudden frame drops can break tension.

At 4K, no preset achieves a fully smooth experience. Low at 65 FPS is the only setting that approaches playability, but the visual compromise is substantial. Medium at 54 FPS (min 45, max 62) might be acceptable for slower-paced sections, but the minimum frame rate suggests potential stutter during action sequences. The 27 FPS at Ultra is effectively unplayable and should be avoided entirely.

The data implies that the High preset is something of a trap for this combination. At 1080p it offers only 17.5% more performance than Medium, but at 4K it provides just 18.5% more than Medium. Meanwhile, the jump from High to Ultra costs 37.4% of performance at 1080p and 50.0% at 4K. This non-linear scaling suggests that Medium is the best quality-per-frame setting, with High being a marginal upgrade and Ultra being a significant downgrade.

FAQ

*Q: Can this system run Downfall at 4K with playable frame rates?*

A: Only at Low settings, which achieves 65 FPS on average. Medium drops to 54 FPS with a minimum of 45 FPS, while High and Ultra fall to 44 FPS and 27 FPS respectively. The data indicates that 4K requires substantial visual compromises.

Q: What is the best resolution for the GTX 1660 SUPER with the Ryzen 5 7600?

A: 1920x1080 provides the most consistent experience, with all presets except Ultra exceeding 99 FPS. At 2560x1440, Medium and High remain playable, but 4K is only viable on Low settings.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 1440p?

A: On High settings, the average FPS drops from 99 to 71, a 28.3% reduction. On Medium, it falls from 120 to 86, a 28.3% reduction. The scaling is nearly identical across presets, indicating a consistent GPU bottleneck.

Q: Is the Ryzen 5 7600 holding back the GTX 1660 SUPER?

A: The benchmark data does not show CPU limitation. The 6-core, 12-thread processor with a 5.10 GHz boost clock delivers scores like 12,735 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 1,852 in single-core, which are far above what this GPU workload requires. The frame rate scaling follows GPU load patterns.

Q: What is the minimum FPS on Medium settings at 1440p?

A: The measured minimum is 73 FPS, with a maximum of 99 FPS and an average of 86 FPS. This 26 FPS variance is the largest spread among the Medium preset measurements across resolutions.

Q: How does the Ultra preset compare to the High preset in terms of performance?

A: At 1080p, Ultra delivers 62 FPS versus High's 99 FPS, a 37.4% penalty. At 1440p, the gap is 44 FPS versus 71 FPS, a 38.0% penalty. At 4K, Ultra manages 27 FPS versus High's 44 FPS, a 38.6% penalty. The cost is consistently severe.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system performs admirably across most settings. Low settings yield an average of 147 FPS, which is the highest measured value in the entire dataset. Medium follows at 120 FPS with a minimum of 102 FPS and a maximum of 138 FPS. High settings produce 99 FPS, while Ultra drops to 62 FPS. This resolution clearly allows the GTX 1660 SUPER to stretch its legs, with only the Ultra preset falling below the 100 FPS mark.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance degrades predictably. Low settings average 105 FPS, maintaining triple-digit performance. Medium averages 86 FPS with a range of 73 to 99 FPS. High settings drop to 71 FPS, and Ultra falls to 44 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 61 FPS, showing the significant impact of quality settings at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the system is clearly out of its depth for high-quality gaming. Low settings average 65 FPS, which is the only preset above 60 FPS. Medium averages 54 FPS with a minimum of 45 FPS and maximum of 62 FPS. High settings average 44 FPS, and Ultra drops to 27 FPS. The performance cliff between 1440p and 4K is steep, with even Low settings losing 38.1% of their 1440p performance.

Comparing across resolutions, the Medium preset shows the most consistent relative performance. It achieves 120 FPS at 1080p, 86 FPS at 1440p, and 54 FPS at 4K. The scaling factors are 0.72 (1080p to 1440p) and 0.63 (1440p to 4K). This suggests that the GPU's fill rate limits are being approached in a predictable manner as pixel count increases.

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 5 7600 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER combination ranks 3,177 out of 3,716 tested combos for Downfall, placing it in the 14.5th percentile of all configurations. This is a low ranking, indicating that most other tested systems deliver higher frame rates in this game. The GPU's 53rd percentile rating among all GPUs, coupled with the CPU's 78th percentile, shows that the graphics card is the primary drag on this ranking.

The GTX 1660 SUPER's nearest rivals in the GPU benchmark database include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (0.4% slower), AMD Radeon RX 580 (0.4% slower), and AMD Radeon 740M (0.9% faster). These close margins suggest that the GPU is positioned in a competitive mid-range segment, but not at the top tier required for high-end Downfall performance. The 12,699 Passmark G3D score reflects this mid-pack positioning.

For the CPU, the Ryzen 5 7600 sits very close to its rivals. The AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX is 0.2% slower, the Intel Core i9-11900KF is 0.4% faster, and the AMD Ryzen 5 8540U is 0.5% faster. This clustering around the 26,324 average benchmark score indicates that the CPU is not a differentiating factor in this combo's ranking. The processor has ample headroom, as evidenced by its 78th percentile ranking among all CPUs.

The gap between the CPU's strong relative position and the GPU's mid-tier standing is the core reason for the combo's low rank. In Downfall, which appears to be GPU-intensive based on the resolution scaling, the 1660 SUPER's 6 GB of VRAM and 5.027 TFLOPS compute are insufficient for high-refresh-rate gaming at higher resolutions. The combo's rank suggests that pairing this CPU with a more powerful GPU would yield significantly better results.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 7600 brings substantial processing power to this pairing. Its 6 cores and 12 threads, based on the Zen 4 architecture, provide strong multi-threaded performance. The 3.80 GHz base clock and 5.10 GHz boost clock allow for rapid single-thread execution, which is reflected in the 1,852 Cinebench R23 single-core score. The 32 MB of shared L3 cache helps reduce memory latency, which can be beneficial for game logic and physics calculations.

In terms of absolute performance, the CPU achieves a 12,735 score in Cinebench R23 multicore and 13,413 in Geekbench multicore. The Passmark multithread score of 27,058 and single-thread score of 3,910 further demonstrate its capability. However, the Downfall frame rate data does not show any signs of CPU bottlenecking. The consistent frame rate scaling with resolution and settings changes is a hallmark of GPU-bound scenarios.

The CPU's memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s via dual-channel DDR5 support is more than adequate for this game. Even with the GTX 1660 SUPER feeding data through a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, the CPU can process draw calls and game state updates without becoming a limiting factor. The 3DMark scores, including 6,499 for 16 threads and 999 for single-thread, confirm that the CPU has substantial reserve capacity.

The processor's 65 W TDP and 5 nm process node indicate an efficient design that does not generate excessive heat, which could theoretically allow for sustained boost clocks during long gaming sessions. However, the benchmark data does not include temperature or clock throttle information, so this remains speculative. What is clear is that the Ryzen 5 7600 is providing a stable platform for the GPU to operate without CPU-induced frame drops.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER is the definitive performance limiter in this combination. Its 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus provides 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p gaming but becomes strained at 4K. The 1530 MHz base and 1785 MHz boost clocks drive 1,408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs to produce the measured frame rates.

The GPU's 5.027 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 10.05 TFLOPS of FP16 (2:1 ratio) represent its raw compute capability. The pixel rate of 85.68 GPixel/s and texture rate of 157.1 GTexel/s determine how quickly the GPU can fill the screen with rendered geometry. These specifications explain why the performance drops so dramatically at 4K, where the pixel count is 4 times that of 1080p.

At 1080p, the GPU has enough throughput to deliver 147 FPS on Low settings, indicating that the 5.027 TFLOPS is not fully utilized at this resolution. The drop to 62 FPS at Ultra suggests that the increased shader complexity and texture sampling are pushing the GPU toward its limits. The 6 GB VRAM capacity could also become a factor at Ultra settings if texture detail exceeds this amount, though the measured data does not isolate this variable.

The GPU's 53rd percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 12,986, places it in the mid-range of the performance spectrum. Its nearest rival, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile, is only 0.4% slower, indicating that this is a well-known performance tier. The 12,699 Passmark G3D score and 5,076 GPU compute score reflect its capabilities across different workloads.

For Downfall, the GPU's limitations are most evident at 4K, where even the Low preset (65 FPS) struggles to maintain high frame rates. The 125 W TDP and 300 W suggested PSU indicate that this is a power-efficient card, but efficiency does not translate to high-end performance. The 12 nm process node, while older than the CPU's 5 nm, is adequate for this level of performance. The data strongly suggests that any upgrade path for this combo should focus on the GPU, as the CPU has significant headroom to support a faster graphics card.