Downfall

Downfall, a 2016 horror title, presents an interesting scalability challenge for the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT combination. The measured data shows a system that is capable of delivering high frame rates at lower settings, but which becomes increasingly GPU-bound at higher resolutions and quality presets. The benchmark results indicate that the optimal configuration depends heavily on the user's display resolution and their preference for visual fidelity versus raw frame rate.

Settings Recommendations

The data shows a clear and consistent performance hierarchy across all three tested resolutions. At 1080p, the Low preset achieves an average of 226.9 FPS, which is the highest measured value in the entire dataset. This drops to 189.9 FPS at Medium, 153.4 FPS at High, and finally 94.4 FPS at Ultra. The step from Medium to High is a 36.5 FPS drop, but the more significant fall occurs when moving to Ultra, which represents a 59 FPS reduction from High. For competitive play or high-refresh-rate monitors, the Low preset is the only choice, as it is the only setting that pushes beyond the 200 FPS mark.

At 1440p, the pattern remains the same but with a tighter spread. The Low preset yields 166.7 FPS, Medium 133.3 FPS, and High 110.9 FPS. The Ultra preset falls to 70.5 FPS. Here, the High preset offers a balanced experience, staying above the 100 FPS threshold which is generally considered smooth for most players. The data suggests that High is the sweet spot at this resolution, providing a substantial visual upgrade over Medium while maintaining playable frame rates.

For 4K gaming, the situation changes dramatically. The Ultra preset produces an average of just 45.1 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target that most users consider the baseline for a playable experience. The High preset achieves 66.2 FPS, which is the only 4K setting that clears this bar comfortably. Medium sits at 84 FPS, and Low reaches 101.6 FPS. Given the demands of 4K, the High preset appears to be the recommended starting point, as it offers the best balance of visual quality and performance without dipping into the sub-60 FPS territory that Ultra exhibits.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 4 architecture, with a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. Its benchmark scores reflect a strong mid-range contender. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 20851, while the single-core score is 2943. The processor's percentile ranking against all CPUs is 82, indicating that it outperforms the vast majority of installed processors.

Looking at its nearest rivals, the Ryzen 5 8400F's average benchmark score of 25064 is essentially identical to the AMD Ryzen 7 2700X, which scores 25057 with a deltaPct of 0. It is also nearly tied with the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 (25099, -0.1%) and the AMD EPYC 9474F (25103, -0.2%). The only rival with a positive delta is the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F, which is 0.3% ahead. This indicates that the 8400F is a very well-rounded processor, with its performance being closely matched by these other options.

In the context of Downfall, the CPU's role appears to be secondary to the GPU at higher settings. The fact that frame rates drop significantly when moving from 1080p Low to 1080p Ultra (226.9 FPS to 94.4 FPS) suggests that the graphical load, rather than CPU processing, is the primary bottleneck. The processor's high single-thread score of 2943 in Cinebench R23 suggests it is more than capable of handling the game's logic and physics, which is consistent with the high frame rates seen at lower resolutions where the GPU is not as heavily taxed.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture and features 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 384.0 GB/s. Its boost clock is rated at 2581 MHz. The GPU's benchmark scores show a strong performance profile, with a percentile ranking of 77 against all GPUs. Its average benchmark score of 33721 places it in a competitive position.

The nearest rivals for the RX 6700 XT show a close grouping. The AMD Radeon RX 6800 is 0.7% ahead, while the NVIDIA RTX A5000 is 1.3% ahead. Conversely, the AMD Radeon HD 7950 and AMD Radeon RX 480 are both 1% behind. This suggests that the RX 6700 XT sits in a well-defined performance tier, with its closest competitors being a mix of newer and older architectures.

The GPU's role in Downfall is clearly dominant, particularly at higher resolutions and settings. The 4K Ultra result of 45.1 FPS is a clear indicator that the GPU is struggling to maintain fluid performance under maximum load. The transition from 1080p High (153.4 FPS) to 4K High (66.2 FPS) represents a 56.8% reduction in frame rate, which is a classic sign of a GPU-bound scenario. The 12 GB of VRAM is likely sufficient for this title, but the raw compute and memory bandwidth of the card become the limiting factors at 4K Ultra.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average frame rate recorded for this hardware combination?

A: The highest average frame rate is 226.9 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with the Low settings preset.

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F significantly faster than the AMD Ryzen 7 2700X in synthetic benchmarks?

A: No. The average benchmark scores are nearly identical, with the Ryzen 5 8400F scoring 25064 and the Ryzen 7 2700X scoring 25057, a deltaPct of 0.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT compare to the NVIDIA RTX A5000 in average benchmark score?

A: The RX 6700 XT has an average score of 33721, while the RTX A5000 scores 33294. This puts the RX 6700 XT 1.3% ahead of the RTX A5000.

Q: Can this system achieve 60 FPS at 4K with the Ultra preset?

A: No. The measured average at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings is 45.1 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target.

Q: What is the performance difference between the Low and Ultra presets at 1440p?

A: The Low preset achieves an average of 166.7 FPS, while the Ultra preset achieves 70.5 FPS. This is a difference of 96.2 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the more significant bottleneck at 1080p with High settings?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the primary bottleneck. The frame rate of 153.4 FPS at 1080p High is still high, but the scaling to 4K shows a significant drop, which is characteristic of GPU limitation.

Resolution Scaling

The measured frame rates reveal a clear and predictable scaling pattern as resolution increases. At the Low preset, the average frame rate drops from 226.9 FPS at 1080p to 166.7 FPS at 1440p, and then to 101.6 FPS at 4K. This represents a 26.5% reduction from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 39.1% reduction from 1440p to 4K. The system remains highly playable even at 4K Low, suggesting that the GPU has enough headroom to handle the increased pixel count.

The High preset shows a steeper decline. Starting at 153.4 FPS at 1080p, it drops to 110.9 FPS at 1440p (a 27.7% reduction), and then to 66.2 FPS at 4K (a 40.3% reduction from 1440p). The 4K High result is still above 60 FPS, but the margin is thinner. The Ultra preset illustrates the most dramatic scaling, falling from 94.4 FPS at 1080p to 70.5 FPS at 1440p (a 25.3% reduction), and then to 45.1 FPS at 4K (a 36.0% reduction from 1440p). The 4K Ultra result is the only configuration that falls below the 60 FPS threshold, highlighting the extreme demands of this combination.

This scaling behavior points to a system that is generally well-balanced, but which becomes increasingly GPU-bound at higher resolutions. The consistent percentage drops across presets suggest that the CPU is not a limiting factor at any tested resolution; the primary constraint is the GPU's ability to render the scene at higher pixel densities.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following data represents the complete set of measured average frame rates for this hardware configuration in Downfall.

At 1920x1080, the performance is as follows:

• Low: 226.9 FPS
• Medium: 189.9 FPS
• High: 153.4 FPS
• Ultra: 94.4 FPS

At 2560x1440, the performance is as follows:

• Low: 166.7 FPS
• Medium: 133.3 FPS
• High: 110.9 FPS
• Ultra: 70.5 FPS

At 3840x2160, the performance is as follows:

• Low: 101.6 FPS
• Medium: 84 FPS
• High: 66.2 FPS
• Ultra: 45.1 FPS

The data shows that the gap between the Low and Ultra presets widens as resolution increases. At 1080p, the difference is 132.5 FPS. At 1440p, this gap narrows to 96.2 FPS. At 4K, the difference is 56.5 FPS. This compression of the performance spread at higher resolutions further underscores the GPU's role as the primary bottleneck. The system's overall rank in the game's benchmark database is 940 out of 1741 combinations, placing it in the upper-middle tier of tested configurations.