Downfall

# Downfall with AMD Ryzen 5 8400F + Intel Arc B370

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F paired with the Intel Arc B370 produces a deeply lopsided result in Downfall, a horror title from 2016 that clearly favors the CPU side of this equation. The data shows a combo ranking 2688th out of 2928 tested configurations, placing it in the bottom 9% of all systems, yet the processor itself sits at the 77th percentile among all CPUs. This gap between component potential and combined outcome points directly at the integrated graphics solution as the bottleneck, with the 6-core Zen 4 chip effectively idle while the GPU struggles to maintain playable framerates.

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

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F brings 6 cores and 12 threads to the table, built on the Zen 4 architecture at a 4 nm process node. Its base clock runs at 4.20 GHz, boosting to 4.70 GHz under load, which provides substantial single-thread headroom for a 2016 horror title. The processor's cache layout includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3, a configuration that benefits latency-sensitive workloads like the scripted scares and physics interactions typical of the horror genre.

Benchmark data confirms the CPU's strength. The Cinebench R23 multicore score reaches 20851, while the single-core score hits 2943, indicating strong per-thread performance that older game engines often rely upon. PassMark's single-thread score of 3685 and multithread score of 24389 reinforce this picture. The 3DMark results show scaling from 1874 with 2 threads up to 6165 at max threads, with 16-thread performance at 6091 — nearly identical to the max-thread figure, suggesting the 12-thread configuration is fully utilized in synthetic workloads.

What matters for Downfall is that the CPU rarely becomes the limiting factor. The game's 2016 release date means its engine was designed for CPUs with far fewer resources than the 8400F provides. Even at the lowest measured framerate of 18 FPS at 4K Ultra, the processor is not likely the cause; rather, the integrated GPU cannot feed frames fast enough to stress the CPU. The nearest rival data shows the 8400F trading blows with the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F (0.2% ahead), Intel Core i7-11850H (0.3% ahead), and Intel Core i7-13620H (0.4% ahead), while the AMD EPYC 9474F sits 0.4% above. These margins are trivial in gaming contexts, confirming that any performance shortfall in this combo stems from elsewhere.

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

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated graphics processor based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, fabricated on Intel's 3 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz, yet its most defining characteristic is the memory configuration: "System Shared" for both size and type, with bandwidth listed as "System Dependent." This means the GPU borrows from the system's DDR5 memory rather than having dedicated VRAM, a design that directly impacts Downfall's texture streaming and framebuffer operations.

With 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster output units, the B370 offers modest raw throughput. Its pixel rate reaches 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate hits 96.00 GTexel/s, while FP32 performance sits at 6.144 TFLOPS. The 10 ray tracing cores are largely irrelevant for a 2016 horror title that predates hardware-accelerated ray tracing in mainstream games. The GPU's TDP of 25 W and IGP slot width confirm its integrated nature, with no power connectors and portable-device-dependent display outputs.

The GPU's benchmark presence is minimal — a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184 places it at the 5th percentile among all GPUs. This is an exceptionally low standing, and the nearest rivals tell a revealing story: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186 (0.2% ahead), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190 (0.5% ahead), and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192 (0.7% ahead). These are legacy discrete and mobile parts from over a decade ago, indicating the B370's performance class is far below what Downfall expects for smooth operation. The shared memory architecture compounds this issue, as the system-dependent bandwidth creates unpredictable performance depending on the CPU's memory traffic.

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

The framerate scaling across resolutions reveals a GPU-bound scenario with classic characteristics. At 1080p High, the combo achieves 64 FPS, but moving to 1440p High drops that to 46 FPS, and 4K High falls to 29 FPS. The percentage drops are steep: 1440p represents a 28% reduction from 1080p, while 4K represents a 55% reduction from 1080p. These scaling factors align with pixel-count increases (1440p has 1.78x the pixels of 1080p, 4K has 4x), suggesting the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth are the limiting resources.

The Low settings tell a similar story but with higher absolute numbers. At 1080p Low, the combo reaches 96 FPS, which drops to 68 FPS at 1440p Low (29% reduction) and 43 FPS at 4K Low (55% reduction). The consistency of these percentages across settings — roughly 28-29% for 1440p and 55% for 4K — indicates that resolution scaling is the primary variable, not settings complexity. This pattern is classic GPU-bound behavior: the CPU has ample headroom, but the integrated GPU cannot maintain frame throughput as pixel workloads increase.

Medium settings show the same trend with more granular data. From 78 FPS at 1080p Medium, the framerate falls to 56 FPS at 1440p Medium (28% reduction) and 35 FPS at 4K Medium (55% reduction). The minimum and maximum framerates for Medium settings — 67-90 FPS at 1080p, 48-64 FPS at 1440p, and 30-40 FPS at 4K — show that even the best-case spikes at higher resolutions remain below the worst-case dips at lower resolutions. This compression of the framerate envelope as resolution increases further confirms that the GPU, not the CPU, determines the experience.

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

At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset delivers an average of 18 FPS, which is effectively unplayable for a horror game requiring responsive controls. High settings improve this to 29 FPS, still below the 30 FPS threshold typically considered minimally playable. Medium settings reach 35 FPS with a minimum of 30 FPS and maximum of 40 FPS, making it the only 4K preset that crosses the playability line. Low settings achieve 43 FPS, providing a smoother experience but at the cost of visual fidelity in a genre where atmosphere matters.

The 2560x1440 results show more viability. Ultra settings produce 29 FPS, matching the 4K High figure and indicating the GPU's performance ceiling. High settings reach 46 FPS, Medium achieves 56 FPS (minimum 48, maximum 64), and Low hits 68 FPS. The jump from Medium to Low represents a 21% improvement, while the jump from High to Medium is 22%, showing diminishing returns as settings increase. The 1440p Medium result of 56 FPS with a 48 FPS minimum is the first configuration where the game becomes comfortably playable without major frame drops.

At 1920x1080, the combo finally shows its potential. Low settings produce 96 FPS, providing a smooth experience ideal for fast-paced sequences. Medium settings deliver 78 FPS with a 67 FPS minimum and 90 FPS maximum, maintaining consistency throughout. High settings reach 64 FPS, still above the 60 FPS standard. Ultra settings drop to 40 FPS, which, while playable, represents a 58% reduction from Low settings and introduces noticeable stutter in a game where sudden movements are common. The 1080p Medium row offers the best balance of stability and quality, with its 67-90 FPS range showing no severe dips.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combo ranks 2688th out of 2928 tested configurations in Downfall, placing it in the 8th percentile overall. This rank is dramatically worse than the CPU's individual standing (77th percentile among all CPUs) and slightly worse than the GPU's individual standing (5th percentile among all GPUs). The discrepancy between CPU percentile and combo rank suggests that the processor is significantly underutilized in this pairing, while the GPU's low percentile aligns closely with the combined outcome.

This ranking places the system in the bottom 240 configurations tested, a position that reflects the GPU's limitations rather than any CPU deficiency. The 6-core, 12-thread Zen 4 processor with its 4.70 GHz boost clock is capable of far more demanding workloads, as evidenced by its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 20851. The fact that this CPU produces results comparable to the Ryzen 5 7500F (0.2% difference) in synthetic benchmarks, yet the combo ranks poorly, isolates the GPU as the culprit.

For a 2016 horror game, this ranking is particularly disappointing because the genre benefits from consistent framerates to maintain tension. The data shows that even the best-case scenario — 1080p Low at 96 FPS — is achievable only by sacrificing visual quality. The 2688th rank out of 2928 combos means that 91.8% of tested systems perform better, which aligns with the GPU's 5th percentile standing. Users seeking better performance would need to either lower resolution to below 1080p (not measured in this data) or accept the visual compromises of Low settings.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

The measured data supports a clear recommendation hierarchy. For 1080p, Medium settings with 78 FPS average (67 FPS minimum, 90 FPS maximum) provide the best experience, as they maintain framerates above the 60 FPS threshold while preserving some visual detail. High settings at 64 FPS are acceptable but offer only a 14 FPS improvement over Medium's minimum, while Ultra at 40 FPS introduces too much variance for a horror title where reaction time matters. Low settings at 96 FPS are technically the smoothest, but the visual downgrade in a genre that relies on atmosphere may not be worth the extra 18 FPS over Medium.

For 1440p, Medium settings at 56 FPS (minimum 48 FPS) represent the only viable option that balances quality and performance. High settings at 46 FPS dip below the 50 FPS comfort zone, and Ultra at 29 FPS is unplayable. Low settings at 68 FPS are smooth but strip away the lighting and shadow effects that define horror aesthetics. The 48 FPS minimum at Medium is tight but manageable, though players sensitive to frame drops may prefer Low settings for consistency.

At 4K, the situation is dire. Only Medium settings (35 FPS average, 30 FPS minimum) cross the playability threshold, and even this is marginal. Low settings at 43 FPS are smoother but require significant visual sacrifices. High settings at 29 FPS and Ultra at 18 FPS are not recommended under any circumstances. The data suggests that 4K gaming with this combo is only feasible at Low or Medium presets, and players prioritizing framerate should consider 1440p instead.

Overall, the 1080p Medium preset offers the best balance of visual fidelity and performance, with its 67 FPS minimum ensuring the game remains responsive during tense moments. The 1440p Medium preset is a viable alternative for users with higher-resolution displays, provided they accept a 48 FPS minimum. For all other configurations, the data indicates either sub-30 FPS averages or excessive visual compromises.

FAQ

Q: Is this combo capable of playing Downfall at 4K?

A: Yes, but only at Low (43 FPS) or Medium (35 FPS) settings. High settings average 29 FPS and Ultra averages 18 FPS, both below playable thresholds. The Medium preset's minimum of 30 FPS is the only 4K option that stays above the 30 FPS line.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F scores an average benchmark of 25005, placing it 0.2% ahead of the Ryzen 5 7500F (24964), 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core i7-11850H (24935), and 0.4% ahead of the Intel Core i7-13620H (24911). The AMD EPYC 9474F leads by 0.4% with a score of 25103.

Q: What is the best framerate this combo can achieve in Downfall?

A: The highest measured average framerate is 96 FPS at 1080p Low settings. The next best is 78 FPS at 1080p Medium, followed by 68 FPS at 1440p Low. No other configuration exceeds 64 FPS.

Q: Why does the combo rank so low despite having a strong CPU?

A: The combo ranks 2688th out of 2928 systems, while the CPU sits at the 77th percentile. The Intel Arc B370 GPU ranks at the 5th percentile among all GPUs, and the measured framerates show GPU-bound scaling across resolutions, indicating the integrated graphics is the limiting factor.

Q: Which resolution and settings combination provides the most consistent framerate?

A: The 1080p Medium preset offers the best consistency with a 67 FPS minimum and 90 FPS maximum, a spread of 23 FPS. The 1440p Medium preset has a 48 FPS minimum and 64 FPS maximum, a spread of 16 FPS, but operates at a lower average of 56 FPS.

Q: How does the GPU's benchmark score compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Arc B370 scores 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186 (0.2% higher), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190 (0.5% higher), and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192 (0.7% higher). The AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168, which is 1.4% lower.