Downfall

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700 paired with the Intel Arc B390 ranks 2,589 out of 2,928 tested combos in Downfall, placing it in the lower 12% of all configurations. This is a combination where the graphics solution is the decisive bottleneck, as the Arc B390’s average benchmark score sits at just 1,482, which places it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs. The CPU, by contrast, is a mid-range performer, with an average benchmark score of 25,517 and a 78th percentile ranking among all processors. The data indicates that the measured frame rates are almost entirely dictated by the GPU’s capabilities, with the CPU providing ample headroom that is rarely utilized at the resolutions tested.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 2,589 out of 2,928 is a clear indicator of its overall performance tier. In a game like Downfall, which is a horror title from 2016, the demands are not exceptionally high by modern standards, yet this pairing still lands in the bottom 12% of all tested systems. This is not a result of the CPU holding the system back; the Ryzen 7 5700 is a capable 8-core processor. Instead, the data points directly to the Intel Arc B390 as the limiting factor. The GPU’s percentile rank of 9 is starkly low, reflecting its performance class.

The nearest rivals for the GPU include the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, GeForce 800M, GT 625 OEM, and GT 710, with deltaPct values of 1.3, 1.5, 2.5, and 2.7 respectively. This means the Arc B390 outperforms these older, entry-level graphics solutions by only a small margin, between 1.3% and 2.7%. These are not modern gaming GPUs; they are legacy parts. This comparison frames the Arc B390 as a very low-end solution, which is consistent with the low FPS numbers measured in Downfall. The CPU’s nearest rivals, such as the Intel Xeon D-2752TER and AMD Ryzen 5 6600H, have nearly identical average scores, with deltas of -0.1% and -0.1% respectively, confirming that the CPU is performing exactly as expected for its class and is not a source of performance degradation.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best average FPS achieved by this combo in Downfall?*

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 106, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This is the only configuration where the combo breaks the 100 FPS threshold.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B390 compare to its closest rivals based on benchmark scores?

A: The Arc B390 has an average benchmark score of 1,482. Its closest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, scores 1,463, which is 1.3% lower. The GeForce 800M scores 1,460 (1.5% lower), the GT 625 OEM scores 1,446 (2.5% lower), and the GT 710 scores 1,443 (2.7% lower). This shows the Arc B390 is only marginally faster than these very old GPUs.

Q: Does the CPU become a limiting factor at any tested resolution?

A: The data does not indicate that the CPU limits performance. At 4K with High settings, the average FPS is 32, while at 1080p with High settings it is 71. This scaling pattern is typical of a GPU-bound scenario. The CPU’s strong multi-threaded scores, such as 20,655 in Cinebench R23, suggest it has far more capability than the GPU can utilize.

Q: What is the difference in average FPS between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset yields an average of 76 FPS, while the Ultra preset yields an average of 32 FPS. This represents a 44 FPS drop, or approximately 57.9% lower performance, when moving from the lowest to the highest quality settings.

Q: Is the Arc B390’s memory configuration a factor in its performance?

A: The Arc B390 uses System Shared memory, with a bandwidth that is system-dependent. This means it relies on the main system RAM, which is a significant disadvantage for a GPU. The data does not include a dedicated VRAM size or bus width, confirming this is an integrated-class solution that shares system resources, which contributes to its low performance metrics.

Q: What is the combo’s rank in relation to the total number of tested systems?

A: The combo ranks 2,589 out of 2,928 tested combinations. This places it in the bottom 11.6% of all systems that have been benchmarked for Downfall.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of how the combo scales with resolution. At 1920x1080 with High settings, the average FPS is 71. Moving to 2560x1440 at the same settings drops the average to 51 FPS, a reduction of 28.2%. At 3840x2160, the average falls to 32 FPS, a further 37.3% reduction from the 1440p result. This scaling pattern is a classic sign of a GPU-bound workload. The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is 54.9%, meaning the Arc B390’s fill rate and shading power are insufficient to maintain frame rates as pixel count increases.

The data for Low settings shows a similar trend. At 1080p Low, the average is 106 FPS. At 1440p Low, it drops to 76 FPS (a 28.3% decrease), and at 4K Low, it falls to 47 FPS (a 38.2% decrease from 1440p). The scaling is consistent across settings presets, which further reinforces the conclusion that the GPU is the limiting component. The CPU, with its 8 cores and 16 threads from the Zen 3 architecture, is not being stressed by the resolution changes. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rates would remain relatively flat across resolutions, which is not the case here. The consistent drop in FPS as resolution increases indicates that the Arc B390’s rendering pipeline is saturated well before the CPU’s processing capabilities are exhausted.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured average FPS, the optimal experience depends on the resolution target. For 1080p, the Low preset delivers the highest average FPS at 106, providing a very smooth experience. The Medium preset at 87 FPS is also playable and offers a better visual quality, while the High preset at 71 FPS is still above the 60 FPS threshold that is generally considered playable. The Ultra preset at 44 FPS is below this threshold and would likely result in a less fluid experience, especially in a horror game where responsiveness matters. For 1440p, the Low preset at 76 FPS is the only option that maintains a high frame rate. The Medium preset at 62 FPS is acceptable, but the High preset at 51 FPS and the Ultra preset at 32 FPS are not recommended for a smooth experience. At 4K, the data shows that the combo is not capable of delivering playable frame rates. The Low preset yields 47 FPS, and the Medium preset yields 39 FPS, but the High preset at 32 FPS and Ultra at 20 FPS are severely lacking.

The data suggests that to achieve the best balance of visual fidelity and performance, the Medium preset at 1080p is the most sensible choice. It provides an 87 FPS average, which is 18% lower than Low but offers a significant visual upgrade. For users prioritizing maximum smoothness, the Low preset at 1080p is the best option. At 1440p, users will need to compromise and use the Low preset to stay above 60 FPS. The Ultra preset is not a viable option at any resolution, as it consistently results in the lowest frame rates, including a 20 FPS average at 4K, which is unplayable.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo’s performance is at its peak. The Low settings preset yields an average FPS of 106, which is the highest recorded average for this pairing. The Medium preset produces an average of 87 FPS, with a minimum of 74 and a maximum of 100 FPS. The High preset delivers an average of 71 FPS. The Ultra preset is significantly more demanding, with an average of 44 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra is 62 FPS, illustrating the substantial cost of enabling the highest quality settings.

At 2560x1440, the performance drops noticeably. The Low preset averages 76 FPS, which is a 28.3% reduction from the 1080p Low result. The Medium preset averages 62 FPS, with a minimum of 53 and a maximum of 71 FPS. The High preset averages 51 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 32 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra remains similar at 44 FPS, but the overall frame rates are lower across the board, making the High and Ultra presets less viable. At 3840x2160, the combo struggles. The Low preset averages 47 FPS, the Medium preset averages 39 FPS (with a minimum of 33 and a maximum of 44 FPS), the High preset averages 32 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 20 FPS. None of these settings achieve a 60 FPS average, and only the Low preset approaches a playable level of smoothness.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700 is a Zen 3 architecture processor with 8 cores and 16 threads. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The CPU’s benchmark results indicate strong multi-threaded performance, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 20,655 and a Geekbench multi-core score of 9,959. Its single-thread performance is also respectable, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,916. These scores place the CPU in the 78th percentile of all CPUs, and its average benchmark score of 25,517 is nearly identical to its nearest rivals, such as the Intel Xeon D-2752TER (25,530) and the AMD Ryzen 5 7640U (25,485).

In the context of Downfall, the CPU’s role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and game logic. The data shows that the CPU is not a limiting factor. The frame rates scale with resolution and settings in a way that is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario. The 3DMark scores for the CPU, such as 6,628 for 16 threads and 5,585 for 8 threads, suggest it has ample processing power for this game. Even at 1080p with Low settings, where the average FPS is 106, the CPU is likely not saturated. The game, being a 2016 release, is not expected to be heavily multi-threaded, but the Ryzen 7 5700’s 16 threads provide a significant amount of headroom. The CPU’s 16 MB of L3 cache and 7 nm process node are modern features that ensure it is not a bottleneck in this pairing.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is the clear performance limiter in this combination. It is based on the Xe3-LPG architecture and is noted as an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a 3 nm process node. Its clocks are listed as a base of 300 MHz and a boost of 2500 MHz. The GPU has 1,536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. It also includes 12 ray tracing cores. The memory configuration is system-dependent, using shared system memory with no dedicated VRAM. This is a fundamental disadvantage for gaming, as the GPU must compete with the CPU for memory bandwidth.

The GPU’s benchmark score is extremely low, with an average of 1,482, placing it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are ancient parts like the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX and GT 710, which it only marginally outperforms. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,482 is a modern benchmark, and this low score confirms the GPU’s position at the bottom of the performance hierarchy. Its pixel rate is 60.00 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 120.0 GTexel/s, but these figures do not translate into playable frame rates at high resolutions. The FP32 performance is 7.680 TFLOPS, which is low for a modern GPU.

The measured FPS data for Downfall reflects these limitations. The GPU’s inability to maintain high frame rates at 4K, even on Low settings (47 FPS), is a direct consequence of its low compute throughput and shared memory architecture. The boost clock of 2500 MHz is not sufficient to overcome the fundamental lack of dedicated graphics memory and the low number of execution units. The data clearly shows that this GPU is not designed for demanding gaming workloads, and its performance in Downfall is consistent with its 9th percentile ranking.