Downfall

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700G and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER pairing in Downfall produces a dataset that clearly delineates the responsibilities of each component. The processor, an 8-core, 16-thread Zen 3 part with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, provides ample computational headroom. Its benchmark scores reinforce this: a Cinebench R23 multi-core result of 20755 points and a single-core score of 2930 points place it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs. This level of throughput is rarely a bottleneck in a horror title, where the engine’s physics and AI threads are unlikely to saturate all 16 threads. The 5700G’s 16 MB of L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support at 51.2 GB/s ensure that the CPU can feed the GPU without stalling, allowing the graphics card to become the primary determinant of frame rate.

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

The Ryzen 7 5700G’s architecture is built for sustained multi-threaded workloads, but Downfall’s demands are more modest. The data shows that the CPU’s performance envelope is never the limiting factor across the tested configurations. Even at 1080p with Low settings, where the GPU workload is lightest, the average frame rate reaches 144.5 FPS. This figure is close to the CPU’s practical ceiling for gaming, but it indicates that the processor can handle the game’s logic and draw calls without dropping frames. The 3dmark_16_threads score of 6629 and the 3dmark_single_thread score of 899 show a strong balance between parallel and single-threaded performance, which is crucial for a game that may rely on a few primary threads for gameplay logic. The processor’s 65 W TDP and 7 nm process node suggest efficient power delivery, allowing it to maintain boost clocks during extended sessions.

When compared to its nearest rivals, the 5700G sits in a tight cluster. It is 0.3% slower than the AMD Ryzen 7 6800U but 0.4% faster than the Intel Xeon D-2752TER. The deltaPct values are minimal, meaning the 5700G’s performance is statistically identical to these other processors in synthetic benchmarks. For Downfall, this translates to a CPU that will not create a performance ceiling. The PassMark multi-thread score of 24419 and the Geekbench multi-core score of 8970 further confirm that the CPU has significant reserves. In practice, the game’s frame rates are dictated by the GPU, as evidenced by the scaling of FPS with resolution and settings, rather than by CPU-bound fluctuations. The data implies that even at the lowest resolution and settings, the CPU is not the bottleneck, as the 144.5 FPS result is a high watermark for this combination.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER is the decisive component in this pairing. With 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, it provides a bandwidth of 336.0 GB/s. The GPU’s base clock is 1530 MHz with a boost clock of 1785 MHz, and it delivers 5.027 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. These specifications place it in the 55th percentile of all GPUs, a mid-range position that is reflected in the measured frame rates. The PassMark G3D score of 12699 and the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1278 show that the card is capable but not overpowering. In Downfall, the GPU’s memory capacity and bandwidth become critical at higher resolutions and settings, where texture data and shading complexity increase.

The GTX 1660 SUPER’s performance relative to its nearest rivals is notable for its consistency. It is 0.2% slower than the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 and the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics, and 0.5% slower than the AMD Radeon Vega 11. The closest competitor, the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT, is 0.7% faster. These narrow margins suggest that the GTX 1660 SUPER is a well-balanced card for 1080p gaming, but its limitations emerge at 4K. The data shows that at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the average FPS drops to 25.2, which is a clear indication that the GPU is overwhelmed. The 6 GB VRAM is likely a constraint here, as the higher resolution demands more memory for frame buffers and textures, potentially causing the card to rely on slower data transfers. The GPU’s 125 W TDP and dual-slot design are consistent with its performance class, and the 14 Gbps effective memory speed helps mitigate some of the bandwidth pressure, but it cannot overcome the sheer pixel count of 4K.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

Within the database of tested combinations for Downfall, this specific pairing of the Ryzen 7 5700G and GTX 1660 SUPER achieves a rank of 1525 out of 1741 total combos. This means that 216 other CPU-GPU combinations deliver higher average frame rates across the tested scenarios. The rank is a composite measure, reflecting the GPU’s mid-range status and the CPU’s ability to keep up. This position is not surprising, given that the GTX 1660 SUPER is an older, end-of-life product (released in 2019), while the CPU is a more recent release (2021). The combo’s rank suggests that it is suitable for 1080p gaming but falls behind more modern hardware in higher-resolution scenarios. The data indicates that the bottleneck is almost exclusively the GPU, as upgrading the CPU alone would not yield significant FPS gains in Downfall.

The rank of 1525 out of 1741 places this combo in the lower 12.5% of all tested configurations. This is a direct consequence of the GPU’s performance ceiling, not a deficiency in the CPU. The CPU’s 83rd percentile ranking versus the GPU’s 55th percentile ranking highlights the imbalance. In Downfall, the game’s horror atmosphere likely relies on detailed environments and lighting, which are GPU-intensive. The combo’s position in the rankings is a quantitative measure of its ability to handle these demands. While it is not a top-tier setup, it provides a playable experience at moderate settings, as the FPS breakdown will show. The rank is a useful metric for users to understand where this hardware sits relative to other options in the same game.

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

The measured FPS data provides a granular view of performance. At 1920x1080, the combo delivers strong results: 144.5 FPS on Low, 121.8 FPS on Medium, 101.9 FPS on High, and 64 FPS on Ultra. The jump from High to Ultra is steep, a 37.2% drop, indicating that the Ultra preset introduces effects that heavily tax the GPU. Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates decline proportionally: 105.6 FPS on Low, 88.4 FPS on Medium, 72.4 FPS on High, and 44 FPS on Ultra. The 1440p High result of 72.4 FPS is still smooth, but the Ultra preset dips below 45 FPS, which may be noticeable in a horror game where responsiveness is key. At 3840x2160, the performance drops significantly: 65.1 FPS on Low, 52.9 FPS on Medium, 42.9 FPS on High, and 25.2 FPS on Ultra. The 4K Ultra result is effectively unplayable for most users, while 4K Low is just about acceptable.

The scaling between settings at each resolution is consistent. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 80.5 FPS, showing the GPU’s headroom at lower resolutions. At 1440p, the same difference is 61.6 FPS, and at 4K, it narrows to 39.9 FPS. This narrowing indicates that the GPU is becoming the limiting factor as resolution increases. The data also shows that the card’s 6 GB VRAM is not an issue at 1080p, but the 4K Ultra result of 25.2 FPS suggests that memory bandwidth and capacity are stretched to their limits. The min and max FPS values are not provided, but the average figures are sufficient to identify trends. For users targeting 60 FPS, the combo achieves this at 1080p Ultra (64 FPS) and at 1440p High (72.4 FPS), but fails to do so at 1440p Ultra (44 FPS) and at any 4K setting except Low (65.1 FPS).

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

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is dramatic and reveals the GPU as the primary constraint. At Low settings, the average FPS falls from 144.5 at 1080p to 65.1 at 4K, a reduction of 54.9%. At Medium settings, the drop is from 121.8 to 52.9, a 56.6% reduction. High settings see a decline from 101.9 to 42.9, a 57.9% reduction, and Ultra settings drop from 64 to 25.2, a 60.6% reduction. This pattern shows that the percentage drop increases slightly with higher settings, which is expected because the GPU’s compute and memory resources become more strained. The consistent drop of over 50% across all settings is a hallmark of a GPU-bound scenario; if the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS would remain relatively flat as resolution increases, since the CPU’s workload is independent of pixel count.

The scaling behavior indicates that the Ryzen 7 5700G is not a limiting factor at any resolution. The CPU’s performance is sufficient to feed the GPU even at 1080p Low, where the frame rate is highest. The fact that the FPS scales so predictably with resolution is a clear sign that the GPU’s pixel throughput and memory bandwidth are the determining factors. The GTX 1660 SUPER’s 336.0 GB/s bandwidth is insufficient for 4K Ultra, as evidenced by the 25.2 FPS result. The data suggests that users should stick to 1080p or 1440p for a smooth experience, with 4K reserved for Low settings if necessary. The resolution scaling analysis confirms that this combo is a 1080p-focused setup, with the GPU’s mid-range specs dictating the performance envelope. The CPU, with its 8 cores and high clock speeds, is more than capable of supporting a more powerful GPU if an upgrade were considered, but in this configuration, the GTX 1660 SUPER is the clear bottleneck.