Downfall

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700X paired with the Intel Arc B370 ranks 2688 out of 2928 tested combos in Downfall, placing it in the bottom 8% of all configurations. This is a low overall ranking, but the data indicates the bottleneck is almost entirely the GPU, not the processor. The Arc B370 sits at the 5th percentile among all GPUs, while the Ryzen 7 5700X sits at the 79th percentile among all CPUs. That massive gap in relative standing is the single most important fact in this dataset, as it frames every FPS result that follows.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 2688th out of 2928 tested combinations, putting it in the 9th percentile overall. This is a poor showing, but the ranking is not a measure of the CPU’s capability—it is a measure of the entire system’s gaming performance in Downfall. The ranking is dragged down by the GPU’s position in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. In contrast, the CPU’s 79th percentile ranking shows it is a far more capable component in general compute tasks, but in this specific game, the GPU is the limiting factor.

The CPU’s average benchmark score is 27578, which is exactly matched by the Intel Core i5-12600K (deltaPct 0). The AMD Ryzen 7 5800 is 0.2% behind, the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X is 0.2% ahead, and the Intel Core Ultra 5 125H is 0.3% ahead. These rival comparisons show that the 5700X is effectively tied with several modern mid-range and upper-mid-range processors. The differences are negligible, meaning the CPU is not the weak link here.

The GPU’s average benchmark score is 1184, based on a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test. Its nearest rivals are the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (0.2% ahead), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (0.5% ahead), the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (0.7% ahead), and the AMD FirePro M2000 (1.4% behind). These are all older, low-power graphics parts, which puts the Arc B370 in a very low performance tier. The 3DMark score is a single data point, but the measured FPS in Downfall confirms the GPU’s weak standing.

FAQ

Q: Is this combo better suited for 1080p or 4K gaming in Downfall?

A: The data shows a clear preference for 1080p. At 1080p Low, the combo averages 96 FPS, which is more than double the 43 FPS at 4K Low. At 1080p High, it reaches 64 FPS, compared to 46 FPS at 1440p High and 29 FPS at 4K High.

Q: What is the most playable setting at 1440p?

A: At 1440p, the Medium preset delivers 56 FPS average with a minimum of 48 FPS and a maximum of 64 FPS. This is the only 1440p setting that stays above 50 FPS on average. The High preset drops to 46 FPS, and Ultra falls to 29 FPS.

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

A: The Ryzen 7 5700X has an average benchmark score of 27578. The Intel Core i5-12600K matches it exactly with a 0% delta. The AMD Ryzen 7 5800 is 0.2% slower, the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X is 0.2% faster, and the Intel Core Ultra 5 125H is 0.3% faster. These differences are within a fraction of a percent, making them effectively identical in synthetic benchmarks.

Q: What does the GPU’s 5th percentile ranking mean for this game?

A: The Arc B370 ranks in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, meaning 95% of tested GPUs are faster. This directly explains the low FPS at higher resolutions. The GPU’s 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1184 is nearly identical to the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186) and the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190), putting it in a legacy performance class.

Q: Is there any setting at 4K that achieves 60 FPS?

A: No. The best 4K result is 43 FPS on Low settings. Medium averages 35 FPS, High averages 29 FPS, and Ultra averages 18 FPS. None of the 4K presets come close to 60 FPS.

Q: What is the best overall experience this combo can deliver?

A: The 1080p Low preset delivers 96 FPS, which is the highest average FPS in the dataset. For a balance of quality and speed, 1080p Medium gives 78 FPS with a minimum of 67 FPS, ensuring consistent frame times. At 1440p, Medium is the only viable option for smooth gameplay, averaging 56 FPS.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is severe. At Low settings, the combo goes from 96 FPS at 1080p to 68 FPS at 1440p (a 29% drop) and then to 43 FPS at 4K (a 37% drop from 1440p). At High settings, the progression is 64 FPS at 1080p, 46 FPS at 1440p, and 29 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1440p to 4K at High settings is a 37% reduction, while the drop from 1080p to 1440p is 28%.

This pattern indicates a GPU-bound system. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS would remain relatively flat across resolutions, but the data shows a steep decline as pixel count increases. The scaling is roughly proportional to the pixel count increase: 1080p to 1440p is a 78% increase in pixels, and 1440p to 4K is a 125% increase. The FPS drops are not perfectly proportional, but they are significant enough to confirm the GPU is the limiting component.

The Medium settings row provides min and max FPS data, which further illustrates the GPU constraints. At 1080p Medium, the range is 67 to 90 FPS. At 1440p Medium, it drops to 48 to 64 FPS. At 4K Medium, it falls to 30 to 40 FPS. The minimum FPS at 4K is exactly 30, which is the threshold often considered the edge of playability. The GPU simply does not have the throughput to drive higher resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its best results. Low settings average 96 FPS. Medium settings average 78 FPS, with a minimum of 67 FPS and a maximum of 90 FPS. High settings average 64 FPS. Ultra settings average 40 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 56 FPS, showing that the GPU’s limited power is heavily taxed by higher presets even at the lowest resolution.

At 2560x1440, the performance drops noticeably. Low settings average 68 FPS. Medium settings average 56 FPS, with a minimum of 48 FPS and a maximum of 64 FPS. High settings average 46 FPS. Ultra settings average 29 FPS. The 1440p results show that Ultra is essentially unplayable, and High is borderline. Medium is the only preset that maintains an average above 50 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the results are mostly below playable thresholds. Low settings average 43 FPS. Medium settings average 35 FPS, with a minimum of 30 FPS and a maximum of 40 FPS. High settings average 29 FPS. Ultra settings average 18 FPS. The 4K data shows that even Low settings struggle to maintain 45 FPS, and Ultra is a slideshow. The minimum FPS of 30 at 4K Medium is the only 4K data point that reaches the 30 FPS floor, and it barely does so.

The Ultra preset is consistently poor across all resolutions: 40 FPS at 1080p, 29 FPS at 1440p, and 18 FPS at 4K. The High preset is playable only at 1080p (64 FPS), marginal at 1440p (46 FPS), and unplayable at 4K (29 FPS). The Medium preset offers the most consistent experience, with 78 FPS at 1080p, 56 FPS at 1440p, and 35 FPS at 4K.

Settings Recommendations

The data suggests that Medium is the best preset for this combo across all resolutions. At 1080p, Medium delivers 78 FPS average with a minimum of 67 FPS, which is smooth and consistent. The jump from Medium to High costs 14 FPS (from 78 to 64), which is a 18% drop for what is likely a modest visual improvement. The jump from Medium to Ultra costs 38 FPS (from 78 to 40), which is a 49% drop—an unacceptable trade-off.

At 1440p, Medium is the only reasonable choice. It averages 56 FPS with a minimum of 48 FPS, keeping the experience above 45 FPS for most of the time. High drops to 46 FPS, which is borderline, and Ultra drops to 29 FPS, which is not smooth. The 1440p Medium data shows a min-to-max range of 48-64 FPS, indicating some variance but generally stable performance.

At 4K, no preset is truly playable, but Medium is the least bad option. It averages 35 FPS with a minimum of 30 FPS. Low averages 43 FPS but lacks the min/max data, suggesting it might have more variance. High at 29 FPS and Ultra at 18 FPS are both below playable thresholds. For 4K, the recommendation is to use Low or Medium, accepting that the experience will be sub-60 FPS.

For users prioritizing frame rate, 1080p Low at 96 FPS is the only preset that approaches high-refresh-rate territory. For users prioritizing visual quality while maintaining playability, 1080p Medium at 78 FPS is the sweet spot. The data does not support using Ultra at any resolution, as the FPS drops are too severe.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700X has 8 cores and 16 threads, based on the Zen 3 architecture (Vermeer). It has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The CPU’s cache configuration includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. Its TDP is 65 W, and it supports DDR4 memory with a dual-channel bus and 51.2 GB/s bandwidth.

The CPU’s benchmark scores show strong multi-threaded performance. In Cinebench R23, it scores 13184 multi-core and 1499 single-core. In Geekbench, it scores 10779 multi-core and 2016 single-core. The 3DMark 16-thread score is 6858, while the single-thread score is 921. These numbers indicate a capable processor for both gaming and productivity, but the data from Downfall suggests the CPU is not the limiting factor.

The nearest rival comparisons show the 5700X is effectively tied with the Core i5-12600K (0% delta), the Ryzen 7 5800 (0.2% behind), the Ryzen 5 7600X (0.2% ahead), and the Core Ultra 5 125H (0.3% ahead). These are all modern processors with similar performance levels. In Downfall, the FPS differences between resolutions are far larger than any CPU-related variance, confirming that the CPU has ample headroom.

The CPU’s 79th percentile ranking among all CPUs further supports this. It is a well-above-average processor. The fact that the combo ranks in the 9th percentile overall is entirely due to the GPU. The CPU’s 8 cores and 16 threads are more than sufficient for a horror game from 2016, and the boost clock of 4.60 GHz provides strong single-thread performance for game logic.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is a low-power integrated graphics solution based on the Xe3-LPG architecture (Panther Lake). It has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The GPU has 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster output units. It includes 10 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The GPU’s memory configuration is "System Shared," meaning it uses system RAM rather than dedicated VRAM. The memory bus width and bandwidth are also "System Shared" and "System Dependent," respectively. This is a significant limitation for gaming, as the GPU must compete with the CPU for memory bandwidth. The GPU’s TDP is 25 W, which is extremely low, and it has no power connectors, indicating it is not designed for high-performance gaming.

The GPU’s only benchmark score is 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. This places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, with nearest rivals being the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190), AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192), and AMD FirePro M2000 (1168). These are all legacy or low-end parts from over a decade ago, confirming the B370’s extremely low performance tier.

The GPU’s weak performance is directly reflected in the Downfall FPS data. At 1080p Low, it manages 96 FPS, but this drops to 43 FPS at 4K Low. The pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s are insufficient for high-resolution gaming. The FP32 performance of 6.144 TFLOPS and FP16 of 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1) are low by modern standards. The data shows that the GPU is the clear bottleneck, as the CPU’s 79th percentile ranking is far higher than the GPU’s 5th percentile ranking.