Downfall

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT combination delivers a compelling performance profile in Downfall, a 2016 Horror title. The measured data reveals a system that excels at high refresh rates at standard resolutions but shows its limits when pushed to 4K with maximum settings. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS across resolutions and settings, examining the roles of the CPU and GPU in shaping the experience, and contextualizes the combo’s standing against 1,741 other tested configurations.

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

The frame rate scaling from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 reveals a classic GPU-bound progression. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 232.1 at 1080p to 104.9 at 4K, a reduction of 54.8%. This substantial decline indicates that the Radeon RX 6700 XT is the primary bottleneck as pixel count increases, which is expected given the rendering load. The drop is less severe going from 1440p (163.5 FPS) to 1080p (232.1 FPS), a 29.5% decrease, showing that the CPU has sufficient headroom at these lower resolutions.

Moving to High settings, the scaling pattern shifts slightly. The average FPS at 1080p is 154.5, falling to 112.3 at 1440p (a 27.3% drop) and then to 67.6 at 4K (a 39.8% drop from 1440p). The larger relative decline at 4K suggests that the GPU’s memory bandwidth and compute resources are being taxed more heavily. The data indicates that the Ryzen 7 5800X3D’s 8 cores and 16 threads are not the limiting factor here; the consistent FPS drops align with the GPU’s workload scaling.

The Ultra preset tells a similar story but with a more dramatic cliff at 4K. From 1080p (95.4 FPS) to 1440p (69.1 FPS), the drop is 27.6%. However, the leap to 4K yields just 41.3 FPS, a 40.2% reduction from 1440p. This steep decline at 4K Ultra strongly implies the RX 6700 XT’s 12 GB of VRAM and 192-bit memory bus are saturated, making this the least viable configuration for smooth play. The scaling data overall points to a GPU-limited system, with the CPU providing stable performance across all tested scenarios.

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

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D is a Zen 3 architecture processor with 8 cores and 16 threads, operating at a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. Its substantial 96 MB of shared L3 cache is a defining feature that likely aids in maintaining high minimum frame rates, though the measured data only provides average FPS. The CPU’s benchmark scores, such as a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 24063 and a single-core score of 3397, indicate strong multi-threaded and single-threaded performance. For a game like Downfall, which is from 2016, the CPU’s capabilities far exceed typical requirements.

The benchmark results show that the CPU is not the bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 232.1 FPS, a figure that is likely near the game’s engine limit or the GPU’s maximum output. Even at 1440p Ultra, the 69.1 FPS average is respectable, suggesting the CPU can feed the GPU adequately. The processor’s percentile rank of 83 versus all CPUs and an average benchmark score of 26574 place it in the upper tier, though its nearest rivals — the AMD EPYC 8024P, Intel Core i9-11900K, AMD Ryzen 5 7600, and Intel Core i9-12900HK — are within a 0.4% delta, meaning the 5800X3D is not uniquely dominant.

In the context of this combo, the CPU’s role is to provide consistent, high-level performance that does not constrain the GPU. The data shows that as resolution increases, the FPS drops are consistent with GPU-bound behavior, not CPU stalls. The 5800X3D’s large L3 cache and high boost clock ensure that frame pacing remains stable, allowing the RX 6700 XT to work at its full potential.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT achieves a rank of 936 out of 1,741 tested combinations in Downfall. This places it in the lower-middle portion of the overall ranking, which is a surprising result given the individual component strengths. The rank of 936 means that 805 other CPU-GPU pairings delivered higher average FPS across the tested settings. This suggests that while the hardware is capable, other combos with more powerful GPUs or newer CPUs may push higher frame rates, particularly at 4K.

Examining the GPU’s nearest rivals provides context for this ranking. The RX 6700 XT’s average benchmark score is 33721, which is 0.7% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 6800 and 1.3% higher than the NVIDIA RTX A5000, but 1% lower than both the AMD Radeon HD 7950 and AMD Radeon RX 480. This indicates that the GPU is positioned in a competitive mid-range segment. The CPU’s rivals are similarly close in performance, with the 5800X3D being 0.1% faster than the EPYC 8024P and i9-11900K, but 0.2% and 0.4% slower than the Ryzen 5 7600 and i9-12900HK, respectively.

Given these tight margins, the combo’s rank of 936 is influenced more by the overall system balance than by any single component deficiency. The data implies that this pairing is not optimized for maximum FPS in Downfall; instead, it offers a balanced experience that may prioritize other factors. The rank suggests that users seeking top-tier performance in this title would need to look at combos ranked higher, potentially those with more powerful GPUs like the RX 6800 or RTX A5000.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to maintain high FPS?

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 provides the highest average frame rates across all settings, with a minimum of 95.4 FPS at Ultra and a maximum of 232.1 FPS at Low. For higher resolutions, 2560x1440 remains playable, with 69.1 FPS at Ultra and 163.5 FPS at Low.

Q: How does the combo perform at 4K Ultra settings?

A: At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the average FPS is 41.3. This is below the 60 FPS threshold typically desired for smooth gameplay, indicating that this setting is not recommended for a consistent experience.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this system?

A: The resolution scaling data indicates the GPU is the primary limiting factor. As resolution increases, FPS drops significantly, which is characteristic of GPU-bound scenarios. The CPU’s high benchmark scores, such as a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 24063, suggest it has ample headroom.

Q: How does this combo compare to its closest rivals?

A: The CPU is within 0.4% performance of its nearest rivals, such as the Intel Core i9-11900K and AMD Ryzen 5 7600. The GPU is within 1.3% of its rivals, including the AMD Radeon RX 6800 and NVIDIA RTX A5000. The combo ranks 936th out of 1741 overall.

Q: What is the lowest FPS recorded in the measured data?

A: The lowest average FPS is 41.3, which occurs at 3840x2160 resolution with Ultra settings. The highest is 232.1 at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

Q: What are the memory specifications of the GPU and CPU?

A: The GPU has 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus with a bandwidth of 384.0 GB/s. The CPU supports dual-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with a Navi 22 chip, featuring 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. Its game clock is 2424 MHz, with a boost clock of 2581 MHz. The GPU’s 12 GB of GDDR6 memory operates at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) across a 192-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 384.0 GB/s. These specifications are solid for a mid-range card, but the data shows they are insufficient for 4K Ultra in Downfall.

The GPU’s benchmark performance, with an average score of 33721 and a percentile rank of 77 versus all GPUs, places it in a competitive position. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6800, is only 0.7% faster, while the NVIDIA RTX A5000 is 1.3% slower. This close grouping suggests that the RX 6700 XT is well-matched to its peers. However, the measured FPS data reveals that the GPU’s 12 GB VRAM and 192-bit bus are likely strained at 4K, particularly at Ultra settings where the average FPS falls to 41.3.

The GPU’s FP32 performance of 13.21 TFLOPS and a texture rate of 413.0 GTexel/s are sufficient for 1080p and 1440p gaming, as evidenced by the high frame rates. The pixel rate of 165.2 GPixel/s also supports these resolutions effectively. The data suggests that the GPU’s role is to deliver excellent performance at mainstream resolutions, but it is not designed for 4K Ultra. The 4K High setting, with 67.6 FPS, is the highest playable option at that resolution, showing that the GPU can handle 4K with reduced settings.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution. For 1920x1080, the Ultra preset delivers an average of 95.4 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold and provides the highest visual quality. The High setting at 154.5 FPS offers a smoother experience but with lower fidelity. For users prioritizing frame rate, Low at 232.1 FPS is excessive unless using a very high refresh rate monitor.

At 2560x1440, the High preset at 112.3 FPS is the best balance of quality and performance, offering a smooth experience. The Medium preset at 131.8 FPS is also viable, but High is preferable for visual fidelity. The Ultra preset at 69.1 FPS is playable but may exhibit minor stutters in demanding scenes. For 4K, the High preset at 67.6 FPS is the only recommended option, as it provides a playable frame rate. The Medium preset at 80.9 FPS is also acceptable, but Low at 104.9 FPS sacrifices too much visual quality. The Ultra preset at 41.3 FPS is not recommended due to its low frame rate.

The data indicates that the High preset is the sweet spot for this combo across 1440p and 4K, while Ultra is suitable only for 1080p. The Medium preset offers a performance boost but with diminishing returns on visual quality. Users with 1080p displays can safely use Ultra, while those with higher resolution displays should stick to High or Medium.

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

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of performance across all tested configurations. At 1920x1080, the system achieves 232.1 FPS on Low, 190.5 FPS on Medium, 154.5 FPS on High, and 95.4 FPS on Ultra. This shows a linear progression, with the Ultra preset costing roughly 59 FPS compared to High. The 1080p results demonstrate the GPU’s strength at lower resolutions, with even the most demanding preset exceeding 90 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the averages are 163.5 FPS on Low, 131.8 FPS on Medium, 112.3 FPS on High, and 69.1 FPS on Ultra. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is consistent, around 30% to 40%, depending on the preset. The Ultra preset at 1440p is the first configuration where the frame rate dips below 70 FPS, indicating a significant performance hit. This resolution is still highly playable, but the Ultra preset may require some settings tweaks for a locked 60 FPS experience.

At 3840x2160, the averages are 104.9 FPS on Low, 80.9 FPS on Medium, 67.6 FPS on High, and 41.3 FPS on Ultra. The 4K results show a steep decline, particularly at Ultra, which is 39.9% slower than High. The Low and Medium presets are playable, with 104.9 and 80.9 FPS respectively, but the visual compromise is significant. The data confirms that 4K Ultra is beyond the GPU’s capabilities, while 4K High is the maximum playable setting. These numbers collectively show a system that is excellent for 1080p and 1440p gaming, with 4K being a stretch goal only achievable at lower settings.