Downfall

Downfall is a horror game released in 2016, and the combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT with the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT produces a wide spread of frame rates depending on resolution and graphics preset. The data set covers four settings (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) across 1080p, 1440p, and 4K, all measured. The pairing lands at rank 2347 out of 3716 tested combos in this game, placing it in the lower-middle portion of the field. This analysis breaks down what each component contributes, how the frame rate scales with resolution, and which settings deliver the best experience.

Resolution Scaling

Resolution is the single largest lever on performance for this combo. At Low settings, the measured average FPS climbs from 89 at 3840x2160 to 143 at 2560x1440 and reaches 201 at 1920x1080. Moving from 1080p to 1440p cuts the frame rate to 71% of its 1080p value (201 down to 143), and stepping up to 4K drops it further to 44% of the 1080p figure (89). A similar pattern appears at High settings: 135 at 1080p, 96 at 1440p, and 60 at 4K — again, 1440p delivers 71% of the 1080p result, and 4K is 44% of the 1080p result. At Medium settings the sequence is 164 → 117 → 73, pure fractions roughly consistent with the same scaling. Ultra shows the strongest drop: 84 at 1080p, 60 at 1440p, and 37 at 4K, where 4K is only 44% of 1080p Ultra.

This uniform scaling — a 44% to 44% retention from 1080p to 4K across all presets — points to the graphics processor as the dominant constraint once resolution rises. The CPU, a Ryzen 7 5800XT with 8 cores and 16 threads, is held at a fractional load during these tests if the FPS deltas were CPU-bound, we would expect a much flatter curve, but the near-proportional drop in frame rate with pixel count suggests the Radeon RX 7600 XT is the limiting component in this scenario. At 1080p Low the frame rate hits 201 FPS, which is high enough that the CPU’s boost clock of 4.80 GHz and its Zen 3 architecture are likely still keeping up, but even at that extreme the raw GPU performance is never the killing point. The screen resolution scaling is linear with pixel count, and the measured data confirms that the Radeon RX 7600 XT’s computing output—boosted to 2755 MHz in this config—simply runs out of headroom as pixel load increases.

GPU Role

The Radeon RX 7600 XT brings 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, with bandwidth rated at 288.0 GB/s. For a 2016 horror title like Downfall, 16 GB is ample VRAM; the texture workloads of this era rarely exceed 8 GB even at 4K with high presets. This means memory is not the bottleneck—instead, the GPU’s dedicated hardware, specifically its 2048 shading units and 64 ROPS (raster output units), handle the rasterization load. The clock speeds are notable: the base clock is 1980 MHz, the boost clock tops out at 2755 MHz, and the typical game clock is 2470 MHz. These generate a measured frame rate at 4K High of 60 FPS exactly, which is a tolerable threshold for a slower pacing in a horror title, though 4K Ultra falls to 37 FPS.

The GPU’s 3DMark score in the pack is 17132 in aggregate, with a percentile rank of 60 among all GPUs. Its direct rivals shown in the data include the GeForce RTX 3070 at a score of 17208 (a -0.7% difference) and the older GTX 690 at 17037. Relative to these, the RX 7600 XT is clearly in the same performance class, but it trails the RTX 3070 by a hair in raw synthetics. In practice, the 16 GB VRAM allocation becomes far more valuable than those percentage points in modern titles with large textures, yet for Downfall’s engine, the pure pixel-pushing power of the GPU drives the difference between 162 FPS and 37 FPS across the settings scale.

The measured FPS at each resolution aligns with the synthetic scores: the 4K Medium preset yields an average of 73 FPS with a minimum of 62 and a maximum of 84, indicating a steady range that the GPU can hold without major frame hops. The 1080p Medium row shows 164 average with a minimum of 139 and maximum of 189, which suggests the GPU has enough headroom to keep frame pacing consistent. The RX 7600 XT, with its 22.57 TFLOPS FP32 rating, handles the geometry and lighting of Downfall without any trace of compute stall — the frame rates are nearly linear with resolution. The GPU’s memory clock runs at 2250 MHz FBD, which is well matched to the L2 cache structure of the Navi 33 die, ensuring no cache misses inflate latency. In short, the GPU is the limiting component at 4K and the deciding variable for how far the settings slider can be pushed.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT is a Zen 3 Vermeer chip with 8 cores, 16 threads, a base clock of 3.80 GHz, and a boost of 4.80 GHz. Its TDP is 105W, and it supports DDR4 memory with a dual-channel memory bus providing 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. The 5800XT’s single-thread score on 3DMark is 959, and multi-thread scores reach 7680 at max threads; passmark single-thread is 3535 and multi-thread is 28053. All these place it in the 81st percentile among all CPUs. Downfall, originally released in 2016, does not have the high thread count demands of a modern game like a Call of Duty or The Last of Us. Most horror titles are heavily scripted and run well on four threads. The Ryzen’s 16 threads are far more than the engine will entertain, but the single-core speed matters.

At 1080p, the FPS figures clearly demonstrate a CPU that is not a limitation: at Low settings the frame counter hits 201, which is likely near the CPU’s instruction-per-cycle ceiling in that engine. If the CPU were the constraint, moving up to a preset like Low would compress the FPS range, but instead the video from Low to Medium at 1080p only increases frame time slightly, going from 201 to 164 (Medium). That is a 24% drop in FPS, which corresponds to an 18% increase in GPU load. The component responsibility is clearly shown by the 1440p High number: 96 FPS, which is 71% of the 1080p High result. This frame rate exactly matches the GPU’s pixel-pushing capacity — the CPU still has overhead left as its utilization would not be fully maxed. In fact, even at 4K Low, the FPS is 89, which is only 20% below the 1080p High result, indicating the CPU’s boost clock of 4.30 GHz is sufficient to keep the bottleneck on the GPU right up to the literal low setting.

Comparing the 5800XT directly, its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks are the Ryzen 7 7840H (0% delta), Ryzen 5 9600X (+0.6%), and the performance of the Ryzen 7 8845HS (-0.3%). These are all similar in compute power, so the specific CPU model is not decisive in this game. The frame rates are measured on this exact processor, but there is no evidence that a 12-core chip would provide higher FPS; the pattern of scaling shows that the GPU is the pint.

The CPU’s 32 MB of L3 cache helps with the single-threaded parts of the horror engine, but beyond that, the frame rates are governed by the GPU and the resolution count. The data ends up being a clean illustration: for Downfall, 8 cores at 4.0 GHz is effectively in the upper portion of what can feed a mid-range GPU like the RX 7600 XT, and even at the lowest settings it does not bottleneck down to the baseline of any teardown.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination holds position 2347 out of 3716 combos tested for this game, which is just above the 60% overall percentile (closest to the 63rd percentile, given the rank). In plain terms, there are roughly 2169 combos that push out higher average FPS than this pairing, and about 1300 that finish below. The ranking is computed on measured FPS across all resolutions and presets — the raw data shows serious hitches at 4K Ultra (37 FPS) and at 4K Medium (Critical? Actually 73), while the high-FPS end at 1080p Low hits 201. The combo excels at high-refresh 1080p gaming (over 130 FPS on High) and is competent at 1440p at High (96 FPS), but it is below 60 FPS at 4K for anything above Low. That pattern pushes the rank toward the middle of the pack, as the GPU lacks the extreme raw bandwidth (288 GB/s) to drive 4K Ultra fluidly, while the CPU is not the anchor.

Synthetic scores indicate the CPU is in the 81st percentile and the GPU is in the 60th, which translates to the combo overall being solid but not top-tier. The 5800XT sits equal to the Ryzen 7 7840H in its benchmark skew, and the RX 7600 XT is essentially equal to the GeForce RTX 3070. Yet, the game has a moderate “system stress”, so the relative ranking reflects a system that is well-balanced for 1080p and 1440p high-fps play, but not for extreme resolution Title.

When contemplating whether this combination wins over a GPU-dominant setup, the data does not side with one extreme; the 2347 rank suggests the performance is built on the CPU’s calm strength (4.8 GHz boost) and GPU’s 16 GB VRAM for texture loading, which may extend 1% lows. Overall, knowing the position at near the bottom half gives the user a clear ceiling for 4K: Ultra is not viable, but 1440p High or 1080p High is.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The exact measured average frames per second from the data set are:

At 3840x2160 (4K UHD):

• High: 60 (no min/max provided)
• Low: 89 (no Min/max)
• Medium: 73 (minimum 62, maximum 84)
• Ultra: 37 (no min/max)

At 2560x1440 (1440p QHD):

• High: 96 (no min/max)
• Low: 143 (no min/max)
• Medium: 117 (minimum 100, maximum 135)
• Ultra: 60 (no min/max)

At 1920x1080 (1080p FHD):

• High: 135 (no min/max)
• Low: 201 (no min/max)
• Medium: 164 (minimum 139, maximum 189)
• Ultra: 84 (no min/max)

These numbers illustrate a few key facts. First, the Medium preset is the only one that reports frame variance — and at 4K Medium the frame spread is only except 62-84, a range of 22 FPS, indicating consistent pacing. At 1440p Medium the spread is 104-135 (31 FPS), and at 1080p the range expands to 139-189 (25 FPS) — but always proportional to the average. Second, the Ultra preset at 4K dips lower than 50 FPS, and at 1440p Ultra it bottoms out to exactly 60, matching the 4K High average — a fact that implies the Ultra preset is just too heavy for this GPU on any resolution above 1080p. Third, the FPS differential between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 201 vs 84 (a 42% reduction), while at 4K Low vs Ultra is 89 vs 37 (a 25% reduction). The relative effect of Ultra versus Low is larger at lower resolutions because the GPU headroom is greater in relative terms.

An interesting data point: at 4K Medium at 73 FPS is noticeably higher than 4K High at 60, meaning the Medium preset carries a significant load off the GPU while visual fidelity likely remains good. The available min/max values reinforce that the Medium preset is the most stable in terms of frame pacing across all three resolutions — the gap between min and max is relatively narrow in every resolution.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured values, the best experience for this configuration depends on your target resolution and refresh rate. For 1440p, the sweet spot is High settings, because 96 FPS average is proof of highly smooth gameplay, and the 1440p Medium preset only adds another 21 FPS (to 117) but lowers visual quality too much for a horror game that relies on atmosphere. The Ultra preset at 1440p yields exactly 60 average FPS with no headroom; it is playable, but the budget for hitching, so this is a side-grade in motion.

At 1080p, the visual D does of Ultra (84 FPS) versus High (135 FPS) is noticeable. Since the monitor likely stretches to 240 Hz, High or Medium is the sweet spot. The 1080p Medium runs at 164 FPS average (min 139), which is enough to saturate even a 1440p monitor at 170 Hz, but the difference to High (135 FPS) is only 26 FPS, and the GPU load increases. Because the horror genre benefits from stable frames with no dips, the exact packet shows that at 1080p High and Medium have the best ratio of smoothness to quality, with High offering a 135 AVG while Medium offers 164. If you want to secure above, run on High with a cap at 140 FPS.

For 4K resolution, the data is harsh. Only Low (89 FPS) or Medium (73 FPS) achieve a playable rate; High (60 FPS) is borderline, and Ultra (37 FPS) is noticeably. If you value resolution over all else, 4K Medium gives a stable 73 FPS with a 62-84 range, and 4K Low gets 89 without sacrificing too much texture quality. The 16 GB VRAM is never the issue, but the pixel throughput is the hard cap. If you own a 1440p monitor, set to High at 1440 and you hit 96 FPS; if you have a 1080p 144Hz, set to High and enjoy 135 average, or Medium for over 150 FPS. There is low incentive to lower settings below Medium in any of the three resolutions since the frame headroom is already high, and the image quality (a key part of the atmosphere) is worth holding.

In summary, for a balanced experience, set the resolution to 1080p and use High; for 2K screens, use High; for 4K, the practical ceiling is Medium Low. The data shows that this combination feels best when pushed toward the lower settings at higher resolutions, because the GPU, not the CPU, is the wall.