Downfall

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti pairing delivers a playable, though not flawless, experience in Downfall, with the data showing that the GTX 1660 Ti is the primary performance limiter across all tested resolutions. The combination ranks 2520th out of 2928 tested configurations for this title, placing it in the lower tier of systems, and the benchmark results highlight a clear trade-off between visual fidelity and frame rate that favors lower settings for smooth gameplay.

FAQ

Q: What is the average frame rate at 1080p with High settings?

A: The system achieves an average of 99 FPS at 1920x1080 with High settings, making it a very smooth experience for most displays. The frame rate is high enough to suggest that the CPU has ample headroom, with the GPU doing the heavy lifting.

Q: How does the GTX 1660 Ti compare to its closest rivals in raw GPU benchmarks?

A: In the PassMark G3D benchmark, the GTX 1660 Ti scores 12871, placing it in the 41st percentile of all GPUs. It is 0.7% ahead of the AMD Radeon 540 and 1.9% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100, indicating it is a modest performer relative to the broader market.

Q: What is the best settings preset for a smooth 4K experience?

A: At 3840x2160, only the Low preset delivers a frame rate above 60 FPS, with an average of 65 FPS. The Medium preset is also playable at 53 FPS average, but for a locked 60 FPS experience, Low is the only option.

Q: Is the Ryzen 7 9700F a high-end CPU in terms of overall benchmark scores?

A: Yes, the Ryzen 7 9700F scores 69996 on average benchmarks, putting it in the 94th percentile of all CPUs. It is nearly identical in performance to the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX, which has an average score of 69875, a delta of only 0.2%.

Q: Does the CPU become a bottleneck at lower resolutions?

A: No, the data suggests the GPU is the bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the system produces 147 FPS, and at 1080p Ultra, it drops to 62 FPS. This significant drop with increased graphical load indicates the GTX 1660 Ti is the limiting component, not the Ryzen 7 9700F.

Q: What is the frame rate variance like on Medium settings?

A: The data shows that on Medium settings, the frame rate variance increases with resolution. At 1080p, the average is 120 FPS with a range of 102 to 138 FPS. At 1440p, the average is 86 FPS with a range of 73 to 99 FPS, and at 4K, the average is 53 FPS with a range of 45 to 61 FPS.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is the decisive factor in this system's Downfall performance. With 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, the GPU provides a bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s. This memory configuration, while sufficient for the game, is a key specification that influences performance, especially at higher resolutions where texture data demands increase. The GPU's core clocks are set to a base of 1500 MHz and a boost of 1770 MHz, with the memory running at an effective 12 Gbps. These clocks, combined with the 1536 shading units, define the raw processing throughput of the card.

The GPU's benchmark results provide context for its in-game behavior. It scores 12871 in the PassMark G3D test, which places it in the 41st percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals, such as the AMD Radeon 540 and Intel Arc A310, score 7673 and 7550, respectively, making the GTX 1660 Ti approximately 0.7% and 2.3% faster than these cards. This data indicates that the GTX 1660 Ti is a low-to-mid-range performer by modern standards, and its role in Downfall is that of a limiting factor. The measured FPS data confirms this, as the system's frame rates scale predictably with the GPU's workload.

At 1080p, the GTX 1660 Ti can deliver high frame rates, but as resolution increases, the demand on its 6 GB frame buffer and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth grows. The data shows a clear pattern: the GPU struggles to maintain high performance at 4K, with average frame rates dropping by roughly half compared to 1440p at the same settings. This suggests that the GPU's memory bandwidth and raw compute power are insufficient for the demands of Downfall at ultra-high resolutions, making it the component that dictates the overall experience.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a steep performance drop as resolution increases, which is a classic indicator of a GPU-bound system. Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 at High settings, the average frame rate falls from 99 FPS to 70 FPS, a reduction of approximately 29%. This significant decline is directly attributable to the increased pixel count, which forces the GTX 1660 Ti to work harder to fill the frame.

Scaling from 2560x1440 to 3840x2160 at High settings shows an even more dramatic impact. The average frame rate drops from 70 FPS to 44 FPS, a 37% decrease. This steep decline at 4K resolution highlights the GPU's limited ability to handle the massive 8.3 million pixel workload. The pattern is consistent across all settings presets, confirming that the GTX 1660 Ti is the primary limiting component.

The data from the Low and Medium presets further reinforces this conclusion. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 147 FPS, but at 4K Low, it drops to 65 FPS, a 56% reduction. Similarly, at Medium settings, the frame rate falls from 120 FPS at 1080p to 53 FPS at 4K, a 56% reduction. The consistent percentage drop across different settings indicates that the resolution scaling is a function of the GPU's raw pixel throughput, not the game's settings complexity. The CPU, with its high benchmark scores, does not appear to be a factor in this scaling, as the frame rate differences are almost entirely dependent on the GPU's workload.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The benchmark data provides a complete picture of performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the system is capable of a wide range of performance. On Low settings, the average FPS is 147, providing an exceptionally smooth experience. Medium settings reduce the average to 120 FPS, with a range of 102 to 138 FPS. High settings yield an average of 99 FPS, and Ultra settings drop the average to 62 FPS. This shows that at 1080p, the game is very playable on all presets, with even Ultra settings maintaining a frame rate above 60 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the performance scales down noticeably. Low settings produce an average of 105 FPS, which remains smooth. Medium settings average 86 FPS, with a range of 73 to 99 FPS. High settings average 70 FPS, which is still acceptable for most users. Ultra settings, however, drop to an average of 44 FPS, which introduces noticeable stutter and is less than ideal for a horror game that benefits from fluid motion.

At 3840x2160, the GPU's limitations become severe. Low settings are the only preset that breaks the 60 FPS barrier, with an average of 65 FPS. Medium settings average 53 FPS, with a range of 45 to 61 FPS, which is borderline playable. High settings drop to 44 FPS, and Ultra settings fall to 27 FPS, which is effectively unplayable. The data clearly shows that 4K resolution is only viable with the Low preset, and even then, the frame rate is not consistently high.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F is a high-performance processor that is not the bottleneck in Downfall. With 8 cores and 16 threads, a base clock of 3.80 GHz, and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, it provides ample processing power for the game's logic and physics. Its benchmark scores are indicative of its strength: it achieves a PassMark Single Thread score of 4691 and a Multithread score of 36470, placing it in the 94th percentile of all CPUs.

The CPU's performance relative to its rivals confirms its high-end status. It is a mere 0.2% slower than the Intel Core i7-14700KF in average benchmark score, and 0.7% faster than the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X. These tiny deltas suggest that the 9700F is at the top of the performance hierarchy, and its capabilities are more than sufficient for Downfall. The game, released in 2016, is unlikely to leverage the full potential of the Zen 5 architecture, but the CPU's high single-thread performance ensures that frame pacing remains stable.

The evidence for the CPU not being a bottleneck is found in the FPS scaling. At 1080p Low, the system produces 147 FPS, which is a high frame rate that would stress a weaker CPU. The fact that the frame rate drops significantly when the resolution is increased, without any change to the CPU workload, strongly suggests that the GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU is capable of feeding the GPU with data at a rate that allows it to reach its maximum performance, but it cannot compensate for the GPU's lack of raw power at higher resolutions. The 65W TDP of the 9700F also indicates it operates efficiently, allowing the system to maintain sustained performance without thermal throttling.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this system depend heavily on the target resolution and the user's preference for visual quality versus frame rate. For a 1080p display, the High preset is the recommended choice, providing an average of 99 FPS. This settings level offers a good balance of visual fidelity and performance, ensuring a smooth and immersive experience in the horror title. The Ultra preset, while averaging 62 FPS, is also viable for users who prioritize maximum graphical detail.

For 1440p, the Medium preset is the best overall recommendation. It delivers an average of 86 FPS, with a minimum of 73 FPS, which provides a consistently smooth experience. The High preset, at 70 FPS, is also acceptable, but the Medium preset offers a more comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold. The Low preset, at 105 FPS, is an option for competitive play or for users with high refresh rate monitors, but the visual quality will be noticeably reduced.

For 4K, the Low preset is the only realistic option for a playable frame rate, with an average of 65 FPS. The Medium preset, at 53 FPS, is playable but may exhibit occasional dips below 60 FPS, which could be distracting in a game that relies on atmosphere. The High and Ultra presets are not recommended due to their low frame rates of 44 and 27 FPS, respectively. Therefore, for the best experience at 4K, the data suggests sacrificing visual detail for performance, making Low the definitive choice.