Downfall

# Downfall with AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D + Intel Arc B370

This combination pairs a high-end 12-core desktop processor with an integrated-class graphics solution, producing results that are heavily skewed toward GPU limitation in this horror title. The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D sits in the 91st percentile among all CPUs, while the Intel Arc B370 ranks in the 5th percentile among all GPUs, creating a massive performance imbalance that defines every measurable frame rate in this analysis. The data shows a system where the CPU has enormous headroom, but the GPU becomes the decisive bottleneck at every resolution and settings level tested.

Settings Recommendations

The measured frame rates across all three resolutions and four settings tiers paint a clear picture: this system needs Low settings for acceptable playability at 1080p, and even then, the margin is not generous. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the average frame rate reaches 96 FPS, which is the only configuration in the entire dataset that clears the 60 FPS threshold by a comfortable margin. Medium settings at 1080p drop to 78 FPS on average, which remains playable but shows a steep 18.75% performance cost for the visual upgrade. High settings at 1080p fall to 64 FPS, still technically smooth, but the gap between Low and High represents a 33.3% reduction in average frame rate.

The Ultra preset is effectively unusable on this hardware combination. At 1080p Ultra, the average frame rate collapses to 40 FPS, which is a 58.3% drop from Low settings at the same resolution. The situation worsens dramatically at higher resolutions: 1440p Ultra averages just 29 FPS, and 4K Ultra averages only 18 FPS. These numbers indicate that Ultra settings impose a rendering load that the Arc B370 simply cannot handle, regardless of the resolution chosen.

For the best experience per the measured data, Low settings at 1920x1080 is the only configuration that provides both smooth gameplay and a reasonable safety margin. Medium at 1080p is the secondary option if visual fidelity matters more than raw frame rate, since 78 FPS still provides decent responsiveness. However, the min FPS data at Medium (67 FPS at 1080p) suggests that even this setting maintains acceptable frame pacing. At 1440p, Low settings produce 68 FPS on average, which is playable but leaves little headroom for demanding scenes. At 4K, no settings level achieves even 45 FPS, making this resolution impractical for this hardware pairing.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D brings substantial processing power to this pairing, with 12 cores and 24 threads running on the Zen 5 architecture. The base clock of 4.40 GHz and boost clock of 5.50 GHz provide strong single-thread performance, which the benchmark data confirms: the 3dmark single-thread score of 1269 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 6739 indicate robust per-core capability. Multi-threaded performance is equally impressive, with Cinebench R23 multicore reaching 47737 and Geekbench multicore hitting 22884.

However, the game's measured frame rates reveal that the CPU is not the limiting factor in any configuration tested. The 3dmark 2-thread score of 2512 and 4-thread score of 4885 suggest that even lightly threaded workloads are handled efficiently, yet the frame rates track almost entirely with GPU capability. The CPU's 128 MB of L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory support provide ample bandwidth for game data, but the Arc B370's system-shared memory architecture means the CPU also feeds the GPU through the same memory subsystem.

The CPU's percentile ranking at 91% of all processors places it well above the GPU's 5th percentile ranking. This 86-percentile gap is the clearest indicator that the processor is operating far below its potential in this game. The nearest CPU rivals show the 9900X3D performing within a narrow band: it trails the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF by 0.6%, leads the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K by 1.3%, the Intel Xeon 6505P by 2%, and the Intel Core i7-14700F by 2.1%. These small deltas confirm that the CPU is not the differentiator in this system's gaming performance.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is the decisive component in this analysis, and its specifications explain why the measured frame rates are so constrained. This integrated GPU operates at a base clock of 300 MHz and boosts to 2400 MHz, with 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster operation units. The memory configuration is system-shared, meaning the GPU draws from the same DDR5 pool as the CPU, with bandwidth listed as system dependent. The 10 ray tracing cores are present but do not meaningfully help in this horror title's measured configurations.

The GPU's benchmark results are remarkably thin: a single 3dmark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184, placing it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are all legacy parts: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (0.2% faster), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (0.5% faster), AMD Radeon HD 7650M (0.7% faster), and AMD FirePro M2000 (1.4% slower). This places the Arc B370 in performance territory comparable to graphics hardware from over a decade ago, which aligns with the measured frame rates in Downfall.

The GPU's pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s provide theoretical ceilings that the game's rendering demands quickly exceed. The FP32 throughput of 6.144 TFLOPS and FP16 of 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1) are modest figures that constrain shader-heavy workloads. The 25 W TDP and IGP slot width indicate this is not designed for discrete gaming performance, and the measured frame rates confirm that expectation. At 1080p Low, the GPU manages 96 FPS, but this drops to 64 FPS at High and 40 FPS at Ultra, showing how quickly the rendering pipeline saturates as settings increase.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for this system?

A: The measured data shows 1920x1080 with Low settings produces the highest average frame rate at 96 FPS. This is the only configuration that exceeds 90 FPS, and it provides the largest margin above the 60 FPS playability threshold.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in overall benchmark performance?

A: The Ryzen 9 9900X3D has an average benchmark score of 54762. It trails the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF by 0.6%, leads the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K by 1.3%, the Intel Xeon 6505P by 2%, and the Intel Core i7-14700F by 2.1%.

Q: Is the Intel Arc B370 competitive with other GPUs in its performance class?

A: The Arc B370's average benchmark score of 1184 places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. It is 0.2% slower than the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, 0.5% slower than the ATI Radeon HD 5770, 0.7% slower than the AMD Radeon HD 7650M, and 1.4% faster than the AMD FirePro M2000.

Q: What frame rates can I expect at 1440p with this hardware?

A: At 2560x1440, Low settings average 68 FPS, Medium averages 56 FPS with a minimum of 48 FPS, High averages 46 FPS, and Ultra averages 29 FPS. Only Low settings at this resolution provide a consistent playable experience.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from Low to Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, Low settings average 96 FPS while Ultra settings average 40 FPS. This represents a 58.3% reduction in average frame rate when enabling the highest quality preset.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck the GPU in this game?

A: No. The CPU ranks in the 91st percentile while the GPU ranks in the 5th percentile. The frame rates scale primarily with resolution and settings changes, indicating the GPU is the limiting component across all measured configurations.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate progression from 1080p to 4K clearly demonstrates the GPU-bound nature of this system. At Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 96 FPS at 1920x1080 to 68 FPS at 2560x1440 (a 29.2% reduction), then to 43 FPS at 3840x2160 (a 55.2% reduction from 1080p). This scaling pattern shows that increasing pixel count has a directly proportional impact on performance, which is characteristic of a GPU-limited scenario.

At High settings, the scaling is similar but with lower absolute values: 64 FPS at 1080p, 46 FPS at 1440p (28.1% reduction), and 29 FPS at 4K (54.7% reduction from 1080p). The consistency of these percentage drops across settings tiers suggests the rendering pipeline is uniformly constrained by the GPU's processing capabilities rather than any specific settings interaction.

The Medium settings tier provides the most complete data with min and max frame rates recorded. At 1080p Medium, the average is 78 FPS with a range of 67 to 90 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 56 FPS with a range of 48 to 64 FPS. At 4K Medium, the average falls to 35 FPS with a range of 30 to 40 FPS. The narrowing delta between min and max at higher resolutions (23 FPS at 1080p, 16 FPS at 1440p, 10 FPS at 4K) indicates that frame pacing becomes more consistent but at lower overall performance levels as resolution increases.

Ultra settings show the most severe scaling degradation: 40 FPS at 1080p, 29 FPS at 1440p (27.5% reduction), and 18 FPS at 4K (55% reduction from 1080p). The 4K Ultra result of 18 FPS is the lowest measured value in the entire dataset, confirming that this configuration is not viable for any practical use. The pattern across all settings tiers suggests that the Arc B370's rendering throughput scales linearly with pixel count, and the CPU's involvement in frame generation is not a limiting factor at any resolution.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full settings range was tested with complete average frame rate data. Low settings deliver 96 FPS average, which is the highest score in the entire dataset. Medium settings produce 78 FPS average with a minimum of 67 FPS and maximum of 90 FPS. High settings yield 64 FPS average, and Ultra settings drop to 40 FPS average. The spread from Low to Ultra at this resolution spans 56 FPS, representing a 58.3% performance range.

At 2560x1440, the same settings progression shows a compressed range. Low settings average 68 FPS, Medium averages 56 FPS with a minimum of 48 FPS and maximum of 64 FPS, High averages 46 FPS, and Ultra averages 29 FPS. The total spread at 1440p is 39 FPS, with Low to Ultra spanning a 57.4% reduction in average frame rate. The Medium setting's minimum of 48 FPS indicates that even this mid-tier preset can dip below the 60 FPS threshold during demanding scenes.

At 3840x2160, performance becomes marginal across all settings. Low settings average 43 FPS, Medium averages 35 FPS with a minimum of 30 FPS and maximum of 40 FPS, High averages 29 FPS, and Ultra averages 18 FPS. The 4K dataset shows the narrowest absolute spread at 25 FPS, but every configuration fails to reach 60 FPS. The Medium setting's maximum of 40 FPS is lower than the High setting's average at 1440p, illustrating the steep cost of 4K rendering on this GPU.

The complete dataset reveals a consistent pattern: each settings tier at a given resolution costs approximately 15-20% performance compared to the tier below, while each resolution step up costs approximately 28-55% depending on the settings level. The combo's overall rank of 2688 out of 2928 combinations in Downfall places it in the bottom 8.2% of tested configurations, which aligns with the GPU's low percentile ranking and the measured frame rates across all nine settings/resolution combinations.