Downfall

Resolution Scaling

The measured frame rates for Downfall reveal a steep performance curve as resolution climbs, with the gap between settings narrowing at higher pixel counts. At 1920x1080, the Intel Core i5-10400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti combination delivers 190.6 FPS on Low settings, which drops to 82.9 FPS on Ultra — a 56.5% reduction in frame rate from the lowest to the highest preset. This wide spread indicates that at 1080p, the GPU is not the primary constraint; the CPU has ample headroom to feed the graphics card, and the workload scales heavily with visual fidelity settings.

Moving to 2560x1440, the same pattern persists but with a tighter band. Low settings produce 133.5 FPS, while Ultra yields 59.4 FPS. The delta between Low and Ultra here is 74.1 FPS, compared to 107.7 FPS at 1080p. This compression suggests that as resolution increases, the pixel fill rate becomes more demanding, and the RTX 3060 Ti starts to feel the load. The GPU's 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth are being exercised more thoroughly at 1440p, though the card still maintains playable frame rates across all presets.

At 3840x2160, the curve flattens dramatically. Low settings hit 82.4 FPS, Medium drops to 69.7 FPS, High settles at 58.9 FPS, and Ultra falls to 34.9 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is now just 47.5 FPS, a much narrower margin than at lower resolutions. This behavior points to a GPU-bound scenario at 4K: the RTX 3060 Ti's 16.20 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 133.2 GPixel/s pixel rate are being saturated, and the CPU's influence on frame rate diminishes. The data indicates that at 4K, the limiting component is unequivocally the graphics card, as even dropping to Low settings cannot push frame rates much beyond 82 FPS.

The scaling pattern across resolutions tells a clear story. From 1080p Low to 4K Low, the frame rate falls from 190.6 to 82.4 FPS — a 56.8% loss. From 1080p Ultra to 4K Ultra, the drop is from 82.9 to 34.9 FPS, a 57.9% loss. These nearly identical percentage declines across the settings spectrum suggest that the RTX 3060 Ti's rendering pipeline is the dominant factor at all resolutions, with the CPU only becoming a secondary consideration at the lowest resolution and settings where frame rates exceed 130 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

In the comprehensive database of tested CPU-GPU combinations for Downfall, this pairing of the Intel Core i5-10400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti holds the 1264th position out of 1741 total combinations. This places the combo in the lower-middle tier of tested systems, which is notable given the individual components' standings. The CPU itself sits at the 73rd percentile among all processors, while the GPU ranks at the 69th percentile among all graphics cards. Yet their combined performance in this specific horror title does not boost them to a higher relative position.

The CPU's nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks provide context for its processing capability. The AMD EPYC 7552 scores 14115 in average benchmark tests, a mere 0.4% ahead of the i5-10400F's 14168 average. The AMD Ryzen 3 7320C sits 0.8% behind, and the Intel Core i5-8500 trails by 1.1%. These tight margins indicate that the i5-10400F is positioned squarely in a competitive mid-range bracket for raw compute, though its 6 cores and 12 threads from the Comet Lake architecture deliver what the data shows as a balanced single-thread and multi-thread profile.

For the GPU, the RTX 3060 Ti's nearest rivals cluster closely around its 25120 average benchmark score. The AMD Radeon RX 6700M is just 0.2% behind, the Radeon RX 6600 is 0.5% behind, and the Radeon 890M matches within 0.5%. The RTX 3060 Ti's 69th percentile ranking among all GPUs suggests it is a solid mainstream performer, but in Downfall specifically, the combo's rank of 1264 out of 1741 indicates that many other systems achieve higher frame rates. This may reflect the game's optimization patterns, which appear to favor certain architectures or combinations over others.

The rank suggests that while each component performs adequately in isolation, the pairing does not produce exceptional results in this title. The data shows a system that can handle the game across all tested resolutions and settings, but it is not among the top performers. For a 2016 horror game, the combination delivers playable results, yet the benchmark position implies that users seeking higher frame rates in Downfall would need to look at higher-tier components.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, built on the Ampere architecture with the GA104 chip, plays a central role in determining Downfall's performance envelope. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which proves adequate for the game's demands at 1080p and 1440p but becomes a limiting factor at 4K. The memory clock runs at 1750 MHz, translating to 14 Gbps effective, and this bandwidth is sufficient to feed the 4864 shading units and 152 texture mapping units.

The GPU's clock speeds — a base of 1410 MHz and a boost of 1665 MHz — are relatively modest by modern standards, yet they deliver 16.20 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. In Downfall, this compute throughput translates to the measured frame rates: at 4K Ultra, the card produces 34.9 FPS, which is a demanding workload for any GPU. The 38 ray tracing cores and 152 tensor cores are present but likely underutilized in this title, as Downfall's 2016 release predates widespread ray tracing adoption, and the game's rendering pipeline is likely rasterization-based.

The GPU's nearest rivals in benchmark scores include the AMD Radeon RX 6700M at 25180 (0.2% ahead), the Radeon RX 6600 at 25235 (0.5% ahead), and the Radeon 890M at 25246 (0.5% ahead). This tight clustering indicates that the RTX 3060 Ti's performance is well within the mainstream GPU envelope. In Downfall specifically, the GPU's 8 GB VRAM capacity is not exceeded at any tested setting, as the game's texture requirements appear manageable within this allocation. The 80 ROPs and 133.2 GPixel/s pixel rate are the key specifications for fill-rate-bound scenarios, and the data shows that at 4K Ultra, the card is clearly fill-rate constrained, producing just 34.9 FPS compared to 82.9 FPS at 1080p Ultra.

The GPU's production status is end-of-life, and its launch MSRP was 399 USD. The 200 W TDP and suggested 550 W PSU indicate a power profile that is typical for this performance class. In Downfall, the GPU's role shifts from being the primary performance driver at 4K to a co-equal partner with the CPU at 1080p, where frame rates above 130 FPS suggest that neither component is fully saturated.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data for Downfall provides clear guidance on the optimal settings for this hardware combination. At 1920x1080, the High preset delivers 130.2 FPS, which is well above the threshold for smooth gameplay in a horror title where responsiveness matters. Ultra drops to 82.9 FPS, still playable but offering diminishing returns for the visual uplift. The Medium preset at 154.2 FPS and Low at 190.6 FPS exceed what most displays can show, making High the sensible choice for 1080p users who want a balance of fidelity and headroom.

At 2560x1440, the High preset produces 89.4 FPS, which remains comfortable for most gaming scenarios. The Medium preset at 112 FPS is also viable, but the visual difference between Medium and High is often noticeable in horror games where atmospheric lighting and shadows are key. Ultra at 59.4 FPS is borderline, hovering near the 60 FPS target, but the 34.9 FPS result at 4K Ultra suggests that pushing beyond High at higher resolutions incurs significant costs. For 1440p, High is the recommended preset, as it maintains frame rates above 85 FPS while preserving visual quality.

At 3840x2160, the choices become more constrained. High settings yield 58.9 FPS, which is just below the 60 FPS standard but generally acceptable for a slower-paced horror title. Medium at 69.7 FPS offers a safer margin, while Low at 82.4 FPS ensures fluid performance at the cost of visual fidelity. Ultra at 34.9 FPS is not recommended, as the frame rate falls below the threshold where motion smoothness degrades noticeably. For 4K users, the Medium preset represents the best compromise, delivering 69.7 FPS while retaining enough graphical detail to maintain the game's atmosphere.

Across all resolutions, the data shows a consistent pattern: High settings provide the best balance of visual quality and performance for this hardware. The RTX 3060 Ti's 8 GB VRAM and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for High presets at every resolution, and the frame rates remain within playable ranges. The Ultra preset, while visually superior, exacts a heavy toll on performance, particularly at higher resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full range of settings was tested. Low settings produce 190.6 FPS, which is the highest frame rate recorded for this combination. Medium settings drop to 154.2 FPS, a 19.1% reduction from Low. High settings yield 130.2 FPS, and Ultra falls to 82.9 FPS. The step from High to Ultra is the largest single-setting penalty at 47.3 FPS, indicating that Ultra introduces significant additional rendering work. The 1080p results show that this combination can easily exceed 60 FPS at every preset, with even Ultra maintaining a playable frame rate.

At 2560x1440, the measured values are 133.5 FPS for Low, 112 FPS for Medium, 89.4 FPS for High, and 59.4 FPS for Ultra. The progression from Low to Ultra reduces frame rate by 74.1 FPS, a 55.5% decrease. The Medium to High transition costs 22.6 FPS, while High to Ultra costs 30 FPS. The 1440p results indicate that Ultra is the first preset to drop below 60 FPS, making it a marginal choice for users with 60 Hz displays. Low and Medium settings provide substantial headroom, while High remains comfortably above 85 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the data shows 82.4 FPS for Low, 69.7 FPS for Medium, 58.9 FPS for High, and 34.9 FPS for Ultra. The total spread from Low to Ultra is 47.5 FPS, which is the narrowest range across all resolutions. This compression reflects the GPU becoming the limiting factor, as even the lowest settings cannot overcome the pixel throughput requirements of 4K. The High to Ultra drop of 24 FPS is particularly steep, representing a 40.7% reduction. The 4K results show that only Low and Medium settings maintain frame rates above 60 FPS, with High falling just short at 58.9 FPS.

Comparing across resolutions at the same settings reveals consistent scaling. At Low settings, 1080p produces 190.6 FPS, 1440p produces 133.5 FPS, and 4K produces 82.4 FPS. At Medium, the values are 154.2, 112, and 69.7 FPS respectively. At High, they are 130.2, 89.4, and 58.9 FPS. At Ultra, they are 82.9, 59.4, and 34.9 FPS. The pattern is uniform: each resolution step up reduces frame rate by roughly 30-35% at most settings, confirming that the rendering workload scales predictably with pixel count. The Ultra preset shows the largest relative drop at 4K, reinforcing the recommendation to avoid Ultra at that resolution.