Downfall

# Downfall with Intel Core i5-12600KF + Intel Arc B370

The Intel Core i5-12600KF paired with the Intel Arc B370 produces a constrained gaming experience in Downfall, a horror title from 2016. The measured frame rates across resolutions and settings reveal a system where the GPU is the primary bottleneck, with the CPU offering ample headroom that never becomes a limiting factor. The combo ranks near the bottom of the database, at 2688 out of 2928 tested combinations, placing it in the 8th percentile of all tested systems. This is a pairing that delivers playable results only at lower resolutions and settings, with the data showing a steep performance cliff as graphical demands increase.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is dramatic and tells a clear story about which component is holding this system back. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 96 FPS at 1920x1080 to 68 FPS at 2560x1440, a 29% reduction, and then further to 43 FPS at 3840x2160, which is a 55% drop from the 1080p baseline. This scaling pattern is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario, where the render resolution directly determines the workload placed on the graphics processor.

At High settings, the same trend continues but with lower absolute values: 64 FPS at 1080p, 46 FPS at 1440p, and 29 FPS at 4K. The percentage drop from 1080p to 4K at High settings is 55%, nearly identical to the Low setting drop. This consistency across settings suggests that the limiting component remains the same regardless of quality level, which is the GPU. The Arc B370, with its 1280 shading units and 20 ROPs, simply cannot maintain higher frame rates as pixel count increases.

The Medium settings row provides additional insight, as it includes minimum and maximum FPS values. At 1080p Medium, the average is 78 FPS with a minimum of 67 FPS and a maximum of 90 FPS. Moving to 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 minimum of 30 FPS and maximum of 40 FPS. The minimum FPS values are particularly telling, at 4K Medium, the minimum of 30 FPS is already below the threshold for smooth gameplay, and the frame time consistency degrades as resolution increases.

The Ultra settings data shows the most severe scaling: 40 FPS at 1080p, 29 FPS at 1440p, and 18 FPS at 4K. The 4K Ultra result of 18 FPS is essentially unplayable, and even the 1440p Ultra result of 29 FPS is marginal. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p at Ultra is a 27.5% drop, while 1440p to 4K is a 38% drop, indicating that the GPU is being overwhelmed by the combination of high settings and high resolution.

The data clearly shows that the CPU is not the limiting factor in this configuration. The Intel Core i5-12600KF, with its 10 cores and 16 threads, has more than enough processing power for a 2016 horror title. The consistent scaling pattern across all settings, where frame rates drop proportionally with pixel count, points exclusively to the GPU as the bottleneck. The Arc B370's system-shared memory and 25 W TDP further reinforce this conclusion, as the GPU is designed for low-power integrated graphics duty rather than high-performance gaming.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Downfall?

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 is the only resolution where the system consistently achieves playable frame rates. At Low settings, the average is 96 FPS, at Medium it is 78 FPS, and at High it is 64 FPS. At 2560x1440, only Low settings (68 FPS) and Medium settings (56 FPS) remain playable, while High drops to 46 FPS and Ultra falls to 29 FPS. At 3840x2160, every setting produces average frame rates below 43 FPS, with Ultra at 18 FPS being effectively unplayable.

Q: How does the Ultra preset compare to High in terms of performance cost?

A: The jump from High to Ultra incurs a significant performance penalty at every resolution. At 1080p, High averages 64 FPS while Ultra averages 40 FPS, a 37.5% reduction. At 1440p, High averages 46 FPS while Ultra averages 29 FPS, a 37% reduction. At 4K, High averages 29 FPS while Ultra averages 18 FPS, a 38% reduction. The consistency of this penalty across resolutions suggests that Ultra adds a uniform workload increase that this GPU cannot absorb.

Q: Is the Intel Core i5-12600KF or the Intel Arc B370 the limiting factor?

A: The benchmark results indicate the GPU is the limiting factor. The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K is directly proportional to pixel count, which is a signature of GPU-bound performance. The CPU, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23391 and a PassMark multithread score of 27575, has substantial processing power that is not being fully utilized in this scenario. The GPU's percentile rank of 5 among all GPUs, compared to the CPU's percentile rank of 79 among all CPUs, further confirms the GPU is the weak link.

Q: What minimum FPS can I expect at Medium settings?

A: The measured data provides minimum FPS values only for Medium settings. At 1080p, the minimum is 67 FPS. At 1440p, the minimum is 48 FPS. At 4K, the minimum is 30 FPS. These minimums are closer to their respective averages than the maximums, indicating some frame time variability, but the 1080p and 1440p minimums remain above playable thresholds.

Q: How does this combo rank against all tested systems in Downfall?

A: This combination ranks 2688 out of 2928 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 8% of all systems. This low ranking is consistent with the GPU's overall performance percentile of 5, which places it near the bottom of all tested GPUs. The CPU's strong performance does not compensate for the GPU's limitations in this gaming workload.

Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Downfall?

A: The data shows 4K gaming is possible but not recommended. At Low settings, the average is 43 FPS, which is borderline playable. At Medium settings, the average drops to 35 FPS with a minimum of 30 FPS. At High settings, the average is 29 FPS, and at Ultra, it falls to 18 FPS. Only Low settings at 4K approach playability, and even then, the frame rate is below the 60 FPS target most players prefer.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data points to a clear hierarchy of playable configurations for this hardware combination. At 1920x1080, the system has enough headroom to run High settings at 64 FPS average, which provides a good balance between visual quality and performance. Medium settings at 1080p offer 78 FPS average with a minimum of 67 FPS, making it the safest choice for consistent frame delivery. Low settings at 1080p reach 96 FPS but sacrifice visual fidelity that the 2016 horror title can provide.

For users who prioritize frame rate stability, Medium settings at 1080p is the recommended configuration. The measured minimum of 67 FPS ensures that the game rarely drops below smooth playback thresholds, and the average of 78 FPS provides margin for demanding scenes. The jump to High settings at 1080p reduces the average to 64 FPS, which is still playable but offers less headroom for frame drops during intense horror sequences.

At 2560x1440, the options narrow considerably. Low settings produce 68 FPS average, which is playable, while Medium settings produce 56 FPS average with a minimum of 48 FPS. High settings at 1440p drop to 46 FPS average, which is below the 60 FPS target but may be acceptable for a slower-paced horror game. Ultra settings at 1440p at 29 FPS is not recommended, as the frame rate is too low for responsive gameplay.

The 3840x2160 resolution should be avoided unless absolutely necessary. Only Low settings at 4K provide an average above 40 FPS, and even that configuration produces 43 FPS, which is below the ideal threshold. Medium settings at 4K average 35 FPS with a minimum of 30 FPS, which is marginal at best. High and Ultra at 4K produce 29 FPS and 18 FPS respectively, both of which are below playable standards.

The best experience per the measured rows is Medium settings at 1920x1080. This configuration offers the best combination of visual quality, average frame rate (78 FPS), and minimum frame rate (67 FPS). The minimum of 67 FPS ensures that even the most demanding scenes in the horror game maintain acceptable performance, while the average provides a smooth experience. For users willing to accept slightly lower visual fidelity, Low settings at 1080p at 96 FPS offers the highest frame rate in the entire dataset.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its best performance across all settings. Low settings produce an average of 96 FPS, which is the highest frame rate recorded for this combination. Medium settings average 78 FPS with a minimum of 67 FPS and a maximum of 90 FPS, providing a tight frame delivery window. High settings average 64 FPS, which is a 33% reduction from Low. Ultra settings average 40 FPS, which is a 58% reduction from Low and a 37.5% reduction from High.

At 2560x1440, performance drops across the board. Low settings average 68 FPS, a 29% reduction from the 1080p Low result. Medium settings average 56 FPS with a minimum of 48 FPS and a maximum of 64 FPS, representing a 28% reduction from the 1080p Medium average. High settings average 46 FPS, a 28% reduction from the 1080p High average. Ultra settings average 29 FPS, a 27.5% reduction from the 1080p Ultra average.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles to maintain playable frame rates. Low settings average 43 FPS, a 37% reduction from the 1440p Low result and a 55% reduction from the 1080p Low result. Medium settings average 35 FPS with a minimum of 30 FPS and a maximum of 40 FPS, representing a 37.5% reduction from the 1440p Medium average. High settings average 29 FPS, a 37% reduction from the 1440p High average. Ultra settings average 18 FPS, a 38% reduction from the 1440p Ultra average and a 55% reduction from the 1080p Ultra average.

The Medium settings rows are the only ones with complete minimum and maximum data. At 1080p, the spread between minimum and maximum is 23 FPS (67 to 90). At 1440p, the spread narrows to 16 FPS (48 to 64). At 4K, the spread narrows further to 10 FPS (30 to 40). This narrowing spread at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU is consistently saturated, leaving less variance in frame delivery.

How This Combo Ranks

This combination of Intel Core i5-12600KF and Intel Arc B370 ranks 2688 out of 2928 tested combinations in Downfall. This places it in the bottom 8.2% of all tested systems, indicating that the vast majority of other hardware configurations deliver better performance in this game. The rank is heavily influenced by the GPU, which has a percentile rank of 5 among all GPUs, placing it in the bottom 5% of graphics processors.

The CPU's performance percentile of 79 among all CPUs shows that the processor is well above average in general computing tasks. However, this does not translate to a good gaming experience in Downfall because the GPU cannot keep up with the CPU's capabilities. The combo rank of 2688 is consistent with the GPU's low percentile, confirming that the graphics processor is the dominant factor in determining this system's gaming performance.

The nearestRivals data for the GPU provides context for its performance level. The Arc B370 scores 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, which is 0.2% below the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186) and 0.5% below the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190). It is 0.7% below the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192) and 1.4% above the AMD FirePro M2000 (1168). These rival GPUs are all from significantly older generations, highlighting how far behind modern standards the Arc B370 is in gaming performance.

The CPU's nearestRivals show a different story. The Intel Core i5-12600KF has an average benchmark score of 27799, which is 0.3% above the AMD Ryzen 5 8500GE (27712) and 0.3% below the Intel Core i9-10900K (27872). It is also 0.3% below the AMD Ryzen 7 6800U (27887) and 0.3% below the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D (27896). This places the CPU in a competitive position among its peers, with performance essentially matching these rival processors.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12600KF brings substantial processing capability to this configuration. With 10 cores and 16 threads, it offers strong multi-threaded performance that is well-suited for modern games. The base clock of 3.70 GHz and boost clock of 4.90 GHz provide high single-thread performance, which is important for game logic and physics calculations. The 20 MB of shared L3 cache helps reduce memory latency and improve data access patterns.

The benchmark data confirms the CPU's strong performance. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23391 and single-core score of 3302 demonstrate excellent processing power. The Geekbench multi-core score of 12137 and single-core score of 2157 further validate the CPU's capabilities. The PassMark multithread score of 27575 and single-thread score of 3925 show balanced performance across different workload types.

In Downfall, a horror game from 2016, the CPU requirements are modest. The game's age means it was designed for hardware from that era, and the Core i5-12600KF far exceeds those requirements. The measured frame rates show no signs of CPU limitation, as the scaling pattern across resolutions is consistent with GPU-bound performance. The CPU's percentile rank of 79 among all CPUs indicates it is well above average, yet the combo rank of 2688 shows that this CPU performance does not translate to gaming success.

The CPU's memory support for both DDR4 and DDR5 provides flexibility, though the system-shared GPU memory means the CPU and GPU are competing for the same memory resources. This can impact performance in memory-intensive scenarios, though the data does not show specific evidence of this in Downfall. The CPU's 125 W TDP and Intel Socket 1700 mounting make it a conventional desktop processor with adequate power delivery for gaming workloads.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is the clear bottleneck in this configuration. With 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster output units, it has a relatively small processing core for gaming tasks. The base clock of 300 MHz and boost clock of 2400 MHz provide the operating frequencies, but the raw compute resources are limited. The FP32 performance of 6.144 TFLOPS and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s indicate modest throughput capabilities.

The GPU's memory configuration is system-shared, meaning it uses the system's main memory rather than dedicated VRAM. The memory bus width and bandwidth are system-dependent, which can introduce latency and bandwidth limitations compared to dedicated graphics memory. This is a significant disadvantage for gaming, as modern games require high-bandwidth memory access for textures and frame buffers.

The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184 places the GPU in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. The nearestRivals data shows the Arc B370 performing at a level comparable to GPUs from over a decade ago. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, ATI Radeon HD 5770, AMD Radeon HD 7650M, and AMD FirePro M2000 are all from the early 2010s, and the Arc B370 is within 1.4% of their performance. This places the GPU at a performance level that predates the game's 2016 release.

The GPU's architecture is Xe3-LPG on a 3 nm process, with a 25 W TDP and integrated graphics form factor. This low power envelope and IGP design explain the limited performance. The GPU has 10 ray tracing cores, which provide some advanced rendering capabilities, but the overall compute resources are insufficient for demanding gaming workloads. The DirectX 12 Ultimate support and Vulkan 1.4 compatibility show modern API support, but the hardware cannot fully leverage these features in practice.

In Downfall, the GPU's limitations are evident at every resolution and setting. The frame rates scale directly with pixel count, confirming that the GPU is the limiting component. Even at 1080p Low settings, the maximum average of 96 FPS shows the GPU cannot push significantly higher frame rates. The 4K results, with averages below 43 FPS at all settings, further demonstrate the GPU's inability to handle high-resolution rendering.