Downfall

Downfall is a 2016 horror title that stresses the GPU heavily at higher resolutions, and the pairing of the Intel Core i5-13400F with the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX produces a predictable scaling curve. At 1080p, the system delivers extremely high frame rates, while 4K Ultra drops to 39 FPS, showing a clear transition from CPU-bound to GPU-bound performance. The data indicates that this combination is well-suited for high-refresh 1440p gaming, but it struggles to maintain smooth 4K performance at maximum settings.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for this combo shows a steep decline as resolution increases, which is typical for a modern high-end GPU paired with a strong mid-range CPU. At 1080p Low, the system averages 242 FPS, which is an enormous headroom for any display. Moving to 1440p Low, the average drops to 165 FPS, a 32% reduction. At 4K Low, the average falls to 95 FPS, which is another 42% drop from 1440p. This pattern indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting factor at 4K, even on Low settings, while the CPU still has ample capacity at 1080p and 1440p.

The scaling from 1080p to 4K is not linear, and the gap widens at higher settings. For High settings, the system goes from 149 FPS at 1080p to 100 FPS at 1440p (a 33% drop) and then to 57 FPS at 4K (a 43% drop from 1440p). Ultra settings show the most dramatic collapse: 101 FPS at 1080p, 68 FPS at 1440p, and 39 FPS at 4K. The 4K Ultra result is below the 60 FPS threshold that many players consider playable, while 1080p Ultra remains comfortably above it.

The delta between Low and Ultra at each resolution illustrates where the bottleneck shifts. At 1080p, Low to Ultra costs 141 FPS (242 to 101), which is a 58% reduction. At 1440p, the same settings change costs 97 FPS (165 to 68), a 59% reduction. At 4K, the cost is 56 FPS (95 to 39), a 59% reduction. This consistent percentage suggests that the GPU is scaling linearly with settings, and the CPU is not introducing a variable bottleneck at any resolution.

Interestingly, the 4K Medium result of 84 FPS with a min of 72 FPS and max of 97 FPS shows that the GPU can handle 4K comfortably if the settings are moderated. The 4K High result of 57 FPS is borderline, while 4K Ultra is clearly too demanding. The data suggests that for 4K play, dropping from Ultra to High yields a 46% improvement (39 to 57 FPS), and dropping to Medium yields a 115% improvement (39 to 84 FPS). This makes Medium the sweet spot for 4K on this hardware.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX is a RDNA 3.0 architecture GPU with 24 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus, providing 960.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock is 1929 MHz, with a boost clock of 2498 MHz and a game clock of 2365 MHz. The GPU has 6144 shading units, 384 TMUs, and 192 ROPs, along with 96 RT cores. This hardware is clearly designed for high-resolution gaming, but Downfall’s older engine does not fully utilize its modern feature set.

The 24 GB VRAM is far more than Downfall needs, even at 4K Ultra. The game’s texture requirements are modest by modern standards, so the VRAM capacity is not a limiting factor in any of the measured scenarios. Instead, the raw compute power of the GPU, measured at 61.39 TFLOPS FP32, is what drives the frame rates. The 479.6 GPixel/s pixel rate and 959.2 GTexel/s texture rate are more relevant to how the card handles the game’s rendering demands.

The GPU’s benchmark scores place it in the 64th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 19410. Its nearest rival, according to the data, is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB with a deltaPct of 0.4, meaning the 7900 XTX is only 0.4% ahead in average score. This is a surprising comparison, but it reflects the aggregate benchmark data rather than gaming-specific performance. In Downfall, the 7900 XTX’s actual FPS results are much stronger than that rival comparison would suggest, as the game is not as demanding as modern titles.

The passmark_g3d score of 31238 and the 3dmark_steel_nomad_dx12 score of 6841 indicate strong DirectX 12 capability, which is relevant since Downfall supports modern APIs. The GPU’s DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) means it can handle the game’s most advanced features, but the measured FPS data shows that even with this support, 4K Ultra is too heavy. The GPU’s power draw is listed at 355 W TDP, with a suggested PSU of 750 W, but this does not directly affect in-game performance metrics.

The card is end-of-life in production status, but its performance in this game remains high. The 4K Low result of 95 FPS shows that the GPU can deliver playable frame rates at 4K if the user is willing to reduce visual fidelity. The 1080p Low result of 242 FPS is far beyond what any display can show, indicating that the GPU is not the bottleneck at that resolution.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-13400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor from the Raptor Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. It has 20 MB of shared L3 cache and 1.25 MB per core of L2 cache, with 80 KB per core of L1 cache. The CPU supports dual-channel DDR4 and DDR5 memory, and its 65 W TDP is modest for a desktop processor.

In Downfall, the CPU’s role is most apparent at 1080p, where frame rates exceed 200 FPS on Low settings. The 1080p Low result of 242 FPS is likely near the CPU’s limit for this game, as the GPU is powerful enough to render far more frames if the CPU could feed it. The 3dmark_single_thread score of 960 and the passmark_single_thread score of 3634 indicate strong single-core performance, which is crucial for older games like Downfall that may not scale well across many threads.

The CPU’s multi-threaded capabilities are also strong, with a cinebench_r23_multicore score of 22604 and a passmark_multithread score of 25032. However, Downfall is not a heavily threaded game, so these scores are less relevant to its performance. The CPU’s 3dmark_16_threads score of 7314 and 3dmark_8_threads score of 5591 suggest that it can handle moderate thread counts without issue, but the game’s engine likely relies on fewer threads.

The CPU’s percentile vs all CPUs is 77, with an average benchmark score of 25292. Its nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS with a deltaPct of 0, meaning they are statistically tied in average score. The Intel Core 5 120 and AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D are both 0.3% behind, while the AMD Ryzen 7 6800H is 0.4% ahead. This places the i5-13400F in a competitive mid-range position, but its gaming performance in Downfall is more dependent on single-thread speed than these aggregate scores.

At 1440p, the CPU still holds frame rates above 100 FPS on High settings (100 FPS) and above 140 FPS on Medium (147 FPS), showing that it is not a bottleneck at this resolution. At 4K, the CPU’s role diminishes further, as the GPU becomes the clear limiting factor. The 4K Ultra result of 39 FPS is purely a GPU limitation, as the CPU has plenty of headroom at that resolution.

The CPU’s boost clock of 4.60 GHz is important for Downfall, as the game’s frame pacing benefits from high single-thread performance. The 3dmark_2_threads score of 1880 and 3dmark_4_threads score of 3459 show that the CPU scales well with additional threads, but the game likely uses only one or two cores for its main simulation. The passmark_find_prime_numbers score of 83 is low, but this is not relevant to gaming.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions and four settings levels, providing a complete picture of performance. At 1920x1080, the system achieves 242 FPS on Low, 219 FPS on Medium (with a min of 186 and max of 251), 149 FPS on High, and 101 FPS on Ultra. The Medium setting has the only recorded min/max values at this resolution, showing a 65 FPS range between the minimum and maximum frame rates.

At 2560x1440, the results are 165 FPS on Low, 147 FPS on Medium (min 125, max 169), 100 FPS on High, and 68 FPS on Ultra. The Medium setting’s min/max range is 44 FPS, which is tighter than at 1080p, suggesting more consistent frame pacing. The drop from Low to Ultra at 1440p is 97 FPS, which is a 59% reduction.

At 3840x2160, the results are 95 FPS on Low, 84 FPS on Medium (min 72, max 97), 57 FPS on High, and 39 FPS on Ultra. The Medium setting at 4K has a min of 72 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS playability threshold, while the max of 97 FPS shows that the GPU can burst much higher. The 4K High result of 57 FPS is just below 60 FPS, making it borderline for smooth gameplay, while 4K Ultra at 39 FPS is not recommended.

The overall combo rank in game is 1889 out of 3716 combos, placing it in the middle of the pack for Downfall. This rank reflects the hardware’s ability to run the game, but the actual FPS data shows that the system is more capable than the rank suggests, particularly at 1080p and 1440p. The dataIsMeasured flag confirms that these are real benchmark results, not estimates.

Looking at the settings progression, Low to Medium provides a modest FPS drop at every resolution: 23 FPS at 1080p, 18 FPS at 1440p, and 11 FPS at 4K. Medium to High is a larger drop: 70 FPS at 1080p, 47 FPS at 1440p, and 27 FPS at 4K. High to Ultra is the steepest drop: 48 FPS at 1080p, 32 FPS at 1440p, and 18 FPS at 4K. This pattern shows that Ultra settings are disproportionately expensive, making them the least efficient choice.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to play Downfall with this hardware?

A: The data shows that 2560x1440 is the sweet spot. At High settings, the system achieves 100 FPS, which is smooth and visually detailed. At Medium, it reaches 147 FPS with a min of 125 FPS, providing excellent responsiveness. 1080p is also viable but exceeds display refresh rates on most monitors, while 4K requires dropping to Medium for playable frame rates.

Q: Can this system run Downfall at 4K 60 FPS?

A: Yes, but only on Medium settings. The 4K Medium result is 84 FPS with a min of 72 FPS, which comfortably exceeds 60 FPS. 4K High averages 57 FPS, which is below 60 FPS, and 4K Ultra averages 39 FPS, which is not smooth. Users targeting 4K 60 FPS should use Medium settings.

Q: How does the CPU affect performance at different resolutions?

A: The CPU is most influential at 1080p, where the 242 FPS Low result is likely CPU-limited. At 1440p, the CPU still provides enough performance for 100+ FPS on High settings. At 4K, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, and the CPU has no meaningful impact on the frame rate differences between settings.

Q: Is the 24 GB VRAM necessary for Downfall?

A: No. Downfall’s graphics requirements are modest, and even 4K Ultra settings do not stress the 24 GB VRAM capacity. The measured FPS results are limited by compute performance, not memory capacity. The 960.0 GB/s bandwidth is more than sufficient for this game.

Q: What are the frame time consistency results?

A: The only recorded min/max values are for Medium settings. At 1080p, the range is 186 to 251 FPS (a 65 FPS spread). At 1440p, the range is 125 to 169 FPS (a 44 FPS spread). At 4K, the range is 72 to 97 FPS (a 25 FPS spread). This shows that frame consistency improves as resolution increases, likely because the GPU is more uniformly loaded.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to other systems in Downfall?

A: The combo rank is 1889 out of 3716, placing it in the 51st percentile of tested configurations. This is a mid-pack result, but the actual FPS figures suggest it is better than the rank implies for 1080p and 1440p gaming. The rank may be skewed by other hardware combinations that perform differently in the game’s engine.

Settings Recommendations

The best experience per the measured rows depends on the user’s display resolution and refresh rate. For 1080p displays, High settings at 149 FPS is the optimal balance, as the visual improvement over Medium (219 FPS) is significant, and the frame rate remains far above any refresh rate. Ultra at 101 FPS is also viable and provides the maximum visual fidelity, but the 48 FPS cost over High is substantial for a horror game where atmosphere matters.

For 1440p displays, High settings at 100 FPS is the recommended choice. This delivers smooth gameplay with good visual quality, and the 100 FPS average is sufficient for most 144Hz monitors. Medium at 147 FPS is the better option for competitive play or if the user prioritizes frame rate over details, but the visual downgrade from High is noticeable. Ultra at 68 FPS is playable but risky, as the lower frame rate can make the horror experience less immersive.

For 4K displays, Medium settings at 84 FPS is the clear winner. This is the only 4K setting that comfortably exceeds 60 FPS, with a min of 72 FPS ensuring no drops below playability. High at 57 FPS is borderline and may cause stutter on some displays, while Ultra at 39 FPS is too slow for a smooth experience. Users with 4K displays should accept Medium settings to enjoy the game’s atmospheric horror without frame rate issues.

The data shows that Ultra settings are the least efficient choice at every resolution. The cost of going from High to Ultra is 48 FPS at 1080p, 32 FPS at 1440p, and 18 FPS at 4K, while the visual difference is typically minimal in a horror game with dark environments. The recommended settings are High at 1080p, High or Medium at 1440p, and Medium at 4K, depending on the user’s preference for visual fidelity versus frame rate smoothness.