Downfall

The Intel Core i5-13400F paired with the Intel Arc B390 presents a stark contrast in component tiers within the Downfall benchmark database. The CPU is a high-end desktop part, while the GPU is an integrated graphics solution. The measured frame rates reveal a system where the graphics processor is the definitive constraint, and the data illustrates how the central processor's capabilities are largely left untapped in this horror title.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core i5-13400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and can boost up to 4.60 GHz. Its substantial L3 cache of 20 MB (shared) and a 65 W TDP place it as a capable desktop part. Benchmark results confirm its strong multi-threaded performance, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 22604 and a Geekbench multicore score of 11068. Single-thread performance is also solid, evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3191.

However, in Downfall, the CPU's raw power does not translate into high frame rates. At 1080p Low settings, the system achieves an average of 106 FPS. This is the highest result recorded for this combo, but it is not a reflection of CPU limits. The data suggests the processor is far from being the bottleneck. The 10 cores and 16 threads are more than sufficient for the game's demands, particularly when compared to the GPU's performance. The CPU's percentile ranking against all CPUs is 77, placing it well above the median. Its average benchmark score of 25292 is nearly identical to its nearest rivals, including the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS (25284) and the AMD Ryzen 7 6800H (25201), with deltaPct values of 0 and 0.4 respectively. This indicates that the i5-13400F is a well-rounded performer in general compute tasks.

The implication is that the game's frame rates are being dictated by the graphics pipeline, not the CPU's ability to feed it. The core clock speeds and cache sizes are largely irrelevant to the final FPS numbers when the graphics processor is the limiting factor. The CPU's role in this combo is to provide a stable platform that never becomes a constraint, which it does easily. The measured FPS does not scale with CPU-bound metrics; instead, it scales directly with the GPU's workload. Even the most demanding CPU tasks in the game would likely not push this processor to its limits, given that the entire system's performance is capped by the integrated graphics.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Arc B390 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on a 3 nm process. It is part of the Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake) generation. Its specifications are modest: 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. It features 12 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate. The GPU's clock speeds are a base of 300 MHz and a boost of 2500 MHz. Its memory configuration is "System Shared," meaning it relies on the system's main memory. The memory bus width and bandwidth are also "System Shared" and "System Dependent," respectively, which is a critical detail for performance.

This GPU's benchmark presence is minimal, with a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482. Its percentile ranking against all GPUs is a very low 9, indicating it performs worse than 91% of all graphics processors in the database. Its nearest rivals are older, low-end dedicated parts like the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463) and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 (1443), with deltaPct values of 1.3 and 2.7. This places the Arc B390's raw compute power in the same league as decade-old entry-level graphics cards.

In Downfall, the GPU's limitations are apparent. The boost clock of 2500 MHz is not enough to compensate for the low shader count and the dependency on shared system memory for VRAM. The "System Shared" memory bandwidth is a significant bottleneck, especially at higher resolutions where the demand for texture data and frame buffer space increases. The data shows that the GPU is the primary constraint across all tested configurations. The performance is consistently low, with the highest average FPS being 106 at 1080p Low. The GPU's low pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s further confirm its limited fill-rate capabilities, which are crucial for a horror game that likely relies on detailed environments and lighting effects.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data across resolutions clearly identifies the GPU as the limiting component. The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is substantial. At Low settings, the average FPS falls from 106 at 1920x1080 to 76 at 2560x1440, and further to 47 at 3840x2160. This is a reduction of approximately 56% from 1080p to 4K. At High settings, the drop is from 71 FPS at 1080p to 51 FPS at 1440p, and then to 32 FPS at 4K, a reduction of about 55%.

This pattern is classic GPU-bound behavior. As the resolution increases, the number of pixels the GPU must render grows exponentially. The CPU's workload does not increase at the same rate. Since the Arc B390 is severely underpowered, its rendering capabilities are saturated even at 1080p. The scaling factor indicates that the system is not CPU-limited; if it were, the FPS would remain relatively flat across resolutions. Instead, the FPS scales inversely with the pixel count, demonstrating that the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth are being exhausted.

The data implies that to maintain a playable frame rate, the resolution must be lowered. The difference between 1080p and 1440p is noticeable, but the jump to 4K results in a dramatic performance collapse. For instance, at Medium settings, the 4K average is 39 FPS, which is nearly half of the 1080p average of 87 FPS. This suggests that the integrated GPU is simply not designed for high-resolution gaming, and the system's overall performance is inextricably tied to the graphics processor's ability to handle the pixel workload.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

In the Downfall benchmark database, this combination of components ranks 2589 out of 2928 tested combos. This places it in the bottom 12% of all systems tested. The ranking is a direct consequence of the Intel Arc B390's weak performance. While the Intel Core i5-13400F is a strong CPU, its contributions are overshadowed by the GPU's limitations. The combo's rank reflects the fact that the graphics processor is the single most important factor for gaming performance in this title.

The high rank number (where a lower number is better) indicates that the vast majority of other component pairings, even those with older or less capable CPUs, outperform this setup. This is because most other combos likely include a dedicated graphics card, which would provide significantly more rendering power than the integrated Arc B390. The data suggests that the CPU's high percentile ranking (77) is irrelevant to the gaming outcome when paired with a GPU in the 9th percentile. The system is effectively held back by its weakest link, which is the graphics solution. The combo's rank is not a reflection of the CPU's capability but rather a clear indicator that this pairing is severely unbalanced for gaming purposes.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The measured FPS data for this combo provides a complete picture of its performance across various settings and resolutions.

At 1920x1080:

• Low: 106 avg FPS
• Medium: 87 avg FPS, with a minimum of 74 FPS and a maximum of 100 FPS
• High: 71 avg FPS
• Ultra: 44 avg FPS

At 2560x1440:

• Low: 76 avg FPS
• Medium: 62 avg FPS, with a minimum of 53 FPS and a maximum of 71 FPS
• High: 51 avg FPS
• Ultra: 32 avg FPS

At 3840x2160:

• Low: 47 avg FPS
• Medium: 39 avg FPS, with a minimum of 33 FPS and a maximum of 44 FPS
• High: 32 avg FPS
• Ultra: 20 avg FPS

The data shows a consistent pattern. At each resolution, the FPS decreases as the settings increase from Low to Ultra. The delta between Low and Ultra is significant. At 1080p, the difference is 62 FPS (from 106 to 44). At 1440p, the difference is 44 FPS (from 76 to 32). At 4K, the difference is 27 FPS (from 47 to 20). The Medium settings row provides the only min/max data points, showing that the frame time variance is relatively stable, with the minimum not dropping too far below the average. This suggests that while performance is low, it is consistent and does not suffer from severe stuttering. The Ultra setting at 4K is essentially unplayable at 20 FPS, while the Low setting at 1080p is the only configuration that approaches a smooth experience.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured data, the most viable settings for this combo are at 1080p. The Low preset at 1920x1080 yields an average of 106 FPS, which is the only setting that provides a truly fluid experience. This is the recommended configuration for players who prioritize a high frame rate, as Downfall is a horror game where smooth motion is critical for immersion and reaction times.

The Medium preset at 1080p also offers a playable experience with an average of 87 FPS. This is a reasonable compromise if the user wants slightly better visual fidelity, as the minimum of 74 FPS suggests it remains smooth in demanding scenes. However, the High preset at 1080p drops to 71 FPS, which is still playable but shows a noticeable performance hit. The Ultra preset at 1080p should be avoided, as the 44 FPS average is below the threshold for smooth gameplay.

At 1440p, the Low preset is the only one that remains playable, with an average of 76 FPS. The Medium preset at 1440p, with an average of 62 FPS, is borderline. The High preset at 51 FPS and Ultra at 32 FPS are not recommended. At 4K, all presets are too slow for a smooth experience, with even the Low preset only achieving 47 FPS. The data suggests that users should stick to 1080p to get the best experience. For a balance of visual quality and performance, the Medium preset at 1080p is the best choice, as it offers a significant visual upgrade over Low while maintaining an average FPS that is above 60. For maximum smoothness, the Low preset is the clear winner.

FAQ

*Q: What is the highest average frame rate this combo can achieve in Downfall?*

A: The highest recorded average frame rate is 106 FPS, which occurs at 1920x1080 resolution with the Low settings preset.

*Q: Is this system capable of running Downfall at 4K resolution?*

A: The data indicates that 4K performance is poor. The best average FPS at 3840x2160 is 47 FPS on Low settings, while the Ultra preset yields only 20 FPS, making 4K largely unplayable.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B390 compare to its nearest rivals in terms of benchmark scores?

A: The Intel Arc B390 has an average benchmark score of 1482. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, has a score of 1463, representing a 1.3% delta. The GeForce GT 710 has a score of 1443, a 2.7% delta, indicating the Arc B390 is slightly faster than these older parts.

*Q: Does the Intel Core i5-13400F bottleneck the system in Downfall?*

A: No. The benchmark results indicate the CPU is far more powerful than the GPU. The CPU's performance is not a limiting factor, as the frame rates are consistently low and scale with resolution, which is a sign of a GPU bottleneck.

Q: What is the performance difference between the Low and Ultra presets at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves an average of 106 FPS, while the Ultra preset achieves an average of 44 FPS. This represents a 62 FPS drop when moving from the lowest to the highest quality settings.

Q: What is the best settings preset to use for a smooth experience based on the data?

A: The Low preset at 1080p provides the smoothest experience with an average of 106 FPS. The Medium preset at 1080p is also a good option, with an average of 87 FPS and a minimum of 74 FPS, offering a balance between visual quality and performance.