Downfall

# Downfall with Intel Core i5-13400F + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050

This combination of the Intel Core i5-13400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 lands at rank 1755 out of 2928 tested combos in Downfall, placing it in the lower-middle tier of the database. The pairing delivers playable frame rates at 1080p and 1440p across most settings, but the horror title's demands at 4K Ultra push the system to its limits, with the GPU emerging as the primary constraint in nearly every scenario.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 1755 out of 2928 represents the 60th percentile of all tested configurations in Downfall. This places it ahead of roughly 40% of systems but behind a substantial portion of the field, reflecting a mid-pack standing that aligns with the individual hardware's benchmark positions. The CPU sits at the 77th percentile against all processors, while the GPU ranks at the 66th percentile against all graphics cards, so the combination performs slightly below what the CPU's percentile might suggest, indicating that the graphics card holds the system back in this title.

Benchmark data for the RTX 5050 shows an average score of 21035, with its nearest rivals clustering tightly around it. The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL trails by just 0.6%, while the AMD Radeon HD 8970M is 1% behind. The AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT sits 1.6% ahead, and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile leads by 1.6%. These margins are razor-thin, meaning the RTX 5050's position among its peers is highly competitive but not dominant.

For the Core i5-13400F, the average benchmark score of 25292 places it in close competition with several AMD and Intel parts. The AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS matches it exactly with a 0% delta, while the Intel Core 5 120 and AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D both trail by 0.3%. The AMD Ryzen 7 6800H sits just 0.4% ahead. This clustering suggests the CPU is well-positioned for its class, though it does not break away from the pack in synthetic workloads.

GPU Role

The RTX 5050 carries 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 320.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock runs at 2500 MHz with 20 Gbps effective speed. The GPU's base clock is 2317 MHz with a boost clock of 2572 MHz, and it draws up to 130 W with a suggested 300 W power supply. Built on TSMC's 5 nm process with 16,900 million transistors on a 149 mm² die, the card offers 2560 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output pipelines.

In Downfall, the GPU's memory configuration directly influences performance at higher resolutions. The 8 GB frame buffer becomes a limiting factor at 4K, particularly at Ultra settings where the average frame rate drops to 37 FPS. The bandwidth figure of 320.0 GB/s is adequate for 1080p and 1440p workloads but struggles to sustain high frame rates when the render resolution increases. The card's FP32 performance of 13.17 TFLOPS and texture rate of 205.8 GTexel/s provide the raw compute needed for the horror game's lighting and shadow effects, yet the modest 32 ROPs cap pixel throughput, which shows in the 4K results.

The GPU's passmark G3D score of 17326 and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2502 reflect its mid-range positioning. Its percentile of 66 against all GPUs confirms that it sits comfortably in the middle of the market, neither a budget afterthought nor a high-end performer. The predecessor GeForce 40 series and successor GeForce 60 series bracket this card's generation, but within Downfall specifically, the data shows the GPU handles the game's demands adequately at lower resolutions while faltering at the extreme end.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of diminishing returns as resolution increases. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 201 FPS average, which drops to 135 FPS at High and 84 FPS at Ultra. Moving to 1440p, the Low setting still delivers a smooth 144 FPS, with High at 96 FPS and Ultra at 60 FPS. At 4K, the numbers fall further: 89 FPS on Low, 73 FPS on Medium, 60 FPS on High, and 37 FPS on Ultra.

The scaling from 1080p to 4K shows a roughly 56% reduction in frame rate at Low settings (201 to 89 FPS), 56% at High (135 to 60 FPS), and 56% at Ultra (84 to 37 FPS). This consistent drop across settings indicates that the GPU is the limiting component throughout the resolution range. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rates would cluster more tightly at lower resolutions where the GPU has more headroom, but instead the system scales nearly linearly with pixel count, a hallmark of GPU-bound performance.

The Medium settings show the most complete data, with minimum and maximum frame rates recorded at all three resolutions. At 1080p Medium, the system averages 165 FPS with a minimum of 140 and maximum of 189. At 1440p Medium, the average falls to 118 FPS with a range of 100 to 135. At 4K Medium, the average is 73 FPS with a range of 62 to 84. The minimum frame rates at each step down (140, 100, 62) demonstrate that even the worst-case dips remain playable at 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K the minimum of 62 FPS approaches the edge of smooth gameplay for a horror title where frame pacing matters.

FAQ

Q: Is this combo capable of running Downfall at 4K?

A: Yes, but with significant caveats. At 4K High, the system averages 60 FPS, which is technically playable, but 4K Ultra drops to 37 FPS average, which is not smooth. For a consistent experience at 4K, the Medium preset at 73 FPS is the realistic ceiling.

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

A: The data shows 1440p as the sweet spot. At 1440p High, the system delivers 96 FPS average, and even Ultra maintains 60 FPS. This provides a balance between visual fidelity and smoothness that 4K cannot match with this hardware.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Core i5-13400F scores 25292 on average, matching the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS exactly. It trails the AMD Ryzen 7 6800H by 0.4% and leads the Intel Core 5 120 and AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D by 0.3% each, showing near-identical performance across this group.

Q: Does the GPU bottleneck the system in Downfall?

A: Yes. The consistent frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K across all settings indicates the RTX 5050 is the limiting factor. The CPU's 77th percentile ranking versus the GPU's 66th percentile further supports this, as the graphics card is the weaker component relative to its peers.

Q: What are the GPU's closest competitors based on average benchmark scores?

A: The RTX 5050's average score of 21035 places it within 1.6% of four rivals: the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT leads by 1.6%, the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile leads by 1.6%, the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL trails by 0.6%, and the AMD Radeon HD 8970M trails by 1%.

Q: Can the system maintain high frame rates at 1080p?

A: Yes, comfortably. At 1080p High, the average is 135 FPS, and Medium reaches 165 FPS. Even at Ultra, the system stays above 60 FPS with an 84 FPS average, making 1080p the most forgiving resolution for this hardware.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its strongest performance. Low settings produce an average of 201 FPS, Medium averages 165 FPS with a minimum of 140 and maximum of 189, High averages 135 FPS, and Ultra averages 84 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 117 FPS, reflecting the heavy cost of the higher-quality presets in Downfall.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain respectable. Low averages 144 FPS, Medium averages 118 FPS with a range of 100 to 135, High averages 96 FPS, and Ultra averages 60 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is roughly 28-31% across settings, which is consistent with the increased pixel count.

At 3840x2160, performance becomes more strained. Low averages 89 FPS, Medium averages 73 FPS with a minimum of 62 and maximum of 84, High averages 60 FPS, and Ultra drops to 37 FPS. The Ultra result at 4K is the only configuration in the entire dataset that falls below 60 FPS average, making it the clear outlier and the least viable option for this combo.

The Medium preset is the only one with complete min/max data across all resolutions, allowing for a direct comparison of frame time consistency. At 1080p, the spread from min to max is 49 FPS; at 1440p, it narrows to 35 FPS; at 4K, it tightens to 22 FPS. This narrowing at higher resolutions suggests that the GPU's workload becomes more uniform as pixel count increases, but the absolute frame rates drop correspondingly.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-13400F features 10 cores and 16 threads, based on the Raptor Lake architecture built on Intel's 10 nm process. It operates at a base clock of 2.50 GHz with a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, drawing 65 W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3. Memory support covers both DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel configuration, and the chip uses the Intel Socket 1700 interface.

In Downfall, the CPU's 10-core configuration provides ample threading for the game's engine, which dates to 2016 and does not appear to scale heavily beyond a handful of cores. The single-thread performance, measured at 960 in 3DMark single-thread and 3191 in Cinebench R23 single-core, ensures that the game's primary simulation thread runs efficiently. The multi-threaded scores, including 22604 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 25032 in Passmark multithread, show headroom that Downfall likely does not fully utilize.

The CPU's percentile of 77 against all processors indicates it outperforms the GPU's 66th percentile, reinforcing that the graphics card is the constraining factor. In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU's nearest rivals cluster within 0.4%, with the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS matching its score exactly. The Passmark physics score of 1437 and integer math score of 79942 suggest strong computational throughput, but these capabilities remain underutilized in a game where the GPU is the bottleneck at every resolution tested.

The CPU's boost clock of 4.60 GHz provides sufficient single-core speed for the horror game's AI and physics routines, while the 20 MB L3 cache helps maintain consistent frame times by reducing memory latency. The 65 W TDP and 10 nm process node keep thermals manageable, allowing sustained boost clocks during extended play sessions. However, the benchmark data shows that the CPU's performance headroom does not translate into higher frame rates once the GPU becomes saturated, which occurs even at 1080p Low where the system hits 201 FPS.