Downfall

# Downfall with Intel Core i5-14400F + NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER

This combination of Intel's 10-core Core i5-14400F and NVIDIA's GTX 1660 SUPER produces a fascinating split personality in Downfall: at 1080p, the pair delivers smooth, high-refresh experiences, but at 4K Ultra, the frame rate collapses to nearly unplayable levels. The benchmark data reveals a system where the GPU's 6 GB of VRAM and Turing architecture become the decisive bottleneck as resolution climbs, while the CPU's strong multi-threaded performance keeps minimums respectable even when average FPS drops.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a steep, predictable decline as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 147 FPS at 1080p to 105 FPS at 1440p, then to 65 FPS at 4K. That represents a 55.8% reduction from 1080p to 4K at Low settings. The pattern is consistent across all quality presets: High settings fall from 99 FPS at 1080p to 71 FPS at 1440p and 44 FPS at 4K, while Medium goes from 120 FPS to 86 FPS to 54 FPS across the same resolutions.

The most dramatic scaling occurs at Ultra settings, where the frame rate drops from 62 FPS at 1080p to 44 FPS at 1440p (a 29% loss) and then to 27 FPS at 4K (a further 38.6% loss from 1440p). This Ultra preset at 4K produces the single worst result in the entire dataset, with an average of just 27 FPS — barely half the 54 FPS achieved at Medium settings at the same resolution. The scaling curve suggests that at 4K, the GTX 1660 SUPER is operating at its absolute limit, with the 6 GB VRAM buffer likely saturated by the combination of high resolution and maximum texture quality.

What makes this scaling data particularly informative is the comparison between Low and Ultra presets at each resolution. At 1080p, the gap between Low (147 FPS) and Ultra (62 FPS) is a massive 85 FPS, indicating that the GPU has headroom to spare at lower resolutions but is heavily taxed by the Ultra preset's additional graphical demands. At 4K, the gap narrows to 38 FPS (65 FPS vs 27 FPS), suggesting that resolution itself becomes the primary limiter regardless of settings — the GPU simply cannot push more frames at 3840x2160, even when quality settings are reduced.

GPU Role

The GTX 1660 SUPER's specifications provide crucial context for these results. Built on the Turing architecture with a 12 nm process node, this GPU features 1,408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs, with a base clock of 1530 MHz and a boost clock of 1785 MHz. The 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus delivers 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is the key specification for understanding 4K performance — at 3840x2160 resolution, the sheer volume of texture data being streamed puts enormous pressure on that memory subsystem.

The GPU's benchmark scores place it in the 53rd percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 12,986. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile, scores 12,940 (0.4% higher), while the AMD Radeon RX 580 scores 12,928 (0.4% higher). This tight clustering indicates that the GTX 1660 SUPER sits in a well-populated performance tier, and the measured Downfall results align with this mid-range positioning.

Looking at the DirectX performance metrics, the GPU scores 50 in Passmark's DirectX 12 test, 104 in DirectX 11, and 189 in DirectX 9. The relatively weak DirectX 12 score compared to DirectX 11 is noteworthy for a 2016-era horror game like Downfall, which may rely on older rendering paths. The Vulkan score of 57,102 and OpenCL score of 52,490 from Geekbench suggest the GPU has reasonable compute capabilities, but the game's engine appears to favor the older API paths where this card performs relatively better.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-14400F presents a stark contrast to the GPU's mid-range positioning. With 10 cores, 16 threads, and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, this processor ranks in the 83rd percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 32,279. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U (32,233, 0.1% higher), Intel Core i9-11900 (32,226, 0.2% higher), and AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS (32,354, 0.2% lower) — all within a fraction of a percent, indicating this CPU is extremely well-matched against its direct competitors.

The CPU's multi-threaded performance is particularly strong, as evidenced by a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21,645 and a Geekbench multi-core score of 11,268. The single-thread results are equally impressive, with Cinebench R23 single-core at 3,055 and Geekbench single-core at 2,058. For Downfall, a horror game that likely has modest CPU demands due to its 2016 release date, this processor provides substantial headroom. The measured FPS data confirms this: even at 1080p Low settings, where the CPU would be most likely to become a bottleneck, the system achieves 147 FPS average, suggesting the processor is nowhere near its limits.

The 20 MB of shared L3 cache and 1.25 MB L2 cache per core provide ample fast memory for game logic and physics calculations. The CPU's 65 W TDP and support for both DDR4 and DDR5 memory make it a flexible choice, though the benchmark data shows no signs of memory bandwidth constraints affecting Downfall performance. The Passmark physics score of 1,523 and multi-thread score of 25,470 further reinforce that this CPU has far more capability than this game demands.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Downfall at 4K?

A: Yes, but with significant compromises. At 4K Medium settings, the system averages 54 FPS with a minimum of 45 FPS, which is playable. However, at 4K Ultra, the average drops to 27 FPS, which would likely feel stuttery and unresponsive. For smooth 4K gameplay, Low settings (65 FPS average) or Medium settings (54 FPS) are the realistic options.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combination?

A: The data strongly favors 1920x1080. At this resolution, every preset except Ultra achieves at least 99 FPS average, with Low hitting 147 FPS and Medium reaching 120 FPS. Even Ultra manages 62 FPS at 1080p, which is playable. At 1440p, only Low (105 FPS) and Medium (86 FPS) exceed 60 FPS, while High drops to 71 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The GPU is clearly the limiting component. The CPU ranks in the 83rd percentile among all processors with a 10-core, 16-thread configuration, while the GPU sits in the 53rd percentile. The dramatic FPS drops at higher resolutions — from 147 FPS at 1080p Low to 65 FPS at 4K Low — are characteristic of GPU saturation, not CPU limitations.

Q: How does the GTX 1660 SUPER compare to its nearest rivals in this game?

A: The GTX 1660 SUPER's average benchmark score of 12,986 is nearly identical to its closest competitors. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile scores 12,940 (0.4% higher), and the RX 580 scores 12,928 (0.4% higher). These tiny margins suggest that in Downfall, this GPU would perform very similarly to those alternatives, with differences of only a few FPS.

Q: What settings provide the best balance of quality and performance at 1440p?

A: Medium settings at 2560x1440 deliver 86 FPS average with a minimum of 73 FPS and maximum of 99 FPS. This is the sweet spot for 1440p — it provides a comfortable margin above 60 FPS while offering better visual quality than Low. High settings at 71 FPS are also viable, but Ultra drops to 44 FPS, which may feel inconsistent.

Q: Does the game benefit from the CPU's high single-thread performance?

A: The CPU's single-thread scores are strong (Cinebench R23 single-core at 3,055, Geekbench single-core at 2,058), but the FPS data suggests this headroom is largely unused. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 147 FPS, which is well above typical monitor refresh rates, and the CPU never appears to constrain performance based on the consistent scaling pattern across resolutions.

Settings Recommendations

For the best overall experience at 1920x1080, Medium settings provide an excellent balance with 120 FPS average, 102 FPS minimum, and 138 FPS maximum. This preset delivers smooth gameplay with a comfortable safety margin above 60 FPS, and the minimum frame rate of 102 FPS ensures no noticeable stuttering. High settings at 1080p (99 FPS) are also viable for players prioritizing visual quality, though the 21 FPS difference from Medium may not justify the additional graphical load.

At 2560x1440, Medium settings again emerge as the optimal choice. The 86 FPS average with 73 FPS minimum and 99 FPS maximum provides a smooth experience that stays above 60 FPS even in demanding scenes. High settings at 71 FPS are acceptable but leave less headroom, while Low at 105 FPS sacrifices too much visual quality. Ultra at 44 FPS is not recommended for 1440p gaming.

For 3840x2160, players must make significant trade-offs. Low settings at 65 FPS provide the most playable experience, though the visual fidelity will be noticeably reduced. Medium settings at 54 FPS with a 45 FPS minimum is borderline — the average is acceptable, but the minimum suggests occasional drops that could be noticeable in a horror game where smooth motion is critical for atmosphere. High and Ultra at 44 FPS and 27 FPS respectively are not recommended for serious gameplay.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its strongest performance across all presets. Low settings achieve 147 FPS average, Medium reaches 120 FPS (with 102 FPS minimum and 138 FPS maximum), High hits 99 FPS, and Ultra drops to 62 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra at this resolution shows a 57.8% performance reduction, indicating the GPU has substantial headroom at 1080p but is heavily taxed by the Ultra preset.

At 2560x1440, performance remains solid for most presets. Low settings deliver 105 FPS average, Medium achieves 86 FPS (73 FPS minimum, 99 FPS maximum), High reaches 71 FPS, and Ultra falls to 44 FPS. The transition from 1080p to 1440p costs between 28.6% (Low) and 29.0% (Ultra) of performance, a consistent penalty that underscores the GPU's bandwidth limitations.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles to maintain playable frame rates at higher presets. Low settings produce 65 FPS average, Medium drops to 54 FPS (45 FPS minimum, 62 FPS maximum), High falls to 44 FPS, and Ultra collapses to 27 FPS. The 4K resolution imposes a severe penalty across all settings, with even the best-case scenario (Low at 65 FPS) representing a 55.8% reduction from the 1080p Low result.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of Intel Core i5-14400F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER ranks 3,177 out of 3,716 tested combinations in Downfall, placing it in the bottom 14.5% of all tested systems. Given the GPU's 53rd percentile ranking and the CPU's 83rd percentile ranking, this low position reflects the game's demanding nature at higher resolutions and the GPU's mid-range capabilities.

The ranking disparity between component percentiles and game performance is instructive. While the CPU is clearly capable of handling this game's computational demands, the GPU's 6 GB VRAM and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth become increasingly inadequate as resolution increases. The data suggests that for Downfall specifically, the GPU is the primary factor determining this combo's ranking, and players seeking better performance would benefit more from a GPU upgrade than from any CPU change.

The measured FPS data reinforces this interpretation. At 1080p, this combo performs respectably, with all presets except Ultra exceeding 60 FPS. However, the system's inability to maintain 60 FPS at 4K Medium settings (54 FPS average) and its collapse at 4K Ultra (27 FPS) indicate that this combination is best suited for 1080p or 1440p gaming, with 4K requiring substantial compromises in visual quality to remain playable.