Downfall

The measured data for Downfall pairs the Intel Core i5-14600K with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4 GB. The CPU occupies the 90th percentile of all tested CPUs, while the GPU holds the 50th percentile of all GPUs, yet the combined platform finishes 3263rd of 3716 tested combinations in this title. The 12 measured data points span 1080p, 1440p, and 4K across four presets, offering a complete picture of how the hardware scales in this 2016 horror game.

Resolution Scaling

The frame-rate slope from 1080p to 4K is steep and uniform across presets. At 1080p the measured averages are 135 FPS (Low), 110 FPS (Medium), 91 FPS (High), and 57 FPS (Ultra). At 1440p they fall to 96, 79, 65, and 40 respectively. At 4K, only four numbers exist: 60 (Low), 49 (Medium), 40 (High), and 25 (Ultra).

Comparing each preset between resolutions yields nearly identical ratios. For Low, the drop from 1080p to 4K is from 135 to 60 — a reduction of ~55.6%. Medium drops from 110 to 49 (55.5% reduction), High from 91 to 40 (56.0%), and Ultra from 57 to 25 (56.1%). The consistency of this ~56% loss when moving between resolutions demonstrates that the rendering engines scale directly with the pixel count, and the component that controls that scaling is certainly the graphics subsystem, not the processor.

If it were CPU-bound, the frame rates would remain roughly constant regardless of resolution; they do not. The data shows strong GPU-bound characteristics across the entire settings range. Importantly, the non-linear drop (fourfold the pixel count but only ~56% frame loss) means the GPU’s fixed-function units are not saturated at 1080p, allowing the game to reach high rates that the pixel output cannot sustain as the resolution climbs. This is typical of a mid-range GPU combined with a high-end CPU, and it is the first clear signal that ‘the’ GPU, not the i5-14600K, is the limiting factor in this pairing. The only resolution with any recorded variance is Medium, which shows minimum/ maximum values: 94–127 at 1080p, 67–91 at 1440p, and 42–56 at 4K, indicating consistent frame presentation under that preset.

GPU Role

The RTX 3050 4 GB carries a modest specification sheet. Its base clock sits at 1545 MHz with a boost clock of 1740 MHz. The chip uses 2048 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, with 16 RT cores and 64 tensor cores. Its backing memory is 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, yielding a peak bandwidth of 192.0 GB/s. These numbers define the GPU’s ceiling in this 2016 title.

The 4 GB capacity appears to matter most at 4K Ultra. Compare the transition from High to Ultra and then analyze the absolute numbers: at 4K, High outputs 40 FPS while Ultra drops to 25 FPS — a further 37.5% reduction from an already low figure. At 1440p, the same preset jump costs 25 FPS (65→40), and at 1080p it costs 34 FPS (91→57). The largest relative loss occurs precisely when the VRAM pressure would also be highest: at 4K Ultra, where the frame buffer must hold the bulk of the scene. An 4GB allocation that fails to hold the complete frame set on ‘Ultra’ will push data to system memory, which is a transparent penalty reflected in the 25 FPS average. The fact that Medium, which is less demanding on graphics memory, retains a playable 49 FPS at 4K while Ultra falls to unplayable levels further points to the memory capacity as the true constraint beyond one preset level.

The texture unit throughput is high — 111.4 GTexel/s, with AA pixel rate at 55.7 GPixel/s — and the shader count is not particularly low for a 2022 GPU, but Downfall’s 4K Ultra settings like more VRAM than this 4 % GB can deliver. The measured results show that the GPU’s boost clock of 1740 MHz is constantly maintained; otherwise the relative differences between 1080p and 4K would not stay as consistent as they do. The bandwidth of 192.0 GB/s is what keeps the 4K Medium preset at 44 FPS, because that preset’s textures can fit inside the GPU’s 4 GB limit.

Settings Recommendations

Depending on the monitor, the best measured experience is clear-cut. At 1080p, all three of the least demanding presets exceed 90 FPS: Medium at 110, High at 91, and Low at 135. Ultra falls to 57, which, while above the refresh rate typical of a entry-level 60-Hz monitor, gives up over 100 FPS in exchange for visual extra that may not be noticed in a frantic survival horror sequence. Since the Medium preset already delivers 90 FPS at 1440p (79 avg), the recommended path to high refresh is Machine, and if you can accept a small dip into the 60s (High preset, 65 FPS) you can preserve a margin.

For 1440p, Medium produces 79 FPS average and that is the smoothest point on the quality/capability curve. The jump to High only gives 65, off 1 FPS of the smoother and substantially better output. Ultra at 1440p resigns to the 40s, which is below the smoothness of modern display. So Medium is the best-balanced preset for QHD.

At 4K only the Low preset reaches 60 FPS, and it does so almost exactly (60 average). Medium stays at 49, High at 40, and Ultra at 25. For the pure performance, match is 4K Low. A user who wants a visual start-up can try Medium, but it requires a 49 FPS average to be playable; anything above that, High, exceeds the average, putting the 4K experience). The data came under the 60-FPS threshold; the game remains playable but not fluid. Operationally, the testing suite shows that the Medium preset is the only settings that record min and max numbers (Obtained) across resolutions, suggesting it is also the most stable profile for this combo.

How This Combo Ranks

In the global ranking of all tested combinations, this pairing of i5-14600K and RTX 3050 4 GB stands at position 3263 out of 3716. This means only 12% of the tested combos rank lower (since 3263/3716 = 0.878, so 12.2% are less capable). It places in the bottom ~12 percent of all rigs, which may appear unexpectedly low given the CPU’s positive standing, but it aligns perfectly with the graphics card’s modest overall ranking.

Consider the CPU’s own percentile: 90th out of 100 (which top percentile of all CPUs). The RTX 3050 4GB carries a 50th percentile among GPUs. The synergy of a top-tier CPU and a mid-range GPU yields results consistent with the GPU’s standing — the GPU is the weak link. The combo’s overall game rank is the product of that imbalance.

In a game that was released in 2016 with frame rates that depend primarily on texture upload and fill rate, the gap to the highest-ranking combos is placed almost entirely in the GPU side of the table. The nearest CPU benchmarks are synthetic (Cinebench R23, GeekBench); those numbers show the CPU’s power is not a constraining factor inside this game .

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-14600K is a 14-core/20-thread processor on the Raptor Lake architecture, with base clock 3.5 GHz and a boost clock of 5.3 GHz. In terms of synthetic benchmarks it is impressive: it scores 24,491 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 2449 in Geekbench 5 multicore. Compared with its nearest CPU rivals in the same benchmark pool, the delta is small: it sits 0.4% behind the Intel Xeon Gold 5318, and 0.3% ahead of the AMD EPYC 4345P, 0.7% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX, and 0.8% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245. Within a 1% band, the CPU appears that it is not a performance gate.

The measured FPS in Downfall, however, show that the CPU is far from being saturated. At 1080p, the FPS spread is from Low 135 to Ultra 57 — a difference of 78 FPS — yet in none of the 12 measurement points the CPU could have been exceeded via any workload in the frame. Look at the resolution scaling facts: the 55% decrease from 1080p to 4K in all saves is purely a fill-rate response, not a core-count response. If the CPU were driving the frame cap, the 1080p High and the 4K High would be identical (91 FPS), but the actual spread is 91 vs 40.

Additionally, the CPU has a 24 MB shared L3 cache and supports dual-channel both DDR4 and DDR5, but these properties have no observable effect because the game is not demanding on CPU threads. A game that makes use of many cores, such as a Grand Strategy or simulation title, would be a completely different story; here, the medium compute load is handled easily by a 3.5 GHz base-clock processor, leaving the entire weight of the image on the RTX 3050’s bus. In short: for this game, the CPU is a dwarf, and the GPU is the main engine.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete set of measured averages, with the min–max range where available, as follows:

1920×1080 (1080p)

• Low: 135 (avg) – no min/max recorded
• Medium: 110 (avg) – min 94, max 127
• High: 91 (avg) – no min/max recorded
• Ultra: 57 (avg) – no min/max recorded

2560×1440 (1440p)

• Low: 96
• Medium: 79 (min 67, max 91)
• High: 65
• Ultra: 40

3840×2160 (4K)

• Low: 60
• Medium: 49 (min 42, max 56)
• High: 40
• Ultra: 25

There is no data for Ultra’s min/max, and the series omits the frames around the lows for all but the Medium preset. These numbers emphasize a uniform scaling slope: from 1080p Medium to 4K Medium emphasizes the performance pitfall of the 3050 under the resolution, while the Low preset maintains 60 (minimum) at the highest resolution. In total, the dataset indicates that the scheduler should prefer the Medium preset at 1080p and the Low preset for 4K smoothing.

FAQ

Q: Which resolution and preset delivers 60 FPS on this setup at 4K?

A: Only the Low preset reaches exactly 60 FPS average at 3840×2160. Every other preset — Medium 49, High 40, Ultra 25 — falls below.

Q: What is the difference between High and Ultra at 1080p?

A: The 1080p High preset averages 91 FPS, while Ultra delivers 57 FPS. That is a drop of 34 FPS, or 37% relative to High.

Q: Does the CPU have effect on the performance?

A: The data shows a constant frame drop ratio from 1080p to 4K across all presets. That indicates that the GPU is the limiting part; the i5-14600K’s own strong synthetic numbers (Cinebench R23 multi 24491, Geekbench 16673) do not translate to changes here, because it is a 2016 game that does not stress the 14-core processor.

Q: Is 4K Ultra playable in Downfall?

A: With this combo, 4K Ultra averages only 25 FPS, so it lacks smoothness, more in stagnancy than game. The measured frame-time (min/max) is unavailable, so we cannot assess frame pacing, but the average strongly indicates it is not recommended.

Q: Why is there no frame time for High settings?

A: The measurement dataset only recorded minimum and maximum for the Medium preset; High and Low only recorded the average. Therefore we can only discuss the min–max for Medium (e.g., 94–127 at 1080p).

Q: How does this CPU compare in benchmarks to nearby CPUs?

A: The i5-14600K’s average benchmark score is 48,618. It sits 0.2% below the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H, 0.3% above AMD EPYC 4345P, 0.7% above Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX, and 0.8% above Intel Core Ultra 5 245. This CPU’s synthetic performance does not matter in this game, because the GPU is fully the bottleneck.