Downfall

The Intel Core i5-14600KF and AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT combination delivers a highly playable experience in Downfall, but the balance of responsibility shifts dramatically depending on the resolution and preset. At 1080p, the system is clearly CPU-bound at lower settings, while at 4K Ultra, the GPU becomes the definitive bottleneck. The data shows a configurable system that can target 60 FPS at 1440p High or 4K Medium, but chasing 4K Ultra will result in a sub-60 FPS experience.

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

The Intel Core i5-14600KF is a 14-core, 20-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, running on a 10 nm process node. It features a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, which are the primary drivers of its strong single-thread performance. The processor’s benchmark scores reflect this capability: it achieves 4594 points in Cinebench R23 single-core and 2445 points in Geekbench single-core. This raw single-thread strength is crucial for Downfall, a horror title where frame pacing and responsiveness are often dictated by the primary game thread.

In the context of this game, the CPU’s role is most apparent at lower resolutions and settings where the GPU is not saturated. At 1080p Low, the system produces an average of 191 FPS. This figure is substantially higher than the 1080p High result of 128 FPS, indicating that the CPU has ample headroom to feed the GPU at lower graphical loads. The processor’s multi-threaded performance, evidenced by a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32544 and a Passmark multithread score of 38697, ensures that background tasks and the game’s engine overhead do not introduce stutter, even when the frame rate is high.

The CPU’s overall standing is strong. It holds a 90th percentile ranking against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 49394. Compared to its nearest rivals, it is virtually tied with the AMD Ryzen 9 7900, which scores 0.3% lower, and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G, which scores 0.4% lower. It is also 0.8% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245. The only competitor in its immediate tier that outperforms it is the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388, which is 0.8% faster. This suggests that for Downfall, the i5-14600KF is not a limiting factor in most scenarios; the data indicates that the bottleneck will shift to the GPU well before the CPU runs out of computational headroom.

The CPU’s cache hierarchy, with 24 MB of shared L3 cache and 2 MB per-core L2 cache, helps maintain high instruction throughput. The processor supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, though the specific memory configuration used in the measured results is not detailed in the data. The processor’s 125 W TDP and unlocked multiplier indicate it is a high-performance desktop part designed for sustained loads, which aligns with the sustained frame rates observed in the benchmark data. In essence, the CPU provides a robust foundation, but its influence on the final FPS numbers diminishes as resolution increases and the GPU takes over the rendering load.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT is the clear performance driver in this pairing, particularly at higher resolutions. This GPU is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture using a 7 nm process, with a die size of 237 mm² and 11,060 million transistors. It operates with a base clock of 1968 MHz and a boost clock of 2589 MHz, with a game clock rated at 2359 MHz. The GPU features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering a bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. This memory configuration is sufficient for Downfall at most settings, but the data suggests it becomes a constraint at the highest preset.

The GPU’s benchmark profile places it at the 70th percentile of all GPUs, with an average score of 24442. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630, which it beats by 0.7%, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER, which it trails by 1.1%. The performance deltas are tight, indicating that the RX 6600 XT sits in a competitive mid-range tier. In Downfall, the GPU’s role is most evident when comparing FPS across settings at the same resolution. At 1440p, the average FPS drops from 136 at Low to 57 at Ultra, a clear sign that the GPU is being tasked with progressively heavier shading and texture work.

The most telling data point for the GPU’s limitations is the 4K Ultra result, which yields an average of only 36 FPS. This is a significant drop from the 4K Medium average of 69 FPS. The jump from Medium to Ultra at 4K incurs a 33 FPS penalty, while the jump from Low to Medium only costs 16 FPS. This suggests that the Ultra preset introduces rendering features that strain the 8 GB VRAM capacity and the GPU’s 10.60 TFLOPS of FP32 compute power. The GPU’s texture rate of 331.4 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 165.7 GPixel/s are adequate for 1080p and 1440p, but they are stretched at 4K Ultra. The data indicates that the RX 6600 XT is a capable 1080p and 1440p card, but for 4K, users must moderate settings to achieve acceptable frame rates.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: What is the best resolution and preset combination for a consistent 60+ FPS experience?

A: The data shows that 1440p High delivers an average of 91 FPS, while 4K Medium delivers 69 FPS. For a solid 60 FPS target, 4K Medium is the highest resolution preset that maintains an average above 60 FPS. At 1440p, users have more headroom, with Medium hitting 111 FPS and High hitting 91 FPS.

Q: How much of a performance drop occurs when moving from 1080p to 4K at the High preset?

A: At High settings, the average FPS drops from 128 at 1080p to 91 at 1440p, and further to 57 at 4K. This represents a 55.4% reduction in average FPS from 1080p to 4K, indicating that the GPU is the primary limiting factor as resolution scales.

Q: Is the RX 6600 XT capable of running Downfall at 4K Ultra?

A: The measured data indicates it is not a smooth experience. The average FPS at 4K Ultra is 36, which is below the standard 60 FPS threshold. This is the lowest average across all tested configurations, suggesting the Ultra preset is too demanding for this GPU at 4K.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its closest rivals in raw processing power?

A: The i5-14600KF has an average benchmark score of 49394, which is 0.3% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 and 0.8% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 5 245. It is only beaten by the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388, which is 0.8% faster.

Q: What is the frame rate variance at 1440p Medium?

A: The 1440p Medium preset shows an average of 111 FPS, with a minimum of 95 FPS and a maximum of 128 FPS. This tight range between the minimum and average suggests consistent frame pacing, which is desirable for a horror game.

Q: Which component is more likely to bottleneck the system at 1080p Low?

A: The data indicates the CPU is the limiting factor at 1080p Low, as the average FPS of 191 is significantly higher than at other settings. This high frame rate suggests the GPU is being underutilized, and the CPU’s single-thread performance is determining the maximum achievable frame rate.

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

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of the system’s performance across three resolutions and four presets. At 1920x1080, the system is highly capable, with the Low preset achieving an average of 191 FPS. The Medium preset yields 156 FPS, with a minimum of 133 FPS and a maximum of 180 FPS. High settings produce 128 FPS, and Ultra drops to 80 FPS. The 1080p results show a clear scaling pattern, with the gap between Low and Ultra being 111 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the performance remains strong but the drop is evident. Low settings average 136 FPS, Medium averages 111 FPS (min 95, max 128), High averages 91 FPS, and Ultra falls to 57 FPS. The transition from 1080p to 1440p at High settings costs 37 FPS, while the transition at Ultra costs 23 FPS. This indicates that the GPU is handling the increased pixel count, but the relative impact of the Ultra preset becomes more pronounced.

At 3840x2160, the system is pushed to its limits. Low settings average 85 FPS, Medium averages 69 FPS (min 59, max 80), High averages 57 FPS, and Ultra averages 36 FPS. The 4K Low result is still above 60 FPS, but every other preset falls below that threshold. The data shows that at 4K, the GPU is the dominant bottleneck, with the Ultra preset incurring a massive 49 FPS penalty compared to Low. The Medium preset at 4K is the only option that provides a playable average above 60 FPS, though the minimum of 59 FPS suggests occasional dips below the target.

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

The resolution scaling behavior reveals a classic shift in system bottleneck. From 1080p to 1440p at High settings, the average FPS drops from 128 to 91, a reduction of 28.9%. From 1440p to 4K at High settings, the average drops from 91 to 57, a reduction of 37.4%. This increasing rate of decline as resolution rises indicates that the GPU is becoming the limiting component.

At the Low preset, the scaling is even more dramatic. The average FPS drops from 191 at 1080p to 136 at 1440p (a 28.8% reduction), and then to 85 at 4K (a 37.5% reduction from 1440p). The fact that the system can achieve 191 FPS at 1080p Low suggests the CPU is capable of much higher frame rates, but the GPU’s pixel throughput limits the final output. The 4K Low result of 85 FPS is telling: it is lower than the 1080p High result of 128 FPS, demonstrating that resolution has a greater impact on performance than the preset level alone.

The data strongly suggests that the RX 6600 XT is the primary bottleneck at 4K. The GPU’s memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s and 8 GB VRAM are likely saturated at this resolution, particularly at higher presets. The scaling from Medium to Ultra at 4K shows a 47.8% drop in average FPS (from 69 to 36), which is the steepest penalty across any resolution. This indicates that the Ultra preset at 4K is not just a matter of pixel count but also of increased memory pressure and compute load that the GPU cannot sustain. Conversely, the CPU’s performance remains relatively stable, as evidenced by the high frame rates at 1080p Low, which are likely near the CPU’s maximum output capability for this title.

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

Based on the measured data, the optimal settings depend on the user’s resolution and performance targets. For users with a 1080p display, the High preset is the best balance of visual fidelity and performance, delivering an average of 128 FPS. This is well above the 60 FPS threshold and leaves headroom for demanding scenes. The Ultra preset at 1080p drops to 80 FPS, which is still playable, but the 48 FPS difference between High and Ultra suggests diminishing returns for the extra visual detail.

For 1440p users, the High preset is again the recommended choice, with an average of 91 FPS. This provides a smooth experience with high detail. The Medium preset offers 111 FPS, which is faster but at a lower visual quality. The Ultra preset at 1440p yields 57 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target and should be avoided for a consistent experience. The data indicates that 1440p High is the sweet spot for this GPU, offering a 34 FPS advantage over Ultra while maintaining a high level of graphical fidelity.

For 4K users, the options are more constrained. The Medium preset is the only configuration that achieves an average above 60 FPS, with a result of 69 FPS. However, the minimum FPS of 59 indicates that there will be occasional dips below 60. The High preset averages 57 FPS, which is close to the target but not consistently above it. The Low preset averages 85 FPS, but the visual quality is significantly reduced. Given the data, 4K Medium is the recommended preset for a playable experience, as it provides the best balance between visual quality and performance. Users seeking higher fidelity should consider dropping to 1440p High, which offers a better overall experience than 4K High. The Ultra preset at 4K is not recommended, as the 36 FPS average is below the playable threshold for a horror game where smooth motion is critical.