Downfall

# Downfall with Intel Core i7-14700F + AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB

Downfall is a 2016 horror title that remains demanding at higher presets, and this pairing of an Intel Core i7-14700F with an AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB shows clear scaling behavior across resolutions. The measured results indicate that the GPU becomes the primary constraint as resolution increases, while the CPU's substantial thread count keeps frame rates high at 1080p. This combination ranks 912th out of 1741 tested combos in Downfall, placing it slightly above the midpoint of the database. The data shows a system that delivers playable performance at 1440p with High settings, but requires careful preset selection at 4K to maintain smooth gameplay.

Resolution Scaling

The transition from 1080p to 4K reveals a steep performance curve that points directly at the GPU as the limiting factor. At High settings, the average frame rate drops from 159.1 FPS at 1920x1080 to 109.5 FPS at 2560x1440, then falls further to 68 FPS at 3840x2160. That represents a 57% reduction in frame rate from 1080p to 4K, which is a substantial hit that mirrors the pixel count increase. The RX 9060 XT's 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 322.3 GB/s bandwidth are being pushed hard at the higher resolutions, and the data reflects this strain.

At Low settings, the scaling pattern changes character. The 1080p result of 235.1 FPS drops to 166.2 FPS at 1440p, and then to 106.1 FPS at 4K. The percentage drop from 1440p to 4K is about 36%, which is less severe than the High preset's 38% drop over the same range, but still substantial. This suggests that even at Low settings, the GPU is the bottleneck at 4K, though the reduced shading load allows the card to maintain a playable 106 FPS.

Medium settings show a similar trend: 188.6 FPS at 1080p, 139.6 FPS at 1440p, and 85.3 FPS at 4K. The 4K Medium result is 45% lower than the 1440p Medium result, indicating that the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth are increasingly taxed as resolution climbs. The 128-bit memory bus and 8 GB capacity start to show their limits here, though the card still delivers acceptable frame rates.

Ultra settings tell a different story. The 4K Ultra result of 42.1 FPS is barely playable, and the 1440p Ultra result of 69.5 FPS is marginal for smooth gameplay. The 1080p Ultra result of 98.7 FPS is the only Ultra preset that clears the 60 FPS threshold comfortably. This pattern indicates that Ultra settings impose a rendering load that the RX 9060 XT cannot sustain at higher resolutions, and the 64 ROPs and 25.64 TFLOPS of FP32 compute are insufficient for 4K Ultra in this horror title.

The scaling from 1080p to 1440p at High settings shows a 31% drop, while the drop from 1440p to 4K is 38%. This non-linear relationship suggests that the GPU's memory bandwidth and pixel throughput are being saturated progressively. The 20.1 Gbps effective memory speed on the 128-bit bus yields 322.3 GB/s, which is modest for 4K gaming, and the data confirms this limitation.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Downfall at 60 FPS in 4K?

A: Yes, but only at Low or Medium settings. The 4K Low result is 106.1 FPS and 4K Medium is 85.3 FPS. At High settings, the 4K average drops to 68 FPS, which is still above 60, but Ultra settings produce only 42.1 FPS, which falls below the threshold.

Q: What is the best resolution for this GPU and CPU combo?

A: The data shows 1440p as the sweet spot. At High settings, the system delivers 109.5 FPS, which is smooth and leaves headroom. At 1080p, the High preset reaches 159.1 FPS, which is excellent but may be unnecessary if you have a 1440p monitor.

Q: How does the RX 9060 XT handle Ultra settings?

A: Ultra settings are only viable at 1080p, where the average is 98.7 FPS. At 1440p, Ultra drops to 69.5 FPS, and at 4K it falls to 42.1 FPS. The GPU's 8 GB VRAM and 64 ROPs are insufficient for Ultra at higher resolutions.

Q: Is the CPU holding back performance in this game?

A: No. The Core i7-14700F has 20 cores and 28 threads with a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The measured frame rates scale consistently with resolution, which indicates the GPU is the limiting component. At 1080p Low, the 235.1 FPS result shows the CPU can feed the GPU well beyond typical display refresh rates.

Q: What settings should I use for a 1440p monitor?

A: High settings at 1440p deliver 109.5 FPS, which is the best balance of visual quality and performance. Ultra at 1440p produces 69.5 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for a horror game where smooth motion matters. Medium at 1440p gives 139.6 FPS if you prefer higher frame rates.

Q: How does the 8 GB VRAM affect 4K performance?

A: The 8 GB frame buffer is a limiting factor at 4K. The results show a steep drop from Medium (85.3 FPS) to High (68 FPS) to Ultra (42.1 FPS). The 322.3 GB/s bandwidth and 128-bit bus struggle with the higher texture and geometry loads at 4K, causing the performance cliff at Ultra settings.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data points to High settings as the optimal choice for most users, provided you are targeting 1080p or 1440p. At 1920x1080, High yields 159.1 FPS, which is well beyond the refresh rate of most monitors and leaves room for background tasks or recording software. At 2560x1440, High produces 109.5 FPS, which is smooth and visually detailed. The jump from Medium to High at 1440p costs about 30 FPS (139.6 down to 109.5), but the visual improvement in a horror game is worth the trade-off for most players.

For 4K users, Medium settings are the best compromise. The 85.3 FPS average at 3840x2160 is above the 60 FPS threshold and maintains decent visual fidelity. High at 4K drops to 68 FPS, which is still playable but closer to the edge. Ultra at 4K is not recommended, as the 42.1 FPS average will feel sluggish in a genre that relies on atmosphere and sudden movements.

If you prioritize frame rate over visuals, Low settings at 1440p deliver 166.2 FPS, and at 1080p they reach 235.1 FPS. This preset is useful for competitive play or for capturing high-refresh-rate footage, but it sacrifices the lighting and shadow effects that make Downfall atmospheric. The Medium preset at 1080p (188.6 FPS) is a strong middle ground for high-refresh monitors.

The data suggests avoiding Ultra settings entirely unless you are on a 1080p display and can tolerate the 98.7 FPS average. The performance cost from High to Ultra at 1080p is a 38% reduction (159.1 down to 98.7), which is a steep price for the incremental visual gains. At 1440p, the Ultra preset's 69.5 FPS is borderline, and at 4K it is unplayable.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full range of presets is playable. Low settings produce 235.1 FPS average, Medium delivers 188.6 FPS, High reaches 159.1 FPS, and Ultra drops to 98.7 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 136.4 FPS, showing that the GPU's compute resources are heavily taxed by the higher presets even at the lowest resolution.

At 2560x1440, the averages are 166.2 FPS on Low, 139.6 FPS on Medium, 109.5 FPS on High, and 69.5 FPS on Ultra. The drop from High to Ultra at 1440p is 40 FPS, which is the largest single-preset jump in this resolution. This indicates that Ultra settings introduce rendering features that disproportionately impact the RX 9060 XT's 2048 shading units.

At 3840x2160, the results are 106.1 FPS on Low, 85.3 FPS on Medium, 68 FPS on High, and 42.1 FPS on Ultra. The 4K Ultra result is the lowest in the entire dataset, and the gap between Medium and High (17.3 FPS) is smaller than the gap between High and Ultra (25.9 FPS). This suggests that the GPU's memory subsystem is the bottleneck at 4K, as the 128-bit bus cannot feed data fast enough for the higher preset's texture loads.

Across all resolutions, the Low preset shows the smallest absolute frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K (129 FPS difference), while Ultra shows the largest (56.6 FPS difference in percentage terms). This pattern reinforces that the GPU is the limiting factor, as the CPU's 28 threads are more than capable of handling the game's logical workload at any resolution.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB is built on the Navi 44 chip with RDNA 4.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 4 nm process. The die contains 29,700 million transistors across a 199 mm² area, giving it a transistor density of 149.2M per mm². The card has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, which are modest numbers for a modern GPU but sufficient for 1080p and 1440p gaming.

The clock behavior is interesting: the base clock is 1700 MHz, but the game clock is rated at 2530 MHz, and the boost clock reaches 3130 MHz. The measured performance suggests the card is running near its game clock during Downfall, as the frame rates scale predictably with resolution and preset. The 32 RT cores are present, but Downfall's 2016 release date means ray tracing is not a significant factor in these results.

The memory configuration is the most limiting aspect. The 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus provides 322.3 GB/s of bandwidth. At 4K High settings, this bandwidth is insufficient, as evidenced by the 68 FPS average. The memory clock is listed at 2518 MHz with 20.1 Gbps effective speed, which is fast for the bus width but still constrained by the narrow interface. The pixel rate of 200.3 GPixel/s and texture rate of 400.6 GTexel/s are adequate for 1440p but fall short at 4K Ultra.

The card's 150 W TDP and dual-slot design suggest it runs relatively cool and quiet, but the performance data shows that the GPU's compute and memory resources are the ceiling for this combo. The 25.64 TFLOPS of FP32 compute is respectable, but Downfall's Ultra preset appears to demand more than this card can deliver at higher resolutions.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i7-14700F is a 20-core, 28-thread processor based on Raptor Lake architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process. It has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 33 MB of shared L3 cache. This configuration is far more than Downfall needs, as the game's 2016 release predates the multi-threaded scaling seen in modern titles.

In the measured results, the CPU never appears to be the bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the 235.1 FPS average indicates the processor can feed the GPU with frames faster than the graphics card can render them. The Passmark multithread score of 41765 and Cinebench R23 multicore score of 35443 show strong multi-threaded performance, but Downfall likely uses only a handful of cores. The single-core performance, reflected in the Cinebench R23 single-core score of 5003 and Passmark single-thread score of 4261, is more relevant for this game.

The CPU's 94th percentile ranking among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 54097, places it in the top tier of desktop processors. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X, which scores 54450 (0.6% higher), and the Ryzen 9 9900X3D at 54681 (1.1% higher). The i7-14700F is 1.2% ahead of the Intel Xeon Phi 7290 and 1.7% ahead of the AMD EPYC 7313P. These margins are negligible for gaming, where the GPU dominates the performance equation.

The combination of 20 cores and 28 threads with a 5.40 GHz boost clock ensures that the CPU will not limit frame rates in Downfall at any resolution or preset. The measured FPS drops from 1080p to 4K are consistent with GPU-bound behavior, and the CPU's headroom is evident in the 235.1 FPS result at 1080p Low. The i7-14700F's launch MSRP of $359 positions it as a high-end desktop processor, and its performance in this pairing is more than sufficient for the horror title's demands.