Downfall

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

The Intel Core i7-14700K brings substantial processing headroom to Downfall, a horror title that does not appear to be exceptionally thread-hungry based on the measured frame rates. This CPU pairs 20 cores with 28 threads, running at a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. The architecture is Raptor Lake-R, built on Intel’s 10 nm process, with a 33 MB shared L3 cache and 2 MB L2 per core. These specifications position the chip in the 96th percentile against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 70074.

The benchmark data for this combo shows that at 1080p, the system delivers 193.5 FPS on Low settings, which is remarkably high and suggests the CPU is not a bottleneck at lower graphical loads. The processor’s single-thread performance is strong, as evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 6287 and a Geekbench single-core score of 2932. In a game like Downfall, which is a linear horror experience rather than a massive open-world simulation, per-core performance often matters more than raw thread counts. The 14700K’s boost clock of 5.60 GHz provides the kind of high-frequency responsiveness that keeps frame pacing consistent even when the GPU is fully engaged.

Compared to its nearest rivals, the 14700K sits within a tight band. The Intel Core i7-14700KF scores 70104 on average, a 0% delta, making it effectively identical in performance. The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X scores 70420, which is 0.5% higher, while the AMD EPYC 9115 trails at 69887, a 0.3% difference. These margins are negligible in real-world gaming scenarios, meaning the 14700K’s role in Downfall is primarily to ensure that the Radeon RX 6600 XT can operate without being starved of draw calls or physics updates. The CPU’s 125 W TDP is modest for a 20-core part, and its support for both DDR4 and DDR5 memory gives platform flexibility, though the benchmark data does not specify which memory type was used in testing.

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

Examining the measured frame rates across all resolutions and presets, the Medium settings tier consistently delivers the most balanced experience. At 1080p, Medium produces 157.3 FPS, which is 35.7% lower than Low’s 193.5 FPS but still far above what most displays can show. More importantly, the jump from Medium to High at 1080p costs 30.3 FPS (127 FPS versus 157.3 FPS), a 19.3% drop, while the visual fidelity gains in a horror game are typically marginal for that cost. The Ultra preset at 1080p falls to 78 FPS, which is a 50.4% reduction from Medium — too severe a penalty for the incremental quality bump.

At 1440p, the pattern repeats. Medium hits 110.5 FPS, which is a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold, while High drops to 90.8 FPS and Ultra plummets to 59.6 FPS. The Ultra preset at 1440p is just under the 60 FPS line, which could cause noticeable stutter in a game that relies on tension and atmosphere. At 4K, Medium still holds at 68.3 FPS, which is playable, but High falls to 54.4 FPS and Ultra dips to 39.2 FPS. Low at 4K yields 82.5 FPS, but that setting likely strips away too much of the game’s visual dread.

The data strongly suggests that Medium is the optimal preset for this combo. It provides the best compromise between frame rate headroom and graphical fidelity across all three resolutions. For users with high-refresh-rate 1080p displays, even High is viable at 127 FPS, but the consistency of Medium — remaining above 68 FPS even at 4K — makes it the safest recommendation for a horror game where frame time spikes can ruin immersion.

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

The scaling behavior across resolutions reveals a system that transitions from CPU-bound to GPU-bound as pixel count increases. At 1080p Low, the combo hits 193.5 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops this to 135.7 FPS, a 29.9% reduction, and then to 4K Low at 82.5 FPS, another 39.2% drop from 1440p. This steep decline indicates that the GPU is the primary constraint at higher resolutions, especially given that the Radeon RX 6600 XT has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth.

On Medium settings, the progression is 157.3 FPS at 1080p, 110.5 FPS at 1440p, and 68.3 FPS at 4K. The percentage drops are 29.7% and 38.2%, respectively, which is remarkably consistent with the Low scaling. This consistency suggests that the game’s rendering workload scales linearly with resolution and that the GPU’s compute resources — 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs — are the limiting factor. The GPU’s boost clock of 2589 MHz and game clock of 2359 MHz are high for the architecture, but the 10.60 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is modest by modern standards.

On High settings, the drop from 1080p (127 FPS) to 1440p (90.8 FPS) is 28.5%, and then to 4K (54.4 FPS) is 40.1%. The Ultra preset shows the largest absolute impact: 78 FPS at 1080p, 59.6 FPS at 1440p, and 39.2 FPS at 4K. The 1080p-to-1440p drop on Ultra is only 23.6%, which indicates that at higher settings, the CPU is starting to flex its muscles more, keeping the frame rate from collapsing as quickly. However, the 4K Ultra result of 39.2 FPS confirms that the GPU is overwhelmed by the combination of high resolution and heavy shading.

The fact that 1080p Low yields 193.5 FPS while 4K Low yields 82.5 FPS — a 57.4% reduction — strongly indicates that the RX 6600 XT is the bottleneck. A more powerful GPU would show a smaller relative drop, as the CPU would be able to feed more frames at higher resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific combination of the Intel Core i7-14700K and AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT ranks 1278 out of 1741 tested combos in Downfall. That places it in the 73.4th percentile of all combos tested, meaning roughly a quarter of configurations perform better. Given the CPU’s 96th percentile ranking and the GPU’s 71st percentile ranking, the combo’s overall position is dragged down by the graphics card, which is expected in a GPU-bound title at higher resolutions.

The rank of 1278 suggests that while this system is far from the bottom of the pack, it is not a high-end configuration for this game. The GPU’s average benchmark score of 27985 places it just above the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti (27956, a 0.1% delta) and the AMD Radeon R9 M395X (27883, 0.4% delta). It trails the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 (28238, -0.9% delta) and the AMD FirePro S7150 (28409, -1.5% delta). These rival comparisons show that the RX 6600 XT is a mid-range part, and the combo rank reflects that reality.

In the context of Downfall specifically, the 1278th rank out of 1741 means that many users with more powerful GPUs will achieve higher frame rates, particularly at 4K where the RX 6600 XT struggles to maintain 60 FPS on Medium. However, the high CPU rank ensures that the system is never held back by processor limitations, which is why the 1080p and 1440p results remain competitive. The data shows that this combo is best suited for 1080p high-refresh-rate gaming or 1440p at Medium settings, where it can outperform its overall rank suggests.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT is the defining component in this combo’s performance profile. Built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with the Navi 23 chip, it features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU’s base clock is 1968 MHz, with a boost clock of 2589 MHz and a game clock of 2359 MHz. It has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, along with 32 ray accelerators.

The 8 GB VRAM capacity is sufficient for Downfall, which is a 2016 horror title with relatively modest texture requirements. However, the 128-bit memory bus is a bottleneck at higher resolutions, as evidenced by the 4K results. At 4K Medium, the combo achieves 68.3 FPS, but this drops to 39.2 FPS on Ultra. The game clock of 2359 MHz and boost clock of 2589 MHz keep the GPU operating at high frequencies, but the 10.60 TFLOPS FP32 throughput limits the pixel fill rate to 165.7 GPixel/s and the texture rate to 331.4 GTexel/s.

The GPU’s 160 W TDP and dual-slot design are modest, and the suggested 450 W PSU is appropriate for this build. In terms of benchmark scores, the RX 6600 XT achieves a PassMark G3D score of 16461 and a Geekbench OpenCL score of 82736, with a Vulkan score of 89263. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1804 is low, reflecting the GPU’s mid-range positioning.

The measured frame rates show that the RX 6600 XT is the primary limiter in this system. At 1080p Low, the GPU can push 193.5 FPS, which is excellent, but the Ultra preset at 4K drops to 39.2 FPS, a 79.7% reduction. The GPU’s 71st percentile ranking against all GPUs is consistent with its performance in Downfall, where it delivers playable frame rates up to 1440p Medium but struggles at 4K with higher presets. The 8 GB VRAM never appears to be a hard constraint at these settings, but the raw compute throughput is insufficient for 4K Ultra. For users targeting 4K, the data suggests that Medium is the ceiling, while 1080p and 1440p users can enjoy high-refresh-rate experiences on Medium or High presets.