Downfall

# Downfall with Intel Core i7-14700K + AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT

The Intel Core i7-14700K paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT delivers a broadly capable experience in Downfall, a 2016 horror title whose demands scale predictably across resolutions and presets. Measured frame rates show this combo averaging 162.9 FPS at 1080p High, 113.4 FPS at 1440p High, and 75.1 FPS at 4K High, placing it in the 843rd position out of 1,741 tested combinations. The data indicates a system that remains fluid at mainstream resolutions but requires preset discipline at 4K to maintain high refresh rates.

Settings Recommendations

The measured rows reveal a clear hierarchy of performance across the four presets. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset delivers 98.7 FPS average, which is playable but noticeably lower than the 162.9 FPS achieved at High. The Medium preset yields 196.2 FPS, while Low reaches 242.7 FPS. For most users targeting 1080p, High represents the optimal balance: it maintains a frame rate comfortably above 144 Hz while avoiding the steep cost of Ultra, which drops performance by approximately 39% relative to High.

At 2560x1440, the pattern shifts. High produces 113.4 FPS, Medium 138.7 FPS, and Low 171.1 FPS. Ultra falls to 73.9 FPS, which is below the 75 FPS threshold that many consider the floor for smooth gameplay. The data suggests that at 1440p, High is the recommended preset for those with 100 Hz or 120 Hz displays, while Medium offers headroom for 144 Hz panels. Ultra at this resolution demands a frame rate sacrifice that few would find acceptable given the visual gains typical of horror titles.

At 3840x2160, the situation becomes more constrained. High yields 75.1 FPS, Medium 86.6 FPS, and Low 104.3 FPS. Ultra drops to 44.1 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target for most users. The recommended preset at 4K is Medium, which provides the highest average frame rate that remains above 60 FPS while still offering better visual fidelity than Low. High is viable for those with 60 Hz displays, but Medium offers a more comfortable margin. Low remains an option for users prioritizing maximum frame rates at 4K, but the visual degradation in a horror game—where atmosphere depends on lighting and shadow quality—makes it a less attractive choice.

FAQ

Q: How does the combo perform at 1080p Ultra compared to 4K Ultra?

A: At 1920x1080 Ultra, the system averages 98.7 FPS, while at 3840x2160 Ultra it drops to 44.1 FPS. This represents a 55% reduction in frame rate when moving from 1080p to 4K at the same preset, indicating that the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions.

Q: Is the Radeon RX 6750 XT sufficient for 4K gaming in Downfall?

A: The data shows 75.1 FPS at 4K High and 86.6 FPS at 4K Medium, both above the 60 FPS threshold. However, Ultra at 4K falls to 44.1 FPS, which is below 60 FPS. The card can handle 4K in this title, but only if the user avoids the Ultra preset.

Q: What is the performance difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Low averages 171.1 FPS while Ultra averages 73.9 FPS. The gap is 97.2 FPS, meaning Ultra delivers roughly 43% of the Low preset's frame rate. This large spread suggests the GPU is heavily taxed by the higher preset's visual effects.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core i7-14700K has an average benchmark score of 70,074. Its closest rival, the Intel Core i7-14700KF, scores 70,104 with a deltaPct of 0. The AMD EPYC 9115 scores 69,887 and is 0.3% behind, while the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X scores 70,420 and is 0.5% ahead. The Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 scores 71,056, which is 1.4% higher.

Q: What is the GPU's standing relative to other graphics cards?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT has an average benchmark score of 35,327 and sits in the 79th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 5600M, scores 35,264 and is 0.2% behind. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Mobile is 0.3% ahead at 35,435, while the AMD Radeon 880M scores 35,646 (0.9% higher). The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 scores 35,787, or 1.3% higher.

Q: Which resolution offers the best frame rate stability across presets?

A: At 1920x1080, all four presets exceed 98 FPS, with the spread from Low to Ultra spanning 144 FPS. At 2560x1440, the spread is 97.2 FPS, and at 3840x2160 it narrows to 60.2 FPS. The 1080p resolution offers the most consistent high performance, with even Ultra remaining above 90 FPS.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT is the primary determinant of frame rates in Downfall, particularly at higher resolutions and presets. The GPU features 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock runs at 2150 MHz, with a game clock of 2495 MHz and a boost clock of 2600 MHz. The card's 2,560 shading units and 64 ROPs contribute to its pixel rate of 166.4 GPixel/s and texture rate of 416.0 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance rated at 13.31 TFLOPS.

The VRAM allocation of 12 GB is sufficient for Downfall's demands, as evidenced by the measured frame rates at 4K. At 3840x2160 High, the card sustains 75.1 FPS, which suggests that memory capacity is not a limiting factor at this resolution. The transition from Medium (86.6 FPS) to High (75.1 FPS) at 4K represents a 13% drop, while High to Ultra (44.1 FPS) represents a 41% drop. This nonlinear scaling indicates that the Ultra preset introduces effects that heavily tax the GPU's compute and memory subsystems.

The GPU's benchmark performance places it in the 79th percentile of all GPUs, with an average score of 35,327. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 5600M (0.2% behind) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 (1.3% ahead). The close margin between these cards suggests that the RX 6750 XT is competitive within its performance class, though the measured game data shows that Downfall's Ultra preset remains challenging for this tier of hardware.

The boost clock behavior is relevant to the 1080p results, where the CPU is less likely to bottleneck. At 1920x1080 Low, the system reaches 242.7 FPS, indicating that the GPU can push very high frame rates when the preset is light. The 39% drop from Low to High at 1080p, and the further 39% drop from High to Ultra, highlights how the GPU's shading and rasterization resources are consumed by increasingly complex lighting and post-processing effects typical of horror games.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i7-14700K and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT ranks 843rd out of 1,741 tested combos in Downfall, placing it in the upper half of all configurations. This rank reflects the balance between a high-end CPU and a mid-range GPU. The CPU itself performs in the 96th percentile of all processors, with an average benchmark score of 70,074, while the GPU sits in the 79th percentile with an average score of 35,327.

The rank of 843 out of 1,741 indicates that roughly 51% of tested combinations outperform this setup in Downfall. Given that the CPU is near the top of the performance spectrum—within 1.4% of the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 and 0.5% of the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X—the ranking is primarily constrained by the GPU. The data suggests that pairing this CPU with a stronger GPU would yield a substantially higher rank, as the CPU's headroom is evident from its synthetic benchmark scores.

The CPU's nearest rival, the Intel Core i7-14700KF, has an average score of 70,104 with a deltaPct of 0, meaning the two are effectively identical in performance. The AMD EPYC 9115 is 0.3% behind, and the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X is 0.5% ahead. This tight clustering indicates that the CPU is not a differentiator in this combo's ranking; rather, the RX 6750 XT's 79th percentile standing defines the system's overall position.

In practical terms, the combo's rank means that users will encounter many systems with higher frame rates in Downfall, particularly those with more powerful GPUs. However, the measured FPS data shows that this combo remains playable at 1080p and 1440p across all presets, and at 4K with High or Medium settings. The rank does not imply poor performance—it reflects the competitive landscape of 1,741 tested configurations.

Resolution Scaling

The measured frame rates show a consistent pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases from 1080p to 4K. At the High preset, the system delivers 162.9 FPS at 1920x1080, 113.4 FPS at 2560x1440, and 75.1 FPS at 3840x2160. This represents a 30% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 34% drop from 1440p to 4K, for a total reduction of 54% from 1080p to 4K.

At the Low preset, the scaling is similar: 242.7 FPS at 1080p, 171.1 FPS at 1440p, and 104.3 FPS at 4K. The percentage drops are 29% and 39% respectively, totaling a 57% reduction. The Medium preset shows 196.2 FPS at 1080p, 138.7 FPS at 1440p, and 86.6 FPS at 4K, with drops of 29% and 38%. The Ultra preset exhibits the steepest scaling: 98.7 FPS at 1080p, 73.9 FPS at 1440p, and 44.1 FPS at 4K, representing drops of 25% and 40%, for a total reduction of 55%.

This scaling behavior indicates that the GPU is the limiting component across all resolutions. The consistent 29-30% drop from 1080p to 1440p reflects the pixel count increase of approximately 78%, which is partially mitigated by the GPU's ability to maintain efficiency at higher loads. The larger drops from 1440p to 4K (34-40%) align with the 125% pixel count increase, suggesting that the GPU's memory bandwidth and shading resources become more strained at 4K.

The fact that the CPU is not the bottleneck is supported by the synthetic benchmark data. The i7-14700K scores 44,534 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 6,287 in single-core, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 242.7 FPS, which is close to the practical limit for many displays, yet the frame rate still scales down as resolution increases—a signature of GPU-bound performance.

The resolution scaling data also reveals that the gap between presets narrows at higher resolutions. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 144 FPS (242.7 vs 98.7). At 4K, this gap narrows to 60.2 FPS (104.3 vs 44.1). This compression suggests that at 4K, the GPU is so heavily loaded that even the Low preset cannot fully escape the resolution penalty, while at 1080p, the GPU has enough headroom to express larger preset differences.