Downfall

# Downfall with Intel Core i7-14700K + NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti

The combination of the Intel Core i7-14700K and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti places 1484th out of 1741 tested combos in Downfall, landing in the bottom 15% of all configurations. This ranking reflects a substantial imbalance: the CPU is a top-tier part sitting in the 96th percentile of all processors, while the GPU ranks in the 55th percentile of all graphics cards. Benchmark results indicate that the GTX 1660 Ti is the clear performance ceiling in this pairing, as the i7-14700K's compute headroom — demonstrated by a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44534 and a single-core score of 6287 — far exceeds what this GPU can utilize in a horror title like Downfall. The measured FPS data confirms that this is a GPU-limited configuration across nearly every resolution and settings combination, with the CPU rarely being the constraining factor.

How This Combo Ranks

The 1484th position out of 1741 combos places this pairing firmly in the lower tier of tested systems for Downfall. To contextualize this rank, consider that the GPU alone sits at the 55th percentile among all graphics cards, while the CPU sits at the 96th percentile among all processors. The gap between these two percentiles explains the overall ranking: the combo's performance is dragged down by the GPU, not elevated by the CPU. The data shows that this pairing performs roughly where the GTX 1660 Ti would perform with a much weaker processor, indicating that the i7-14700K contributes negligible additional FPS in this title.

The GTX 1660 Ti's nearest rivals in the benchmark database underscore its mid-range positioning. It sits within 0.8% of the AMD Radeon RX 570X, NVIDIA Tesla K10, and NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile, and within 0.7% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680. These tiny deltaPct values — all under 1% — indicate that the GPU's raw compute capabilities are firmly in a narrow performance band. The CPU, by contrast, is essentially tied with the Intel Core i7-14700KF (0% delta), just 0.3% ahead of the AMD EPYC 9115, 0.5% behind the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X, and 1.4% behind the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270. None of these CPU rivals would meaningfully change the combo's ranking in Downfall, because the bottleneck is consistently the GPU.

The measured FPS data reinforces this conclusion. At 1080p Ultra, the combo produces 64 FPS; at 4K Ultra, it drops to 28.7 FPS. These numbers align with what a mid-range GPU from the GeForce 16-series would deliver, not what a top-4% CPU would enable if the system were CPU-bound. The rank of 1484 out of 1741 means roughly 85% of tested combos outperform this pairing in Downfall, which is consistent with a GPU that launched in early 2019 paired with a CPU that launched in late 2023.

FAQ

Q: Is the Intel Core i7-14700K bottlenecking the GTX 1660 Ti in Downfall?

A: No. The data shows the opposite: the GPU is the limiting component. The CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44534 and single-core score of 6287 place it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU's Passmark G3D score of 12871 places it in the 55th percentile. The FPS measurements across all resolutions and settings are consistent with GPU-bound performance.

Q: How does this combo compare to the GPU's nearest rivals?

A: The GTX 1660 Ti is within 0.8% of the AMD Radeon RX 570X, NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile, and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680, and within 0.7% of the NVIDIA Tesla K10. These near-identical average benchmark scores (ranging from 13812 to 14029) mean that swapping to any of these GPUs would produce nearly the same FPS in Downfall.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 1080p gameplay?

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers 151.6 FPS, Medium delivers 121.7 FPS, High delivers 101.1 FPS, and Ultra delivers 64 FPS. For smooth 60+ FPS gameplay with higher visual quality, the High preset at 101.1 FPS provides the best balance, as it maintains a large margin above 60 FPS while offering significantly better visuals than Low or Medium.

Q: Can this combo handle 4K resolution?

A: Barely, and only at lower settings. At 3840x2160, the Low preset achieves 64.5 FPS, Medium drops to 55.3 FPS, High falls to 44.7 FPS, and Ultra is only 28.7 FPS. The 4K Low preset is the only 4K configuration that clears the 60 FPS threshold, and it does so narrowly.

Q: How does the CPU's performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The i7-14700K is essentially tied with the i7-14700KF (0% delta), 0.3% ahead of the AMD EPYC 9115, 0.5% behind the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X, and 1.4% behind the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 in average benchmark score. These differences are negligible for gaming, particularly when paired with a GPU that becomes the bottleneck.

Q: What does the combo's rank of 1484 out of 1741 mean in practical terms?

A: It means this pairing performs in the bottom 15% of all tested combinations for Downfall. Given the CPU's top-tier status, this ranking is entirely attributable to the GPU's mid-range capabilities. Users with this combo should expect performance similar to what they would get with a much weaker CPU paired with the same GPU.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience in Downfall, the data supports prioritizing resolution over settings where necessary. At 1920x1080, the High preset at 101.1 FPS is the optimal choice: it provides a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold while delivering substantially better visual fidelity than Low (151.6 FPS) or Medium (121.7 FPS). The Ultra preset at 64 FPS is playable but leaves almost no headroom for frame-time spikes in a horror title, where smoothness is critical for atmosphere. At 2560x1440, the Medium preset at 88.1 FPS is the recommended balance, as High drops to 69.9 FPS and Ultra falls to 48.2 FPS, which is below the smoothness threshold. At 3840x2160, the Low preset at 64.5 FPS is the only viable option for maintaining 60+ FPS; all other settings at this resolution fall below 60 FPS, with Ultra at a slideshow-like 28.7 FPS.

The measured data shows a clear pattern: the GTX 1660 Ti has enough headroom for High settings at 1080p and Medium at 1440p, but 4K requires the lowest settings to remain playable. The 6 GB GDDR6 memory and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth of the GPU are likely contributing factors to the steep performance drop at higher resolutions and settings, though the data does not isolate memory capacity versus compute limitations.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full settings ladder shows a wide spread: Low delivers 151.6 FPS, Medium 121.7 FPS, High 101.1 FPS, and Ultra 64 FPS. The step from High to Ultra represents a 37.1 FPS drop (from 101.1 to 64), which is the largest single-settings penalty at this resolution. The jump from Low to Medium costs 29.9 FPS, and from Medium to High costs 20.6 FPS. This pattern suggests that Ultra settings introduce effects that heavily tax the GPU's shading units (1536) and texture mapping units (96), which are modest by modern standards.

At 2560x1440, the same settings ladder compresses: Low produces 103.5 FPS, Medium 88.1 FPS, High 69.9 FPS, and Ultra 48.2 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 55.3 FPS, proportionally similar to the 1080p spread but with lower absolute values. Notably, the High to Ultra penalty at 1440p is 21.7 FPS (from 69.9 to 48.2), which pushes Ultra below the 60 FPS threshold. The Medium preset at 88.1 FPS remains comfortably playable, while High at 69.9 FPS is still above 60 FPS but with less margin.

At 3840x2160, the GPU's limitations become stark. Low yields 64.5 FPS, Medium 55.3 FPS, High 44.7 FPS, and Ultra 28.7 FPS. Every settings increase beyond Low drops the frame rate below 60 FPS, and Ultra produces less than half the FPS of Low. The 4K Ultra result of 28.7 FPS is the lowest measurement in the entire dataset, indicating that this combination is not suited for maximum settings at 4K. The spread from Low to Ultra at 4K is 35.8 FPS, which is the largest absolute range across all resolutions, highlighting how pixel count amplifies the GPU's workload.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K reveals a heavily GPU-bound system. At Low settings, performance falls from 151.6 FPS at 1080p to 103.5 FPS at 1440p (a 48.1 FPS drop), then to 64.5 FPS at 4K (a further 39 FPS drop). The total reduction from 1080p to 4K at Low is 87.1 FPS, representing a 57.5% decrease. At Ultra settings, the same resolution scaling shows 64 FPS at 1080p, 48.2 FPS at 1440p, and 28.7 FPS at 4K — a total drop of 35.3 FPS, or 55.2%. These percentage drops are similar across settings, which is characteristic of a GPU that is consistently the limiting factor regardless of quality preset.

The pixel count increase from 1080p to 4K is approximately 4x, yet the FPS does not drop to 25% of the 1080p value at any settings level. At Low, 4K FPS (64.5) is 42.5% of 1080p FPS (151.6); at Ultra, 4K FPS (28.7) is 44.8% of 1080p FPS (64). This sub-linear scaling suggests that the system is not purely pixel-bound; the CPU, despite being underutilized overall, still helps maintain higher FPS at 4K than a purely GPU-limited model would predict. However, the CPU's contribution is marginal — the i7-14700K's 20 cores and 28 threads are far beyond what Downfall, a 2016 horror title, can leverage, so the GPU remains the dominant constraint.

The data indicates that the GTX 1660 Ti's 192-bit memory bus and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth are likely saturated at higher resolutions, particularly at 4K where the 6 GB VRAM capacity may also become a factor. The measured FPS at 4K Ultra (28.7) versus 4K Low (64.5) shows that settings have a larger impact at 4K than at 1080p, where the same settings change yields a range of 151.6 to 64 FPS. This suggests that at 4K, both memory bandwidth and compute resources are strained, making the choice of settings more critical for maintaining playability. Overall, the resolution scaling analysis confirms that this combo is best suited for 1080p or 1440p gaming, with 4K reserved for low settings and users who accept frame rates in the 60 FPS range at best.