Downfall

# Downfall with Intel Core Ultra 5 225 + AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT

This combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT delivers a mid-tier performance profile for Downfall, placing in the 1282nd position out of 2928 tested combos, which puts it in the 56th percentile of all system configurations. The pairing shows a clear balance between CPU and GPU capabilities, with the system achieving playable frame rates across all resolutions tested, though the scaling patterns reveal distinct bottlenecks depending on the graphics preset and resolution selected.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 1282 out of 2928 tested combinations places this system squarely in the upper-middle tier of hardware configurations for Downfall. This ranking reflects a balanced pairing where neither component drastically limits the other in most scenarios, though the data reveals that the GPU becomes the primary constraint at higher resolutions and quality settings.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 sits at the 85th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 36938. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F at 36945 (0% delta), the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D at 37018 (-0.2% delta), the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 at 37093 (-0.4% delta), and the Intel Core i9-12900T at 37112 (-0.5% delta). This clustering indicates the CPU performs essentially on par with a broad range of mid-range processors, with negligible performance differences of less than 1% among the closest competitors.

The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT achieves the 71st percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 26011. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon R9 M395X at 25891 (0.5% delta), the AMD FirePro W7100 at 25856 (0.6% delta), the AMD FirePro D700 at 25842 (0.7% delta), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile at 25740 (1.1% delta). The GPU slightly outperforms these competitors by margins of 0.5% to 1.1%, indicating it holds a small but measurable edge over its closest alternatives.

The combination's overall ranking suggests that in Downfall specifically, this system performs better than 56% of all tested configurations, which aligns with the expectation that the GPU's 71st percentile standing and the CPU's 85th percentile standing combine to produce a system that handles the game's horror-themed rendering demands competently without reaching the top tier.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Downfall?

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 provides the highest frame rates across all settings, with averages ranging from 101 FPS at Ultra to 240 FPS at Low. At 2560x1440, frame rates remain solid with averages from 72 FPS at Ultra to 172 FPS at Low. The 3840x2160 resolution shows the system can still maintain playable performance, with averages from 45 FPS at Ultra to 107 FPS at Low.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 scores 36938 on average benchmarks, placing it within 0.5% of the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F, AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D, AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450, and Intel Core i9-12900T. All five processors are effectively performance equivalents, with the largest delta being -0.5% against the Intel Core i9-12900T.

Q: Is the GPU a bottleneck at 4K resolution?

A: Yes, the data indicates the GPU becomes the limiting factor at 3840x2160. The frame rate drops from 107 FPS at Low to 45 FPS at Ultra, a reduction of 58% when moving from the lowest to highest quality preset. This significant scaling pattern points to the GPU's rendering limits at this resolution.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The only settings with recorded minimum FPS values are Medium presets. At 1920x1080 Medium, the minimum is 167 FPS; at 2560x1440 Medium, the minimum is 119 FPS; and at 3840x2160 Medium, the minimum is 74 FPS. All other settings presets lack minimum FPS data.

Q: How does the CPU's single-thread performance affect gameplay?

A: The CPU scores 3655 in Cinebench R23 single-core and 4412 in PassMark single-thread tests. These scores, combined with the CPU's 85th percentile ranking, indicate strong single-thread capability that supports consistent frame pacing in Downfall, as evidenced by the high frame rates achieved even at lower resolutions.

Q: What is the memory configuration and does it matter for this game?

A: The CPU supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The GPU has 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The substantial GPU memory capacity ensures texture loading is unlikely to be a constraint in Downfall's horror environments.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 reveals important insights about the system's bottleneck characteristics. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 240 at 1080p to 172 at 1440p (a 28% decrease), then to 107 at 4K (a 38% decrease from 1440p). This substantial decline across resolutions indicates the GPU is the primary limiting factor even at the lowest quality preset, as the CPU's performance headroom cannot compensate for the increased pixel count.

At Medium settings, the scaling shows a similar pattern: 197 FPS at 1080p, 140 FPS at 1440p (a 29% decrease), and 87 FPS at 4K (a 38% decrease from 1440p). The consistent ~30% reduction between 1080p and 1440p, followed by a larger ~38% drop to 4K, suggests the GPU's pixel throughput becomes increasingly strained as resolution increases.

High settings demonstrate a more pronounced scaling penalty: 161 FPS at 1080p, 115 FPS at 1440p (a 29% decrease), and 72 FPS at 4K (a 37% decrease from 1440p). The Ultra preset shows the most extreme scaling: 101 FPS at 1080p, 72 FPS at 1440p (a 29% decrease), and 45 FPS at 4K (a 38% decrease from 1440p). This consistent 29% reduction between 1080p and 1440p across all presets, followed by a 37-38% reduction between 1440p and 4K, points decisively to the GPU as the limiting component.

The CPU's role in this scaling pattern is minimal. Given the Core Ultra 5 225's strong benchmark scores and the fact that frame rates scale predictably with pixel count, the data indicates the processor maintains adequate throughput even at 1080p where the GPU is least stressed. The system shows no evidence of CPU-induced frame rate caps, as evidenced by the 240 FPS result at 1080p Low.

Settings Recommendations

For players prioritizing smooth gameplay, the Medium preset at 1920x1080 offers the best balance, delivering 197 FPS average with a minimum of 167 FPS and maximum of 226 FPS. This configuration provides substantial headroom above typical display refresh rates while maintaining visual quality improvements over the Low preset. The 240 FPS result at Low settings is available for competitive play, but the 22% frame rate increase over Medium comes at the cost of reduced visual fidelity.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset again provides the optimal experience with 140 FPS average, a minimum of 119 FPS, and a maximum of 162 FPS. This resolution offers a meaningful visual upgrade over 1080p while maintaining frame rates that exceed standard 60Hz displays by a comfortable margin. The High preset at this resolution achieves 115 FPS, which remains playable, but the Medium preset's higher minimum frame rate of 119 FPS versus High's lack of recorded minimum data suggests better frame pacing stability.

For 3840x2160, the Low preset at 107 FPS is the recommended choice, as it maintains smooth performance. The Medium preset at 87 FPS with a 74 FPS minimum is acceptable for players who prefer higher visual quality, but the 20 FPS drop from Low to Medium may be noticeable. The Ultra preset at 45 FPS falls below the threshold for smooth gameplay and should be avoided.

The High preset at 4K achieves 72 FPS, which is playable but offers no recorded minimum FPS data, making it riskier than Medium's documented 74 FPS minimum. Overall, Medium settings at 1080p or 1440p provide the most consistent and reliable experience across the resolution spectrum.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its strongest performance. The Low preset achieves an average of 240 FPS with no recorded minimum or maximum values. Medium settings produce an average of 197 FPS, with a minimum of 167 FPS and maximum of 226 FPS. High settings average 161 FPS, while Ultra settings average 101 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 58% reduction in frame rate, reflecting the increasing GPU workload.

At 2560x1440, performance remains strong but shows expected declines. Low settings average 172 FPS, Medium settings average 140 FPS with a minimum of 119 FPS and maximum of 162 FPS, High settings average 115 FPS, and Ultra settings average 72 FPS. The transition from 1080p to 1440p costs approximately 28-29% of frame rate across all presets, a consistent scaling factor.

At 3840x2160, the system begins to show its limits. Low settings average 107 FPS, Medium settings average 87 FPS with a minimum of 74 FPS and maximum of 100 FPS, High settings average 72 FPS, and Ultra settings average 45 FPS. The 4K Ultra result of 45 FPS represents the lowest performance point in the entire dataset, falling below the 60 FPS threshold typically considered smooth.

The Medium preset is the only one with complete FPS data across all three resolutions, providing the most reliable indication of frame pacing. The minimum FPS values show consistent scaling: 167 at 1080p, 119 at 1440p, and 74 at 4K, each representing approximately 71% of the previous resolution's minimum. This pattern reinforces the GPU-bound nature of the system at higher resolutions.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 features 10 cores and 10 threads, operating at a base clock of 3.30 GHz with a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. This configuration, built on the Arrow Lake architecture using TSMC's 3 nm process, provides strong computational throughput without hyper-threading. The CPU's cache hierarchy includes 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache, which supports the game's data access patterns.

In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 25891 and a single-core score of 3655. The PassMark results show a multi-thread score of 30459, a single-thread score of 4412, and a physics score of 2342. These figures place the processor at the 85th percentile among all CPUs, indicating it provides substantial headroom for gaming workloads.

For Downfall specifically, the CPU's performance is more than adequate. The 240 FPS result at 1080p Low demonstrates that the processor can feed the GPU with sufficient frames even at high frame rates. The CPU's 10 cores and 10 threads are well-suited to the game's horror genre requirements, which typically involve moderate CPU loads for AI, physics, and scene management rather than extreme multi-threaded workloads.

The CPU's nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F, scores 36945 on average benchmarks, essentially identical to the Core Ultra 5 225's 36938. The other rivals show negligible differences, confirming that the CPU is not a differentiating factor in this combo's performance. The processor's 65W TDP and DDR5 memory support with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth ensure it does not create memory bandwidth bottlenecks for the GPU.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture using the Navi 22 chip on a 7 nm process. It features 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing 432.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The GPU operates at a base clock of 2150 MHz, a game clock of 2495 MHz, and a boost clock of 2600 MHz, with memory running at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective).

The GPU's compute resources include 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, 64 render output units, and 40 ray tracing cores. Its peak performance figures include 13.31 TFLOPS FP32 compute, 416.0 GTexel/s texture rate, and 166.4 GPixel/s pixel rate. The card has a 250W TDP and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6.

In Downfall, the GPU's 12 GB VRAM capacity ensures that texture memory is not a limiting factor even at 4K resolution with Ultra settings. The 432.0 GB/s memory bandwidth provides sufficient throughput for the game's horror environments, which often feature detailed textures and atmospheric effects.

The GPU's benchmark results place it at the 71st percentile among all GPUs, with a PassMark G3D score of 20700 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2548. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon R9 M395X, scores 25891, just 0.5% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile trails by 1.1%, confirming that the RX 6750 XT holds a competitive position in its performance class.

The frame rate data clearly identifies the GPU as the bottleneck at higher resolutions and settings. The consistent ~29% performance drop from 1080p to 1440p and ~38% drop from 1440p to 4K across all presets indicates that the GPU's pixel throughput, not the CPU, limits performance. The 45 FPS result at 4K Ultra represents the GPU's maximum capability for this game at the highest quality settings, while the 240 FPS result at 1080p Low shows the GPU can exceed most display refresh rates when the workload is lighter.