Downfall

# Downfall Performance Analysis: Intel Core Ultra 5 225 + Intel Arc B390

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 paired with the Intel Arc B390 delivers a playable but constrained experience in Downfall, a 2016 horror title. The benchmark data shows this combination ranks 2589th out of 2928 tested combos, placing it in the bottom 12% of all systems. The Arc B390's integrated graphics architecture, which shares system memory, becomes the dominant bottleneck across most resolutions and settings. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 106 FPS average, but this drops precipitously as resolution and quality increase. The CPU, by contrast, demonstrates substantial headroom in synthetic tests, suggesting it is rarely the limiting factor in this title. The measured data reveals a system that can handle competitive frame rates only at lower presets and resolutions, with severe degradation at 4K Ultra where the average falls to just 20 FPS.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data indicates that the Low preset is the only setting tier that consistently delivers smooth gameplay across all three tested resolutions. At 1080p, the Low preset produces an average of 106 FPS, which is nearly 19% higher than the 87 FPS achieved at Medium. The jump to High at 1080p yields 71 FPS, still playable but representing a 33% reduction from Low. At 1440p, Low maintains a respectable 76 FPS average, while Medium drops to 62 FPS and High falls to 51 FPS. The Ultra preset at 1440p produces just 32 FPS, rendering it unsuitable for smooth play.

For gamers prioritizing frame rate stability, the Medium preset at 1080p offers the best balance, with an average of 87 FPS and a reported minimum of 74 FPS against a maximum of 100 FPS. This 26 FPS spread between minimum and maximum indicates moderate frame pacing consistency. The Low preset at 1080p provides the highest raw performance at 106 FPS but sacrifices visual fidelity. At 1440p, the Low preset at 76 FPS remains the only setting that clears the 60 FPS threshold. The Medium preset at 1440p, with its 53 FPS minimum and 71 FPS maximum, may suffice for less demanding players. High settings at 1080p produce 71 FPS average, which is acceptable for many users. However, the data strongly suggests avoiding Ultra entirely, as even at 1080p it only manages 44 FPS average, and at 4K it collapses to 20 FPS. The 4K resolution should be avoided altogether, as the best result there is 47 FPS at Low settings, which still falls below the 60 FPS target.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 operates as an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a slot width classified as IGP and no power connectors required. Its base clock runs at 300 MHz with a boost clock reaching 2500 MHz, and it draws 80 W of power. The GPU is built on Intel's 3 nm process using the Xe3-LPG architecture with the Panther Lake chip. It features 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output pipelines, along with 12 ray tracing cores. The pixel rate is 60.00 GPixel/s, the texture rate is 120.0 GTexel/s, and FP32 performance is rated at 7.680 TFLOPS.

Critically, this GPU uses System Shared memory, meaning there is no dedicated VRAM. Memory type, bus width, and bandwidth are all classified as System Shared or System Dependent. This architectural choice has profound implications for Downfall's performance. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark score of 1482 places this GPU in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, indicating very low overall performance. Its nearest rivals in synthetic testing are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX with a score of 1463 (1.3% slower), the NVIDIA GeForce 800M at 1460 (1.5% slower), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM at 1446 (2.5% slower), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 at 1443 (2.7% slower). This positions the Arc B390 as barely edging out decade-old entry-level discrete GPUs.

The shared memory architecture means that as resolution increases, the GPU must compete with the CPU for memory bandwidth. This explains the dramatic FPS drops observed when moving from 1080p to 4K. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 106 FPS, but at 4K Low it falls to 47 FPS, a 55.7% reduction. The GPU's 24 ROPs and 48 TMUs are insufficient for high-resolution rendering, particularly at Ultra settings where the 4K average of 20 FPS indicates the GPU is severely overburdened. The DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) API support and Vulkan 1.4 compatibility do not compensate for the raw throughput limitations. The 12 ray tracing cores provide hardware RT capability, but enabling such features would likely crush performance further given the already marginal frame rates.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 is a 10-core, 10-thread desktop processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. It has a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The processor contains 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. Cache configuration includes 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is dual-channel DDR5 with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. This is a recently released chip, having launched on January 6, 2025, with a launch MSRP of $246.

In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU demonstrates solid performance. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 25891, while the single-core score is 3655. Cinebench R20 results are 6317 multi-core and 891 single-core, and Cinebench R15 shows 2609 multi-core and 368 single-core. PassMark results include a multi-thread score of 30459, single-thread score of 4412, and a physics score of 2342. The CPU's average benchmark score is 36938, placing it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F with an identical average score of 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 shows the Core Ultra 5 225 performs nearly identically to these alternatives in aggregate benchmarks.

Given that the GPU is an IGP sharing system memory, the CPU's high memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s theoretically helps feed the integrated graphics. However, the measured game FPS data suggests the CPU is not the primary constraint. The 1080p Low result of 106 FPS indicates the CPU can drive frame rates above 100 FPS, but the GPU's architecture limits higher performance. The CPU's 10 cores and 10 threads provide ample processing power for Downfall, a 2016 title that would not require extensive multi-threading. The boost clock of 4.90 GHz ensures strong single-threaded performance, which is more relevant for older game engines. The PassMark single-thread score of 4412 confirms excellent single-core capability. The CPU's 85th percentile ranking versus the GPU's 9th percentile ranking creates a massive imbalance, with the GPU being roughly nine times worse relative to its peers than the CPU. This configuration is CPU-overpowered for the GPU, meaning the Arc B390 leaves significant CPU performance untapped in gaming workloads.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for playable frame rates?

A: The data shows that 1080p Low delivers the highest average at 106 FPS. For better visuals while maintaining playability, 1080p Medium offers 87 FPS average with a 74 FPS minimum. At 1440p, only the Low preset at 76 FPS exceeds 60 FPS. 4K should be avoided entirely, as even Low settings only produce 47 FPS.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B390 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B390 scores 1482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. This is 1.3% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463), 1.5% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce 800M (1460), 2.5% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM (1446), and 2.7% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 (1443). It ranks in the 9th percentile of all GPUs.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 a capable processor for gaming?

A: Yes, the CPU is highly capable. It ranks in the 85th percentile of all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 36938. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 25891 and single-core is 3655. The PassMark single-thread score of 4412 indicates strong per-core performance. In this system, the CPU is not the bottleneck.

Q: Why does performance drop so severely at 4K resolution?

A: The GPU uses System Shared memory with no dedicated VRAM, making it System Dependent for bandwidth. At 3840x2160, the highest average is 47 FPS at Low settings, falling to 32 FPS at High and just 20 FPS at Ultra. The integrated GPU architecture cannot handle the memory bandwidth demands of 4K rendering.

Q: What is the CPU's nearest rival and how do they compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 5600F has an average score of 36945, essentially identical to the Core Ultra 5 225's 36938, showing a 0% delta. The AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D at 37018 is 0.2% faster, the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 at 37093 is 0.4% faster, and the Intel Core i9-12900T at 37112 is 0.5% faster.

Q: Can this system handle Ultra settings in Downfall?

A: Ultra settings are not recommended. At 1080p Ultra, the average FPS is 44. At 1440p Ultra, it drops to 32 FPS. At 4K Ultra, the average is just 20 FPS. These frame rates fall below playable thresholds for a horror game where smooth motion matters.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a stark resolution scaling pattern that clearly identifies the GPU as the limiting component. Moving from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings, the average FPS drops from 106 to 76, a 28.3% reduction. From 1440p to 4K at Low, the average falls from 76 to 47, another 38.2% reduction. Combined, the 1080p to 4K transition at Low settings results in a 55.7% FPS loss. At High settings, the scaling is even more severe: 71 FPS at 1080p drops to 51 FPS at 1440p (28.2% loss), then to 32 FPS at 4K (37.3% loss), totaling a 54.9% reduction from 1080p to 4K. Medium settings show 87 FPS at 1080p, 62 FPS at 1440p, and 39 FPS at 4K, with a 55.2% total decline. Ultra settings collapse from 44 FPS at 1080p to 32 FPS at 1440p (27.3% loss) and then to 20 FPS at 4K (37.5% loss), a 54.5% total reduction.

The consistency of these percentage drops across settings presets is notable. The resolution scaling penalty is roughly uniform regardless of quality level, suggesting a fundamental bandwidth or fill-rate limitation rather than a settings-specific bottleneck. The 4K Ultra result of 20 FPS represents a 81.1% reduction from the 1080p Low peak of 106 FPS. This pattern indicates that the Arc B390's pixel throughput and shared memory bandwidth cannot scale with resolution demands. The pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s seems adequate on paper, but the System Shared memory architecture creates severe contention. The fact that the GPU's performance percentile is 9 while the CPU's is 85 reinforces the conclusion that resolution scaling is entirely GPU-bound. The 4K results across all settings (20-47 FPS) are uniformly below 60 FPS, meaning this system cannot deliver smooth gameplay at 4K under any configuration.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system produces its best results. Low settings achieve an average of 106 FPS, which is the highest measurement in the entire dataset. Medium settings deliver 87 FPS average with a minimum of 74 FPS and maximum of 100 FPS, providing a 26 FPS range. High settings yield 71 FPS average, while Ultra settings drop to 44 FPS. The progression from Low to Medium costs 19 FPS (17.9% reduction), Medium to High costs 16 FPS (18.4% reduction), and High to Ultra costs 27 FPS (38.0% reduction). The Ultra preset at 1080p represents a 58.5% performance penalty compared to Low.

At 2560x1440, performance degrades noticeably. Low settings produce 76 FPS average, which is 30 FPS lower than the 1080p Low result. Medium settings achieve 62 FPS average with a minimum of 53 FPS and maximum of 71 FPS, showing an 18 FPS spread. High settings deliver 51 FPS average, and Ultra settings fall to 32 FPS. The step from Low to Medium costs 14 FPS (18.4% reduction), Medium to High costs 11 FPS (17.7% reduction), and High to Ultra costs 19 FPS (37.3% reduction). Interestingly, the proportional penalties between settings are nearly identical to those at 1080p, confirming that settings have a multiplicative effect on performance regardless of resolution.

At 3840x2160, the results are marginal across the board. Low settings produce 47 FPS average, which is the only 4K result above 40 FPS. Medium settings achieve 39 FPS average with a minimum of 33 FPS and maximum of 44 FPS, a narrow 11 FPS range that suggests the GPU is heavily constrained. High settings deliver 32 FPS average, and Ultra settings bottom out at 20 FPS. The Low to Medium step costs 8 FPS (17.0% reduction), Medium to High costs 7 FPS (17.9% reduction), and High to Ultra costs 12 FPS (37.5% reduction). The Ultra preset at 4K represents an 81.1% performance loss compared to the 1080p Low peak. The minimum FPS of 33 at 4K Medium indicates that even the best-case frame delivery at 4K falls below smooth gameplay thresholds. Across all resolutions, the Ultra preset consistently imposes roughly a 37-38% penalty over High, and Medium imposes approximately 17-18% penalty over Low, showing a predictable settings scaling curve. However, the absolute numbers make it clear that only 1080p Low/Medium or 1440p Low offer genuinely playable experiences, with 1080p High being borderline acceptable at 71 FPS.