Downfall

# Downfall with Intel Core Ultra 5 235 + AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT

This combination places the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 with the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT at rank 2091 out of 2928 tested combos in Downfall, a horror title from 2016. The pairing delivers playable frame rates at 1080p and 1440p across most settings, but struggles at 4K Ultra where the average drops to 36 FPS. The CPU sits in the 89th percentile among all processors, while the GPU ranks in the 70th percentile, indicating a balanced pairing where the graphics card becomes the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions and quality presets.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 is a 14-core, 14-thread processor from the Core Ultra Series 2, built on Arrow Lake architecture using a 3 nm process from TSMC. It operates at a base clock of 3.40 GHz and boosts up to 5.00 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The CPU features 24 MB of shared L3 cache, with 192 KB of L1 and 3 MB of L2 per core. It supports DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus, delivering 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The processor includes integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 24 EUs, though discrete GPU testing here uses the RX 6600 XT.

In Downfall, the CPU's role is evident from the measured frame rates. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 191 FPS average, which climbs to 136 FPS at 1440p Low and 85 FPS at 4K Low. This scaling pattern shows that even at the lowest settings, where CPU load is proportionally higher, the Core Ultra 5 235 provides ample headroom. The processor's single-thread performance, reflected in a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2085, supports high frame rates in a horror game that relies on sudden scripted events and physics calculations.

Multi-threaded capability is strong as well, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 14769 and a Passmark multithread score of 37816. The CPU's Passmark single-thread score of 4516 places it well above average, and its overall percentile of 89 versus all CPUs confirms it as a high-end part. The nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375, scores nearly identically with a 0.1% delta, while the Intel Core i9-13900HX is 0.1% behind. This means the Core Ultra 5 235 trades blows with mobile flagship parts, making it more than sufficient for a 2016 horror title that does not demand modern multi-core scaling.

Data compression and encryption scores of 390711 and 29293 respectively show strong general-purpose throughput, but in gaming, the key metric is the ability to feed the GPU. The 14 threads (equal to cores, no hyper-threading) handle Downfall's workload without issue. At 1080p Ultra, the average FPS of 80 suggests the CPU is not the limiting factor; rather, the GPU's rendering load at higher settings caps performance. The CPU's 89th percentile ranking and competitive delta against the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (0.1% ahead) and EPYC 4364P (0.2% ahead) indicate that this processor will not bottleneck the RX 6600 XT in this title.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT is an RDNA 2.0 architecture GPU based on the Navi 23 chip, manufactured on a 7 nm TSMC process. It features 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs, with 32 ray tracing cores. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1968 MHz, a game clock of 2359 MHz, and a boost clock of 2589 MHz. It comes with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory runs at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). The card has a TDP of 160 W, requires a single 8-pin power connector, and supports PCIe 4.0 x8.

The RX 6600 XT's 8 GB VRAM is a critical factor in Downfall at higher resolutions. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS drops to 36, which is barely playable and suggests VRAM capacity or bandwidth limitations. The 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, while respectable for 1080p, becomes strained at 4K with high-resolution textures. The GPU's Passmark G3D score of 16461 places it in the 70th percentile among all GPUs, and its average benchmark score of 24442 is close to rivals like the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 (0.7% higher) and Intel Arc A350M (0.8% lower). Interestingly, the RTX 2080 SUPER is only 1.1% ahead in average benchmark score, indicating the RX 6600 XT punches above its class in synthetic tests.

In Downfall specifically, the GPU's role dominates at higher settings. At 1080p Low, the system hits 191 FPS, but at 1080p Ultra it drops to 80 FPS — a 58% reduction. This performance cliff is typical of a GPU-bound scenario where shading complexity and memory pressure increase. The DirectX 12 benchmark score of 61 (Passmark) is notably low compared to DirectX 11 (163) and DirectX 10 (109), which may explain why Ultra settings, likely utilizing more advanced rendering features, cause steep drops. The GPU's compute score of 7520 and floating-point performance of 10.60 TFLOPS are adequate for the game's horror lighting and shadow effects, but the 8 GB VRAM becomes a limiting factor at 4K.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals clear scaling trends from 1080p to 4K. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 128 at 1080p to 91 at 1440p (a 29% reduction), then to 57 at 4K (a 55% reduction from 1080p). Low settings show a similar pattern: 191 FPS at 1080p, 136 at 1440p (29% lower), and 85 at 4K (55% lower). Medium settings follow suit with 156 FPS at 1080p, 111 at 1440p (29% lower), and 69 at 4K (56% lower). Ultra settings see the steepest decline: 80 FPS at 1080p, 57 at 1440p (29% lower), and 36 at 4K (55% lower).

The consistent 29% drop from 1080p to 1440p and roughly 55% drop from 1080p to 4K across all settings indicates that the GPU is the primary limiter. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the percentage drops would vary more significantly between Low and Ultra settings. The near-uniform scaling suggests the RX 6600 XT's rendering throughput and memory bandwidth are the constraining factors. At 4K, even Low settings yield only 85 FPS, which is playable but far from the 191 FPS at 1080p Low.

The medium settings at 1440p provide a notable data point: 111 FPS average with a minimum of 95 FPS and maximum of 128 FPS. This consistency (a 16 FPS spread) indicates stable performance without major frame-time spikes. At 4K Medium, the average drops to 69 FPS with a minimum of 59 FPS and maximum of 80 FPS, showing a 21 FPS spread that suggests occasional stutters in demanding scenes. The 4K Ultra average of 36 FPS is below the 60 FPS threshold considered smooth, and the lack of min/max data for Ultra presets prevents further analysis of frame-time stability.

The resolution scaling data strongly suggests that for a consistent 60+ FPS experience, 1440p is the practical ceiling for this combination. At 4K, only Low settings achieve above 60 FPS (85 FPS average), while Medium and High hover around 69 and 57 FPS respectively. The 8 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory bus are likely the culprits at 4K, as texture data exceeds the bandwidth available.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Downfall at 4K 60 FPS?

A: No. The best 4K result is 85 FPS at Low settings, but Medium drops to 69 FPS, High to 57 FPS, and Ultra to 36 FPS. To maintain 60+ FPS at 4K, you must use Low settings.

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

A: 1440p offers the best balance. At Medium settings, the system achieves 111 FPS average with a 95 FPS minimum, while High settings reach 91 FPS. Both are well above 60 FPS and provide better visual quality than 1080p.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 has an average benchmark score of 46062, which is 0.1% higher than the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (46030) and 0.1% lower than the Intel Core i9-13900HX (46098). It also edges out the AMD EPYC 4364P (45970) by 0.2% and EPYC 7303 (45960) by 0.2%.

Q: Is the RX 6600 XT the bottleneck in this system?

A: Yes, particularly at higher resolutions. The FPS drops from 1080p to 4K are consistent across all settings (roughly 55% reduction), which indicates GPU limitation. The CPU's 89th percentile ranking and strong single-thread score of 4516 suggest it has ample headroom.

Q: What settings should be avoided?

A: Ultra settings at any resolution above 1080p. At 1440p Ultra, the average FPS is 57, and at 4K Ultra it drops to 36 FPS. The DirectX 12 benchmark score of 61 for this GPU may explain poor Ultra performance.

Q: How much VRAM does this game need at 4K?

A: The RX 6600 XT has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The steep performance drop at 4K (85 FPS at Low vs 36 FPS at Ultra) suggests that the 8 GB capacity and 128-bit bus are insufficient for high-quality 4K textures.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combination depend on the target resolution. At 1080p, High settings (128 FPS average) provide an excellent experience with plenty of headroom, while Ultra (80 FPS) is still smooth but with diminishing returns. The Medium preset at 1080p (156 FPS) is overkill for most displays, so High is recommended for visual fidelity without sacrificing frame rate.

At 1440p, Medium settings (111 FPS average, 95 FPS minimum) offer the best experience. The High preset (91 FPS) is also viable and provides better visuals, but the minimum frame rate data is not available. Ultra at 1440p (57 FPS average) falls below the 60 FPS threshold and should be avoided. The Medium preset's 95 FPS minimum ensures smooth gameplay even in demanding horror sequences.

At 4K, only Low settings (85 FPS average) deliver a consistently smooth experience. Medium (69 FPS) is playable but with a 59 FPS minimum, which may cause noticeable stutters. High (57 FPS) and Ultra (36 FPS) are not recommended for 4K. Given the game's horror genre, where sudden frame drops can break immersion, the Medium preset at 1440p provides the best combination of visual quality and frame-time consistency.

The measured data shows that the Medium preset at 1440p (111 FPS average, 95-128 FPS range) offers the most stable performance profile. This is the recommended settings/resolution combination for the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 + AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT in Downfall.

Measured FPS Breakdown

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 191 FPS average
• Medium: 156 FPS average (minimum 133, maximum 180)
• High: 128 FPS average
• Ultra: 80 FPS average

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 136 FPS average
• Medium: 111 FPS average (minimum 95, maximum 128)
• High: 91 FPS average
• Ultra: 57 FPS average

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 85 FPS average
• Medium: 69 FPS average (minimum 59, maximum 80)
• High: 57 FPS average
• Ultra: 36 FPS average

The data shows a clear hierarchy: at every resolution, Low settings deliver the highest frame rates, with Medium and High following, and Ultra bringing up the rear. The Medium preset is the only one with complete min/max data, showing consistent frame delivery. At 1080p, all presets exceed 60 FPS, making it the safest resolution for Ultra settings. At 1440p, Low through High all stay above 60 FPS, but Ultra dips to 57 FPS. At 4K, only Low and Medium achieve 60+ FPS averages, with High and Ultra falling below.

The performance gaps between settings are notable. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 111 FPS (191 vs 80), while at 4K it narrows to 49 FPS (85 vs 36). This compression at higher resolutions further confirms that the GPU is the limiting factor, as the relative cost of each setting tier diminishes when the GPU is already saturated. The 4K Medium minimum of 59 FPS is particularly relevant for horror gameplay, as it suggests the system can maintain near-60 FPS in most scenes, with the 80 FPS maximum providing headroom for less demanding moments.