Downfall

# Downfall with Intel Core Ultra 5 245 + NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER

This combo ranks 2505th out of 2928 tested combinations in Downfall, placing it in the lower 15th percentile of all systems evaluated for this horror title. The pairing of Intel's 14-core Core Ultra 5 245 with NVIDIA's GTX 1660 SUPER produces playable frame rates at most settings, but the data clearly shows where the bottleneck lies and which configurations deliver the most consistent experience.

How This Combo Ranks

At position 2505 out of 2928 tested combos, this system sits firmly in the lower tier of performance for Downfall. The ranking reflects a hardware pairing where the GPU, released in 2019 and now end-of-life, carries most of the performance burden. The GTX 1660 SUPER holds a 53rd percentile ranking among all GPUs, meaning roughly half of all graphics cards tested outperform it in synthetic benchmarks. The CPU, by contrast, ranks in the 90th percentile among all processors, a significant gap that foreshadows where the performance ceiling lies.

The CPU's average benchmark score of 48995 places it within 0.4% of the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (49196) and 0.5% of the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (49228). It sits 0.6% above the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H (48698) and 0.8% above the Intel Core i5-14600K (48618). These margins are negligible, indicating the processor is not the differentiator in this system's Downfall performance. The GPU's average benchmark score of 12986 puts it 0.4% behind the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (12940) and 0.4% behind the RX 580 (12928), while running 0.7% ahead of the Tesla M2090 (13075) and 0.9% ahead of the Radeon 740M (12870). In practical terms, the GTX 1660 SUPER performs essentially on par with its closest rivals, which explains why this combo's overall ranking is driven primarily by GPU capability rather than CPU strength.

GPU Role

The GTX 1660 SUPER carries 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock runs at 1530 MHz with a boost clock of 1785 MHz, and memory operates at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The card features 1408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 48 render output units, with a pixel rate of 85.68 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 157.1 GTexel/s. FP32 performance sits at 5.027 TFLOPS. This is a Turing-architecture card built on TSMC's 12 nm process, containing 6,600 million transistors on a 284 mm² die.

For Downfall specifically, the 6 GB VRAM capacity proves sufficient across all tested settings, as evidenced by playable frame rates even at 4K with High settings. The memory bandwidth of 336.0 GB/s appears adequate for this horror title's texture streaming demands, though the card's 53rd percentile GPU ranking suggests it operates near the middle of the performance distribution. The absence of ray tracing cores or tensor cores means the card relies entirely on traditional rasterization, which aligns with Downfall's 2016 release date and its graphical requirements from that era. The 125 W TDP and dual-slot design indicate a modest power footprint, but the data suggests the GPU's compute capabilities, not its memory subsystem, are the primary constraint in demanding scenes.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern across all resolutions: Medium settings provide the best balance of visual quality and performance, with the only complete min/max frame time data recorded at this preset. At 1920x1080, Medium delivers 120 avg FPS with a minimum of 102 and maximum of 138, representing a 21% drop from Low's 147 avg FPS but a 21% improvement over High's 99 avg FPS. The frame time consistency at Medium, with only an 18 FPS spread between minimum and maximum, suggests stable performance without major hitches.

At 2560x1440, Medium again proves optimal with 86 avg FPS (min 73, max 99), a 26 FPS spread that remains manageable. The step from Medium to High costs 15 FPS (down to 71), while the step from Medium to Low gains 19 FPS (up to 105). At 3840x2160, Medium produces 54 avg FPS (min 45, max 62), which dips below the 60 FPS threshold but remains playable for a horror title where atmosphere matters more than competitive responsiveness. The Ultra preset consistently underperforms across all resolutions, delivering only 27 FPS at 4K, 44 FPS at 1440p, and 62 FPS at 1080p — never reaching the smoothness of Medium at the next resolution down.

For players prioritizing frame rate, Low at 1080p offers 147 avg FPS, but the jump to Medium costs only 27 FPS while likely providing substantially better visual fidelity. Given that Downfall is a horror game where visibility and atmosphere contribute to the experience, Medium settings at 1080p or 1440p represent the sweet spot based on the measured data.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Downfall at 4K?

A: Yes, but with caveats. At 3840x2160, the combo achieves 65 avg FPS on Low, 54 avg FPS on Medium (min 45, max 62), 44 avg FPS on High, and 27 avg FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset at 4K produces playable frame rates, though the minimum of 45 FPS indicates occasional dips.

Q: How much performance does the Ultra preset cost compared to Medium?

A: At 1920x1080, Ultra delivers 62 avg FPS versus Medium's 120 avg FPS, a 48% reduction. At 2560x1440, Ultra drops to 44 avg FPS from Medium's 86 avg FPS, again a 49% loss. At 3840x2160, the gap narrows slightly with Ultra at 27 avg FPS versus Medium's 54 avg FPS, a 50% reduction.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this combo?

A: The GPU is clearly the bottleneck. The CPU ranks in the 90th percentile among all processors with an average benchmark score of 48995, while the GPU ranks in the 53rd percentile with an average score of 12986. Across all resolutions, frame rates scale with resolution changes in a pattern consistent with GPU-bound performance.

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 1440p with High settings?

A: The measured data shows 71 avg FPS at 2560x1440 with High settings. This is 15 FPS below the Medium preset's 86 avg FPS but still above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay.

Q: How does the GTX 1660 SUPER compare to its nearest GPU rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The card's average benchmark score of 12986 places it 0.4% below the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (12940) and 0.4% below the RX 580 (12928), while running 0.7% ahead of the Tesla M2090 (13075) and 0.9% ahead of the Radeon 740M (12870). These differences are within measurement noise.

Q: Does the 6 GB VRAM cause any issues at higher resolutions?

A: The data does not indicate VRAM-related problems. The system achieves playable frame rates at 4K across all settings, including 65 avg FPS on Low and 54 avg FPS on Medium, suggesting 6 GB is sufficient for Downfall's memory requirements at this resolution.

Resolution Scaling

The transition from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 and then to 3840x2160 reveals how this combo scales with pixel count. At Low settings, the progression runs 147 → 105 → 65 avg FPS across 1080p, 1440p, and 4K respectively. This represents a 29% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 38% drop from 1440p to 4K. At Medium settings, the numbers are 120 → 86 → 54 avg FPS, with drops of 28% and 37% respectively. High settings show 99 → 71 → 44 avg FPS, with drops of 28% and 38%. Ultra settings produce 62 → 44 → 27 avg FPS, with drops of 29% and 39%.

The consistency of these percentage drops across all settings — hovering around 28-29% for the 1080p-to-1440p step and 37-39% for the 1440p-to-4K step — strongly indicates GPU-bound performance. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the frame rate differences between resolutions would compress significantly at higher settings, as the GPU would be waiting on the processor. Instead, the uniform scaling pattern suggests the GTX 1660 SUPER is doing the heavy lifting, with its fill rate and shading capabilities determining the output at each resolution. The 4K-to-1080p ratio of approximately 2.3x average FPS improvement across settings aligns with the pixel count difference of 4x, though the sub-linear scaling indicates some overhead that prevents perfect scaling.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 brings 14 cores and 14 threads to this pairing, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. This Arrow Lake-S architecture chip, built on TSMC's 3 nm process, contains 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support extends to DDR5 with dual-channel configuration and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, plus ECC memory capability. The CPU connects via PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes and includes integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units.

In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU achieves a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 32924 and single-core score of 4648. Its PassMark multithread score of 38706 and single-thread score of 4394 place it comfortably in the 90th percentile of all CPUs. The nearest rivals in average benchmark score include the Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G at 49196 (-0.4%), Ryzen 9 7900 at 49228 (-0.5%), Xeon Gold 5318H at 48698 (+0.6%), and Core i5-14600K at 48618 (+0.8%). These margins are all within 1%, confirming the Ultra 5 245 performs on par with its direct competitors.

For Downfall, the CPU's 14 cores and 14 threads provide ample processing headroom. The game, released in 2016, likely cannot fully utilize this many cores, but the high boost clock of 5.10 GHz ensures strong single-threaded performance where it matters. The CPU's 90th percentile ranking versus the GPU's 53rd percentile creates a significant imbalance that keeps the system from achieving higher composite rankings. The measured frame rates across all resolution and settings combinations show no evidence of CPU-induced stuttering or frame drops, supporting the conclusion that the processor is not the performance limiter in this configuration.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo produces its highest frame rates across all settings. Low settings deliver 147 avg FPS, Medium delivers 120 avg FPS with a minimum of 102 and maximum of 138, High delivers 99 avg FPS, and Ultra delivers 62 avg FPS. The Medium preset's frame time data shows an 18 FPS spread between minimum and maximum, indicating stable performance. The gap between Low and Medium is 27 FPS, between Medium and High is 21 FPS, and between High and Ultra is 37 FPS — the largest single-setting drop occurs when moving from High to Ultra.

At 2560x1440, the pattern continues with lower absolute numbers but similar relationships between settings. Low produces 105 avg FPS, Medium produces 86 avg FPS (min 73, max 99), High produces 71 avg FPS, and Ultra produces 44 avg FPS. The Medium preset shows a 26 FPS spread between minimum and maximum, slightly wider than at 1080p but still within acceptable bounds. The setting-to-setting deltas are 19 FPS (Low to Medium), 15 FPS (Medium to High), and 27 FPS (High to Ultra).

At 3840x2160, the system struggles to maintain high frame rates but remains playable at most settings. Low delivers 65 avg FPS, Medium delivers 54 avg FPS (min 45, max 62), High delivers 44 avg FPS, and Ultra delivers 27 avg FPS. The Medium preset's frame time spread of 17 FPS is the tightest of any resolution at this setting, suggesting the GPU is consistently loaded without hitting thermal or power limits. The drop from Low to Medium is 11 FPS, from Medium to High is 10 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 17 FPS. Notably, the minimum FPS of 45 at 4K Medium remains above the 30 FPS threshold typically considered the floor for playable frame rates, though it falls short of the 60 FPS target many players prefer.