Downfall

Downfall’s measured performance with the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 reveals a configuration that is heavily GPU-bound at higher resolutions, yet surprisingly CPU-limited at 1080p. The data shows a clear hierarchy: as resolution drops, the framerate ceiling becomes increasingly dependent on the processor’s capabilities, while the RTX 5090’s raw power dominates at 4K. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS across resolutions and settings, examining the roles of the GPU’s memory and clocks, the CPU’s core configuration, and how this specific combo ranks among thousands of tested configurations.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data illustrates a dramatic scaling pattern across the three resolutions, with the most significant drops occurring when moving from 1440p to 4K. At High settings, the average framerate falls from 217 FPS at 2560x1440 to 135 FPS at 3840x2160, representing a 37.8% reduction. This steep decline intensifies when looking at Ultra settings, where the average drops from 135 FPS at 1440p to just 84 FPS at 4K — a 37.8% decrease that mirrors the High setting pattern. The consistency of this percentage drop across both High and Ultra presets strongly indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting factor at 4K, as the workload scales almost linearly with pixel count.

At 1080p, however, the scaling pattern tells a different story. The jump from 1080p to 1440p at High settings shows a decrease from 303 FPS to 217 FPS, a 28.4% drop. This is notably smaller than the 37.8% drop observed between 1440p and 4K, suggesting that at 1080p, the system is not purely GPU-limited. The 452 FPS result at 1080p Low settings further supports this theory, as such a high framerate would require the CPU to feed frames at an extremely rapid pace. The Core Ultra 5 245, with its 14 cores and 14 threads, appears to be the bottleneck in this scenario, as its single-thread performance of 4648 in Cinebench R23 may not be sufficient to fully saturate the RTX 5090 at these lower resolutions.

The medium settings data provides additional insight into this scaling behavior. At 4K Medium, the average FPS is 164 with a minimum of 140 and maximum of 189. At 1440p Medium, these numbers rise to 264 average, 225 minimum, and 304 maximum. The 1440p to 4K drop of 37.9% (from 264 to 164) again aligns closely with the High and Ultra patterns, reinforcing the GPU-bound nature of the workload at higher resolutions. However, the 1080p Medium results of 370 average, 314 minimum, and 425 maximum show a much smaller 28.7% decrease compared to 1440p Medium, again highlighting the CPU’s role in limiting performance at lower resolutions.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090’s specifications are central to understanding its performance in Downfall. With 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus, the GPU delivers 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth, which is more than sufficient for this 2016 horror title’s texture and geometry requirements. The memory clock runs at 1750 MHz with 28 Gbps effective speed, and the GPU’s boost clock of 2407 MHz ensures high sustained performance. The RTX 5090’s 21760 shading units, 680 TMUs, and 176 ROPs provide a massive parallel processing capability, reflected in its 104.8 TFLOPS FP32 throughput. These specifications place the GPU in the 92nd percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 79842.

In Downfall, the GPU’s role becomes increasingly dominant as resolution increases. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS of 84 represents a substantial workload that fully utilizes the RTX 5090’s capabilities. The GPU’s nearest rivals in average benchmark score include the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB (deltaPct 0.3%), Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB (0.6%), and AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT (1.1%), with the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X slightly behind at -1.4%. These competitors, while close in synthetic benchmarks, would likely struggle to match the RTX 5090’s real-world performance in Downfall given the latter’s architectural advantages.

The 32 GB VRAM capacity is particularly noteworthy for this game. Downfall, released in 2016, likely does not require extensive video memory, so the RTX 5090’s capacity is far beyond what is necessary. This oversupply means that VRAM is not a limiting factor at any resolution or setting, allowing the GPU to focus entirely on compute and rendering tasks. The measured FPS differences between settings at the same resolution (e.g., 135 FPS High vs 84 FPS Ultra at 4K) are therefore attributable to the increased computational demands of higher detail levels, not memory constraints. The GPU’s pixel rate of 423.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 1,636.8 GTexel/s provide the throughput needed to maintain high framerates even at 4K Ultra, although the 84 FPS result indicates that even this flagship GPU is challenged by the game’s maximum settings at this resolution.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 presents an interesting case for Downfall’s performance. With 14 cores and 14 threads, the processor lacks hyperthreading, meaning each core handles a single thread. The base clock of 3.50 GHz and boost clock of 5.10 GHz provide substantial single-thread performance, as evidenced by its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4648. The processor’s multi-core score of 32924 in the same benchmark demonstrates strong parallel processing capability, though Downfall is unlikely to fully utilize all 14 cores given its age and genre.

The CPU’s performance in relation to its rivals is notable. The nearest rivals by average benchmark score include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (deltaPct -0.4%), AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (-0.5%), Intel Xeon Gold 5318H (0.6%), and Intel Core i5-14600K (0.8%). These delta percentages are extremely small, indicating that the Core Ultra 5 245 performs essentially on par with these competitors in synthetic benchmarks. The processor’s 90th percentile ranking among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 48995, places it firmly in the upper echelon of desktop processors.

In Downfall, the CPU’s role is most apparent at 1080p resolution. The 452 FPS result at Low settings represents a scenario where the GPU has excess capacity, and the CPU’s ability to process game logic and issue draw calls becomes the limiting factor. The Core Ultra 5 245’s single-thread performance, while strong, appears to cap the framerate in this scenario. At 1080p High, the 303 FPS result shows a 32.9% decrease from Low, which is primarily due to increased GPU workload but also reflects the CPU’s inability to maintain higher framerates. The 1080p Ultra result of 190 FPS indicates that even with the GPU heavily loaded, the CPU still manages to provide sufficient performance, though the gap between High and Ultra (303 to 190 FPS) is larger than the gap between Medium and High (370 to 303 FPS), suggesting a non-linear scaling of CPU demands with settings.

The processor’s 24 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB L2 cache per core provide adequate data locality for this game’s workload. The dual-channel DDR5 memory support with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth ensures that memory bandwidth is not a bottleneck, particularly at lower resolutions where the CPU’s memory access patterns are more critical. The 65W TDP and 3 nm process node (TSMC) indicate an efficient design that can sustain high boost clocks without excessive power draw, which is beneficial for maintaining consistent framerates over extended gaming sessions.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 ranks 56th out of 2928 tested combos in Downfall, placing it in the top 1.9% of all configurations. This high ranking is primarily driven by the RTX 5090’s exceptional performance, as the GPU’s 92nd percentile ranking significantly outweighs the CPU’s 90th percentile ranking. The combo’s rank suggests that while the processor is capable, it is not the primary contributor to this excellent positioning — the GPU carries most of the performance weight.

This ranking becomes more meaningful when compared to the individual components’ standings. The GPU’s average benchmark score of 79842 places it just 0.3% ahead of the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB and 0.6% ahead of the Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB, while being 1.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT. The CPU’s average score of 48995 is nearly identical to its rivals, with the closest being the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G at only 0.4% difference. The fact that this combo achieves rank 56 despite the CPU being mid-pack relative to its peers underscores the GPU’s dominance in determining Downfall’s performance.

The measured FPS data supports this ranking. At 4K Ultra, the 84 FPS average is a strong result for a demanding resolution and settings combination, though it falls short of the 135 FPS achieved at High settings. The 4K High result of 135 FPS and 1440p Ultra result of 135 FPS are identical, suggesting that the GPU is the limiting factor in both scenarios, with the extra pixel count at 4K being offset by lower settings complexity. This consistency indicates that the combo’s rank 56 is well-earned, as it demonstrates the ability to maintain high framerates across various resolution and settings combinations.

FAQ

Q: Why does the framerate drop so significantly from 1440p to 4K?

A: The measured data shows a consistent 37.8% decrease in average FPS when moving from 2560x1440 to 3840x2160 across High and Ultra settings. This consistent percentage indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor, as the workload scales linearly with the increased pixel count.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 sufficient for the RTX 5090?

A: The data suggests the CPU is adequate but not perfectly matched. At 1080p Low, the 452 FPS average indicates a CPU bottleneck, as the GPU is not fully utilized. However, at 4K, the CPU’s role diminishes, and the GPU becomes the primary determinant of performance.

Q: How does the RTX 5090’s 32 GB VRAM affect Downfall’s performance?

A: The 32 GB GDDR7 memory is far more than Downfall requires, so VRAM capacity is never a limiting factor. The measured FPS differences between settings are due to computational demands, not memory constraints.

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

A: The 2560x1440 resolution offers the best balance, with 217 FPS at High settings and 135 FPS at Ultra. This provides high framerates while taking advantage of the GPU’s capabilities without hitting the CPU bottleneck seen at 1080p.

Q: Why is the 1080p Low result of 452 FPS so much higher than 1080p High at 303 FPS?

A: The 49.2% difference between Low and High settings at 1080p reflects the GPU’s increased workload at High settings, but the absolute framerates indicate that the CPU is still able to feed frames rapidly. The CPU’s single-thread performance of 4648 in Cinebench R23 becomes the limiting factor at these extreme framerates.

Q: How does this combo compare to other tested configurations?

A: This combo ranks 56th out of 2928 tested combos, placing it in the top 1.9% of all configurations. This ranking is primarily driven by the RTX 5090, which ranks in the 92nd percentile of all GPUs.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of performance across resolutions and settings. At 3840x2160, the average FPS ranges from 84 at Ultra settings to 201 at Low settings. The Medium setting at 4K yields an average of 164 FPS with a minimum of 140 and maximum of 189, providing the only min/max data at this resolution. The High setting at 4K achieves 135 FPS average, while Low reaches 201 FPS.

At 2560x1440, performance improves significantly. The Ultra setting produces 135 FPS average, matching the 4K High result exactly, which is a notable observation. The High setting at 1440p reaches 217 FPS, while Medium achieves 264 FPS with a minimum of 225 and maximum of 304. The Low setting at 1440p produces 323 FPS average, a substantial 60.7% improvement over the 4K Low result.

The 1920x1080 resolution shows the highest framerates, with Low settings reaching 452 FPS average. The Medium setting at 1080p achieves 370 FPS with a minimum of 314 and maximum of 425, while High produces 303 FPS. The Ultra setting at 1080p yields 190 FPS, which is lower than the 1440p High result of 217 FPS, indicating that the CPU bottleneck becomes more pronounced at this resolution.

The scaling across resolutions for each setting reveals consistent patterns. For High settings, the FPS drops from 303 at 1080p to 217 at 1440p to 135 at 4K — a 28.4% decrease followed by a 37.8% decrease. For Low settings, the drops are from 452 to 323 to 201, representing 28.5% and 37.8% decreases respectively. For Medium settings, the drops are from 370 to 264 to 164, representing 28.6% and 37.9% decreases. For Ultra settings, the drops are from 190 to 135 to 84, representing 28.9% and 37.8% decreases. The remarkable consistency of these percentages across all settings suggests a highly predictable scaling behavior.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the user’s priority between framerate and visual quality. For 4K displays, the High setting at 135 FPS average provides an excellent balance, as it delivers nearly double the framerate of Ultra (84 FPS) while still offering substantial visual detail. The Medium setting at 164 FPS is also viable, though the 29 FPS improvement over High (135 to 164) may not justify the visual downgrade for most users. The Low setting at 201 FPS is available for those prioritizing maximum framerate, but the visual compromise is significant.

At 2560x1440, the Ultra setting at 135 FPS is the recommended choice for users seeking the best visual experience without sacrificing smoothness, as this framerate is well above the threshold for smooth gameplay. The High setting at 217 FPS offers a substantial improvement for competitive play, while Medium at 264 FPS and Low at 323 FPS provide diminishing returns in framerate for reduced visual quality. The 1440p Ultra result matching the 4K High result at 135 FPS suggests that users can choose between higher resolution with lower settings or lower resolution with higher settings while maintaining identical framerates.

For 1920x1080, the High setting at 303 FPS is the most balanced option, as it provides excellent framerates while maintaining reasonable visual quality. The Ultra setting at 190 FPS is also viable for users who prioritize visuals, though the 113 FPS difference between Ultra and High (190 to 303) is substantial. The Medium setting at 370 FPS and Low at 452 FPS are excessive for most displays, as they exceed the refresh rate of virtually all monitors. Given that the CPU bottleneck becomes apparent at 1080p, users with high-refresh-rate displays may prefer higher resolutions to better utilize the RTX 5090’s capabilities. The data indicates that the Medium setting provides the most consistent performance with its min/max values at each resolution, making it the safest choice for users concerned about framerate stability.