Downfall

The data for Downfall with the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT reveals a system with substantial headroom for high-refresh-rate play, though its behavior across presets and resolutions tells a complex story about where the bottleneck truly lies. The measured FPS values show a wide spread from 45 FPS at 4K Ultra to 240 FPS at 1080p Low, indicating a configuration that can be tuned for vastly different experiences depending on the user's display and preference for visual fidelity.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data points to the Medium preset as the most balanced experience for this combination across all tested resolutions. At 4K, the Medium preset delivers an average of 87 FPS with a minimum of 74 FPS and a maximum of 100 FPS, which is a playable and smooth experience for a horror title where frame pacing matters for atmosphere. This is a critical finding because the jump from Medium to High at 4K costs 15 FPS (dropping from 87 to 72), while the jump from Low to Medium only costs 20 FPS (from 107 to 87), suggesting that the Medium preset captures most of the visual improvements without the steep performance penalty seen at High.

At 1440p, the Medium preset achieves 140 FPS average with a minimum of 119 FPS, which is well above the threshold for most high-refresh-rate monitors. The High preset at this resolution still delivers a strong 115 FPS, making it a viable alternative if the user prioritizes visual quality over the 25 FPS difference. However, the Ultra preset at 1440p drops to 72 FPS, which is a significant reduction that mirrors the 4K High performance, indicating that the Ultra preset's demands are disproportionately heavy on this GPU.

The 1080p results reinforce the Medium preset as the sweet spot. With an average of 197 FPS and a minimum of 167 FPS, this setting provides an exceptionally smooth experience that exceeds the refresh rate of most mainstream monitors. The Low preset at 1080p hits 240 FPS, but the 43 FPS gain over Medium comes at the cost of visual quality that is likely too severe for a game that relies on environmental detail for its horror atmosphere. The High preset at 1080p still manages 161 FPS, which is excellent, but the Medium preset's combination of 197 FPS average and 167 FPS minimum makes it the most consistent option for competitive or high-refresh play.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 brings 20 cores and 20 threads to this pairing, with a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. This is a processor designed for heavy multi-threaded workloads, as evidenced by its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42,216 and single-core score of 5,960. The CPU's 30 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB per-core L2 cache provide ample fast storage for game data, while the 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth on DDR5 support ensures the GPU is fed without starvation.

In Downfall, the CPU's role appears to be secondary at most settings, given that the frame rates scale primarily with resolution and preset changes. The data shows that at 1080p Low, the system reaches 240 FPS, which is a frame rate where CPU limitations typically become apparent. The fact that the CPU can sustain this level suggests that the 20-core design, even with its 2.40 GHz base clock, has sufficient single-thread performance (boosted to 5.30 GHz) to avoid becoming a bottleneck at this resolution.

The CPU's benchmark percentiles place it in the 93rd percentile against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 64,640. Its nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 4464P, scores 64,823, which is just 0.3% higher, indicating that the Ultra 7 265 is positioned at the top tier of desktop processors. The PassMark multi-thread score of 49,682 and single-thread score of 4,689 further confirm that this CPU is not the limiting factor in most Downfall scenarios, as the frame rate variations across settings are more consistent with GPU-bound behavior.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with a Navi 22 chip, featuring 2,560 shading units and 40 ray tracing cores. Its memory configuration of 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus provides 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is substantial for a card in this class. The boost clock of 2600 MHz and game clock of 2495 MHz indicate a well-binned part that can sustain high frequencies under load.

The GPU's role in Downfall is clearly the dominant factor in performance scaling. The data shows that moving from Low to Ultra at any resolution causes dramatic FPS drops, which is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario, especially at higher resolutions. At 1080p, the jump from Low (240 FPS) to Ultra (101 FPS) represents a 58% reduction, while at 4K, the same preset change drops performance from 107 FPS to 45 FPS, a 58% reduction as well, though the absolute numbers are much lower.

The GPU's 12 GB of VRAM is likely sufficient for Downfall at all tested settings, as the game's release date of 2016 suggests it was designed for hardware with less memory. The card's 71st percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 26,011, places it in the mid-to-upper tier. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon R9 M395X, scores 25,891, a 0.5% difference, showing that the RX 6750 XT is competitive with other mid-range options of its generation.

How This Combo Ranks

This combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT ranks 1,282 out of 2,928 tested combos in Downfall, placing it in the 56th percentile of all systems tested. This is a moderate ranking that reflects the GPU's mid-range positioning rather than the CPU's high-end capabilities. The data suggests that the CPU is overqualified for this GPU pairing, as the Ultra 7 265 sits in the 93rd percentile for CPUs, while the RX 6750 XT sits in the 71st percentile for GPUs.

The rank of 1,282 indicates that there are many combinations that outperform this one in Downfall, likely those with higher-tier GPUs. However, the ranking also shows that this combo is not near the bottom, suggesting that the RX 6750 XT provides a solid baseline for 1080p and 1440p gaming. The delta between the CPU and GPU percentiles (93 vs. 71) implies that upgrading the GPU would yield a significant improvement in this game's performance, while upgrading the CPU would have minimal impact.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS data across resolutions reveals a consistent pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases, but the degree of degradation varies by preset. Moving from 1080p to 1440p at Medium settings, the average FPS drops from 197 to 140, a 29% reduction. From 1440p to 4K at the same preset, the average drops from 140 to 87, a 38% reduction. This increasingly steep drop-off at higher resolutions is a hallmark of GPU-bound performance, as the pixel count increases exponentially (from 2.07 million at 1080p to 8.29 million at 4K).

The Low preset shows the most aggressive scaling, with 240 FPS at 1080p dropping to 172 FPS at 1440p (a 28% reduction) and then to 107 FPS at 4K (a 38% reduction from 1440p). The Ultra preset shows a similar pattern but with more severe absolute losses: 101 FPS at 1080p, 72 FPS at 1440p, and 45 FPS at 4K. The consistent percentage drops across presets indicate that the game's rendering engine scales predictably with resolution, and the limiting component is the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth.

The data strongly suggests that the GPU is the primary limiting factor at all resolutions above 1080p. The CPU's high single-thread performance (5.30 GHz boost) and multi-thread capabilities (20 cores) are more than sufficient to feed the GPU even at 1080p Low where frame rates approach 240 FPS. The 432.0 GB/s memory bandwidth of the RX 6750 XT is likely the constraint at 4K, where the 12 GB of VRAM and 192-bit bus are pushed to their limits.

FAQ

Q: What is the best preset to use with this combo for a 1440p 144Hz monitor?

A: The Medium preset at 1440p delivers 140 FPS average with a 119 FPS minimum, which is well above 144Hz. The High preset at 115 FPS is also viable, but the Medium preset's 25 FPS advantage makes it the safer choice for maintaining smooth gameplay.

*Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Downfall?*

A: Yes, but only at lower presets. The Low preset at 4K achieves 107 FPS, and the Medium preset achieves 87 FPS with a 74 FPS minimum. The High preset drops to 72 FPS, and the Ultra preset falls to 45 FPS, which may be too low for a smooth experience in a horror game.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this configuration?

A: The GPU is the clear bottleneck. The CPU ranks in the 93rd percentile, while the GPU ranks in the 71st percentile. The frame rate scaling across resolutions and presets is consistent with GPU-bound behavior, as the Ultra 7 265 has ample headroom even at 240 FPS.

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

A: This combo ranks 1,282 out of 2,928 tested combinations, placing it in the 56th percentile. This is a moderate ranking that reflects the GPU's mid-range status, despite the CPU being a top-tier processor.

Q: What is the expected frame rate at 1080p Ultra settings?

A: The measured data shows 101 FPS average at 1080p Ultra. This is playable, but the Medium preset's 197 FPS average offers a significantly smoother experience for fast-paced scenes.

Q: Does the 12 GB VRAM cause any issues at 4K?

A: The data does not indicate VRAM-related issues, as the game's 2016 release predates high VRAM requirements. The performance drops at 4K are more likely due to the GPU's compute capabilities and memory bandwidth rather than insufficient VRAM capacity.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table presents the exact measured FPS values for each resolution and settings combination.

| Resolution | Settings | Avg FPS | Min FPS | Max FPS |

|------------|----------|---------|---------|---------|

| 3840x2160 | High | 72 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 107 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 87 | 74 | 100 |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 45 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | High | 115 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 172 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 140 | 119 | 162 |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 72 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | High | 161 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 240 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 197 | 167 | 226 |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 101 | - | - |

The data shows that the Medium preset is the only one with measured minimum and maximum FPS values across all resolutions, indicating more comprehensive testing at this setting. The lack of min/max data for other presets suggests either that those tests were less detailed or that the frame times were more consistent. The 4K Ultra result of 45 FPS is the lowest measured value, while the 1080p Low result of 240 FPS is the highest, representing a 5.3x performance spread across the tested range. This wide variance underscores the importance of selecting the appropriate preset for the target resolution to achieve the desired balance of visual quality and frame rate.