Downfall

# Downfall with Intel Core Ultra 7 265 + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070

The measured frame rates for this pairing reveal a system that scales predictably across resolutions, with the RTX 3070 acting as the primary throughput gate while the Core Ultra 7 265 provides ample headroom. The data shows a combination ranked 1207th out of 2928 tested combos in Downfall, placing it in the upper-middle tier of all tested configurations for this horror title.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS trajectory from 1080p to 4K tells a clear story about where the bottleneck lives in this system. At High settings, the average frame rate drops from 172 FPS at 1920x1080 to 123 FPS at 2560x1440, then falls to 77 FPS at 3840x2160. This represents a 29% reduction moving from 1080p to 1440p, and an additional 37% reduction moving from 1440p to 4K. The total scaling from 1080p to 4K at High settings is a 55% performance loss, which is substantial but not catastrophic for a game running this well.

The Low settings preset shows even more dramatic scaling, with 257 FPS at 1080p dropping to 183 FPS at 1440p (a 29% decline) and then to 114 FPS at 4K (a 38% decline from 1440p). The pattern here is consistent: each resolution step costs roughly 30-40% of the remaining performance. This consistent percentage-based decline across all settings levels strongly indicates the GPU is the limiting factor, as CPU-bound scenarios would typically show less severe scaling at higher resolutions where pixel throughput dominates.

Looking at Medium settings, which include min/max data, the 1080p result shows an average of 210 FPS with a minimum of 179 and maximum of 242. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 150 FPS with a minimum of 127 and maximum of 172. The 4K Medium result averages 93 FPS with a minimum of 79 and maximum of 107. The narrowing range between min and max at higher resolutions (63 FPS gap at 1080p versus 28 FPS at 4K) suggests that as resolution increases, frame time variance compresses — a characteristic of GPU-bound workloads where the rendering pipeline stays consistently saturated.

Ultra settings present the steepest curve, with 108 FPS at 1080p, 77 FPS at 1440p, and 48 FPS at 4K. The 4K Ultra result falls below the 60 FPS threshold, which is notable for a game from 2016. The scaling from 1080p to 4K at Ultra is a 55% drop, nearly identical to the High preset's scaling. This consistency across presets reinforces that resolution scaling is dominated by GPU fill-rate and memory bandwidth constraints rather than settings-specific CPU overhead.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo maintain 60 FPS at 4K?

A: At High settings, the average FPS at 3840x2160 is 77, which clears the 60 FPS bar. Medium settings average 93 FPS at 4K. However, Ultra settings drop to 48 FPS average, so 4K Ultra is not viable for smooth gameplay with this pairing.

Q: What is the best resolution for high refresh rate monitors?

A: At 1920x1080, all presets exceed 100 FPS, with Low reaching 257 FPS and Medium hitting 210 FPS. At 2560x1440, Low (183 FPS) and Medium (150 FPS) both support 144Hz displays, while High (123 FPS) approaches that threshold. The 4K results cap out at 114 FPS on Low, so 4K high refresh rate is not achievable.

Q: How does the Ultra preset compare to High at the same resolution?

A: At 1080p, Ultra produces 108 FPS versus High's 172 FPS — a 37% performance penalty. At 1440p, the gap narrows slightly: 77 FPS versus 123 FPS, a 37% reduction. At 4K, Ultra yields 48 FPS versus 77 FPS, a 38% penalty. The consistent ~37-38% cost suggests Ultra settings impose a fixed additional workload regardless of resolution.

Q: Is the CPU holding back performance at 1080p?

A: The 1080p Low preset achieves 257 FPS, which is a very high frame rate. Given the Core Ultra 7 265's specs — 20 cores, 20 threads, and a 5.30 GHz boost clock — the data suggests the CPU can feed the GPU well beyond typical display refresh rates. The consistent resolution scaling indicates GPU-bound behavior rather than CPU stalls.

Q: What is the frame time consistency like at Medium settings?

A: The Medium preset is the only one with min/max data. At 1080p, the range spans 179-242 FPS (63 FPS spread). At 1440p, it narrows to 127-172 (45 FPS spread). At 4K, it compresses further to 79-107 (28 FPS spread). Higher resolutions show tighter frame time distributions, indicating more stable GPU scheduling under heavier load.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested systems for Downfall?

A: The combo holds position 1207 out of 2928 total tested combinations, placing it in the 59th percentile — meaning roughly 41% of tested combos perform better in this game. This is consistent with the RTX 3070's overall GPU percentile of 61.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides clear guidance for optimal settings at each resolution. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset delivers 108 FPS average, which is fully playable and visually rich. However, High settings at 172 FPS offer a 59% performance increase over Ultra with presumably modest visual differences — the data suggests High is the sweet spot for 1080p. The Medium preset (210 FPS) becomes attractive only for 240Hz displays, while Low (257 FPS) serves esports-style maximum refresh scenarios.

At 2560x1440, High settings produce 123 FPS, which comfortably exceeds 60 FPS and approaches 120Hz territory. Medium at 150 FPS is better suited for 144Hz monitors, while Ultra at 77 FPS is just above the 60 FPS minimum for smooth play. The recommendation here depends on display capability: for 144Hz panels, Medium provides headroom; for 60-120Hz displays, High delivers the best visual quality per frame.

At 3840x2160, the choices become more constrained. High settings at 77 FPS is the recommended balance, offering smooth gameplay above 60 FPS. Medium at 93 FPS provides additional headroom for VRR displays or frame drops. Ultra at 48 FPS falls below the 60 FPS threshold and should be avoided for consistent play. Low at 114 FPS is viable if frame rate takes priority over visual fidelity, but the jump from Low to Medium (93 FPS) costs only 18% performance while likely delivering substantial visual improvements.

The overall pattern suggests High is the default recommendation across all resolutions, with Medium serving as the high-refresh-rate alternative at 1080p and 1440p, and Low reserved for maximum FPS scenarios.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 sits at rank 1207 out of 2928 tested combos in Downfall. This places the pairing in the upper half of all tested configurations, though not near the top tier. The percentile position of 59th (derived from rank relative to total) aligns closely with the RTX 3070's standalone GPU percentile of 61, suggesting the GPU is the primary differentiator for this game's performance ranking.

The CPU's percentile of 93 among all CPUs indicates the Core Ultra 7 265 is a high-performing processor in general benchmarks. The gap between the CPU's strong relative standing and the combo's mid-tier ranking reinforces that Downfall's performance ceiling here is dictated by the GPU. The RTX 3070's average benchmark score of 17208 places it in the 61st percentile of all GPUs, which correlates well with the combo's 59th percentile position in-game.

The nearest rivals for the GPU include the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT (avg score 17083, just 0.7% behind) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 (17037, 1% behind). The RTX 3070 sits 1.5% ahead of the NVIDIA Tesla K40c (17468). These tight margins suggest the GPU's competitive position is narrow, which explains why the combo rank doesn't climb higher — small GPU performance differences translate directly to game position changes.

For the CPU, nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 4464P (avg score 64823, 0.3% ahead), the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F (64438, 0.3% behind), and the AMD EPYC 7343 (64202, 0.7% behind). These sub-1% differences indicate the CPU's performance tier is well-established, but its influence on Downfall's frame rates is secondary to the GPU's throughput.

GPU Role

The RTX 3070's specifications directly explain the measured performance envelopes. With 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus delivering 448.0 GB/s bandwidth, the card has sufficient memory throughput for 1080p and 1440p at all settings, but the 4K Ultra result of 48 FPS suggests the 8 GB capacity may be a limiting factor at the highest resolution and quality tier. The 1500 MHz base clock and 1725 MHz boost clock provide the compute foundation, while 5888 shading units and 96 ROPs handle the pixel throughput demands evident in the resolution scaling data.

The GPU's 20.31 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 165.6 GPixel/s pixel rate explain why Medium settings at 4K achieve 93 FPS — the card has substantial raw throughput but becomes constrained as settings increase. The 317.4 GTexel/s texture rate supports the High preset's 77 FPS at 4K, but Ultra's additional texture detail pushes the card past its comfortable operating point.

The PassMark G3D score of 22214 and 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 3162 provide synthetic benchmarks that correlate with the measured game performance. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 112821 and Vulkan score of 21022 indicate the card's compute capabilities are solid, which matters for a horror game that may use post-processing effects. The DirectX 12 score of 85 and DirectX 11 score of 182 from PassMark show the card's API-specific performance varies, with DirectX 11 being notably stronger — relevant since Downfall released in 2016 when DirectX 11 was the standard.

The GPU's 46 RT cores and 184 tensor cores are present but likely underutilized in this title given its age. The 8 nm process node and 220 W TDP represent the card's power envelope, but the measured FPS data is the more relevant metric here. The 61st percentile standing among all GPUs places the RTX 3070 in the upper-middle tier, consistent with its performance in Downfall.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the average FPS values by preset are: Low 114, Medium 93 (min 79, max 107), High 77, and Ultra 48. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 58% performance drop, with each settings tier costing approximately 16-19 FPS on average. The Medium preset's min/max range of 79-107 FPS indicates frame pacing is stable, with the minimum staying above 60 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low 183, Medium 150 (min 127, max 172), High 123, and Ultra 77. The gap between High and Ultra here is 46 FPS, the largest single-tier drop at any resolution, suggesting Ultra settings impose a significant additional load at this resolution. The Medium min/max spread (45 FPS) is wider than at 4K, indicating more frame time variability at moderate resolution.

At 1920x1080, the averages are: Low 257, Medium 210 (min 179, max 242), High 172, and Ultra 108. The Low preset's 257 FPS is the highest measured value in this dataset. The Medium min/max range spans 63 FPS, the widest of any resolution, showing that at 1080p the system has enough headroom for frame rate fluctuations. The Ultra preset's 108 FPS still exceeds 60 FPS, making 1080p Ultra viable for standard refresh displays.

Comparing across resolutions at the same preset: High loses 49 FPS from 1080p to 1440p (172 to 123), then 46 FPS from 1440p to 4K (123 to 77). Low loses 74 FPS from 1080p to 1440p (257 to 183), then 69 FPS to 4K (183 to 114). Medium loses 60 FPS (210 to 150), then 57 FPS (150 to 93). Ultra loses 31 FPS (108 to 77), then 29 FPS (77 to 48). The absolute FPS losses are larger at lower presets because the starting frame rates are higher, but the percentage losses remain consistent.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 provides a robust foundation for this gaming workload. With 20 cores and 20 threads, the processor has substantial parallel throughput, though Downfall from 2016 is unlikely to utilize all cores effectively. The base clock of 2.40 GHz and boost clock of 5.30 GHz give the CPU strong single-thread performance when needed, which is critical for game logic and draw call processing.

The CPU's Cinebench R23 scores of 42216 multicore and 5960 singlecore demonstrate its capability, with the singlecore result particularly relevant for gaming. The PassMark single-thread score of 4689 and multithread score of 49682 reinforce this profile. The 30 MB shared L3 cache and 3 MB per-core L2 cache provide ample data locality for game assets, while the DDR5 dual-channel memory interface with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth feeds the GPU without bottlenecking.

The CPU's 93rd percentile standing among all CPUs — with nearest rivals including the AMD EPYC 4464P (0.3% ahead) and Intel Core Ultra 7 265F (0.3% behind) — shows the processor operates at the top of its class. However, in Downfall, the measured FPS scaling across resolutions indicates the CPU is not the limiting factor. The fact that 1080p Low achieves 257 FPS while 4K Ultra drops to 48 FPS points to GPU constraints rather than CPU throughput limits.

The 65 W TDP and 3 nm process node from TSMC make this an efficient processor, but efficiency doesn't directly translate to higher frame rates in this context. The PCIe Gen 5 interface with 20 lanes provides ample bandwidth for the RTX 3070's PCIe 4.0 connection. The integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 32EU is present but irrelevant for this dedicated GPU configuration.

The CPU's PassMark data compression score of 522983 and encryption score of 40456 indicate strong general-purpose compute, but these don't directly impact gaming performance. The physics score of 2923 in PassMark is more relevant, as game physics can be CPU-bound, yet the consistent GPU-bound scaling pattern suggests physics isn't a bottleneck in this title. The 418 find prime numbers score is a weaker result, but this metric doesn't correlate with gaming workloads.