Downfall

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 compare to its closest rivals in overall CPU benchmark scores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 scores an average of 64,640 across benchmark tests. This places it essentially even with its nearest rivals: it trails the AMD EPYC 4464P by 0.3% and the AMD EPYC 9124 by 0.7%, while leading the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F by 0.3% and the AMD EPYC 7343 by 0.7%.

Q: What is the performance percentile ranking of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 among all GPUs?

A: The RTX 3080 sits in the 68th percentile of all GPUs. Its average benchmark score is 23,172. The data shows it is nearly identical in score to its listed rivals, with the NVIDIA P106-100 and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 both matching its performance within a 0.3% delta.

Q: What is the best average frame rate achieved by this combo at 3840x2160?

A: At 4K, the highest average FPS is 133, which is achieved with the Low settings preset. The next highest is 109 FPS on Medium, while High settings yield 89 FPS and Ultra drops to 56 FPS.

Q: What is the lowest average frame rate recorded for this combination?

A: The lowest average frame rate in the measured data is 56 FPS at 3840x2160 resolution with the Ultra settings preset. This is the only measured configuration that falls below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Does the CPU have more cores than threads?

A: No, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 has 20 cores and 20 threads, meaning there is a 1:1 ratio. This indicates no hyper-threading or simultaneous multithreading is active for this processor.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265?

A: The CPU supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a total memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. This is a key factor for feeding data to the GPU in processor-intensive scenes.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is built on the Ampere architecture with a GA102 chip fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung. It features 8,704 shading units, 272 texture mapping units, and 96 raster operation units. The card operates with a base clock of 1440 MHz and a boost clock of 1710 MHz. The memory subsystem is a 10 GB GDDR6X configuration on a 320-bit bus, delivering 760.3 GB/s of bandwidth. This memory bandwidth is substantial and directly contributes to the high frame rates observed at 4K resolution, where data throughput demands are greatest.

The GPU's compute capabilities are notable. It delivers 29.77 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and an equal 29.77 TFLOPS of FP16 performance (1:1 ratio). The pixel rate is 164.2 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 465.1 GTexel/s. These specifications suggest the GPU can handle heavy shading and texture work. In Downfall, a horror game that likely relies on dynamic lighting and shadow effects, the RTX 3080's 68 RT cores and 272 tensor cores provide the necessary hardware for advanced rendering features, though the measured data does not specify if ray tracing is enabled in the tested presets.

The relationship between the GPU's memory and the game's results is evident in the measured FPS data. At 3840x2160, the average frame rate scales from 56 FPS on Ultra to 133 FPS on Low. The 10 GB of VRAM is sufficient for the demands of this game at 4K, as no benchmark row indicates a memory capacity bottleneck that would cause severe frame drops. The card's 760.3 GB/s bandwidth ensures that texture streaming at high resolutions does not become a limiting factor, allowing the GPU to maintain consistent performance across the tested presets.

The GPU's production status is end-of-life, but its benchmark percentile of 68% shows it remains competitive. Its average benchmark score of 23,172 places it almost exactly on par with the NVIDIA P106-100 and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16, with deltas of -0.3% for both. This parity in synthetic benchmarks does not necessarily translate to gaming performance, as the measured FPS data shows strong results in Downfall.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 achieves a rank of 776 out of 2,928 tested combos in Downfall. This places it in roughly the top 26.5% of all combinations tested for this game. The rank is a holistic measure that considers the interaction between the CPU and GPU across all tested settings and resolutions.

This ranking indicates a well-balanced pairing. The CPU, which sits in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, is not bottlenecking the GPU in a way that would drag the combo down. Conversely, the GPU, at the 68th percentile, is the more limiting component, but the measured FPS results demonstrate that this limitation only manifests at the highest settings and resolutions. The combo's rank reflects that it can deliver playable frame rates in most configurations, with the exception of 4K Ultra.

The data shows that the combo is more capable at lower resolutions. At 1920x1080, every preset achieves an average FPS above 125, which is a strong result. At 2560x1440, the average FPS ranges from 90 on Ultra to 214 on Low. At 3840x2160, the range narrows from 56 on Ultra to 133 on Low. This pattern suggests that the combo's ranking is bolstered by its strong performance at 1080p and 1440p, where it excels, rather than at 4K, where it struggles to maintain high frame rates on the Ultra preset.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of the combo's performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. All data points are measured averages, with some Medium settings rows also providing minimum and maximum frame rates.

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers exceptional performance across the board. The Low preset achieves an average of 299 FPS, which is the highest average in the entire dataset. Medium settings provide an average of 245 FPS, with a minimum of 208 FPS and a maximum of 282 FPS. High settings yield 201 FPS average, and Ultra settings drop to 125 FPS average. Even the lowest average at this resolution, 125 FPS, is far above the threshold for smooth gameplay, indicating that the combo is never CPU or GPU bound in a problematic way at 1080p.

At 2560x1440, the performance scales down proportionally but remains strong. Low settings achieve an average of 214 FPS. Medium settings provide an average of 175 FPS, with a minimum of 149 FPS and a maximum of 201 FPS. High settings yield 143 FPS average, and Ultra settings drop to 90 FPS average. The gap between Low and Ultra at this resolution is 124 FPS, showing that the Ultra preset imposes a significant load increase. The minimum FPS recorded at Medium (149) is still higher than the average FPS at Ultra (90), which underscores the impact of the preset choice.

At 3840x2160, the combo's limits become apparent. Low settings achieve an average of 133 FPS, which is still very playable. Medium settings provide an average of 109 FPS, with a minimum of 92 FPS and a maximum of 125 FPS. High settings yield 89 FPS average, which is acceptable for most players. Ultra settings drop to 56 FPS average, which is below the 60 FPS threshold typically considered necessary for smooth motion. The minimum FPS at Medium (92) is above the average FPS at Ultra (56), indicating that the Ultra preset introduces a substantial performance penalty at 4K.

The Medium presets are the only ones with reported minimum and maximum values. At 1080p, the variance is from 208 to 282 FPS, a spread of 74 FPS. At 1440p, the variance is from 149 to 201 FPS, a spread of 52 FPS. At 4K, the variance is from 92 to 125 FPS, a spread of 33 FPS. This decreasing variance at higher resolutions suggests that the GPU becomes more consistently loaded as resolution increases, reducing frame time spikes.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process at TSMC. It has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU supports DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth.

In terms of synthetic benchmarks, the CPU demonstrates strong multi-threaded performance. It scores 42,216 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 5,960 in single-core. In PassMark tests, it scores 49,682 in multithread, 4,689 in single-thread, and 172,776 in floating point math. The passmark data compression score is 522,983, which is exceptionally high. The CPU's percentile rank of 93% indicates it is faster than the vast majority of all CPUs tested.

For Downfall, the CPU's role is likely secondary to the GPU, as the game's frame rates scale more dramatically with resolution and settings changes than with CPU load. The 20 cores and 20 threads provide ample processing power for game logic, physics, and AI. The boost clock of 5.30 GHz ensures that single-threaded tasks, which are common in game engine main loops, are handled swiftly. The L3 cache of 30 MB is large enough to hold significant portions of game data, reducing the need for slower memory accesses.

The CPU's nearest rivals in benchmark scores are server-class EPYC processors, which have different design goals. The 265's performance is within 0.7% of the AMD EPYC 7343 and AMD EPYC 9124, and within 0.3% of the AMD EPYC 4464P. This indicates that the Core Ultra 7 265 offers comparable raw compute to these enterprise parts, despite its desktop-oriented design. In the context of Downfall, the CPU is unlikely to be the bottleneck at any resolution, as the GPU is the more constrained component based on the FPS scaling patterns.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides clear guidance on the optimal settings for this combo. The goal is to maintain an average frame rate above 60 FPS while maximizing visual quality. The data shows that the Ultra preset is only viable at 1080p and 1440p, while the High preset is the best choice for 4K.

At 1920x1080, all presets deliver average frame rates above 125 FPS. The Ultra preset at 125 FPS is the best choice for maximum visual quality, as it remains well above the 60 FPS threshold. However, for players with high refresh rate monitors, the High preset at 201 FPS or Medium at 245 FPS may be preferable to take advantage of displays capable of 144 Hz or higher. The Low preset at 299 FPS is only recommended for competitive play where frame rate is paramount over visuals.

At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset at 90 FPS is the recommended choice for visual fidelity, as it provides a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. The High preset at 143 FPS is the best option for players with 144 Hz monitors, offering a smoother experience than Ultra. Medium at 175 FPS and Low at 214 FPS are also viable, but they sacrifice visual quality for frame rates that exceed the refresh rate of most monitors.

At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset at 56 FPS is not recommended, as it falls below the 60 FPS threshold. The High preset at 89 FPS is the best balance of visual quality and performance at 4K. Medium settings at 109 FPS provide additional headroom for players who prioritize frame rate stability over some visual effects. Low settings at 133 FPS are also viable but offer significantly reduced visual fidelity.

The data indicates a clear pattern: the combo is capable of running the game at the highest settings at 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K, the High preset is the maximum recommended setting. The Medium presets at all resolutions provide the best frame time consistency, as evidenced by the reported minimum and maximum values. For players who experience sensitivity to frame drops, the Medium preset at 4K (minimum 92 FPS) or 1440p (minimum 149 FPS) offers the most stable experience without dipping below 90 FPS.