Downfall

Downfall, a horror title from early 2016, presents a demanding workload for modern hardware, particularly for integrated graphics. The benchmark data for the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX paired with the AMD Radeon 890M reveals a system that is heavily constrained by its GPU component across all tested resolutions and settings. This analysis breaks down the measured performance, contextualizes it within the broader combo landscape, and provides actionable settings guidance based solely on the provided data.

Resolution Scaling

The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and consistent across all settings presets, clearly identifying the GPU as the primary bottleneck in this pairing. At the "Low" settings preset, the average frame rate falls from 94 FPS at 1920x1080 to 42 FPS at 3840x2160, representing a 55% reduction in performance. This severe scaling indicates that the AMD Radeon 890M's rendering capabilities are exhausted as pixel count increases, with the CPU having ample headroom to spare.

The trend continues with the "Medium" preset, where the average drops from 77 FPS at 1080p to 34 FPS at 4K, again a 55% decline. The "High" preset shows a similar pattern, falling from 63 FPS at 1080p to 28 FPS at 4K, a 56% reduction. Even the most demanding "Ultra" preset, which starts at a low 39 FPS at 1080p, plummets to just 18 FPS at 4K, a 54% decrease. The uniformity of this ~55% drop across all settings is a strong indicator that the limiting factor is purely the fill-rate and shader throughput of the iGPU, not any CPU-side physics or game logic constraints.

This scaling behavior suggests that the game’s resolution is the dominant variable for this combo. The 890M, with its pixel rate of 92.80 GPixel/s, simply cannot sustain playable frame rates at higher resolutions. The data from the "Medium" preset, which includes min and max FPS figures, further illustrates the strain; at 4K, the frame time variance is significant, with a min of 29 FPS and a max of 39 FPS, while at 1080p, the range is much wider (66 to 89 FPS), indicating that the GPU is working closer to its limits at higher resolutions, compressing the frame time variance.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Core Ultra 7 265HX and the Radeon 890M places at rank 2746 out of 2928 tested combos in Downfall. This puts it in the bottom 7% of all systems tested for this specific game, which is a very low standing. This ranking is a direct consequence of the GPU's performance class, which is in the 45th percentile among all GPUs, whereas the CPU sits in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs. The massive gap in their relative standings creates a severe imbalance that hampers the overall gaming experience.

To contextualize the GPU's performance, its average benchmark score of 9210 is nearly identical to the AMD Radeon Vega 8, which scores 9221, a delta of -0.1%. It also trails the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 (9273) by -0.7% and the GTX 465 (9294) by -0.9%. These are all older, low-to-mid-range discrete GPUs, which highlights that the 890M, despite being a modern integrated solution, is competing with hardware from a previous generation. The combo's low rank is, therefore, not a reflection of the CPU, but rather a clear statement that the integrated GPU is the performance ceiling for this system in Downfall.

The CPU's own benchmark scores are strong, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 40642 and a single-core score of 5737. Its average benchmark score of 63173 places it in the 93rd percentile, just 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i7-13790F and 0.7% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX. This shows that the processor is a high-end mobile part, but its power is left largely untapped in this GPU-bound scenario. The data indicates that the system's rank is almost entirely determined by the 890M's capabilities, making the combo a classic example of a CPU outclassing its graphics counterpart for gaming purposes.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process. It features a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, along with a substantial 30 MB of shared L3 cache. In synthetic benchmarks, it demonstrates exceptional multi-threaded performance, scoring 40642 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 17069 in Cinebench R20 multi-core. Its single-thread performance is also strong, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 5737.

However, in Downfall, this CPU power is not the deciding factor. The measured FPS data shows a consistent performance drop that aligns perfectly with GPU load increases from resolution scaling. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see performance scaling that is less dependent on resolution and more consistent across different graphics settings at the same resolution. The data shows the opposite: at 1080p, the FPS drops from 94 at "Low" to 39 at "Ultra," a 59% reduction, which is a classic sign of a GPU that is being overwhelmed by increased graphical complexity.

The 265HX's role here is to feed the 890M with draw calls and game logic, a task it handles with ease. The Passmark multi-thread score of 47985 and the Passmark physics score of 2978 suggest that the CPU is well-equipped for any simulation or AI tasks the horror game might throw at it. Yet, the frame rates are capped by the GPU's ability to process pixels. The 20 cores and 20 threads provide a massive amount of parallel processing capability, but the game's engine is unlikely to be using all of them, and the iGPU simply cannot keep up with the frames the CPU is capable of requesting.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of the system's capabilities. At 1920x1080, the system is most viable. The "Low" preset achieves an average of 94 FPS, which is smooth. The "Medium" preset is also playable, with an average of 77 FPS and a range of 66 to 89 FPS. The "High" preset drops to 63 FPS, which is still acceptable for many players. The "Ultra" preset, however, falls to 39 FPS, which is on the edge of playability for a smooth experience.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance takes a significant hit. The "Low" preset averages 67 FPS, which is still decent. The "Medium" preset averages 55 FPS, with a range of 47 to 63 FPS. The "High" preset drops to 45 FPS, which is getting less comfortable. The "Ultra" preset is largely unplayable, with an average of just 28 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles across the board. The "Low" preset is the only one that approaches playability, averaging 42 FPS. The "Medium" preset averages 34 FPS, with a range of 29 to 39 FPS. The "High" preset averages 28 FPS, and the "Ultra" preset is a slideshow at 18 FPS. The data clearly shows that 4K is not a viable resolution for this combo in Downfall, regardless of the settings used.

The frame time data from the "Medium" preset is particularly revealing. At 1080p, the spread between min (66) and max (89) is 23 FPS, indicating some stutter. At 1440p, the spread is 16 FPS (47 to 63), and at 4K, the spread narrows to 10 FPS (29 to 39). This narrowing of the frame time variance at higher resolutions suggests that the GPU is so saturated that it is consistently producing frames at its maximum capacity, with less fluctuation because it is constantly at its limit.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 890M is an integrated GPU based on the RDNA 3.5 architecture, manufactured on a 4 nm process. It has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Its boost clock is listed at 2900 MHz, and it has a theoretical FP32 performance of 5.939 TFLOPS. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, making it feature-complete for modern APIs. However, its performance class, as indicated by its 45th percentile ranking among all GPUs, is its primary limiting factor.

The GPU's average benchmark score is 9210, placing it just behind the AMD Radeon Vega 8 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960. In the context of Downfall, this performance level translates directly into the FPS figures we see. The game, being a horror title from 2016, is not exceptionally demanding by modern standards, but it still requires a certain level of pixel throughput. The 890M's 32 ROPs and 5.939 TFLOPS of compute power are simply insufficient to drive high resolutions and high settings simultaneously.

The GPU's memory is "System Shared," meaning its bandwidth is "System Dependent." This is a critical detail, as the iGPU must share the system's DDR5 memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. This shared bandwidth can become a secondary bottleneck, especially at higher resolutions where more texture data needs to be fetched. The benchmark data, however, shows that the primary limitation is the raw compute and fill-rate of the GPU, given the consistent ~55% performance drop when scaling from 1080p to 4K. The GPU's low Passmark G3D score of 8076 and its DirectX 11 score of 73 further corroborate its mid-range-to-low-end standing.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to play Downfall with this CPU and GPU combo?

A: Based on the measured data, 1920x1080 is the only resolution that provides consistently playable frame rates. At 1080p, even the "High" preset averages 63 FPS, while the "Ultra" preset drops to an average of 39 FPS.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX bottlenecking the AMD Radeon 890M in this game?

A: No. The data shows a classic GPU-bound scenario. The CPU is in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU is in the 45th percentile. The FPS scales heavily with resolution and settings, which is characteristic of a GPU limitation, not a CPU one.

Q: How does the Radeon 890M compare to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 in this game?

A: The two GPUs have very similar average benchmark scores. The Radeon 890M scores 9210, while the GTX 960 scores 9273, making the 890M 0.7% slower. You can expect similar performance in Downfall from these two parts.

Q: Can this combo run Downfall at 4K resolution?

A: Technically yes, but it is not recommended. The highest average FPS at 3840x2160 is 42 FPS on the "Low" preset. All other settings presets at 4K produce an average of 34 FPS or lower, which is not a smooth experience.

Q: What is the frame time variance like at 1440p on Medium settings?

A: At 2560x1440 with the "Medium" preset, the system averages 55 FPS, with a minimum of 47 FPS and a maximum of 63 FPS. This shows a 16 FPS spread, indicating some inconsistency in frame pacing.

Q: Given the performance, what is the highest settings preset that maintains an average above 60 FPS?

A: The "Medium" preset at 1920x1080 is the highest settings level that achieves an average above 60 FPS, with an average of 77 FPS. The "High" preset at the same resolution falls just short, averaging 63 FPS.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides a clear hierarchy for optimizing the experience in Downfall with this hardware. For a target of 60 FPS or higher, the only viable configurations are at 1920x1080 resolution. The "Medium" preset is the best choice here, as it provides a comfortable average of 77 FPS, leaving some headroom for demanding scenes. The "High" preset at 1080p is also an option, averaging 63 FPS, which is acceptable for a horror game where atmosphere can be more important than raw frame rate. The "Low" preset at 1080p, while averaging 94 FPS, is visually less appealing and unnecessary given the performance of the "Medium" preset.

For players who prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate, the "High" preset at 2560x1440 is a possibility, but the average of 45 FPS may be too low for some. The "Medium" preset at 1440p, averaging 55 FPS, offers a reasonable balance, but the lower frame rate and increased variance compared to 1080p make the lower resolution the better recommendation. The "Ultra" preset is not recommended at any resolution, as it only achieves an average of 39 FPS even at 1080p, which is too low for a consistent experience.

In summary, the optimal configuration for this system is 1920x1080 with the "Medium" preset, which provides the best balance of visual quality and smooth performance. If a higher frame rate is desired, dropping to the "Low" preset at 1080p yields an average of 94 FPS. At 1440p, the "Medium" preset is the most balanced, but the system is clearly more comfortable at 1080p. The 4K resolution should be avoided for this title, as even the lowest settings preset cannot maintain a steady 60 FPS.