Downfall

# Downfall with Intel Core Ultra 7 265K + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 delivers exceptional frame rates in the 2016 horror title Downfall, ranking 63rd out of 3,716 tested combinations. This puts the combo in the top 1.7% of all tested systems, with the CPU holding a 94th percentile position among all processors and the GPU sitting at the 92nd percentile among all graphics cards. The data shows a system built for high-refresh-rate 1440p gaming and very playable 4K performance, with the CPU's 20 cores and 20 threads proving more than adequate for a game from this era, even at high frame rates.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K is a 20-core, 20-thread desktop processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 3.90 GHz and boosts up to 5.50 GHz, features 30 MB of shared L3 cache alongside 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The CPU's benchmark scores reflect a strong all-round performer: Cinebench R23 multicore reaches 35,850 points, single-core hits 2,020 points, Geekbench multicore scores 23,085, and single-core 2,713, while PassMark multithread shows 58,594 points and single-thread 4,928.

In Downfall, a horror game released in 2016, the CPU's role is less demanding than in modern titles, but the data confirms it is not a bottleneck even at extreme frame rates. At 1080p Low settings, the system averages 452 FPS, which is a frame rate where CPU limitations typically surface. The fact that the average reaches 452 FPS indicates the 265K's single-thread performance — evidenced by its 2,020 Cinebench R23 single-core score — is sufficient to feed the RTX 5090 at these speeds. The closest CPU rivals in the benchmark database include the Intel Xeon 6511P at a 0.2% lower average score, the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 at 0.7% lower, the Intel Core i7-14700KF at 1% higher, and the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F at 1.3% higher. The 265K's performance sits right in this cluster, meaning its capability is comparable to those processors for this workload.

The CPU's 20 cores with no hyper-threading (20 threads total) is a configuration that handles Downfall's threading model easily. The game, being from 2016, likely uses fewer threads, so the multicore advantage of the 265K — reflected in its 20,918 Cinebench R20 multicore score and 58594 PassMark multithread score — may go partially unused. However, the high boost clock of 5.50 GHz ensures that single-threaded game logic runs efficiently. The 125W TDP and unlocked multiplier indicate a chip designed for performance, and the data supports that it delivers in this context, with the system's performance ranking in the 94th percentile for the CPU alone.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo achieves in Downfall, and at what settings?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 452, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The next highest is 370 FPS at 1920x1080 Medium, followed by 323 FPS at 2560x1440 Low.

Q: How does the Ultra preset compare to High at 4K in terms of average FPS?

A: At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset averages 84 FPS, while High averages 135 FPS. This represents a 51 FPS difference (approximately 60.7% higher FPS on High), showing that Ultra settings impose a significant performance cost at 4K.

Q: What is the combo's ranking among all tested systems in Downfall?

A: The combination ranks 63rd out of 3,716 tested combos, placing it in the top 1.7% of all systems tested for this game.

Q: Does the RTX 5090's benchmark position align with its in-game performance?

A: The RTX 5090 holds a 92nd percentile ranking among all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 79,842. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB (0.3% higher), Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB (0.6% higher), AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT (1.1% higher), and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X (1.4% lower). The in-game results reflect this top-tier positioning, with 4K High averaging 135 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more likely to be the limiting factor at 1080p Low settings?

A: At 1920x1080 Low, the system hits 452 FPS average. Given that the CPU scores in the 94th percentile and the GPU in the 92nd, the data suggests the CPU's single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,020) is likely the limiting factor at this extreme frame rate, since the GPU has headroom at such low resolution and settings.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for Medium settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440 Medium, the minimum FPS recorded is 225, with an average of 264 and a maximum of 304. This minimum indicates the combo maintains fluid performance even during demanding scenes.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured data reveals a clear scaling pattern as resolution increases from 1080p to 4K. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 303 at 1920x1080 to 217 at 2560x1440, then to 135 at 3840x2160. This represents a 28.4% decrease from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 37.8% decrease from 1440p to 4K, for a total drop of 55.4% from 1080p to 4K. The scaling is consistent across other settings as well: Low settings go from 452 FPS at 1080p to 323 at 1440p (28.5% drop) and 201 at 4K (37.8% drop from 1440p), while Medium goes from 370 to 264 (28.6% drop) and then to 164 (37.9% drop).

This scaling pattern is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario at higher resolutions. The percentage drops are nearly identical across all settings, which indicates that the RTX 5090's rendering load is scaling predictably with pixel count. At 1080p, the extreme frame rates (452 FPS on Low) suggest the CPU is the primary limiter, as the GPU would be capable of even higher output if the CPU could feed it faster. The 265K's single-core performance, while strong, has a ceiling that becomes apparent at these very high frame rates.

At 4K, the GPU becomes the clear limiting factor, with the RTX 5090's 32 GB of GDDR7 memory and 1.79 TB/s bandwidth being taxed by the higher pixel count. The fact that the frame rates remain playable even at 4K Ultra (84 FPS average) shows the GPU's raw compute power — 104.8 TFLOPS FP32 and 1,636.8 GTexel/s texture rate — is substantial. The resolution scaling data suggests that for competitive or high-refresh-rate play, 1440p is the sweet spot, while 4K is viable for slower-paced horror gameplay where 84-135 FPS is acceptable.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its highest frame rates. Low settings average 452 FPS, Medium averages 370 FPS with a minimum of 314 and maximum of 425, High averages 303 FPS, and Ultra averages 190 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 262 FPS, showing a significant performance cost for higher quality settings. Even at Ultra, the 190 FPS average is well above what most displays can show, making 1080p a resolution where this combo is severely overqualified.

Moving to 2560x1440, frame rates remain very high. Low settings average 323 FPS, Medium averages 264 FPS with a minimum of 225 and maximum of 304, High averages 217 FPS, and Ultra averages 135 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is roughly 28-29% across settings, as noted earlier. At 1440p Ultra, the 135 FPS average is still excellent for most gaming scenarios, and the 217 FPS on High is ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors.

At 3840x2160, the system shows its limits but remains playable. Low settings average 201 FPS, Medium averages 164 FPS with a minimum of 140 and maximum of 189, High averages 135 FPS, and Ultra averages 84 FPS. The 4K Ultra result of 84 FPS is the lowest average recorded, but it's still smooth for a horror game. The Medium setting at 4K, with its minimum of 140 FPS, offers a particularly good balance for 4K displays with high refresh rates. The data shows a consistent pattern: each resolution step down from 1080p to 4K reduces performance by roughly 28-38%, depending on the settings tier.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 combination ranks 63rd out of 3,716 tested combos in Downfall. This places the system in the top 1.7% of all configurations tested, which is an elite tier given the large number of combinations. The ranking reflects both the CPU's and GPU's high percentile positions — 94th for the CPU and 92nd for the GPU — working together effectively.

The CPU's nearest rivals in the benchmark database provide context for its contribution. The Intel Xeon 6511P scores 71,051 (0.2% lower than the 265K's 70,879 average), the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 scores 71,370 (0.7% lower), the Intel Core i7-14700KF scores 70,163 (1% higher), and the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F scores 69,996 (1.3% higher). These deltas are small, indicating the 265K is in a tight performance band with these processors. For Downfall specifically, the 63rd rank suggests that the combo outperforms the vast majority of systems, likely including many with older or lower-tier CPUs paired with high-end GPUs.

The GPU's nearest rivals show a similar pattern. The NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB scores 79,605 (0.3% higher than the RTX 5090's 79,842 average), the Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB scores 79,396 (0.6% higher), the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT scores 78,940 (1.1% higher), and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X scores 80,959 (1.4% lower). These are all professional or mobile workstation GPUs, which are not typical gaming comparisons, but they indicate the RTX 5090's raw compute is competitive with the highest-performing accelerators. In gaming workloads like Downfall, the RTX 5090's 32 GB VRAM and GDDR7 memory bandwidth give it a distinct advantage that the benchmark scores may not fully capture.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and refresh rate. For 1920x1080 displays, even Ultra settings deliver 190 FPS average, which exceeds most monitors' refresh rates. The data shows no reason to drop below High at 1080p, since 303 FPS on High is already beyond what typical 1080p displays (240Hz or lower) can show. Ultra at 1080p is the best choice for maximum visual quality without sacrificing smoothness.

At 2560x1440, the choice becomes more nuanced. High settings at 217 FPS average is ideal for 240Hz displays, while Ultra at 135 FPS is still excellent for 144Hz or 165Hz monitors. The Medium setting, with a minimum of 225 FPS, offers the most consistent high-refresh experience if frame pacing is a concern. For most players, High at 1440p provides the best balance of visual fidelity and performance, as the 217 FPS average leaves headroom for demanding scenes.

At 3840x2160, the data suggests prioritizing settings based on refresh rate. For 120Hz displays, High at 135 FPS average is the best match, as it stays above 120 FPS on average. For 60Hz displays, Ultra at 84 FPS is viable, but High offers more headroom. The Medium setting at 4K, with a minimum of 140 FPS, is the only preset that guarantees 140+ FPS at all times, making it the best choice for 144Hz 4K monitors. The Low setting at 201 FPS average is unnecessary for visual quality in a horror game, as the atmosphere benefits from higher detail settings.

The overall recommendation is to use High settings at any resolution for the best experience, as it delivers 303 FPS at 1080p, 217 FPS at 1440p, and 135 FPS at 4K. Ultra is only recommended for 1080p or for players who prioritize visual quality over frame rate at 1440p and 4K. The measured data shows that the difference between High and Ultra is substantial — 60.7% more FPS on High at 4K — making High the pragmatic choice for most users.