Downfall

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and Intel Arc B390 combination delivers playable but constrained performance in Downfall, with the integrated graphics acting as the definitive bottleneck across all tested configurations. The combo ranks in the 2589th position out of 2928 tested combinations, placing it in the lower percentile of systems, yet the CPU’s substantial 24-core and 24-thread configuration ensures that frame rates are governed almost entirely by the GPU’s 7.680 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 60.00 GPixel/s pixel rate. Benchmark results indicate that the system can achieve 106 FPS at 1080p Low, but this figure collapses to 20 FPS at 4K Ultra, revealing a steep performance curve that is characteristic of a processor far outpacing its graphics solution.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is a high-core-count desktop processor built on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture, featuring 24 cores and 24 threads. Its base clock of 3.70 GHz can boost up to 5.50 GHz, and it carries a 125 W TDP. This CPU sits in the 96th percentile of all processors, with an average benchmark score of 93,785, indicating that it is a top-tier part for compute-heavy workloads. In Downfall, a 2016 horror title, the CPU’s role is to feed frames to the GPU, and the data shows that it is never the limiting factor at any resolution or settings level.

The processor’s multi-core strength is evident in its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44,253 and its Passmark multi-thread score of 68,574. However, Downfall is not a title that scales linearly with core counts; it is a game from 2016, and its engine likely relies more on single-thread performance. Here, the 270K Plus still excels, posting a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,439 and a Passmark single-thread score of 5,068. These numbers place it well above the requirements for the game’s logic and physics, meaning that the CPU has ample headroom to process game state updates, AI, and draw calls without breaking a sweat.

The CPU’s memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s over dual-channel DDR5 further supports the GPU’s needs, though the Arc B390 uses System Shared memory, which is dependent on the system’s RAM configuration. The 36 MB of shared L3 cache also helps reduce latency for frequently accessed data. When comparing the CPU to its nearest rivals, the Intel Xeon 6520P has an average score of 93,786 (0% delta), while the AMD EPYC 4564P sits at 95,183 (-1.5%), and the AMD EPYC 9175F at 95,615 (-1.9%). These deltas are minuscule, confirming that the 270K Plus is competitively positioned among workstation-class chips, but such raw compute power is largely wasted in Downfall due to the GPU constraint.

The benchmark results show that as resolution increases from 1080p to 4K, the average FPS drops consistently across all settings, which is a classic sign of GPU limitation. For example, at High settings, the system goes from 71 FPS at 1080p to 51 FPS at 1440p, and finally to 32 FPS at 4K. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect the frame rates to remain relatively flat across resolutions, as the same number of draw calls would be processed regardless of pixel count. The steep decline proves that the GPU is saturated, and the CPU is effectively idle waiting for the next frame. Therefore, the CPU’s high clocks and core count do not translate into higher frame rates in this title; they simply ensure that the processor never introduces stutter or frame-pacing issues.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus + Intel Arc B390 combination ranks 2589th out of 2928 tested combos in Downfall. This places the system in the bottom 12% of all tested configurations, which is a poor showing for a CPU that ranks in the 96th percentile overall. The disparity between CPU rank and combo rank highlights the immense drag of the integrated graphics. The Arc B390, which is an IGP (Integrated Graphics Processor) part, ranks in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 1,482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12.

To contextualize the GPU’s position, its nearest rivals are all legacy NVIDIA parts: the GeForce GT 520MX (1,463 score, +1.3% delta), the GeForce 800M (1,460, +1.5%), the GeForce GT 625 OEM (1,446, +2.5%), and the GeForce GT 710 (1,443, +2.7%). These are entry-level parts from over a decade ago, and the Arc B390 only barely outperforms them. This explains why the combo rank is so low; the system is effectively paired with a GPU that is only marginally faster than a GeForce GT 710, which is not designed for modern gaming at high settings.

In the context of Downfall, a horror game that can be demanding on shadows and lighting, the combo’s low rank means that most other systems tested will offer higher frame rates. The data shows that the combo achieves a maximum of 106 FPS at 1080p Low, but this is an outlier; the more realistic scenario is the 4K Ultra result of 20 FPS, which is unplayable. The rank of 2589 out of 2928 suggests that the system is suitable only for low-resolution, low-settings play, and even then, it is far from the top of the charts. The CPU’s power is irrelevant when the GPU cannot keep up, and the benchmark data reflects this imbalance clearly.

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

The measured FPS data reveals a consistent and steep drop in performance as resolution scales from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At Low settings, the system delivers 106 FPS at 1080p, which drops to 76 FPS at 1440p (-28.3%), and then to 47 FPS at 4K (-38.2% from 1440p). This pattern is typical of a GPU-bound scenario, where the number of pixels to render increases quadratically with resolution, and the GPU’s fill rate becomes the limiting factor. The Arc B390’s pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s are simply insufficient to maintain high frame rates at higher resolutions.

At Medium settings, the same trend is observed: 87 FPS at 1080p, 62 FPS at 1440p, and 39 FPS at 4K. The min FPS at 1080p Medium is 74, and the max is 100, indicating some variance but still within a playable range. At 1440p Medium, the min FPS drops to 53 and max to 71. At 4K Medium, the min FPS is 33 and max is 44, which shows that the frame rate is not just lower on average but also more unstable, likely due to the GPU struggling to keep up with the pixel workload.

The drop from 1080p to 4K is most dramatic at High settings, where the system goes from 71 FPS to 51 FPS to 32 FPS. This represents a 54.9% reduction in performance from 1080p to 4K. For a GPU-bound system, this is expected, but the absolute numbers are low. The CPU is capable of much higher frame rates, as evidenced by the 106 FPS at 1080p Low, but the GPU cannot scale beyond its limits. The data strongly indicates that the limiting component is the GPU, not the CPU. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rates would show a plateau at lower resolutions, where the CPU’s frame time exceeds the GPU’s render time. Here, the frame rates continue to climb as resolution drops, which is the opposite of a CPU-bound scenario.

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

The benchmark data provides exact average FPS figures for each resolution and settings combination. At 3840x2160 (4K), the system achieves 32 FPS on High, 47 FPS on Low, 39 FPS on Medium, and 20 FPS on Ultra. The Medium setting is the only one with min/max data, showing a range of 33 to 44 FPS. The Ultra setting at 20 FPS is the lowest result in the entire dataset, making it effectively unplayable. The Low setting at 47 FPS is the most viable at 4K, but it still falls below the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay.

At 2560x1440 (1440p), the results are more promising. High settings yield 51 FPS, Low yields 76 FPS, Medium yields 62 FPS (with min 53 and max 71), and Ultra yields 32 FPS. The Low setting at 76 FPS is the only configuration that approaches a consistently smooth experience, while Ultra at 32 FPS mirrors the 4K High result. The Medium setting at 62 FPS is borderline playable, but the min FPS of 53 suggests occasional dips that could be noticeable in a horror game.

At 1920x1080 (1080p), the system shows its best performance. High settings deliver 71 FPS, Low delivers 106 FPS, Medium delivers 87 FPS (with min 74 and max 100), and Ultra delivers 44 FPS. The Low setting at 106 FPS is the highest result across the entire test matrix, indicating that the system can handle the game smoothly at reduced graphical fidelity. The Medium setting at 87 FPS is also respectable, and even High at 71 FPS is playable. However, Ultra at 44 FPS is below the 60 FPS target, showing that the GPU’s limitations become apparent even at 1080p when settings are maxed out.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Arc B390 is an integrated graphics processor based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on a 3 nm process. It has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz, with 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The GPU also features 12 ray tracing cores, though Downfall from 2016 is unlikely to use them. The memory is System Shared, meaning it relies on the system’s DDR5 RAM, with bandwidth being system-dependent. This is a critical limitation, as the GPU must compete with the CPU for memory bandwidth, and the shared memory architecture is typically slower than dedicated VRAM.

The GPU’s FP32 compute is rated at 7.680 TFLOPS, and its pixel rate is 60.00 GPixel/s. These figures are modest, and the GPU ranks in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, with a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,482. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1,463), GeForce 800M (1,460), GT 625 OEM (1,446), and GT 710 (1,443). The Arc B390 is only 1.3% faster than the GT 520MX, which is a stark indicator of its entry-level performance envelope.

In Downfall, the GPU’s role is to render the game’s horror environment, including textures, lighting, and shadows. The 24 ROPs and 48 TMUs are the key components for pixel and texture processing, and their limited count explains why the system struggles at higher resolutions. At 4K, the GPU must process four times the pixels of 1080p, and the 60.00 GPixel/s pixel rate is insufficient to maintain high frame rates. The texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s also becomes a bottleneck when detailed textures are loaded at High or Ultra settings.

The boost clock of 2500 MHz is relatively high for an IGP, but the thermal and power constraints of an integrated solution (80 W TDP) limit sustained performance. The system shared memory further exacerbates the issue, as the memory bandwidth is system-dependent and likely far lower than what a dedicated GPU would offer. This is evident in the frame rate drops at higher settings; for example, the 4K Ultra result of 20 FPS is a direct consequence of the GPU’s inability to handle the combined load of resolution and graphical fidelity.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for this system in Downfall?*

A: The data shows that 1080p Low yields the highest average FPS at 106, followed by 1080p Medium at 87 FPS. For a balance of visuals and performance, 1080p High at 71 FPS is the highest quality option that remains above 60 FPS.

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

A: The GPU is the definitive bottleneck. The CPU ranks in the 96th percentile, while the GPU ranks in the 9th percentile. The frame rate drops as resolution increases, which is characteristic of a GPU-bound system.

Q: How does the Arc B390 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B390 scores 1,482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. It is 1.3% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1,463), 1.5% faster than the GeForce 800M (1,460), 2.5% faster than the GT 625 OEM (1,446), and 2.7% faster than the GT 710 (1,443).

Q: Can this system achieve 60 FPS at 1440p?

A: Yes, but only at Low settings, where it averages 76 FPS. At Medium settings, it drops to 62 FPS, and at High settings, it falls to 51 FPS. Ultra settings produce only 32 FPS at 1440p.

Q: What is the lowest frame rate recorded, and at what settings?

A: The lowest average frame rate is 20 FPS at 3840x2160 (4K) with Ultra settings. The next lowest is 32 FPS, which occurs at both 4K High and 1440p Ultra.

*Q: How does the combo rank among all tested systems in Downfall?*

A: The combo ranks 2589th out of 2928 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 12% of all systems tested for this game.