Downfall

# Downfall Performance Analysis: Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus + AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT

This combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT delivers a distinctly CPU-favored balance in Downfall, ranking 1282nd out of 2928 tested combos — placing it in the upper-middle tier of all tested configurations. The data shows a system that excels at high refresh rates in lighter settings but struggles to maintain consistent frame pacing at maximum visual fidelity, particularly at 4K resolution.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's position at 1282 out of 2928 tested combinations places it in the 56th percentile of all evaluated systems for Downfall. This ranking reflects a pairing where the CPU's substantial compute resources are often underutilized due to GPU limitations at higher resolutions, yet the system still outperforms a significant majority of tested configurations.

Benchmark results indicate the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus holds a 96th percentile ranking among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 84003. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, scores 83807 — a mere 0.2% difference, placing these two processors in a statistical dead heat. The AMD EPYC 4584PX trails by 1.1% at 83090, while the AMD EPYC 9135 sits 1.2% behind at 82980. Interestingly, the AMD EPYC 7F72 actually outperforms the 290K Plus by 1.3% with a score of 85072, indicating that the 290K Plus's top-tier position among consumer chips doesn't translate to absolute leadership in all workloads.

On the GPU side, the Radeon RX 6750 XT achieves a 71st percentile ranking among all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 26011. Its closest competitor, the AMD Radeon R9 M395X, scores 25891 (0.5% behind), while the AMD FirePro W7100 and FirePro D700 trail by 0.6% and 0.7% respectively. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile sits 1.1% behind at 25740. This GPU ranking is notably lower than the CPU's percentile, suggesting the graphics card is the limiting factor in this pairing for demanding scenarios.

The gap between CPU and GPU percentiles — 96 versus 71 — explains the combo's mid-tier overall ranking. In Downfall, where frame rates are highly sensitive to both components, this imbalance becomes apparent: the CPU has headroom to spare, but the GPU constrains performance at higher settings and resolutions.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus brings substantial processing resources to this pairing, featuring 24 cores and 24 threads operating at a base clock of 3.70 GHz and boost clock of 5.80 GHz. This Arrow Lake Refresh processor, built on a 3 nm TSMC process with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, represents one of the most capable desktop CPUs available.

In Downfall, a horror title from 2016, the CPU's role is primarily to maintain minimum frame rates and ensure consistent frame pacing. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51731 and single-core score of 7303 demonstrate exceptional computational throughput. The PassMark multithread score of 60860 and single-thread score of 4823 further corroborate this processor's strength across both heavily threaded and lightly threaded workloads.

The 36 MB of shared L3 cache, combined with 3 MB L2 per core and 192 KB L1 per core, provides ample on-die storage for game assets and physics calculations. The 115.2 GB/s dual-channel DDR5 memory bandwidth ensures the CPU can feed data to the GPU without becoming a bottleneck in most scenarios.

The fact that the 290K Plus has no hyperthreading (24 cores, 24 threads) is noteworthy. In Downfall, which likely doesn't scale perfectly across 24 threads, the high single-thread performance becomes more relevant. The Cinebench R15 single-core score of 736 and R20 score of 3067 indicate excellent per-thread performance, which helps maintain high frame rates even when the game's engine is limited to fewer threads.

Data encryption (PassMark score of 52563) and compression (698346) scores suggest the CPU handles background tasks without interfering with game performance, though these workloads are less relevant to gaming than the physics score of 3315, which directly impacts in-game object interactions.

FAQ

Q: Does this combo achieve 60+ FPS at 4K Ultra settings in Downfall?

A: No. The measured average FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings is 45 FPS, which falls below the 60 FPS threshold. At 4K High settings, the average rises to 72 FPS, making High the highest settings tier that maintains playable frame rates at 4K.

Q: How does the CPU's performance compare to its closest rival?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus scores 84003 on average benchmarks, just 0.2% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K's 83807. The AMD EPYC 7F72 actually leads both with 85072, 1.3% ahead of the 290K Plus. The AMD EPYC 4584PX and EPYC 9135 trail by 1.1% and 1.2% respectively.

Q: What is the best resolution for competitive frame rates with this combo?

A: At 1080p Low settings, the system achieves 240 FPS average. At 1440p Low, it drops to 172 FPS. For high refresh rate monitors, 1080p Medium (197 FPS) or 1440p Medium (140 FPS) provide excellent smoothness while maintaining visual quality.

Q: Is the GPU the bottleneck at 4K resolution?

A: The data strongly suggests yes. At 4K, the frame rate drops from 72 FPS at High settings to 45 FPS at Ultra — a 37.5% reduction. Meanwhile, the CPU's 96th percentile ranking indicates it has significant headroom remaining. The GPU's 71st percentile ranking aligns more closely with the observed frame rates.

Q: How does the RX 6750 XT compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The RX 6750 XT averages 26011 in benchmarks, leading the AMD Radeon R9 M395X (25891) by 0.5%, the AMD FirePro W7100 (25856) by 0.6%, and the AMD FirePro D700 (25842) by 0.7%. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile trails by 1.1% at 25740.

Q: What frame rates can be expected at 1440p Medium settings?

A: The measured average FPS at 2560x1440 with Medium settings is 140 FPS, with a minimum of 119 FPS and maximum of 162 FPS. This represents a strong balance of visual quality and performance for this resolution.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system demonstrates excellent performance across all settings tiers. Low settings produce an average of 240 FPS, Medium reaches 197 FPS with a minimum of 167 and maximum of 226, High achieves 161 FPS, and Ultra drops to 101 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a consistent scaling pattern, with each tier costing roughly 20-25% performance.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain highly playable. Low settings deliver 172 FPS, Medium averages 140 FPS (minimum 119, maximum 162), High reaches 115 FPS, and Ultra maintains 72 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p at each settings tier ranges from 28-29% for Low, Medium, and High presets, while Ultra sees a smaller 29% reduction, suggesting the GPU is becoming the primary constraint.

At 3840x2160, performance becomes more variable. Low settings still deliver a respectable 107 FPS, Medium averages 87 FPS (minimum 74, maximum 100), High drops to 72 FPS, and Ultra falls to 45 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra at 4K is particularly notable — a 27 FPS difference — indicating that Ultra settings introduce computational demands that significantly exceed the GPU's capabilities.

The minimum FPS measurements available for Medium settings across all resolutions show consistent frame pacing: 167 at 1080p, 119 at 1440p, and 74 at 4K. These minimums are 85%, 85%, and 85% of their respective averages, suggesting stable performance without severe frame time spikes in this settings tier.

Resolution Scaling

The transition from 1080p to 1440p to 4K reveals important insights about the system's bottleneck characteristics. At Low settings, the frame rate drops from 240 FPS at 1080p to 172 FPS at 1440p (a 28% reduction) and then to 107 FPS at 4K (a 38% further reduction). At Medium settings, the progression is 197 → 140 → 87, representing 29% and 38% reductions respectively.

High settings show similar scaling: 161 → 115 → 72, with 29% and 37% reductions. Ultra settings follow the pattern with 101 → 72 → 45, showing 29% and 38% reductions.

The consistent ~29% drop from 1080p to 1440p across all settings suggests the GPU is the limiting factor even at lower resolutions, since a CPU-bound scenario would show less degradation. The ~37-38% drop from 1440p to 4K further reinforces this conclusion — the GPU's pixel throughput and memory bandwidth (432.0 GB/s) become increasingly strained as resolution increases.

The RX 6750 XT's 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus provides substantial bandwidth, yet the data shows it cannot maintain the same frame rate scaling efficiency as resolutions increase. The CPU's 96th percentile ranking versus the GPU's 71st percentile ranking predicts exactly this behavior: the CPU has ample headroom, while the GPU approaches its limits.

At 4K Ultra specifically, the 45 FPS average indicates the GPU is heavily loaded. The fact that 4K Low (107 FPS) exceeds 1440p Ultra (72 FPS) demonstrates that resolution has less impact on performance than settings complexity, further pointing to GPU shader and texture throughput as the key constraint.

Settings Recommendations

For 1080p displays, the data supports Medium settings as the optimal choice. The 197 FPS average with a 167 FPS minimum provides excellent smoothness on high refresh rate monitors while maintaining visual quality above Low. High settings at 161 FPS remain viable for 144Hz displays, but Ultra's 101 FPS sacrifices too much frame rate for the visual gains in this horror title.

At 1440p, Medium settings deliver 140 FPS with a 119 FPS minimum, making this the recommended preset for most users. The 115 FPS at High settings remains playable for 100Hz+ displays, while Ultra's 72 FPS may be preferable for players prioritizing visual fidelity over frame rate. Low settings at 172 FPS are only recommended for competitive play where maximum responsiveness is required.

For 4K resolution, the choices become more constrained. High settings at 72 FPS provide the best balance of visual quality and smoothness, comfortably exceeding the 60 FPS threshold. Medium settings at 87 FPS offer additional headroom for demanding scenes, though the visual differences between Medium and High may be less noticeable than the frame rate improvement suggests. Ultra settings at 45 FPS are not recommended for general play, as the sub-60 FPS experience may cause discomfort in a horror game where smooth motion is important for atmosphere.

The minimum FPS data available for Medium settings — 167 at 1080p, 119 at 1440p, and 74 at 4K — indicates this preset provides consistent performance without severe drops. This consistency is particularly valuable in horror games where sudden frame hitches can disrupt immersion.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT serves as the primary performance limiter in this configuration for Downfall. Built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with the Navi 22 chip on a 7 nm TSMC process, this GPU features 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The 40 ray tracing cores provide hardware acceleration for DirectX 12 Ultimate features, though Downfall's 2016 release date means these capabilities are unlikely to be heavily utilized.

The GPU operates at a base clock of 2150 MHz, boosting to 2600 MHz, with a game clock of 2495 MHz. Memory runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), providing 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth across a 192-bit interface. The 12 GB GDDR6 frame buffer is more than sufficient for Downfall's requirements, as evidenced by the consistent performance across resolutions without memory-related stuttering.

The GPU's 71st percentile ranking and average benchmark score of 26011 place it below the CPU's capabilities, and the measured frame rates reflect this imbalance. At 4K Ultra, the 45 FPS average suggests the GPU is operating near its theoretical limits, with the 13.31 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 166.4 GPixel/s pixel rate determining the upper bound of performance.

The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2548 provides additional context for the GPU's DirectX 12 performance, which is relevant since Downfall likely utilizes modern graphics APIs. The PassMark G3D score of 20700 and GPU compute score of 9550 further characterize the GPU's capabilities, though these synthetic benchmarks align with the observed in-game performance.

The GPU's TDP of 250 W and dual-slot design indicate a power-hungry component, though the suggested 600 W PSU provides adequate headroom. The PCIe 4.0 x16 interface ensures sufficient bandwidth for data transfer from the CPU, and the display outputs (1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a) support modern high refresh rate monitors.

The RX 6750 XT's production status as end-of-life and its release date of March 2022 place it as a previous-generation component, which explains its mid-tier ranking. In Downfall, the GPU's RDNA 2.0 architecture delivers acceptable performance at lower settings and resolutions, but cannot fully leverage the CPU's capabilities at higher loads. The data conclusively shows that upgrading this GPU would yield more significant frame rate improvements than any CPU change.