Downfall

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus compare to its closest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K?

A: The 290K Plus posts an average benchmark score of 84,003, which is a 0.2% improvement over the 285K's 83,807. This places the two processors in a statistical tie, with the 290K Plus edging ahead by a negligible margin.

Q: What is the GPU's standing relative to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT averages 17,083 in benchmark scores, which is 0.7% behind the RTX 3070's 17,208. The RX 7600 XT sits in the 60th percentile among all GPUs, indicating a mid-range positioning.

Q: What frame rates can this combo achieve at 1080p on High settings?

A: At 1920x1080 with High settings, the system delivers an average of 135 FPS. This is a substantial 39 FPS jump over the 4K High result of 96 FPS at 1440p, showing strong headroom at lower resolutions.

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

A: The combo ranks 1,816th out of 2,928 tested combinations, placing it in the lower-middle portion of the database. This rank reflects the GPU's mid-tier performance rather than the CPU's top-tier capabilities.

Q: What are the minimum and maximum FPS at 1440p Medium settings?

A: At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the combo averages 117 FPS with a minimum of 100 FPS and a maximum of 135 FPS. The 35 FPS spread between min and max indicates some frame pacing variability but no severe stuttering.

Q: Does the CPU's 24-core configuration help in this horror title?

A: The Core Ultra 9 290K Plus features 24 cores and 24 threads with a boost clock of 5.80 GHz. While this provides massive compute headroom, Downfall's measured FPS scaling shows the GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher resolutions, so the CPU's full potential is rarely exercised.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor built on TSMC's 3 nm process with a 125 W TDP. It operates from a 3.70 GHz base clock up to a 5.80 GHz boost clock, and its 36 MB of shared L3 cache provides substantial on-die storage for frequently accessed data. The chip's PassMark single-thread score of 4,823 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 7,303 demonstrate strong per-core performance, which matters for Downfall's gameplay logic and AI routines.

In multi-threaded workloads, the CPU is exceptional: its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51,731 and PassMark multi-thread score of 60,860 place it in the 96th percentile among all CPUs. The 290K Plus outperforms the AMD EPYC 7F72 by 1.3% in average benchmark score (84,003 vs. 85,072 for the EPYC, meaning the EPYC leads by that margin), while beating the EPYC 9135 by 1.2%. This level of compute power is far beyond what a horror game like Downfall requires, meaning the CPU is effectively never the bottleneck in this configuration.

The 290K Plus supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel interface and 115.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth, along with ECC memory support. It also integrates Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, though the discrete RX 7600 XT renders all game frames. The CPU's PCIe Gen 5 interface with 20 lanes from the CPU provides ample bandwidth for the GPU, though the RX 7600 XT only uses PCIe 4.0 x8.

The benchmark data reveals that the CPU's role in Downfall is to stay out of the way. At 1080p Low, the combo hits 201 FPS average, which is the highest measured result across all configurations. This indicates that even at the lowest settings, the CPU can feed the GPU enough data to maintain high frame rates. The 290K Plus's 24 cores may be overkill for a title with modest threading requirements, but the high boost clock ensures that single-threaded game logic runs without delays. The CPU's average benchmark score of 84,003 is only 0.2% above the 285K, meaning there is no meaningful performance difference between the two processors in this context.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 33 chip, manufactured on TSMC's 6 nm process. It features 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU runs at a 1,980 MHz base clock and boosts to 2,755 MHz, with a game clock of 2,470 MHz. Its 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs provide a raw compute throughput of 22.57 TFLOPS FP32.

The GPU's 16 GB VRAM capacity is notable for a mid-range card and exceeds what most games at 1080p or 1440p require. In Downfall, the memory capacity does not appear to be a constraint, as the frame rates scale predictably with resolution and settings. The GPU's PassMark G3D score of 17,132 places it in the 60th percentile among all GPUs, which is a solidly mid-range position. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690, scores 17,037 (0.3% behind), while the RTX 3070 leads by 0.7% with a score of 17,208.

At 1080p, the GPU delivers excellent performance: 201 FPS at Low, 164 FPS at Medium, 135 FPS at High, and 84 FPS at Ultra. The drop from Low to Ultra is 117 FPS, showing that settings have a dramatic impact on the GPU's workload. At 1440p, the same pattern holds with 143 FPS at Low and 60 FPS at Ultra. At 4K, the Ultra setting drops to 37 FPS average, which is below the playable threshold for most users, while Low maintains 89 FPS.

The GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,348 and Geekbench OpenCL score of 92,426 indicate that its compute performance scales appropriately for its class. The RX 7600 XT's 190 W TDP and dual-slot design with a single 8-pin power connector make it a straightforward install for most systems. The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, ensuring compatibility with modern game APIs.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT ranks 1,816th out of 2,928 tested combos in Downfall, placing it in the 62nd percentile of all combinations. This rank is heavily influenced by the GPU's mid-range standing, as the CPU is in the top 4% of all processors. The disparity between the CPU's 96th percentile ranking and the combo's 62nd percentile ranking illustrates that the GPU is the limiting factor in this pairing.

Among the GPU's nearest rivals, the RX 7600 XT's 17,083 average score is competitive with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 (17,037, 0.3% behind) and the AMD Radeon HD 7970M (17,019, 0.4% behind), while trailing the RTX 3070 by 0.7%. This tight grouping means that swapping the RX 7600 XT for any of these alternatives would produce nearly identical frame rates in Downfall. The combo's rank of 1,816 out of 2,928 suggests that there are roughly 1,100 combos that perform better, most of which likely feature higher-tier GPUs.

The CPU's nearest rivals show a similar clustering: the 290K Plus (84,003) is 0.2% ahead of the 285K (83,807), 1.1% ahead of the EPYC 4584PX (83,090), and 1.2% ahead of the EPYC 9135 (82,980). The EPYC 7F72 leads the 290K Plus by 1.3% with a score of 85,072. These sub-2% differences mean that CPU choice has virtually no impact on the combo's ranking in Downfall, as the game is not CPU-bound at the tested settings.

The measured FPS data confirms this analysis. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 201 FPS, which is likely near the CPU's maximum frame delivery capability. However, at 4K Ultra, the frame rate drops to 37 FPS, a 164 FPS reduction that is entirely attributable to the GPU's rendering limits. The combo's mid-pack ranking is therefore a reflection of the GPU's performance class rather than any deficiency in the CPU.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear pattern of GPU-bound scaling across resolutions. At 1080p High, the combo delivers 135 FPS. Moving to 1440p High reduces the average to 96 FPS, a 28.9% drop. At 4K High, the average falls to 60 FPS, another 37.5% reduction from 1440p. This scaling is consistent with a GPU that is being pushed progressively harder as pixel count increases.

The Low settings show a similar trend: 201 FPS at 1080p, 143 FPS at 1440p, and 89 FPS at 4K. The 1080p to 1440p drop is 58 FPS (28.9%), while the 1440p to 4K drop is 54 FPS (37.8%). These percentages align closely with the pixel count increases, confirming that the GPU is the limiting component across all settings.

At Medium settings, the combo delivers 164 FPS at 1080p, 117 FPS at 1440p, and 73 FPS at 4K. The 1080p to 1440p reduction is 47 FPS (28.7%), and the 1440p to 4K reduction is 44 FPS (37.6%). The consistency of these percentage drops across settings indicates that the game's rendering load scales linearly with resolution, and the GPU's fixed resources are the bottleneck.

Ultra settings show the steepest scaling: 84 FPS at 1080p, 60 FPS at 1440p, and 37 FPS at 4K. The 1080p to 1440p drop is 24 FPS (28.6%), and the 1440p to 4K drop is 23 FPS (38.3%). The 4K Ultra result of 37 FPS is the only measured configuration below 60 FPS, suggesting that this settings/resolution combination exceeds the GPU's comfortable operating range.

The data indicates that the CPU is never the limiting factor in this combo. The consistent scaling percentages across all settings and resolutions point to a GPU-bound scenario. The RX 7600 XT's 16 GB VRAM and 288 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient at 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K with Ultra settings, the GPU's compute throughput of 22.57 TFLOPS is insufficient to maintain high frame rates.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its strongest performance. Low settings produce an average of 201 FPS, the highest result in the entire dataset. Medium settings average 164 FPS with a minimum of 139 FPS and a maximum of 189 FPS, giving a 50 FPS spread. High settings average 135 FPS, while Ultra settings drop to 84 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a total reduction of 117 FPS, with the largest single-step drop occurring from High to Ultra at 51 FPS.

At 2560x1440, performance remains strong but shows the GPU working harder. Low settings average 143 FPS, a 58 FPS reduction from 1080p Low. Medium settings average 117 FPS with a minimum of 100 FPS and a maximum of 135 FPS. High settings average 96 FPS, and Ultra settings drop to 60 FPS. The 1440p results show that the GPU can still maintain playable frame rates at all settings, though the Ultra result of 60 FPS is exactly at the typical target threshold.

At 3840x2160, the GPU's limitations become apparent. Low settings average 89 FPS, which is still smooth. Medium settings average 73 FPS with a minimum of 62 FPS and a maximum of 84 FPS. High settings average 60 FPS, and Ultra settings drop to 37 FPS. The 4K Ultra result is the only configuration that falls below 60 FPS in the entire dataset, making it the only undesirable combination for smooth gameplay.

The Medium settings at each resolution provide the most complete data, with min/max values recorded. At 1080p, the 139-189 FPS range indicates consistent performance. At 1440p, the 100-135 FPS range shows a tighter clustering. At 4K, the 62-84 FPS range has a 22 FPS spread, which is the narrowest of the three, suggesting that the GPU maintains relatively stable performance even under heavy load.

The overall FPS pattern shows that this combo is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming. At 1080p, even Ultra settings clear 84 FPS, providing a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. At 1440p, Ultra settings hit exactly 60 FPS on average, which is acceptable for most players. The 4K results are serviceable at Low and Medium settings but fall short at High and Ultra. The data suggests that players targeting 4K should stick to Medium settings or below, while 1080p and 1440p players can enjoy all settings without concern.