Downfall

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus paired with the AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT delivers a robust 1080p and 1440p experience in Downfall, with 4K Ultra remaining a demanding target. Benchmark data shows this combination ranking in the 64th percentile of tested systems for this title, indicating solid but not top-tier performance. The measured frame rates reveal a system that excels at high-refresh 1440p gaming, while the CPU’s exceptional single-threaded capabilities ensure the GPU is the primary bottleneck at lower resolutions.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 1440p with High settings?

A: At 2560x1440 with High settings, the combo produces an average of 126 FPS. This represents a significant drop from the 188 FPS achieved at Low settings, but remains well above the 79 FPS seen at Ultra settings.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest rival in raw benchmark scores?

A: The RX 7700 XT has an average benchmark score of 22549, which is 0.5% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile’s score of 22435, and 1.7% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 5700’s score of 22170.

Q: What is the CPU’s benchmark percentile ranking?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus ranks in the 96th percentile among all CPUs tested, indicating it outperforms the vast majority of processors in synthetic benchmarks.

Q: What is the best 4K result recorded for this combo?

A: The highest average FPS at 3840x2160 is 117 FPS, achieved with Low settings. The most demanding 4K preset, Ultra, yields only 49 FPS on average.

Q: How much faster is the CPU than the Core Ultra 9 285K?

A: The 290K Plus has an average benchmark score of 84003, which is 0.2% higher than the 285K’s score of 83807. This is a marginal performance edge.

Q: What is the FPS range for 1080p Medium settings?

A: At 1920x1080 with Medium settings, the measured average is 215 FPS, with a minimum of 183 FPS and a maximum of 247 FPS.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT is the primary driver of Downfall’s visual output, equipped with 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU’s boost clock reaches 2544 MHz, with a game clock of 2171 MHz, providing the computational throughput needed for the horror title’s demanding scenes. The 3456 shading units and 96 ROPs handle pixel processing, with a pixel rate of 244.2 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 549.5 GTexel/s, ensuring that high-resolution textures and effects are processed efficiently.

The data indicates the GPU’s performance is solid for its class, with an average benchmark score of 22549 and a percentile rank of 67 among all GPUs. This places it just ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile (22435, +0.5%) and slightly behind the RTX 4060 Mobile (22729, -0.8%). In Downfall, the GPU’s influence is most apparent at higher resolutions; the transition from 1080p to 1440p and then to 4K shows a clear scaling pattern that reflects the increasing load on the memory subsystem and shading units.

The 12 GB VRAM capacity is sufficient for the game’s High and Ultra presets at all tested resolutions, as evidenced by the playable frame rates down to 4K High (78 FPS). The GPU’s RDNA 3.0 architecture, built on a 5 nm process with 28,100 million transistors, provides the raw power for the game’s DirectX 12 Ultimate features. The measured results show that the GPU is the limiting factor at 4K Ultra, where the 49 FPS average indicates the 35.17 TFLOPS FP32 performance is fully saturated, whereas at lower resolutions, the frame rates climb steeply, suggesting the CPU can feed the GPU without becoming a bottleneck.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus provides the processing foundation for this combo, featuring 24 cores and 24 threads (no hyper-threading) with base and boost clocks of 3.70 GHz and 5.80 GHz respectively. This Arrow Lake Refresh part, built on a 3 nm process, has a large 36 MB shared L3 cache, which is critical for game logic, AI pathfinding, and physics calculations in Downfall. The CPU’s benchmark scores are exceptional, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 51731 and a single-core score of 7303, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs.

The processor’s single-threaded performance is particularly relevant for Downfall, where the horror genre often relies on scripted events and complex AI routines that can tax individual cores. The PassMark single-thread score of 4823 confirms this strength. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 84003 is 0.2% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K (83807), 1.1% higher than the AMD EPYC 4584PX (83090), and 1.2% higher than the AMD EPYC 9135 (82980), but 1.3% lower than the AMD EPYC 7F72 (85072).

In the measured FPS data, the CPU’s role is evident at 1080p, where frame rates reach as high as 263 FPS on Low settings. At this resolution, the GPU is not the bottleneck, and the CPU’s ability to issue draw calls and process game state quickly determines the upper limit. The data shows that the CPU can push the RX 7700 XT to its maximum output at 1080p, but as resolution increases, the GPU’s workload grows, and the CPU’s advantage becomes less pronounced. The 24 cores also ensure that background tasks and the game’s multi-threaded rendering pipeline do not cause frame hitches, as evidenced by the consistent frame times at Medium settings across all resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data for Downfall reveals a clear performance hierarchy across resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the combo delivers exceptional frame rates: Low settings produce 263 FPS average, Medium hits 215 FPS (min 183, max 247), High reaches 176 FPS, and Ultra drops to 110 FPS. These numbers indicate that 1080p is well within the GPU’s comfort zone, with even Ultra settings remaining highly playable for high-refresh monitors.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates scale down proportionally. Low settings yield 188 FPS, Medium averages 154 FPS (min 131, max 177), High produces 126 FPS, and Ultra falls to 79 FPS. The 1440p Ultra result is still above 60 FPS, making it viable for standard refresh displays, while the Medium and High presets offer excellent balance for 144Hz monitors. The 4K results at 3840x2160 show a more dramatic drop: Low settings average 117 FPS, Medium averages 96 FPS (min 81, max 110), High averages 78 FPS, and Ultra averages just 49 FPS.

The data shows clear step-downs between settings presets. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 153 FPS (263 to 110), while at 1440p it is 109 FPS (188 to 79), and at 4K it is 68 FPS (117 to 49). This pattern indicates that the GPU’s compute resources, particularly the 3456 shading units, are the primary constraint as resolution increases. The 4K Ultra result of 49 FPS is the only sub-60 FPS outcome, suggesting that this preset is too demanding for the RX 7700 XT at that resolution.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations, this specific pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT ranks 1041 out of 2928 combos for Downfall. This places the combo in the 64.5th percentile (calculated from the rank), meaning it outperforms roughly two-thirds of all tested systems for this game. This ranking is respectable, but not elite, reflecting the GPU’s mid-range positioning despite the CPU’s top-tier status.

The ranking is heavily influenced by the GPU’s performance ceiling. While the CPU ranks in the 96th percentile overall, the GPU’s 67th percentile ranking pulls the combo down from the upper echelon. The delta between the CPU’s high benchmark scores and the GPU’s more modest scores means that in GPU-bound scenarios (4K, Ultra settings), the combo performs similarly to systems with weaker CPUs but comparable GPUs. Conversely, at 1080p Low settings, the CPU’s strength allows the combo to achieve frame rates that rival systems with more powerful GPUs.

The rank of 1041 out of 2928 suggests that for Downfall, this combo is a solid mid-pack performer. It will comfortably handle the game at 1440p with High settings (126 FPS) and even 4K with Medium settings (96 FPS), but it will not compete with top-tier combos that feature higher-end GPUs like the RTX 4080 or RX 7900 XTX. The data indicates that the CPU is not holding the combo back; upgrading the GPU alone would yield significant gains, while upgrading the CPU would have marginal impact on Downfall’s frame rates.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings preset depends on the target resolution and refresh rate. For 1920x1080, the High preset at 176 FPS is the best balance of visual quality and performance, as it provides a significant improvement over Medium (215 FPS) in fidelity while still exceeding the refresh rate of most 144Hz monitors. The Ultra preset at 110 FPS is also viable for 144Hz displays, making it the recommended choice for those prioritizing visual detail over maximum frame rate.

For 2560x1440, the Medium preset at 154 FPS is the best overall choice for high-refresh gaming, as it provides a smooth experience on 144Hz panels while maintaining decent visual quality. The High preset at 126 FPS is also excellent for 120Hz monitors, and the Ultra preset at 79 FPS is acceptable for 60Hz displays, though the visual upgrade may not justify the 47 FPS drop from High. For 3840x2160, the Medium preset at 96 FPS is the sweet spot, offering playable performance on 60Hz displays with good visual fidelity. The High preset at 78 FPS is also viable, but the Low preset at 117 FPS is not recommended due to the significant visual compromise for only a 21 FPS gain over Medium.

The data shows that the Medium preset consistently offers the best balance across all resolutions, with frame rates that are 37-39% higher than High (e.g., 215 vs 176 at 1080p) while still providing a reasonable visual experience. Players with 144Hz 1440p monitors should select Medium for the best experience, while those with 4K 60Hz displays can use Medium or High. The Ultra preset is only recommended for 1080p, where the 110 FPS average still provides smooth gameplay.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals the relative bottleneck of the GPU in this combo. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 176 at 1080p to 126 at 1440p (a 28.4% decrease) and then to 78 at 4K (a 55.7% decrease from 1080p). This scaling pattern is steeper than the pixel count increase (1080p to 4K is 4x the pixels, but FPS only drops to 44.3% of the original), indicating that the GPU is not purely pixel-bound and that other factors, such as memory bandwidth and shading complexity, play a role.

The Low settings scaling is more linear: 263 FPS at 1080p drops to 188 at 1440p (28.5% decrease) and then to 117 at 4K (55.5% decrease from 1080p). This consistency suggests that at Low settings, the GPU is more purely resolution-bound, with the 432.0 GB/s memory bandwidth becoming a limiting factor at higher resolutions. The Medium settings show a similar pattern: 215 FPS at 1080p, 154 at 1440p (28.4% decrease), and 96 at 4K (55.3% decrease).

The data indicates that the CPU is not a significant bottleneck at any resolution. The frame rates scale almost identically across all presets when moving from 1080p to 4K, which would not be the case if the CPU were limiting performance at lower resolutions. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the 1080p frame rates would plateau regardless of the GPU’s capabilities. Instead, the consistent scaling pattern points to the GPU as the primary constraint. The 4K Ultra result of 49 FPS, which is 44.5% of the 1080p Ultra result of 110 FPS, further confirms that the GPU’s 35.17 TFLOPS is being fully utilized at higher resolutions, while the CPU has ample headroom to maintain frame delivery.