Downfall

# Downfall with Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus + AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX produces a system that is clearly GPU-bound at 4K in Downfall, yet becomes increasingly CPU-limited as resolution drops. The measured frame rates reveal a wide performance envelope — from 68 FPS at 4K Ultra to 364 FPS at 1080p Low — indicating that the hardware scales aggressively with both settings and resolution, but the scaling pattern is far from uniform. The data suggests a system with substantial headroom at lower resolutions, while 4K Ultra pushes the GPU to its limits, resulting in a playable but less fluid experience.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate progression across resolutions is steep and consistent, but the magnitude of the drop depends heavily on the settings preset. At High settings, the average FPS falls from 244 at 1080p to 175 at 1440p, a reduction of 69 FPS, and then to 109 at 4K, another 66 FPS drop. This represents a 55% reduction from 1080p to 4K at High settings, indicating that the rendering load at 4K roughly doubles compared to 1080p, which is consistent with the pixel count difference. The system is clearly capable of maintaining high frame rates at 1080p and 1440p, but 4K High still delivers a respectable 109 FPS average, suggesting the GPU has enough headroom for demanding horror scenes.

At Ultra settings, the scaling becomes more dramatic. The average FPS drops from 153 at 1080p to 109 at 1440p (a 44 FPS loss), and then plummets to 68 at 4K. The 4K Ultra figure is less than half of the 1080p Ultra score, demonstrating that the combination of maximum settings and 4K resolution places a severe load on the GPU. The fact that 4K Ultra (68 FPS) is lower than 1440p High (175 FPS) by a factor of 2.6 highlights how much headroom exists in lower-resolution configurations. The scaling pattern strongly suggests that at 4K, the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX is the limiting component, while at 1080p and 1440p, the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus becomes increasingly relevant, particularly at Low settings.

The Low settings data tells the most revealing story about the CPU's role. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 364 FPS, which drops to 260 FPS at 1440p and 162 FPS at 4K. The 1080p Low figure is remarkably high, indicating that the CPU can feed the GPU at very high frame rates when the graphical load is minimal. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings (a 104 FPS drop) is steeper than the corresponding drop at High settings (69 FPS), suggesting that the GPU becomes more of a bottleneck at higher resolutions even at Low settings, while at 1080p Low, the CPU is likely the primary limiter.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the benchmark database, this specific combination of Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX ranks 359th out of 2,928 tested combos for Downfall. This places the system in the top 12.3% of all tested configurations, which is a strong showing given the sheer variety of hardware combinations in the database. The rank is particularly notable because it puts this combo ahead of a vast majority of alternatives, though it does not reach the very top tier of configurations that likely pair even more powerful GPUs with this CPU.

The combo rank of 359 out of 2,928 indicates that while this is a high-end setup, there is still meaningful headroom for improvement. The ranking reflects the measured FPS across all settings and resolutions, meaning that the system's performance at 4K Ultra (68 FPS) drags down its overall standing compared to combos that might excel at lower resolutions. The data also shows that this combo's performance in Downfall is strong enough to place it in the upper percentile of results, but the gap to the top-ranked combos is likely substantial, given the wide distribution of scores in the database.

The ranking is also influenced by the fact that the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has an average benchmark score of 84,003, which places it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, while the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX has an average benchmark score of 19,410, sitting in the 64th percentile of all GPUs. This mismatch in percentile rankings suggests that the GPU is the weaker link in this combo, which is consistent with the observed frame rates at 4K where the GPU is clearly the bottleneck.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX is equipped with 24 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 960.0 GB/s. This large memory capacity and high bandwidth are well-suited for Downfall's horror environments, which often feature complex textures and detailed lighting effects that can consume significant VRAM. The GPU's base clock is 1929 MHz, with a boost clock of 2498 MHz and a game clock of 2365 MHz, and these clocks are relatively high, allowing the card to sustain strong performance in demanding scenes.

The GPU's benchmark results show a PassMark G3D score of 31,238, which is notably higher than its nearest rivals, including the NVIDIA TITAN Xp (19,177, a 1.2% delta) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB (19,334, a 0.4% delta). However, the RX 7900 XTX's average benchmark score of 19,410 places it in the 64th percentile of all GPUs, which is a surprisingly low percentile for a card with this level of performance, suggesting that the benchmark database includes many specialized or workstation GPUs that skew the distribution.

In Downfall, the GPU's role is most apparent at 4K Ultra, where the average FPS drops to 68, indicating that the card is struggling to maintain fluid frame rates under maximum load. The 4K Medium settings produce a more playable 132 FPS average with a minimum of 113 FPS, showing that the GPU has enough headroom to handle medium settings at 4K with acceptable frame pacing. The GPU's 24 GB of VRAM is unlikely to be a limiting factor in Downfall, as the game's textures and geometry can be accommodated within this capacity even at 4K Ultra, but the computational load of maxed-out settings clearly pushes the card to its limits.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal setting for a balance of visual quality and performance is Medium at 1440p, where the system achieves an average of 213 FPS with a minimum of 181 FPS and a maximum of 245 FPS. This configuration provides a smooth and responsive experience, with frame rates well above the threshold for competitive play. At 1440p High, the average drops to 175 FPS, which is still excellent, but the Medium preset offers a 38 FPS advantage while likely sacrificing minimal visual fidelity in a horror game where atmosphere matters more than fine details.

For 4K gaming, the Medium preset is the recommended choice, delivering an average of 132 FPS with a minimum of 113 FPS and a maximum of 152 FPS. This is a significant improvement over 4K High (109 FPS) and a massive leap over 4K Ultra (68 FPS). The 4K Medium configuration provides a frame rate that is smooth enough for immersive horror gameplay without the stutter that might occur at 4K Ultra. The High preset at 4K is also viable at 109 FPS, but the Medium preset offers a 23 FPS improvement, which is more noticeable in fast-paced scenes.

At 1080p, the Low preset achieves 364 FPS, which is excessive for a horror game that does not require competitive frame rates, but it demonstrates the system's capability to push very high frame rates. The Medium preset at 1080p (298 FPS) is far more than sufficient, and the High preset (244 FPS) offers excellent visual quality. The Ultra preset at 1080p (153 FPS) is still playable but represents a steep drop from High, suggesting that players should avoid Ultra unless they prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers an average of 364 FPS at Low settings, 298 FPS at Medium (with a minimum of 253 FPS and a maximum of 343 FPS), 244 FPS at High, and 153 FPS at Ultra. The Medium settings show a narrow frame time distribution, with the minimum and maximum spanning 90 FPS, indicating consistent performance. The gap between High and Ultra at 1080p is 91 FPS, which is substantial and suggests that Ultra settings introduce a significant computational overhead that may not be justified by visual improvements.

At 2560x1440, the average FPS values are 260 at Low, 213 at Medium (minimum 181, maximum 245), 175 at High, and 109 at Ultra. The Medium preset at 1440p shows a spread of 64 FPS between minimum and maximum, which is tighter than at 1080p, suggesting that the GPU is becoming more consistently utilized. The drop from High to Ultra at 1440p is 66 FPS, which is proportionally similar to the 1080p drop, indicating that Ultra settings have a consistent impact on performance regardless of resolution.

At 3840x2160, the system achieves 162 FPS at Low, 132 FPS at Medium (minimum 113, maximum 152), 109 FPS at High, and 68 FPS at Ultra. The Medium preset at 4K has a spread of 39 FPS between minimum and maximum, which is the tightest of all resolutions, indicating that the GPU is operating near its limits and frame times are more consistent under load. The Ultra preset at 4K is the only configuration that falls below 100 FPS, and its 68 FPS average is below the 70 FPS threshold that many players consider the minimum for smooth gameplay, making it the least recommended option.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus features 24 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz. This high core count and fast boost clock are well-suited for Downfall, which can utilize multiple threads for physics, AI, and scene management in a horror environment. The CPU's L3 cache is 36 MB (shared), and it supports DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, providing ample data throughput for feeding the GPU.

The CPU's benchmark scores are impressive, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51,731 and a single-core score of 7,303. These results place the CPU in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, and its average benchmark score of 84,003 is slightly higher than its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, which scores 83,807 (a 0.2% delta). The CPU also outperforms the AMD EPYC 4584PX (83,090, a 1.1% delta) and the AMD EPYC 9135 (82,980, a 1.2% delta), while trailing the AMD EPYC 7F72 (85,072, a -1.3% delta).

In Downfall, the CPU's role is most evident at 1080p Low, where the system achieves 364 FPS, a figure that is likely limited by the CPU's ability to issue draw calls and process game logic. The fact that the frame rate drops to 260 FPS at 1440p Low and 162 FPS at 4K Low indicates that the GPU becomes the limiting factor as resolution increases, even at low settings. The CPU's high single-core performance (Cinebench R23 single-core score of 7,303) is critical for maintaining high frame rates in a game that may have significant per-frame CPU overhead.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Downfall?

A: The data shows that 1440p Medium provides the best balance, with an average of 213 FPS and a minimum of 181 FPS. This configuration offers smooth gameplay while maintaining good visual quality, and it avoids the steep performance penalty of 4K Ultra.

Q: How much FPS do you lose going from 1080p to 4K at High settings?

A: At High settings, the average FPS drops from 244 at 1080p to 175 at 1440p and then to 109 at 4K. This represents a total reduction of 135 FPS, or a 55% decrease from 1080p to 4K.

Q: Is the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX the bottleneck in this system?

A: Yes, at 4K Ultra the average FPS drops to 68, which is well below the performance at lower resolutions, indicating that the GPU is the limiting component. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 364 FPS, suggesting the CPU is capable of much higher frame rates than the GPU can deliver at higher resolutions.

Q: What is the minimum FPS at 4K Medium settings?

A: The measured minimum FPS at 4K Medium is 113, with an average of 132 FPS and a maximum of 152 FPS. This indicates consistent frame pacing that is suitable for a horror game.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus compare to its nearest CPU rival?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has an average benchmark score of 84,003, which is 0.2% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K (83,807). It also outperforms the AMD EPYC 4584PX by 1.1% and the AMD EPYC 9135 by 1.2%, but trails the AMD EPYC 7F72 by 1.3%.

Q: What is the combo rank of this system in Downfall?

A: The combo ranks 359th out of 2,928 tested combinations, placing it in the top 12.3% of all configurations. This ranking reflects the system's strong performance across all measured settings and resolutions.