Downfall

# Downfall Performance Analysis: Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti

This combination of Intel's flagship Arrow Lake Refresh processor and NVIDIA's Ampere-based RTX 3070 Ti produces a fascinating dataset in Downfall, a 2016 horror title that remains surprisingly demanding. The measured FPS across three resolutions and four settings tiers reveals a system that is clearly CPU-limited at lower resolutions but transitions to GPU-bound behavior at 4K, with the combo ranking in the 1328th position out of 3716 tested combinations — placing it in the upper third of all tested systems but far from the top tier.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 1328 out of 3716 tested combinations places this pairing in the 64th percentile overall — a solid but not spectacular position. This ranking is particularly interesting given the CPU's individual performance class. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus sits at the 96th percentile against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 84003. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K (0.2% faster), the AMD EPYC 4584PX (1.1% faster), and the AMD EPYC 9135 (1.2% faster), while the AMD EPYC 7F72 trails by 1.3%.

The GPU, meanwhile, ranks at the 75th percentile against all GPUs with an average score of 29945. Its closest competitors are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Mobile (0.1% faster), the AMD Radeon RX 6800 (0.5% faster), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti (0.5% slower), and the AMD Radeon RX 6700 (1.6% slower). This creates an interesting mismatch: the CPU is near the top of its class, while the GPU is solidly mid-range. The 64th percentile combo ranking reflects this asymmetry — the GPU becomes the limiting factor in many scenarios, dragging the overall position below what the CPU alone might suggest.

The data implies that this pairing is balanced toward CPU-heavy workloads. In a game like Downfall, which is a horror title likely to feature complex AI and physics calculations, the 24-core processor can shine, but the GPU's 8 GB of VRAM and mid-range compute capabilities cap the visual experience. The 36% of tested combos that rank higher likely pair similar CPUs with more powerful GPUs, suggesting this configuration is optimized for scenarios where CPU performance matters more than raw graphical throughput.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti brings 8 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 608.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock runs at 1188 MHz with 19 Gbps effective speed, while the GPU core operates between a 1575 MHz base and 1770 MHz boost clock. These specifications place it firmly in the upper-midrange tier, as evidenced by its 75th percentile ranking against all GPUs.

In Downfall, the GPU's role becomes apparent when examining the performance deltas between settings at each resolution. At 1080p, the jump from Low to Ultra settings costs 157 FPS (from 270 to 113), which represents a 58% performance drop. This massive scaling factor suggests that the GPU is being pushed hard even at lower resolutions, with the 8 GB VRAM buffer potentially becoming a constraint as texture quality and effects increase.

The GPU's 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs provide substantial compute throughput, with FP32 performance rated at 21.75 TFLOPS. Its 48 RT cores and 192 tensor cores add hardware acceleration for ray tracing and DLSS, though the measured data does not specify whether these features are enabled in Downfall. The 169.9 GPixel/s pixel rate and 339.8 GTexel/s texture rate suggest the card can handle high-resolution textures, but the 8 GB memory capacity may be insufficient for the highest quality presets at 4K in this title.

The RTX 3070 Ti's position relative to its nearest rivals — within 1.6% of the RX 6700, RX 6800, RTX 2080 Ti, and RTX 5070 Mobile — indicates that the GPU is not a class leader but rather a consistent performer. Its 290 W TDP and 600 W suggested PSU requirement are noteworthy, though the measured FPS data shows the card handling Downfall comfortably even at 4K Ultra with 50 FPS average.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS progression from 1080p to 4K reveals the classic signs of a system transitioning from CPU-bound to GPU-bound behavior. At 1080p Low, the system delivers 270 FPS average — a figure so high that it strongly suggests the CPU is the primary limiter, as the RTX 3070 Ti would likely struggle to produce such frame rates if fully utilized. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus, with its 5.80 GHz boost clock and 24 cores, provides the raw processing power to feed the GPU at these lower resolutions.

Moving to 1440p, the Low setting drops to 193 FPS, a 28.5% reduction from 1080p. This scaling is relatively mild, indicating that the system is still partially CPU-limited at this resolution. However, the gap narrows as settings increase: High goes from 181 FPS at 1080p to 129 FPS at 1440p (28.7% drop), while Ultra drops from 113 to 81 FPS (28.3% drop). The consistency of these percentages suggests a balanced scaling pattern where both CPU and GPU are contributing to the performance envelope.

At 4K, the picture changes dramatically. Low settings produce 120 FPS, a 37.8% drop from 1440p, while High yields 80 FPS (38% drop from 1440p). The Ultra preset at 4K manages only 50 FPS, a 38.3% reduction. This consistent ~38% scaling across all settings at the 4K transition is a clear indicator of GPU limitation — the RTX 3070 Ti's 8 GB VRAM and 608.3 GB/s bandwidth are being saturated by the pixel throughput required at 3840x2160.

The data implies that at 1080p and 1440p, the CPU's 24 cores and 24 threads with 36 MB of shared L3 cache are more than sufficient, allowing the GPU to become the bottleneck at higher resolutions. The 50 FPS floor at 4K Ultra is respectable for a horror game, where atmosphere often matters more than frame rate, but it does indicate that this combination is best suited for 1440p gaming where it can maintain 81 FPS or higher even at maximum settings.

FAQ

Q: Is this combo better suited for 1080p or 1440p gaming in Downfall?

A: The measured data shows strong performance at both resolutions, but 1440p offers a better balance. At 1440p Ultra, the system averages 81 FPS, while 1080p Ultra averages 113 FPS. The 28% performance drop from 1080p to 1440p is acceptable given the significant resolution increase, and the 81 FPS average at 1440p Ultra is well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay.

Q: How does the RTX 3070 Ti compare to its closest GPU rivals?

A: The RTX 3070 Ti's average benchmark score of 29945 places it within 1.6% of the AMD Radeon RX 6700 (30433), 0.5% of the AMD Radeon RX 6800 (30095), and 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti (29783). The RTX 5070 Mobile is nearly identical at 29928, just 0.1% slower.

Q: What is the CPU's performance standing relative to other processors?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus scores 84003 on average, placing it at the 96th percentile of all CPUs. It is 0.2% faster than the Core Ultra 9 285K (83807), 1.1% faster than the AMD EPYC 4584PX (83090), and 1.2% faster than the AMD EPYC 9135 (82980), while trailing the AMD EPYC 7F72 (85072) by 1.3%.

Q: Does the 8 GB VRAM limit performance at 4K Ultra settings?

A: The 4K Ultra preset averages 50 FPS, which is the lowest measured result in the dataset. While the game remains playable, the significant drop from 4K Medium's 98 FPS suggests that the 8 GB GDDR6X memory and 608.3 GB/s bandwidth are being heavily taxed at the highest quality settings and resolution combination.

Q: How does the combo's overall ranking compare to its individual component rankings?

A: The combo ranks 1328 out of 3716 (64th percentile), which is notably lower than the CPU's 96th percentile and the GPU's 75th percentile rankings. This gap indicates that the pairing does not achieve the sum of its parts, likely due to the GPU becoming a bottleneck at higher resolutions.

Q: What is the best resolution for maintaining high frame rates in this game?

A: At 1080p, all settings produce at least 113 FPS, with Low reaching 270 FPS. At 1440p, the range is 81 to 193 FPS. For the highest refresh rate displays, 1080p is optimal, but 1440p offers a superior visual experience while still delivering 81 FPS minimum at Ultra settings.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture, manufactured on TSMC's 3 nm process. It features a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, with a 125 W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache, totaling 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die.

The CPU's benchmark scores reveal its strengths: Cinebench R23 multi-core reaches 51731, while single-core hits 7303. PassMark multi-thread scores 60860, with single-thread at 4823. These numbers place the CPU at the 96th percentile of all processors, with its nearest rivals being the Core Ultra 9 285K, EPYC 4584PX, and EPYC 9135 — all within 1.2% of its average score.

In Downfall, the CPU's role is most evident at lower resolutions and settings. At 1080p Low, the system produces 270 FPS average, a figure that approaches the limits of what even the RTX 3070 Ti can output. The 24 cores and 24 threads, combined with the 5.80 GHz boost clock, provide ample processing power for the game's AI, physics, and game logic. However, the data shows that the CPU is not the limiting factor at higher resolutions — the FPS drops consistently across all settings when moving from 1440p to 4K, indicating GPU saturation.

The lack of hyperthreading (24 cores, 24 threads) is notable, but the high clock speeds and large L3 cache compensate. The dual-channel DDR5 memory support with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth ensures the CPU can feed data to the GPU without creating a bottleneck. The processor's 96th percentile ranking and its position relative to rivals like the EPYC 4584PX (1.1% slower) suggest that this is one of the fastest consumer CPUs available, even if the game's performance is ultimately capped by the GPU.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data across all resolution and settings combinations provides clear guidance for optimizing the Downfall experience. At 1080p, the Low preset delivers 270 FPS average, which is excessive for most displays. The Medium preset at 221 FPS (with a minimum of 188 and maximum of 254) offers a better balance, while High at 181 FPS remains excellent. The Ultra preset at 113 FPS is still smooth and provides the best visual quality without sacrificing playability at this resolution.

At 1440p, the Medium preset delivers 158 FPS average with a minimum of 134 FPS, making it the sweet spot for high-refresh-rate monitors. The High preset at 129 FPS is also excellent, while Ultra at 81 FPS remains above the 60 FPS threshold. The Low preset at 193 FPS is unnecessary unless chasing maximum frame rates.

At 4K, the Medium preset provides the best experience at 98 FPS average with a minimum of 83 FPS — this is the only 4K setting that comfortably exceeds 60 FPS while maintaining reasonable visual quality. The High preset at 80 FPS is still playable, but the Ultra preset's 50 FPS average falls below the 60 FPS threshold and may be too choppy for some players. The Low preset at 120 FPS sacrifices too much visual fidelity for the frame rate gain.

The data indicates that the Medium preset offers the best performance-to-quality ratio at every resolution. At 1440p Medium, the system delivers 158 FPS with a minimum of 134 FPS, providing a smooth experience with headroom for frame rate dips. At 4K Medium, the 98 FPS average with an 83 FPS minimum ensures consistent performance above the 60 FPS threshold. For players seeking maximum visual fidelity, the High preset at 1440p (129 FPS) is the recommended choice, as it maintains high frame rates while improving image quality over Medium.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured FPS dataset for this combination reveals consistent scaling patterns across resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves 270 FPS average, Medium delivers 221 FPS (minimum 188, maximum 254), High produces 181 FPS, and Ultra drops to 113 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra at 1080p shows a 58% performance reduction, indicating that the GPU is being progressively more taxed as settings increase.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 193 FPS, Medium delivers 158 FPS (minimum 134, maximum 181), High produces 129 FPS, and Ultra averages 81 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 1440p is 58% — identical to 1080p — suggesting that the rendering workload scales proportionally with settings regardless of resolution.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 120 FPS, Medium delivers 98 FPS (minimum 83, maximum 113), High produces 80 FPS, and Ultra averages 50 FPS. The Low to Ultra scaling at 4K is also 58%, maintaining the consistent pattern. However, the absolute FPS values show a clear resolution penalty: compared to 1080p, the 4K results are 55.6% lower for Low, 55.7% lower for Medium, 55.8% lower for High, and 55.8% lower for Ultra.

The Medium preset is the only setting tier with recorded minimum and maximum FPS values across all resolutions. At 1080p, the range is 188 to 254 FPS (spread of 66 FPS), at 1440p it is 134 to 181 FPS (spread of 47 FPS), and at 4K it is 83 to 113 FPS (spread of 30 FPS). This narrowing spread at higher resolutions further confirms that the GPU becomes the limiting factor as resolution increases, reducing the frame time variance caused by CPU-side bottlenecks.