Downfall

The AMD Radeon 880M integrated GPU paired with the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H processor delivers a playable but constrained experience in Downfall, a horror title from 2016. Benchmark data shows this combination ranks 2852 out of 2928 tested system configurations for this game, placing it in the bottom 3% of all recorded setups. The measured frames per second across resolutions and settings reveal that while 1080p Low and Medium presets are smooth, the GPU becomes the dominant bottleneck as resolution climbs to 1440p and 4K. The following analysis breaks down the measured performance data, the role of the GPU’s shared memory architecture, and how the CPU’s 16-core design influences the results.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 1080p with High settings for this game?

A: The measured average is 60 FPS at 1920x1080 with the High preset. This is the baseline for playable performance, as the Medium preset delivers 73 FPS and Low reaches 89 FPS, while Ultra drops to 37 FPS.

Q: How does the Radeon 880M compare to its nearest GPU rivals in raw benchmark scores?

A: The Radeon 880M has an average benchmark score of 8436, placing it in the 43rd percentile of all GPUs. Its closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX with a score of 8427, a delta of 0.1%. The NVIDIA GeForce MX330 scores 8458 (0.3% higher), the AMD Radeon HD 8870M scores 8462 (0.3% higher), and the AMD Radeon R9 M375X scores 8325 (1.3% lower).

Q: What is the CPU’s multi-core performance in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H scores 28221 points in Cinebench R23 multi-core, and 3984 points in single-core. Its average benchmark score is 40518, placing it in the 87th percentile of all CPUs, with the nearest rival being the Intel Core 7 253PE at 40557 (a 0.1% difference).

Q: Is the Radeon 880M’s VRAM dedicated or shared with the system?

A: The GPU uses system-shared memory. The memory size, type, and bus width are all listed as "System Shared," and the bandwidth is "System Dependent." This means the GPU relies on the CPU’s LPDDR5X memory, which runs dual-channel at 153.6 GB/s.

Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded for this combination at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, the best result is 40 FPS with the Low preset. Medium yields 32 FPS, High yields 27 FPS, and Ultra drops to 17 FPS. No minimum or maximum FPS values were recorded for the 4K Low, High, or Ultra presets.

Q: What is the GPU’s clock speed range, and how does it affect performance?

A: The Radeon 880M has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz. With 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs, the boost clock drives the pixel rate of 46.40 GPixel/s and texture rate of 139.2 GTexel/s, which directly influence the measured FPS at lower resolutions.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 880M is an integrated GPU built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture with a 4 nm process node, containing 34,000 million transistors on a 233 mm² die. Its role in Downfall is defined by the system-shared memory configuration. There is no dedicated VRAM; instead, the GPU accesses the same LPDDR5X memory pool as the CPU, over a dual-channel bus with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth. This shared arrangement means that the GPU’s effective memory performance is tied to the system’s memory load, which is a critical limitation in a game that demands consistent texture streaming.

The GPU’s raw compute capabilities are modest. It delivers 4.454 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and the same 4.454 TFLOPS for FP16, with a 1:1 ratio. The 12 ray tracing cores and support for DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) are present, but the measured FPS data suggests that Downfall does not benefit significantly from these features at higher resolutions. The GPU’s 43rd percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 8436, positions it near older discrete mobile parts like the GTX 675MX and MX330, according to the nearest rival data.

At 1080p, the GPU’s boost clock of 2900 MHz is sufficient to push average FPS above 60 for Low through High presets. The 768 shading units process the pixel workload efficiently at this resolution, as evidenced by the 89 FPS at Low and 73 FPS at Medium. However, the 16 ROPs become a limiting factor at higher settings. The pixel rate of 46.40 GPixel/s, while adequate for 1080p, is strained when the resolution increases to 2560x1440, where the High preset drops to 43 FPS and Ultra to 27 FPS.

The system-shared memory is the primary constraint at 4K. With no dedicated VRAM, the GPU must compete with the CPU for memory bandwidth, and the "System Dependent" bandwidth figure reflects this volatility. At 3840x2160, even the Low preset only manages 40 FPS, and the High preset falls to 27 FPS. The data indicates that the GPU’s memory architecture is not designed for high-resolution texture loads, which is a common limitation of integrated graphics. The 880M’s 4.454 TFLOPS of compute is not the bottleneck at 4K; rather, it is the inability to rapidly access texture data from shared memory that caps performance.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for Downfall shows a clear pattern of degradation as resolution increases, with the GPU becoming the limiting component at higher pixel counts. Starting at 1920x1080 with the High preset, the average is 60 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 at the same preset drops the average to 43 FPS, a reduction of 28.3%. At 3840x2160, the High preset averages 27 FPS, which is 55% lower than the 1080p result. This scaling pattern indicates that the GPU’s pixel throughput is insufficient for the increased pixel count.

The Low preset tells a similar story. At 1080p, Low averages 89 FPS. At 1440p, it drops to 64 FPS, a 28.1% decline. At 4K, Low averages 40 FPS, which is 55.1% lower than the 1080p score. The consistency of these percentage drops across presets suggests that the resolution scaling is primarily a function of the GPU’s fill rate and memory bandwidth, not the game’s settings complexity.

The Medium preset, which is the only one with recorded minimum and maximum FPS values, provides additional insight. At 1080p, Medium averages 73 FPS with a minimum of 62 and maximum of 84. At 1440p, the average drops to 52 FPS, with a minimum of 44 and maximum of 60. At 4K, the average is 32 FPS, with a minimum of 28 and maximum of 37. The minimum FPS values at each resolution are within 15% of the average, indicating that the frame pacing is relatively stable, but the overall performance ceiling is low.

The Ultra preset shows the most severe scaling. At 1080p, Ultra averages 37 FPS. At 1440p, it drops to 27 FPS, a 27% decline. At 4K, Ultra averages 17 FPS, which is 54.1% lower than the 1080p result. These numbers suggest that Ultra settings introduce effects that disproportionately tax the GPU’s 16 ROPs and shared memory, making the preset impractical at any resolution above 1080p.

The resolution scaling data points to the GPU as the primary bottleneck. The CPU’s performance, which is in the 87th percentile of all processors, does not change with resolution, so the FPS drops are attributable to the Radeon 880M’s inability to keep up with pixel and texture workloads. The fact that the 1080p Low preset achieves 89 FPS while 4K Low only reaches 40 FPS indicates that the GPU’s fill rate, not the CPU, is the limiting factor.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings for the AMD Radeon 880M in Downfall depend on the target resolution and the user’s preference for smoothness over visual fidelity. The data shows that the Medium preset is the sweet spot for most scenarios, as it is the only preset with complete minimum and maximum FPS data, indicating a stable frame delivery.

At 1920x1080, Medium averages 73 FPS with a minimum of 62, which is comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. The High preset also achieves 60 FPS average, but without minimum FPS data, the Medium preset’s recorded 62 FPS floor provides more confidence in consistent performance. The Low preset at 89 FPS is the fastest option, but it sacrifices visual quality that the Medium preset restores with only a 16 FPS average penalty.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset averages 52 FPS with a minimum of 44, which is playable but not ideal for fast-paced horror sequences. The High preset drops to 43 FPS, and Ultra falls to 27 FPS, which is below the threshold for smooth motion. For 1440p, Medium is the recommended choice, as it offers the best balance of the measured rows. The Low preset at 64 FPS is smoother, but the visual downgrade may not be worth the 12 FPS gain over Medium.

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves a 60 FPS average. The Low preset averages 40 FPS, Medium averages 32 FPS, High averages 27 FPS, and Ultra averages 17 FPS. For 4K, the Low preset is the only viable option, as it provides the highest average FPS. However, the 40 FPS average is below the 60 FPS target, so users should expect a compromised experience. The Medium preset’s 32 FPS average, with a minimum of 28, is borderline playable, but the Low preset’s higher average makes it the better choice for maintaining frame rate.

The Ultra preset is not recommended at any resolution. At 1080p, it averages 37 FPS, which is below the Medium preset’s minimum of 62 FPS. The performance cost of Ultra settings is severe, with the 1080p Ultra result being only 5 FPS higher than the 4K Medium result. Given the data, the Medium preset at 1080p provides the best overall experience, with a 73 FPS average and a 62 FPS minimum, while the Low preset at 4K is the only acceptable option for users who must play at that resolution.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data for Downfall with the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H and AMD Radeon 880M is organized by resolution and settings. Each entry lists the average FPS, and the Medium preset includes minimum and maximum FPS values.

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: Average 89 FPS. No minimum or maximum recorded.
• Medium: Average 73 FPS, minimum 62 FPS, maximum 84 FPS.
• High: Average 60 FPS. No minimum or maximum recorded.
• Ultra: Average 37 FPS. No minimum or maximum recorded.

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: Average 64 FPS. No minimum or maximum recorded.
• Medium: Average 52 FPS, minimum 44 FPS, maximum 60 FPS.
• High: Average 43 FPS. No minimum or maximum recorded.
• Ultra: Average 27 FPS. No minimum or maximum recorded.

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: Average 40 FPS. No minimum or maximum recorded.
• Medium: Average 32 FPS, minimum 28 FPS, maximum 37 FPS.
• High: Average 27 FPS. No minimum or maximum recorded.
• Ultra: Average 17 FPS. No minimum or maximum recorded.

The data reveals a consistent hierarchy across all resolutions: Low is the fastest, followed by Medium, then High, with Ultra being the slowest. The gaps between presets are not uniform. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Medium is 16 FPS, between Medium and High is 13 FPS, and between High and Ultra is 23 FPS. At 1440p, the gaps are 12 FPS (Low to Medium), 9 FPS (Medium to High), and 16 FPS (High to Ultra). At 4K, the gaps are 8 FPS (Low to Medium), 5 FPS (Medium to High), and 10 FPS (High to Ultra). The narrowing gaps at higher resolutions suggest that the GPU’s resource limits compress the performance differences between settings.

The Medium preset’s minimum and maximum FPS values provide insight into frame consistency. At 1080p, the 62-84 FPS range shows a 22 FPS spread, which is relatively wide but still above the 60 FPS target. At 1440p, the 44-60 FPS range has a 16 FPS spread, with the maximum exactly at 60 FPS. At 4K, the 28-37 FPS range has a 9 FPS spread, indicating tighter frame pacing but at a lower overall performance level.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is a 16-core, 16-thread processor from the Core Ultra Series 3, based on the Panther Lake architecture with a 3 nm process node. It has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, with a TDP of 25 W. The CPU’s cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. It supports LPDDR5X memory over a dual-channel bus, with a measured bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s.

The CPU’s benchmark scores place it in the 87th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 40518. In Cinebench R23, it scores 28221 in multi-core and 3984 in single-core. Its nearest rivals are the Intel Core 7 253PE (40557, 0.1% higher), Intel Core 5 223PE (40585, 0.2% higher), AMD Ryzen 9 7940H (40431, 0.2% lower), and Intel Xeon 6507P (40426, 0.2% lower). These scores indicate that the CPU is not a bottleneck in Downfall, as its performance is competitive with other high-end mobile processors.

In Downfall, the CPU’s role is to feed the GPU with draw calls, physics calculations, and game logic. The 16 cores and 16 threads are more than sufficient for a 2016 horror title, which is unlikely to utilize more than 8 threads effectively. The boost clock of 5.00 GHz ensures strong single-thread performance, as evidenced by the 3984 Cinebench R23 single-core score. This is critical for maintaining frame times in scenarios where the game’s main thread is the bottleneck, but the measured FPS data shows that the GPU is the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

The CPU’s memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s is shared with the GPU, and this is where the interaction becomes important. At 1080p, the CPU can deliver data to the GPU quickly enough to sustain 89 FPS on Low, but at 4K, the same memory bandwidth is insufficient for the GPU’s texture demands. The CPU’s 18 MB of L3 cache helps mitigate some of the memory latency, but it cannot compensate for the GPU’s lack of dedicated VRAM.

The PassMark single-thread score of 4005 and multi-thread score of 32956 further confirm the CPU’s capability. The data shows that the CPU’s performance is consistent with its rivals, and the 0.1-0.2% deltas to the nearest rivals are negligible. For Downfall, the CPU is not the constraint; the Radeon 880M’s shared memory architecture and 16 ROPs are what limit the FPS at 1440p and 4K. Users with this CPU should focus on GPU settings rather than CPU-related tweaks, as the data indicates that lowering resolution or settings will yield the most significant FPS improvements.