Downfall

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H and AMD Radeon RX 7900M combination delivers a performance profile in Downfall that is defined by its high refresh rate capabilities at lower resolutions and a sharp, predictable drop as resolution climbs. The data indicates a system that is exceptionally well-suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, but which sees its limits tested at 4K, particularly under the highest graphical loads. This analysis breaks down the measured performance of this specific pairing, examining the role of each component, how they scale across settings, and where the bottleneck ultimately lies.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is a 16-core, 16-thread mobile processor based on the Panther Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process node. It operates with a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, with a TDP of 25 W. The processor features a substantial cache hierarchy, including 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is for LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus, providing a bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s, which is relevant for feeding the GPU in a combined workload. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 44466 places it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs, indicating strong overall compute capability.

In the context of Downfall, a horror title from 2016, the CPU’s role is to maintain frame pacing and handle game logic. The benchmark results show that this processor is more than capable of keeping up with the GPU at lower resolutions. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves an average of 257 FPS. This high frame rate, which far exceeds standard display refresh rates, suggests that the CPU is not the limiting factor at this resolution; the sheer headroom indicates that the Ultra X9 388H can easily feed the GPU with draw calls and physics data. The processor's nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D, posts an average score of 44573, a negligible 0.2% difference, meaning the X9 388H is essentially performance-equivalent to that chip in general compute. Compared to the Intel Core i9-13950HX, which scores 44342, the X9 388H is 0.3% faster, showing that its 16 cores and high boost clock are competitive with top-tier mobile silicon from a previous generation.

The single-threaded performance is also critical for a game like Downfall, which may rely on a primary thread for rendering commands. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2200.5 points, combined with the 5.10 GHz boost clock, suggests excellent responsiveness. At 4K resolution, the frame rate drops to 76 FPS on High settings, a 55.8% decrease from the 1080p High result of 172 FPS. This massive drop is a clear indicator that the workload shifts heavily to the GPU at higher resolutions. The CPU’s performance at 1080p, where the GPU is less burdened, shows that the X9 388H provides enough headroom to avoid being a bottleneck in this specific pairing. The data suggests that if the GPU were stronger, the CPU could likely push even higher frame rates at 1080p, but the measured results show the GPU becomes the primary constraint as resolution and settings increase.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Radeon RX 7900M is a high-end mobile GPU based on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, utilizing the Navi 31 chip. It is built on a 5 nm process by TSMC and packs 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, resulting in a memory bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s. The GPU’s base clock is 1825 MHz, with a boost clock of 2090 MHz, and memory runs at 18 Gbps effective. With 4608 shading units, 288 TMUs, and 192 ROPs, the RX 7900M is a brute-force rendering engine, further supported by 72 RT cores. Its compute power is rated at 38.52 TFLOPS for FP32 operations. The GPU’s average benchmark score of 97487 places it in the 94th percentile of all GPUs, highlighting its position as a top-tier mobile part.

In Downfall, the RX 7900M’s performance is the dominant factor in determining the final frame rate at higher resolutions. The 16 GB of VRAM is a significant asset, ensuring that texture data and geometry for a 2016 title are unlikely to exceed memory capacity, even at 4K Ultra. The 4K Ultra result of 48 FPS, while playable, is a clear indicator of the GPU’s limits under maximum load. This is a 55.8% reduction from the 4K High setting (76 FPS), showing the immense cost of the Ultra preset’s increased draw distances and shadow quality. The GPU’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000, has an average score of 101872, which is 4.3% higher, but the RX 7900M outperforms the AMD Radeon Pro VII by 0.4% (score of 97131). These comparisons reinforce that the RX 7900M is a high-performance part, but the game’s engine and shader complexity are what drive the specific numbers seen here.

The scaling from 1080p to 1440p and then to 4K shows a classic GPU-bound progression. At 1080p Medium, the card achieves 210 FPS, while at 1440p Medium, it drops to 150 FPS, a 28.6% decrease. Moving to 4K Medium, the frame rate falls to 93 FPS, another 38% drop from 1440p. This pattern demonstrates that the GPU’s fill rate and shading power are being taxed progressively as pixel count increases. The 576.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth is sufficient to handle the data throughput, but the sheer number of pixels at 4K requires the GPU’s compute units to work much harder, leading to the observed performance decay. The data shows that for maximum frame rates, the GPU prefers 1080p and 1440p, where it can fully stretch its legs, while 4K is reserved for High and Medium settings to maintain smooth gameplay.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The resolution scaling data is the clearest indicator of the system’s bottleneck. From 1080p to 4K, the frame rates drop significantly across all settings, but the magnitude of the drop varies depending on the graphical load. At Low settings, the average FPS goes from 257 at 1080p to 114 at 4K, a drop of 55.6%. At High settings, the drop is from 172 to 76, a 55.8% reduction. At Medium, the drop is from 210 to 93, a 55.7% decrease. At Ultra, the drop is from 108 to 48, a 55.6% reduction. The consistency of this ~55-56% drop across all settings is a strong indicator that the system is entirely GPU-bound at 4K.

This pattern suggests that the CPU is not the limiting factor. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the performance would not scale so linearly with resolution. The fact that the frame rate at 4K Low (114 FPS) is still higher than the frame rate at 4K Ultra (48 FPS) shows that the GPU is doing less work at Low settings, allowing for a higher output. The Ultra preset at 4K is particularly demanding, with the 48 FPS result being the lowest of all measured configurations. This indicates that the RX 7900M is being pushed to its absolute limit, likely due to high-resolution shadow maps, ambient occlusion, and other post-processing effects that scale with pixel count.

The transition from 1440p to 4K is the most punishing. For example, at High settings, the drop is from 123 FPS to 76 FPS, a 38.2% reduction. This is a steeper relative drop than the transition from 1080p to 1440p, which saw a 28.5% reduction (from 172 to 123 FPS). This non-linear scaling is typical of GPU-bound scenarios where the pixel count increases by a factor of 2.25 from 1440p to 4K, but the frame rate does not halve, indicating that the GPU is still able to utilize its resources effectively but is reaching its memory bandwidth or shading limits. The data clearly shows that for the best experience, 1440p is the sweet spot for this combo, offering a high frame rate (123 FPS on High) without the steep penalties of 4K.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings depend on the user’s target resolution and refresh rate. For 1080p, the Ultra preset yields an average of 108 FPS, which is smooth and playable on a 100Hz or 120Hz monitor. However, the Medium preset offers a substantial jump to 210 FPS, which is ideal for high-refresh-rate displays (144Hz+). The Low preset’s 257 FPS is the maximum possible, but the visual quality trade-off is significant. For most users on 1080p, the Medium preset at 210 FPS provides an excellent balance of visual fidelity and frame rate, as the min FPS of 178 and max of 241 indicate a stable experience. Ultra at 1080p is also viable at 108 FPS, but the jump to Medium is a 94% increase in frame rate for a likely minor visual difference.

At 1440p, the Medium preset is the best all-rounder, delivering 150 FPS with a min FPS of 127 and max of 172. This is a very smooth experience for high-refresh-rate gaming. The High preset at 123 FPS is also excellent, offering better visuals with only a 18% performance hit compared to Medium. The Ultra preset at 77 FPS is the minimum recommendation for a smooth experience, but it is a 48.7% drop from High, making it a less attractive option. For 1440p, High is the recommended setting, as it provides a high frame rate that is well above the 60 FPS threshold, while Ultra is only for those who prioritize visuals over frame rate and have a 75Hz monitor.

At 4K, the situation is more constrained. The Ultra preset’s 48 FPS is the only result below 60 FPS, making it the least desirable. The High preset at 76 FPS is the best choice for 4K, providing a playable and smooth experience on a 60Hz or 75Hz display. The Medium preset at 93 FPS is even better, offering a significant improvement over High (a 22.4% increase) and is suitable for users with a 100Hz 4K monitor. The Low preset at 114 FPS is the maximum frame rate at 4K, but the visual compromise is severe. The data suggests that for 4K, the Medium preset is the optimal balance, as it offers the highest frame rate while still maintaining a reasonable level of graphical detail. In summary, the recommended presets are Medium for 1080p and 4K, and High for 1440p, to maximize the measured performance.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The measured data for this specific combination of the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H and AMD Radeon RX 7900M in Downfall places it at rank 1219 out of 2928 total tested combos. This means the combo performs better than approximately 58.4% of all other CPU-GPU pairings tested in this game. While this might seem like a mid-pack result, it is important to contextualize this rank within the specific hardware class. This is a mobile gaming setup, and the rank reflects the balance between the two components. The RX 7900M is a high-end mobile GPU (94th percentile), but it is paired with a 25W mobile CPU that, while powerful (88th percentile), is not the absolute top-tier in terms of raw multithreaded performance.

The rank of 1219 suggests that while the GPU is very strong, the CPU might be holding it back in certain scenarios, or that other combos with more powerful desktop CPUs or higher-end mobile parts (like those with more L3 cache) achieve higher frame rates. The fact that the CPU’s nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D, is within 0.2% of its average score indicates that the X9 388H is a solid performer, but it is not a flagship part. The GPU’s rivals, such as the Quadro RTX 6000, are 4.3% faster on average, which could translate to a few extra frames in Downfall.

However, the rank should be interpreted as a holistic measure. The combination’s ability to hit 210 FPS at 1080p Medium and 150 FPS at 1440p Medium places it in a strong position for high-refresh-rate gaming. The lower rank is likely due to the 4K Ultra result of 48 FPS, which is below 60 FPS and may be considered a subpar experience by some users. Overall, the data shows that this combo is a high-performing mobile solution, but it does not crack the top tier of all tested combos due to the inherent power and thermal constraints of a laptop form factor. The rank confirms the balanced nature of the pairing, where the GPU is strong enough to dominate most scenarios, but the CPU’s 16-thread limit and 18 MB of L3 cache prevent it from achieving the very highest frame rates seen with more powerful desktop CPUs.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The following table details the exact measured average FPS for every configuration tested in the FACT PACK. This data serves as the definitive reference for this CPU-GPU combo in Downfall.

1920x1080 (1080p)

• Ultra: 108 FPS
• High: 172 FPS
• Medium: 210 FPS (min 178 FPS, max 241 FPS)
• Low: 257 FPS

2560x1440 (1440p)

• Ultra: 77 FPS
• High: 123 FPS
• Medium: 150 FPS (min 127 FPS, max 172 FPS)
• Low: 183 FPS

3840x2160 (4K)

• Ultra: 48 FPS
• High: 76 FPS
• Medium: 93 FPS (min 79 FPS, max 107 FPS)
• Low: 114 FPS

The data shows a consistent hierarchy across all resolutions: Low is the fastest, followed by Medium, High, and Ultra. The gap between Medium and High is notable; for example, at 1080p, the difference is 38 FPS (210 vs 172), while the gap between High and Ultra is 64 FPS (172 vs 108). This suggests that the Ultra preset introduces particularly heavy effects that cause a disproportionate performance penalty. The min and max FPS values for Medium settings at all resolutions show that the frame time consistency is good, with the min FPS typically being around 75-85% of the average, indicating no severe stutters.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to achieve the highest frame rate?

A: The data shows the highest average FPS is achieved at 1080p. With Low settings, the combo reaches 257 FPS, and with Medium settings, it hits 210 FPS. This indicates 1080p is the ideal resolution for maximum frame rates.

*Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Downfall?*

A: Yes, it can. The measured results show 76 FPS on High settings and 93 FPS on Medium settings at 3840x2160. However, the Ultra preset drops to 48 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS standard for smooth gameplay.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rival in terms of compute performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H has an average benchmark score of 44466. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D, scores 44573, which is 0.2% higher. The Intel Core i9-13950HX scores 44342, which is 0.3% lower, showing the X9 388H is essentially on par with these parts.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between 1080p and 4K on High settings?

A: At 1080p High, the combo achieves 172 FPS. At 4K High, it drops to 76 FPS. This represents a 55.8% reduction in performance when moving from 1080p to 4K.

Q: Does the GPU have enough VRAM for this game at maximum settings?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7900M is equipped with 16 GB of GDDR6 memory. Given that Downfall is a 2016 title, this is more than sufficient for the game’s texture and geometry data, even at 4K Ultra, which is the most demanding setting measured.

Q: What is the combo’s overall ranking compared to other tested systems?

A: The combo is ranked 1219 out of 2928 total tested combinations in Downfall. This means it performs better than 58.4% of all other CPU-GPU pairings, placing it in the upper-middle tier of tested hardware.