Greedfall

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 9060 produces a specific performance profile in Greedfall, placing the combination at rank 1672 out of 2938 tested combos. This position, within the 57th percentile of all tested configurations, indicates a setup that is capable but not at the top tier for this Action RPG. The combo sits in the middle of the pack, suggesting that while it can handle the game, there are numerous other CPU-GPU pairings that achieve higher frame rates.

The rank reflects the balance between the 2000-series six-core processor and the Radeon RX 9000 series graphics card. Data shows the CPU’s average benchmark score is 21484, placing it in the 75th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU’s average score is 16014, placing it in the 59th percentile of all GPUs. The combo’s overall rank is lower than either component’s individual percentile, indicating that in Greedfall, the pairing does not fully leverage the strengths of both parts, likely due to a bottleneck at higher settings. This is a configuration that delivers playable performance at lower resolutions but struggles to maintain high frame rates at 4K Ultra.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 is the primary driver of visual fidelity in this setup, and its specifications directly influence the measured frame rates. The GPU comes with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s. This memory configuration is a key factor; the data shows that at 4K Ultra settings, the average FPS drops to 31, which is a stark indicator that the 8 GB VRAM buffer and the memory bandwidth are insufficient for the highest texture and detail loads at that resolution.

Clock speeds are also critical. The GPU has a base clock of 1700 MHz, a game clock of 2400 MHz, and a boost clock of 2990 MHz. The high boost clock allows for significant performance headroom when thermals and power allow, but the effect is more pronounced at lower resolutions where the GPU is not the sole limiting factor. For instance, at 1080p Low, the average FPS is 167, demonstrating the GPU’s raw capability when the CPU can keep up with frame generation.

The GPU’s architectural features, including 1792 shading units and 64 ROPs, contribute to its pixel rate of 191.4 GPixel/s. This is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p gaming, as shown by the 119 average FPS at 1080p High and 83 average FPS at 1440p High. However, the transition to 4K exposes the GPU’s limitations. The benchmark scores for the GPU, such as a Passmark G3D score of 17631 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 3322, place it in the 59th percentile of all GPUs, with its nearest rival being the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, which is only 0.7% faster on average. This context shows that the RX 9060 is a mid-range performer, capable of solid 1080p and 1440p gameplay, but it is not designed for 4K Ultra settings in demanding titles like Greedfall.

FAQ

Q: What is the overall performance rank of the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 + AMD Radeon RX 9060 combo in Greedfall?

A: The combo ranks 1672 out of 2938 tested combinations. This places it in the lower half of the performance spectrum, indicating a mid-tier setup for this game.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9060 has an average benchmark score of 16014, which is 0.7% lower than the RTX 3060 Ti’s average score of 16129. This makes the two cards nearly identical in overall performance.

Q: What is the best average FPS achieved by this combo at 1080p?

A: The highest average FPS at 1920x1080 is 167, which is achieved with Low settings. At Medium settings, the average is 131 FPS, and at High settings, it is 119 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU a bottleneck at 1080p Low settings?

A: The data suggests the CPU becomes a limiting factor at lower settings. The jump from 1080p Low (167 FPS) to 1440p Low (116 FPS) shows a steep drop, but the CPU’s 6 cores and 12 threads are likely holding back the GPU from achieving even higher frame rates at 1080p Low.

Q: What is the FPS difference between 1080p and 4K at High settings?

A: At 1080p High, the average FPS is 119. At 4K High, the average FPS drops to 49. This represents a 59% reduction in performance, highlighting the GPU’s struggle with the increased resolution.

Q: What is the performance difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the average FPS at Low settings is 116, while at Ultra settings, it drops to 53. This is a 54% decrease in average FPS, showing the significant cost of enabling the highest visual quality presets.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of how the combo scales across resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the combo delivers high frame rates. The Low preset yields an average of 167 FPS, which is a very smooth experience. Medium settings reduce the average to 131 FPS, with a minimum of 112 FPS and a maximum of 151 FPS, ensuring consistent gameplay. High settings bring the average down to 119 FPS, still a very playable level. Ultra settings, however, see a significant drop to an average of 76 FPS, which is still acceptable but shows the cost of the highest preset.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance scales down as expected. The Low preset averages 116 FPS, which remains a high-refresh-rate experience. Medium settings average 91 FPS, with a minimum of 77 FPS and a maximum of 105 FPS, providing a solid balance. High settings average 83 FPS, which is smooth for most players. Ultra settings drop to an average of 53 FPS, which is a noticeable decline and begins to approach the threshold where frame pacing may become inconsistent.

At 3840x2160, the GPU’s limitations become apparent. The Low preset averages 69 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for a 4K experience. Medium settings average 54 FPS, with a minimum of 46 FPS and a maximum of 62 FPS, indicating occasional dips below 60 FPS. High settings average 49 FPS, which is a marginal experience. Ultra settings produce an average of 31 FPS, which is not a smooth gaming experience. The data shows a clear progression: the combo is capable at 1080p and 1440p for most settings, but 4K is only viable at Low or Medium settings.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen architecture, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz. It has a 16 MB shared L3 cache and supports dual-channel DDR4 memory. In Greedfall, the CPU’s role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and game logic. The data indicates that this processor is a limiting factor at lower resolutions. At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 167, but the CPU’s performance ceiling prevents the GPU from reaching even higher frame rates.

The CPU’s benchmark scores reinforce this. Its Passmark single-thread score is 2239, and its Geekbench single-core score is 1154. These are modest scores, indicating that the processor’s per-core performance is not exceptional. In a game like Greedfall, which likely relies on a few primary threads for simulation and rendering tasks, this can become a bottleneck. The CPU’s multicore performance is stronger, with a Passmark multithread score of 13160 and a Cinebench R15 multicore score of 1248, but this is less relevant for frame rate generation in most games.

Comparatively, the CPU’s nearest rival is the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V, which has an average score of 21440, a mere 0.2% higher. This means the Ryzen 5 2600 is competitive with modern low-power chips in synthetic benchmarks. However, in Greedfall, the measured FPS data shows that the CPU’s limits are reached between the High and Ultra presets at 1080p, where the average FPS drops from 119 to 76. This drop is larger than what would be expected from GPU-bound scaling alone, suggesting the CPU is struggling to maintain frame times with the increased draw calls and physics calculations at Ultra settings.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the target resolution. For 1920x1080, the High preset offers the best balance of visual quality and performance, with an average of 119 FPS. This provides a smooth experience with good detail. The Ultra preset, at 76 FPS, is also viable but sacrifices frame rate for marginal visual gains. The Medium preset, at 131 FPS, is excellent for competitive play, but the High preset is recommended for the best overall experience.

For 2560x1440, the High preset is again the recommended choice, yielding an average of 83 FPS. This is just above the 60 FPS threshold, ensuring a responsive feel. The Medium preset, at 91 FPS, offers a higher frame rate with slightly reduced visual quality, and is a good alternative for players who prioritize smoothness. The Low preset, at 116 FPS, is the best choice for maximum frame rate, but the visual compromise is significant. The Ultra preset, at 53 FPS, is not recommended as it falls below the desired 60 FPS mark.

For 3840x2160, the data suggests that only the Low preset, at 69 FPS, provides a consistently playable experience. The Medium preset, at 54 FPS, is borderline, with a minimum of 46 FPS, which may result in noticeable stutter. The High and Ultra presets, at 49 and 31 FPS respectively, are not suitable for a smooth gaming experience. Therefore, for 4K, the Low preset is the only recommendation, and players should consider lowering the resolution to 1440p for a more satisfying experience.

Resolution Scaling

The data reveals a clear pattern in how performance scales with resolution. From 1080p to 1440p at High settings, the average FPS drops from 119 to 83, a 30% decrease. This is a substantial drop, but it is typical for a GPU-bound scenario at high detail. From 1440p to 4K at High settings, the average FPS drops from 83 to 49, a 41% decrease. This larger drop indicates that the GPU is becoming increasingly overwhelmed by the pixel count, and the 8 GB VRAM and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient to maintain performance.

The scaling pattern changes at lower settings. At Low settings, the drop from 1080p (167 FPS) to 1440p (116 FPS) is 31%, and from 1440p to 4K (69 FPS) is 41%. The consistent percentage drops at both High and Low settings suggest that the GPU is the primary limiting factor across all settings. However, the absolute frame rates at 1080p Low (167 FPS) are high enough that the CPU’s performance ceiling is likely being approached. If the CPU were the sole bottleneck, we would expect the 1080p to 1440p drop to be smaller, as the GPU would have more headroom. The fact that the drop is similar at all settings indicates that the GPU is the dominant constraint.

The 4K Ultra result of 31 FPS is particularly telling. It is less than half the 4K Low result of 69 FPS, showing that the Ultra preset adds a massive load that the GPU cannot handle. This suggests that the combo is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, where it can deliver high frame rates at reasonable settings. For 4K, the data clearly shows that the limiting component is the GPU, and the only viable options are Low or Medium settings. The CPU’s role is secondary, and its performance is adequate for the frame rates the GPU can produce at these resolutions.