Greedfall

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800X paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 produces a mid-tier result in Greedfall, landing at rank 1776 out of 2938 tested combos. This placement, roughly in the 60th percentile of all combinations, shows a system that is capable of smooth 1080p play but begins to strain at higher resolutions, particularly when ultra settings are enabled. The data indicates a balanced pairing where neither component is an extreme outlier, but the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck as resolution climbs.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 1776 out of 2938 tested combinations places it in the upper-middle portion of the database. This is not a top-tier enthusiast setup, but it is far from a low-end configuration. The ranking reflects a system that can handle the game’s demands at mainstream settings, though it lacks the headroom for maximum quality at 4K.

To contextualize this rank, the CPU itself sits at the 81st percentile among all processors tested. Its average benchmark score of 29123 puts it within a narrow band of rivals: it is 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 5 135H, 0.6% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 5600XT, and 0.4% and 0.5% behind the Intel Xeon Phi 7210 and Intel Core i5-13500HX, respectively. These deltas are so small that the 5800X is essentially performance-equivalent to those chips in synthetic workloads.

The GPU tells a similar story. The RTX 5050 sits at the 66th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 21035. Its nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL (0.6% faster), the AMD Radeon HD 8970M (1% faster), the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (1.6% slower), and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile (1.6% faster). Again, the margins are minuscule, indicating that the 5050 is a solidly average performer in this synthetic context.

Given these component-level positions, the in-game rank of 1776 makes sense. The system is neither CPU-starved nor GPU-starved at 1080p, but the overall result is constrained by the GPU’s memory bandwidth and capacity when moving to higher resolutions. The data shows a classic pairing: a strong eight-core CPU that can feed frames quickly, paired with a GPU that delivers acceptable but not spectacular frame rates.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with a 5 nm process node from TSMC. It packs 16,900 million transistors on a 149 mm² die. The GPU has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding a memory bandwidth of 320.0 GB/s. The memory clock runs at 2500 MHz, which translates to 20 Gbps effective.

In Greedfall, this memory configuration proves to be a limiting factor at higher resolutions. The base clock of 2317 MHz and boost clock of 2572 MHz are respectable, and the GPU’s 2560 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output pipelines provide adequate compute throughput. The pixel rate is 82.30 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 205.8 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance at 13.17 TFLOPS.

However, the 8 GB VRAM capacity is the crux of the matter. At 1080p, the game fits comfortably within this budget, and the GPU delivers strong frame rates. At 1440p, the demand on VRAM increases, and while the card still performs adequately, the margin shrinks. At 4K, the 8 GB buffer becomes a serious constraint. The measured FPS drops sharply at 4K Ultra, falling to 30 FPS average, which suggests the GPU is both bandwidth-limited and capacity-limited.

The 128-bit memory bus is narrow by modern standards, and the 320.0 GB/s bandwidth is modest. The data shows that this bandwidth is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p, where the GPU can maintain playable frame rates. But at 4K, the combination of high-resolution textures and the game’s rendering demands overwhelms the memory subsystem. The 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores are present for ray tracing and DLSS features, but the measured data does not include ray tracing results, so their impact on Greedfall specifically is not quantified here.

The GPU’s synthetic benchmarks reinforce this profile. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2502 is a moderate result. In Geekbench, the OpenCL score is 90334 and the Vulkan score is 89381, showing consistent performance across APIs. The PassMark G3D score is 17326, with a GPU compute score of 9184. These numbers place the 5050 as a competent mainstream card, but not one that excels in compute-heavy scenarios.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of what settings to use at each resolution for the best balance of visual quality and frame rate.

At 1920x1080, the High preset delivers an average of 114 FPS. This is an excellent result, offering smooth gameplay with high visual fidelity. The Medium preset yields 126 FPS, which is a marginal gain of 12 FPS over High. The Low preset hits 160 FPS, which is the highest frame rate recorded for this combo. Ultra drops to 73 FPS, which is still playable but represents a significant 41 FPS penalty over High. The sweet spot at 1080p is High, as it provides a high frame rate while keeping visual quality strong. Medium is a reasonable choice if you prioritize frame rate over visuals, but the difference between Medium and High is small enough that most users will prefer High.

At 2560x1440, the High preset maintains an average of 79 FPS. This is a solid result for 1440p gaming. Medium delivers 87 FPS, which is again only slightly better than High. Low reaches 111 FPS, offering a fast experience if you need it. Ultra falls to 50 FPS, which is a steep drop of 29 FPS from High. The recommendation here is High, as it provides a smooth experience at 79 FPS with good detail. Medium is a viable alternative if you want a bit more headroom, but the visual difference is likely minimal.

At 3840x2160, the situation changes drastically. High delivers an average of 47 FPS, which is borderline for smooth gameplay. Medium yields 52 FPS, which is actually the best 4K result among the non-Low presets. Low reaches 66 FPS, making it the only 4K preset that hits a consistently smooth frame rate. Ultra drops to 30 FPS, which is only suitable for screenshots or very slow-paced play. At 4K, the recommendation is Low if you demand fluid motion, or Medium if you can tolerate occasional dips. High is not recommended for competitive play, as 47 FPS average will likely feel stuttery in action scenes.

The data suggests that High is the best overall preset for this combo at 1080p and 1440p, while Low or Medium is necessary at 4K. The GPU simply does not have the VRAM or bandwidth to handle Ultra at any resolution without a substantial frame rate penalty.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data is comprehensive, covering three resolutions and four settings presets.

At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves an average of 160 FPS. Medium follows at 126 FPS, with a minimum of 107 FPS and a maximum of 144 FPS. High delivers 114 FPS average. Ultra drops to 73 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 87 FPS, showing a wide range of performance depending on settings.

At 2560x1440, Low delivers 111 FPS. Medium averages 87 FPS, with a minimum of 74 FPS and a maximum of 100 FPS. High hits 79 FPS. Ultra falls to 50 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 61 FPS, which is still substantial but less than at 1080p. This indicates that the GPU is starting to become a limiting factor as resolution increases.

At 3840x2160, Low achieves 66 FPS. Medium averages 52 FPS, with a minimum of 44 FPS and a maximum of 60 FPS. High delivers 47 FPS. Ultra drops to 30 FPS. The range from Low to Ultra is 36 FPS, the smallest of the three resolutions. This compression of frame rates at 4K shows that the GPU is struggling to maintain performance even at Low settings, and the difference between presets narrows because the GPU is the bottleneck across all of them.

For the Medium preset, which has complete data at all three resolutions, the 1080p result is 126 FPS, 1440p is 87 FPS, and 4K is 52 FPS. This shows a clear progression of diminishing returns as resolution increases. The minimum FPS at 1080p Medium is 107, at 1440p Medium is 74, and at 4K Medium is 44. The maximum FPS follows a similar pattern: 144 at 1080p, 100 at 1440p, and 60 at 4K.

The Ultra preset, which lacks min/max data, shows averages of 73 FPS at 1080p, 50 FPS at 1440p, and 30 FPS at 4K. These are the lowest averages across all presets, confirming that Ultra is not a practical choice for this combo at any resolution above 1080p.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and informative. At High settings, the average FPS goes from 114 at 1080p to 79 at 1440p, a drop of 30.7%. From 1440p to 4K, it falls to 47 FPS, a further drop of 40.5%. The cumulative drop from 1080p to 4K at High is 58.8%.

At Medium settings, the scaling is slightly different. 1080p yields 126 FPS, 1440p yields 87 FPS, and 4K yields 52 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 31.0%, and from 1440p to 4K is 40.2%. The total drop from 1080p to 4K is 58.7%.

At Low settings, 1080p delivers 160 FPS, 1440p delivers 111 FPS, and 4K delivers 66 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 30.6%, and from 1440p to 4K is 40.5%. The total drop is 58.8%.

The consistency of these percentages across presets is striking. Regardless of whether you use Low, Medium, or High, the relative FPS loss when moving from 1080p to 1440p is roughly 31%, and from 1440p to 4K is roughly 40%. This uniformity indicates that the limiting factor is not the settings themselves but the resolution-dependent workload. The GPU’s pixel rate and texture rate are fixed, and as resolution increases, the GPU must process more pixels, leading to a predictable scaling curve.

The fact that the scaling is so consistent across presets suggests that the CPU is not a bottleneck at any resolution. If the CPU were limiting, we would expect to see smaller percentage drops at higher resolutions, because the CPU would be saturated even at 1080p. Instead, the GPU is clearly the limiting component, as the frame rates scale almost exactly with the pixel count. From 1080p to 1440p, the pixel count increases by 77.8%, yet the FPS drops by about 31%, which indicates that the GPU is not purely pixel-bound—likely due to memory bandwidth constraints. From 1440p to 4K, the pixel count increases by 125%, and the FPS drops by about 40%, which is a more linear relationship, suggesting the GPU is now fully saturated.

The 8 GB VRAM capacity is likely a contributor here. At 4K, Greedfall’s textures and frame buffers may exceed 8 GB, forcing the GPU to spill to system memory over the PCIe bus, which is much slower. This would explain the steep drop at 4K and the fact that even Low settings cannot maintain a high frame rate. The 320.0 GB/s bandwidth is also a factor, as higher resolutions require more data to be fetched from memory, and this bandwidth is simply not sufficient for 4K at high settings.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800X is an eight-core, 16-thread processor based on the Zen 3 architecture, codenamed Vermeer. It has a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The CPU is built on a 7 nm process node from TSMC, with 4,150 million transistors on a 74 mm² die. It supports DDR4 memory in dual-channel mode, with a memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s.

In Greedfall, the CPU’s role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and game logic. The 5800X’s 8 cores and 16 threads are more than sufficient for this game, which was released in 2019 and does not have the massive multi-threading demands of newer titles. The CPU’s 32 MB of L3 cache is ample for the game’s working set, and the 4.70 GHz boost clock ensures strong single-threaded performance, which is critical for game logic.

The CPU’s synthetic benchmarks confirm its capability. In Cinebench R23, it scores 15476 in multicore and 1574.5 in single-core. In Geekbench, it scores 11036 in multicore and 2032 in single-core. The 3DMark scores show scaling from 1846 in 2-thread tests to 7586 in 16-thread tests, indicating that the CPU scales well with additional threads but does not have an unusual multi-threading advantage.

The nearest rival comparisons show that the 5800X is essentially on par with several other CPUs. Its average benchmark score of 29123 is within 0.6% of the AMD Ryzen 5 5600XT and within 0.5% of the Intel Core i5-13500HX. This means that swapping the 5800X for a similar-tier CPU would have negligible impact on Greedfall’s frame rates, as the game is not CPU-bound with this combo.

The measured FPS data supports this conclusion. The consistent resolution scaling across settings presets indicates that the CPU is not a bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 160 FPS, which is well above the refresh rate of most monitors. Even at 1080p Ultra, 73 FPS shows that the CPU can push enough frames to keep the GPU busy. If the CPU were weak, we would see lower frame rates at 1080p Low, where the GPU is least stressed, but the 160 FPS result shows no such limitation.

The CPU’s TDP is 105 W, and it uses the AMD Socket AM4 platform with PCIe Gen 4 support. The 5800X has 20 PCIe lanes from the CPU, which is sufficient for the RTX 5050’s PCIe 5.0 x8 interface. The CPU’s memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s is more than adequate for Greedfall, which does not require high memory throughput.

In summary, the Ryzen 7 5800X provides a solid foundation for this combo. It has enough cores and clocks to avoid being a limiting factor in Greedfall, and its performance is on par with several modern rivals. The data shows that the GPU is the bottleneck at higher resolutions, while the CPU has ample headroom to support the GPU at 1080p and 1440p. The 5800X’s 81st percentile standing among all CPUs means it is a well-above-average processor, and it pairs well with the RTX 5050 for this game.