Greedfall

The pairing of AMD’s Ryzen 7 7700 processor with Intel’s Arc B370 integrated graphics creates a stark imbalance in Greedfall. The data shows a CPU capable of top-tier processing performance paired with a GPU that sits near the bottom of the discrete graphics hierarchy. This combination produces playable frame rates only at lower resolutions and settings, with the graphics solution acting as the primary bottleneck across the board.

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

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated graphics processor built on the Xe3-LPG architecture, fabricated on Intel’s 3 nm process node. Its clock speeds are listed with a base of 300 MHz and a boost up to 2400 MHz. The memory configuration is entirely system-shared, meaning there is no dedicated VRAM; the GPU pulls from the same pool as the CPU. Memory bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent," which in practice ties performance directly to the speed of the installed DDR5 memory, though the exact impact in Greedfall is not quantified in the measured data.

The GPU’s compute specifications are modest. It has 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 render output units. The pixel rate is rated at 48.00 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance is rated at 6.144 TFLOPS for FP32 operations, with FP16 performance at 12.29 TFLOPS. The GPU also includes 10 ray tracing cores, though Greedfall’s measured results do not isolate ray tracing workloads.

In the context of this game, the Arc B370’s performance percentile is striking. It ranks in the 5th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 1184 from the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test. Its nearest rivals in the benchmark database include the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (score 1186, delta -0.2%), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (score 1190, delta -0.5%), and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (score 1192, delta -0.7%). The AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168, which is 1.4% lower. This places the Arc B370 in direct competition with graphics solutions that are well over a decade old. The benchmark results indicate that the GPU is the limiting factor in Greedfall, as its frame rates drop significantly as resolution and settings increase.

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

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700 provides a strong foundation for the system. It is an 8-core, 16-thread processor based on the Zen 4 architecture, code-named Raphael, and built on TSMC’s 5 nm process. It has a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 32 MB of L3 cache. The CPU supports DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus, with a theoretical memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s.

The Ryzen 7 7700’s benchmark scores show a well-rounded processor. In Cinebench R23, it scores 18760 in multi-core and 1930 in single-core. Geekbench scores are 15371 multi-core and 2525 single-core. PassMark multi-thread score is 34470, with a single-thread score of 4063. The processor’s average benchmark score is 40081, placing it in the 87th percentile among all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 (score 40048, delta 0.1%), Intel Core 5 221E (score 40144, delta -0.2%), AMD Ryzen 9 270 (score 40246, delta -0.4%), and Intel Core i9-13905H (score 40313, delta -0.6%). These rivals are within a fraction of a percent of the Ryzen 7 7700, indicating that CPU performance is not a differentiator in this system.

In Greedfall, the CPU’s role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and game logic. Given the Ryzen 7 7700’s high percentile ranking, it is unlikely to be the source of frame rate drops. The data supports this: when the GPU is less stressed at lower resolutions, frame rates increase, which is the opposite of a CPU-bound scenario. The CPU’s 8 cores and 16 threads are more than sufficient for this 2019 Action RPG, leaving the Arc B370 as the clear bottleneck.

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

The measured FPS data for Greedfall with this combination reveals a consistent pattern of performance degradation as workload increases. At 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the system achieves an average of 76 FPS at Low settings. This drops to 60 FPS at Medium settings, with a minimum of 51 FPS and a maximum of 69 FPS. High settings yield 54 FPS average, and Ultra settings fall to 35 FPS average. The 1080p results show that the system is capable of smooth gameplay only at Low settings, with Medium being borderline and Ultra being playable but not ideal.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates drop noticeably. Low settings average 53 FPS, Medium averages 41 FPS (with a minimum of 35 and maximum of 48), High averages 38 FPS, and Ultra drops to 24 FPS. At this resolution, only Low settings remain comfortably above 60 FPS, while Medium and High are playable but not smooth. Ultra settings approach the territory where frame pacing becomes a concern.

At 3840x2160, the performance falls off a cliff. Low settings average 31 FPS, Medium averages 25 FPS (minimum 21, maximum 28), High averages 22 FPS, and Ultra averages just 14 FPS. None of these frame rates are suitable for a smooth gaming experience. The data shows that 4K is essentially unplayable with this hardware, regardless of settings.

The pattern is clear: the Arc B370 struggles as resolution increases, and the gap between settings widens. The delta between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 41 FPS (76 vs 35), while at 4K it is only 17 FPS (31 vs 14). This suggests that at higher resolutions, the GPU is so saturated that even reducing settings yields diminishing returns.

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

The scaling from 1080p to 4K shows a dramatic drop in performance that is characteristic of a GPU-bound system. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 76 at 1080p to 53 at 1440p, a 30% reduction, and then to 31 at 4K, a 59% reduction from the 1440p figure. At High settings, the progression is 54 FPS at 1080p, 38 FPS at 1440p, and 22 FPS at 4K. The reduction from 1080p to 1440p is 30%, and from 1440p to 4K is 42%.

The data indicates that the limiting component is overwhelmingly the GPU. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect frame rates to remain relatively flat as resolution increases, since the CPU workload would stay constant. Instead, the frame rates drop by roughly half when moving from 1080p to 4K, which is exactly what a weak GPU with a strong CPU would exhibit. The Ryzen 7 7700’s high benchmark scores support this interpretation; the CPU has ample headroom to process game logic, but the Arc B370 cannot push enough pixels to take advantage of it.

The scaling also shows that the GPU’s fill rate and memory bandwidth constraints become more pronounced at higher resolutions. With a pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s, the Arc B370’s theoretical limits are quickly reached. At 4K, the GPU is operating at its absolute limit, as evidenced by the fact that even dropping from High to Low settings only yields a 9 FPS improvement (from 22 to 31 FPS). This is a classic sign of a component that is fully saturated.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

In the database of tested combinations for Greedfall, this specific pairing of the AMD Ryzen 7 7700 and Intel Arc B370 ranks 2699 out of 2938 total combinations. This places it in the bottom 8% of all tested systems. The rank reflects the overall performance profile, which is dragged down significantly by the GPU’s low standing.

The GPU’s 5th percentile ranking among all GPUs is the primary driver of this poor combo rank. The CPU’s 87th percentile ranking is irrelevant when the graphics solution is this weak. The data suggests that any combination with the Arc B370 would likely rank similarly low, as the GPU’s average benchmark score of 1184 is a severe handicap. The nearest rival GPUs, such as the ATI Radeon HD 5770 and AMD Radeon HD 7650M, are all within a few points of the Arc B370’s score, confirming that this is an entry-level graphics solution by modern standards.

The combo rank is a useful metric for potential users. It indicates that this system is not suitable for Greedfall at high settings or high resolutions. The measured FPS data aligns with this rank, showing that the system only achieves acceptable performance at 1080p Low settings. The rank is not an indictment of the CPU, which performs admirably in synthetic benchmarks, but rather a reflection of the GPU’s limitations.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for Greedfall with this hardware depend heavily on the target resolution. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 76 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. The Medium preset averages 60 FPS, with a minimum of 51 FPS, which is playable but subject to occasional dips. For a consistent experience, Low is the safest choice, but Medium is acceptable for users who prioritize visual quality over a strict frame rate lock.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 53 FPS, which is below the ideal 60 FPS but still playable. The Medium preset averages 41 FPS, which is noticeably less smooth, and High drops to 38 FPS. For 1440p, Low is the only preset that approaches playability, and users should expect some frame rate variance. The Ultra preset at 24 FPS is not recommended.

At 3840x2160, none of the presets achieve a playable frame rate. The Low preset averages 31 FPS, which is marginal, but the Medium (25 FPS), High (22 FPS), and Ultra (14 FPS) presets are all too low for a satisfying experience. The data suggests that 4K gaming is not viable with this combination, regardless of settings.

The best experience per the measured rows is achieved at 1080p with the Low preset. This yields the highest average FPS of 76, with no minimum FPS data provided, suggesting a stable frame rate. For users who want a balance between performance and visuals, 1080p Medium at 60 FPS is the second-best option, though the 51 FPS minimum indicates potential stutter in demanding scenes. The data does not support any settings above Medium at 1080p, as High (54 FPS) and Ultra (35 FPS) sacrifice too much performance for marginal visual gains. The recommendation is to prioritize frame rate over fidelity, as the GPU’s low benchmark scores indicate it lacks the headroom for high-end presets.