Greedfall

This analysis covers the measured performance of Greedfall — an Action RPG released on 2019-09-09 — running on the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070. The Ryzen 7 7700X is an 8-core, 16-thread desktop CPU built on Zen 4 "Raphael", with a base clock of 4.50 GHz and boost clock of 5.40 GHz, launched on 2022-09-26 with a launch MSRP of $399. The RTX 3070 is an Ampere GA104 GPU with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus and a launch MSRP of 499 USD. The table below compiles the measured FPS results across three resolutions and four quality presets, plus the component-level rank and benchmark context. All figures in this page come from the specified dataset; the emphasis is on how this combined hardware behaves in Greedfall specifically, not on general synthetic out-of-game results.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest measured average frame rate for this combination in Greedfall?

A: The peak measured average FPS is 204, recorded at 1920x1080 with the Low preset. From the same resolution, Medium returns 160, High returns 146, and Ultra returns 93 average FPS.

Q: Is there any measured configuration that drops below a 60 FPS average?

A: Yes — the 3840x2160 Ultra preset is the only measured row with an average under 60, sitting at 38 FPS. The 4K High preset lands on exactly 60 FPS, while 4K Medium averages 66 FPS with a minimum dip to 56 FPS. All other resolutions and settings stay at or above 60 FPS on average.

Q: What is the CPU benchmark percentile and how does that compare to the GPU percentile?

A: The Ryzen 7 7700X sits at the 85th percentile among all CPUs in the database, while the RTX 3070 sits at the 61st percentile among all GPUs. That gap suggests the GPU is the comparatively weaker link in the pairing for this game’s budget.

Q: Which neighbor is the RTX 3070 closest to in average benchmark score?

A: Among the listed nearest rivals, the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT has an avgScore of 17083 and a deltaPct of 0.7, the closest to the RTX 3070’s average benchmark score of 17208. The NVIDIA GTX 690 is 1% behind, and the AMD Radeon HD 7970M is 1.1% behind; the NVIDIA Tesla K40c is 1.5% ahead.

Q: How many total combos was the Greedfall rank measured against?

A: The Greedfall combo is ranked 1584 out of 3703 total tested combos. That means it is positioned above the median of the tested field, with 2119 combos recording a lower relative ranking.

Q: Which memory-related specs does the RTX 3070 have for this test?

A: The card uses 8 GB of GDDR6 VRAM with a 256-bit bus and a memory bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s. The memory clock is listed as 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), and the GPU’s base/boost clocks are 1500 MHz and 1725 MHz, respectively.

How This Combo Ranks

The Greedfall measured rank for this combination is 1585 of 3703. That places the pairing in the upper half of the database, but not near the top. Since a lower rank number means better performance in the context of the sorted list, a rank of 1585 means the Ryzen 7 7700X + RTX 3070 combo outsourced 2118 of the tested combos and trails 1584 others. Converted to a simple position within the list, roughly 57% of the tested combos are worse — this is a comfortable above-average placement, but it is not the kind of result that dominates the charts.

The component-level context suggests where the limitation lies. The Ryzen 7 7700X holds an 85th percentile standing against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 35909. The RTX 3070, meanwhile, receives a 61st and 0006 percentile and an average GPU benchmark score of 17208. These two percentiles are for different pools, so the raw numbers are not directly comparable, but the discrepancy still points in one direction: the CPU is substantially more capable within its own field than the GPU is within its field. That imbalance shows in actually the game’s internal hitches — as the resolution climbs and the shadows get higher, the GPU levels of headroom narrows much faster than the CPU effort.

The CPU’s nearest rival list merely illustrates the did zone. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 delivers 35802 average benchmark score, only 0.3% behind the 7700X; the Intel Core 7 250H scores 35728, a 0.5% gap; and the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H scores 35670, a 0.7% gap. The rivals are extremely close in synthetic compute, implying that the 7700X won’t unexpectedly brick the Greedfall experience on its own. The GPU’s rival list shows the opposite — the RTX 3070 is surrounded by older and newer parts at similar average scores, with deltaPct of 0.7 to 1.1% in either direction, so it behaves at the naked center of an average-spreader segment.

GPU Role

The GPU’s core role in the Greedfall results is directly visible in the measured FPS table. The RTX 3070 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth. That is a steady mid-band capacity, but it does not sit at the same power tier as the Ryzen, which is a high-end 8-core part. The game’s data shows this budget in practical terms: at 3840x2160 Ultra, the average FPS craters to 38, which is the only sub-60 average in the entire measured set. At 4K High, the same GPU only reaches 60 FPS even. At 4K Medium, the engine picks up 66 frames average and a 56 FPS minimum, so the Ultra preset is clearly the biggest single hit on the 4K side.

The GPU hardware itself is well identified. It is an Ampere GA104 chip fabricated on 8 nm, with 5888 shading units, 184 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The 46 RT cores and 184 tensor cores confirm second-generation ray tracing support, but Greedfall does not appear to be designed around ray tracing, so those cores matter less in the measured FPS values. The FP32 compute is rated at 20.31 TFLOPS. The GPU’s pixel rate is 165.6 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 317.4 GTexel/s. With a 20.31 TFLOPS throughput, the chip can process plenty of classic rendered effects, but the more interesting cue is the memory delay: 8 GB VRAM, 256-bit bus and 14 Gbps effective memory — these are weaker numbers than what would be typical for high-end 4K gaming at Ultra quality in an Action RPG that stretches shadow and particle budgets.

Keep the role of the GPU separate from the CPU: the CPU here does have the 85th percentile and a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 19088, but the measured FPUs prove that by the time the resolution moves up to 4K, the RTX 3070 is the restraint. Specifically, at 3840x2160 Medium, the average is 66 FPS, and at 3840x2160 High it is 60 FPS. Everything below Ultra at 4K brings the GPU’s workload to about the boundary of 60 FPS; Ultra pushes it beyond what the chip can maintain, yielding the worst minimum frame pacing. The min and max numbers are only recorded in the Medium preset (4K min 56 max 76, 1440p min 94 max 128, 1080p min 136 max 184), which suggests the sec structure of that preset produces a stable pacing window.

Settings Recommendations

Choosing the best measured preset for this pairing depends heavily on the resolution. For 1920x1080, the menu data shows no real hazard: Low runs at 204 average, Medium at 160, High at 146, and Ultra at 93. An aggressive choice on 1080p is Ultra — 93 FPS is still above playable 60, and the visual detail gain over Low is substantial. If the user prefers frame rate headroom, Medium at 160 is nearly double the average.

At 2560x1440, the preset response tightens: Low 141, Medium 111, High 101, and Ultra 64. The Ultra preset sits on the edge of 60, with an average of 64, meaning the heavier Ultra effects at 1440p are the last playable tier before the GPU bottoms out. For a multi-scale requirement, Medium provides 111 FPS and stays at a solid 50% headroom over the API. High at 101 is also perfectly usable, although it is the second-lowest of the playable tiers. The list from 1440p Low to Ultra shows the classic negative curve; the only caveat is that 1440p Ultra still keeps itself at 64, so it is not the soft spot.

At 3840x2160, the GPU struggles with anything above a certain point. Medium averages 66 FPS with a 56 FPS minimum, which is the only 4K preset that is consistently near or above 60. High hits exactly 60 FPS on average with no minimum figure recorded. Ultra falls to 38, and 4K Medium is the sensible compromise if the aim is to stay above the immersive frame. 4K Low is 84 FPS, but that comes with the most aggressive reduction in visual complexity.

Thus, the measured data indicates the practical target: 1080p or 3240p users can pick Ultra or High based on personal preference, while 4K users should settle for Medium or High.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the four rows are:

• Low: 204 average (no min/max recorded)
• Medium: 160 average, 136 min, 184 max
• High: 146 average (no min/max recorded)
• Ultra: 93 average (no min/max recorded)

The 1080p spread is very wide, especially for the GPU. Low produces more than twice the FPS of Ultra. The Medium data also shows a 48-frame band from min to max, which reflects exploration areas with smaller variance. Overall, the 1080p results are fully fluid for this combo.

At 2560x1440:

• Low: 141 average (no min/max recorded)
• Medium: 111 average, 94 min, 128 max
• High: 101 average (no min/max recorded)
• Ultra: 64 average (no min/max recorded)

In 1440p, the Low-to-Ultra range runs from 64 to 141, a difference of 77 frames. The Medium min at 94 means that even the “budget” Medium preset stays consistently above 60 FPS for the majority of the frame counts in the area. The 1440p Ultra average of 64 is the only recorded preset where the mean is within 4 of 60 FPS, so it the clear limit for this resolution.

At 3840x2160:

• Low: 84 average (no min/max recorded)
• Medium: 66 average, 56 min, 76 max
• High: 60 average (no min/max recorded)
• Ultra: 38 average (no min/max recorded)

At 4K, the pattern changes drastically. Low is already only 84 average, and the gap between Low, Medium (66) and High (60) is moderate, but Ultra (38) is a major drop. The Medium preset’s min is 56, so the data indicates that the graph’s transition from 144