Greedfall

The Intel Core i5-14600KF paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT delivers a highly capable 1440p and 1080p experience in Greedfall, with the data showing a significant performance ceiling that is only challenged by the most demanding 4K Ultra settings. The combination of a 14-core processor and a 16 GB RDNA 2 graphics card produces frame rates that are consistently smooth across most tested configurations, though the 4K Ultra preset reveals a clear limitation in the GPU’s ability to maintain high performance under maximum load.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average frame rate achieved by this combo?

A: The highest recorded average frame rate is 231 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rival?

A: The Intel Core i5-14600KF has an average benchmark score of 49394, which is 0.3% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 7900's score of 49228, making the performance essentially identical.

Q: What is the GPU's percentile ranking among all tested graphics cards?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT falls in the 85th percentile of all GPUs, indicating it outperforms a substantial majority of tested graphics hardware.

Q: Does the combo perform better at 1440p High or 1080p Ultra?

A: At 2560x1440 with High settings, the average FPS is 114, while at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings, the average FPS is 105, showing the 1440p High preset provides a higher frame rate.

Q: What is the frame time consistency at 4K Medium?

A: At 3840x2160 with Medium settings, the average FPS is 75, with a minimum of 64 FPS and a maximum of 86 FPS, indicating a variance of 22 FPS between the minimum and maximum recorded frames.

Q: How does the combo rank among all tested combinations?

A: The combo ranks 1177th out of 3703 total tested combinations, placing it in the top third of all recorded system configurations for this game.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT serves as the primary rendering engine in this configuration, and its specifications directly explain the performance patterns observed in the measured data. The GPU operates with a base clock of 1825 MHz and a boost clock of 2250 MHz, with a game clock of 2015 MHz that represents the typical sustained frequency during gaming workloads. This clock architecture allows the card to scale its performance dynamically, which is evident in the substantial frame rate differences between Low and Ultra settings at each resolution.

The 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus provides a memory bandwidth of 512.0 GB/s, which becomes increasingly critical as resolution increases. At 3840x2160, the demand on memory bandwidth and capacity grows, and the data shows this transition clearly. The GPU’s 4608 shading units and 128 ROPs handle the pixel processing workload, with a pixel rate of 288.0 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 648.0 GTexel/s, providing the raw throughput necessary for the Action RPG’s environments.

The RX 6800 XT’s position in the 85th percentile of all GPUs is reflected in its benchmark scores, particularly the Passmark G3D score of 24980 and the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3689. When compared to its nearest rivals, the GPU shows a 1.5% advantage over the NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile but trails the Intel Arc A550M by 2.5%, placing it in a competitive mid-to-high tier segment. The 7 nm process node from TSMC, with 26,800 million transistors on a 520 mm² die, represents a mature architecture that delivers consistent results across the measured presets.

The GPU’s role becomes the limiting factor at the highest settings, particularly at 4K Ultra where the average FPS drops to 43. This performance cliff suggests that while the card has ample memory capacity, the compute units are saturated by the combination of high resolution and maximum graphical fidelity. The data indicates the RX 6800 XT is best utilized at High or Medium settings where it can leverage its full clock speeds without hitting the architectural bottlenecks that emerge at Ultra.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear and predictable scaling pattern as resolution increases, with the performance drops indicating where the system’s bottleneck shifts between CPU and GPU. At 1920x1080, the combo achieves 231 FPS on Low settings, which drops to 160 FPS at 2560x1440 and further to 96 FPS at 3840x2160. This represents a 30.7% reduction from 1080p to 1440p and a 40% reduction from 1440p to 4K at Low settings, showing that even at minimal graphical load, resolution scaling has a significant impact.

The High settings preset shows a similar pattern but with less dramatic percentage drops. At 1080p High, the average is 165 FPS, which falls to 114 FPS at 1440p (a 30.9% drop) and then to 68 FPS at 4K (a 40.4% drop from 1440p). The consistency of these percentage reductions across Low and High settings suggests that the scaling is primarily driven by the GPU’s pixel processing capabilities rather than any specific setting interaction. The RX 6800 XT’s 128 ROPs and 288.0 GPixel/s pixel rate are the key specifications that determine how quickly the card can fill frames at higher resolutions.

The Medium settings data, which includes min and max FPS values, provides additional insight into the scaling behavior. At 1080p Medium, the average is 181 FPS with a minimum of 154 and maximum of 209, while at 1440p Medium the average drops to 126 FPS with a minimum of 107 and maximum of 145. The 4K Medium preset shows an average of 75 FPS with a minimum of 64 and maximum of 86. The frame variance increases proportionally with resolution, from 55 FPS at 1080p to 38 FPS at 1440p and 22 FPS at 4K, indicating that higher resolutions compress the frame time distribution as the GPU approaches its limits.

The Ultra preset reveals the most pronounced scaling penalty. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 105 FPS, which drops to 73 FPS at 1440p (a 30.5% reduction) and then plummets to 43 FPS at 4K (a 41.1% reduction from 1440p). This 4K Ultra result is the only measured configuration that falls below the 60 FPS threshold, suggesting that this is the point where the GPU’s architectural limits are definitively reached. The data implies that the CPU, with its 14 cores and 20 threads, is not the limiting factor at any resolution, as the consistent scaling percentages point squarely at the GPU as the performance ceiling.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides clear guidance on which preset offers the optimal balance of visual quality and performance for this combo. The High settings preset emerges as the recommended choice across all three resolutions, delivering 165 FPS at 1080p, 114 FPS at 1440p, and 68 FPS at 4K. These figures represent the only preset that maintains an average above 60 FPS at every resolution, making it the most versatile option for users who may switch between display resolutions.

The Medium preset offers a modest performance increase over High, with 181 FPS at 1080p, 126 FPS at 1440p, and 75 FPS at 4K. The difference between High and Medium is 16 FPS at 1080p, 12 FPS at 1440p, and 7 FPS at 4K, which represents a diminishing return as resolution increases. Given that the performance gap narrows at higher resolutions, the visual quality improvement from Medium to High becomes relatively more valuable at 4K, where the 68 FPS average on High is already above the 60 FPS target.

The Low preset provides the highest possible frame rates, reaching 231 FPS at 1080p, 160 FPS at 1440p, and 96 FPS at 4K. This preset is only recommended for competitive scenarios or for users with high refresh rate displays who prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity. The jump from Low to Medium at 4K, from 96 to 75 FPS, represents a 21.9% performance cost, which may be acceptable given the substantial visual improvements that Medium typically offers over Low in an Action RPG like Greedfall.

The Ultra preset is the only configuration that fails to maintain playable performance at 4K, with an average of 43 FPS. At 1080p and 1440p, Ultra delivers 105 FPS and 73 FPS respectively, which are still respectable figures, but the 4K result makes this preset a poor choice for 4K displays. The data suggests that High settings at 4K provide the best experience for users with 4K monitors, while 1080p and 1440p users can comfortably experiment with Ultra settings if they prefer maximum visual fidelity over the headroom provided by High.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 1177 out of 3703 total tested combinations places it in the 68th percentile of all system configurations tested for Greedfall. This ranking indicates that the Intel Core i5-14600KF and AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT combination outperforms approximately two-thirds of all tested setups, while being outperformed by the remaining third. The rank is a composite measure that accounts for performance across all tested resolutions and settings, giving a holistic view of the combo’s capabilities.

The CPU’s individual performance contributes significantly to this ranking. With an average benchmark score of 49394, the i5-14600KF sits in the 90th percentile of all CPUs, indicating that the processor is not a bottleneck in this system. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 9 7900, scores 49228, a 0.3% difference that places them in a statistical tie. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 trails by 0.8%, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 leads by 0.8%, showing that the i5-14600KF is positioned firmly in the upper echelon of desktop processors.

The GPU’s contribution is comparatively more modest. The RX 6800 XT’s 85th percentile ranking among all GPUs is lower than the CPU’s 90th percentile, suggesting that the graphics card may be the constraining factor in this combo’s overall rank. The GPU’s nearest rivals show a tighter competitive field, with the NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile just 1.5% behind and the Intel Arc A550M 2.5% ahead. This competitive positioning explains why the combo ranks in the top third but not the top 10% — the CPU is elite, but the GPU is merely strong.

The gap between the CPU’s high percentile and the combo’s overall rank suggests that Greedfall’s performance is more dependent on GPU capability than CPU capability. This is corroborated by the resolution scaling data, which shows consistent percentage drops as resolution increases regardless of settings. The 4K Ultra result, where the combo falls to 43 FPS, is a clear indicator that the GPU’s 85th percentile ranking is the limiting factor in the combo’s overall standing.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its highest performance across all settings. The Low preset achieves an average of 231 FPS, representing the absolute peak of the measured data. The Medium preset averages 181 FPS, with a minimum of 154 and maximum of 209 FPS, showing a 55 FPS variance that indicates some frame time inconsistency. The High preset averages 165 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 105 FPS, creating a performance hierarchy where Low is 40% faster than Medium, which is 9.7% faster than High, which is 57.1% faster than Ultra.

At 2560x1440, the performance drops are consistent across all settings. The Low preset averages 160 FPS, which is 71 FPS lower than the 1080p Low result. The Medium preset averages 126 FPS with a minimum of 107 and maximum of 145 FPS, showing a 38 FPS variance. The High preset averages 114 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 73 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 87 FPS, compared to 126 FPS at 1080p, indicating that the performance spread narrows as resolution increases.

At 3840x2160, the combo’s performance becomes more moderate. The Low preset averages 96 FPS, which is the only 4K result above 90 FPS. The Medium preset averages 75 FPS with a minimum of 64 and maximum of 86 FPS, representing a 22 FPS variance that is the tightest of any Medium setting across resolutions. The High preset averages 68 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 43 FPS, which is the only measured result below 60 FPS. The 4K Ultra result is 53.1% slower than the 4K High result, demonstrating the significant performance cost of the highest settings at this resolution.

The data reveals that the Medium preset provides the only complete min/max FPS information across all three resolutions, with the 1080p Medium showing a 154 minimum and 209 maximum, the 1440p Medium showing a 107 minimum and 145 maximum, and the 4K Medium showing a 64 minimum and 86 maximum. This suggests that the Medium preset is the most thoroughly characterized setting in the dataset, likely representing the nominal operating point for this hardware combination.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-14600KF provides the computational foundation for this combo, and its specifications indicate that it is not a limiting factor in Greedfall’s performance. The processor features 14 cores and 20 threads, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, enabling substantial multi-threaded throughput for the game’s background simulation and AI processing. The 24 MB of shared L3 cache, combined with 2 MB of L2 cache per core, provides rapid access to frequently used data, reducing memory latency that could impact frame pacing.

The CPU’s benchmark results demonstrate its high-end positioning. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32544 and single-core score of 4594 both indicate strong performance, with the multi-core result showing the benefit of the 14-core configuration. The Geekbench multi-core score of 17085 and single-core score of 2445 further corroborate the CPU’s capabilities. The Passmark multi-thread score of 38697 and single-thread score of 4273 place the processor in the 90th percentile of all CPUs, confirming its elite status.

The CPU’s relationship to the measured FPS data is most apparent at low resolutions and settings where GPU load is minimal. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 231 FPS, a result that would be difficult to reach if the CPU were a bottleneck. The fact that the FPS scales consistently with resolution and settings, rather than showing a plateau that would indicate CPU limitation, suggests that the i5-14600KF has ample headroom for this game. The CPU’s 5.30 GHz boost clock is particularly relevant for Greedfall, which may rely on single-threaded performance for game logic.

The CPU’s nearest rivals show that it sits at the top of its performance class. The 0.3% delta over the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 is negligible, while the 0.8% lead over the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and the 0.8% deficit to the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 show a tightly clustered group. The CPU’s architecture, with its Raptor Lake design on a 10 nm process and 257 mm² die size, provides a mature and well-optimized platform. The 125 W TDP indicates that the processor requires adequate cooling to maintain its boost clocks, but the measured FPS data shows that the cooling solution is sufficient for sustained gaming performance.