Greedfall

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-14600KF paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 achieves a combo rank of 254 out of 3703 tested combinations in Greedfall. This places the pairing in the top 7% of all tested configurations, a strong showing that reflects the hardware’s ability to drive this 2019 Action RPG at high frame rates across all resolution tiers. The rank is particularly notable given the game’s age; it suggests the combination is not merely adequate but decisively overqualified for the title’s demands.

Benchmark results indicate that the combo’s standing is driven by the GPU’s raw throughput at higher resolutions and the CPU’s substantial single-thread headroom at lower settings. The data shows a clear hierarchy: at 1920x1080 with Low settings, the average FPS reaches 318, which is more than double the 4K Ultra result of 60 FPS. This wide spread demonstrates that the combo scales predictably with workload, but the rank itself is anchored by the fact that even the most demanding preset—4K Ultra—remains playable, a feat not every combination in the database can claim.

Relative to its nearest rivals, the CPU sits in a tight cluster. The i5-14600KF’s average benchmark score of 49394 is 0.3% above the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (49228) and 0.4% above the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (49196). It edges out the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 by 0.8% (48995) but trails the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 by 0.8% (49796). These deltas are negligible in real-world gaming, meaning the CPU is not a differentiating factor in this combo’s rank. The GPU, however, shows a different story. The RTX 4080’s average score of 54247 is 0.1% above the RTX 4080 SUPER (54209) but 1.1% below the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X (54828) and 2.6% below the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB (55698). The 4080’s percentile rank of 86 among all GPUs reinforces that it is a high-end part, but the measured FPS in Greedfall are what boost the combo above many others.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 is the dominant component in this pairing, and the measured FPS data confirms its central role. With 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus, the card offers 716.8 GB/s of bandwidth—ample for Greedfall’s textures and geometry at 4K. The memory clock runs at 1400 MHz, translating to 22.4 Gbps effective, which is a high-speed configuration that keeps the GPU fed during intense scenes. The base clock of 2205 MHz and boost clock of 2505 MHz provide the computational thrust, with 9728 shading units and 112 ROPs handling pixel output. The card’s pixel rate of 280.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 761.5 GTexel/s are directly reflected in the FPS numbers.

At 1080p, the GPU is often underutilized, as evidenced by the Low preset hitting 318 FPS—a figure that suggests the CPU is the limiting factor at that setting. However, as resolution increases, the GPU’s workload scales. At 1440p High, the average FPS drops to 157, and at 4K High, it falls to 94. The 4K Ultra result of 60 FPS is the clearest indicator of the GPU’s ceiling in this game; the card is pushing close to its limits with maximum settings at the highest resolution. The GPU’s 48.74 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 76 RT cores are not heavily taxed by Greedfall, which is not a ray-tracing title, but the raw rasterization power is what drives the frame rates.

The GPU’s 86th percentile ranking among all GPUs places it well above average, and its nearest rivals show minimal performance deltas. The RTX 4080 SUPER is only 0.1% faster on average, which is within noise, while the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB is 2.6% faster in synthetic benchmarks—yet the measured FPS in Greedfall do not reflect that, suggesting the 4080’s driver optimization or memory configuration is better suited to this specific title. The card’s end-of-life production status and launch MSRP of 1,199 USD are historical facts, but the performance data shows it remains a formidable choice for this game.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo achieves in Greedfall?

A: The highest measured average FPS is 318, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the peak performance point in the dataset, indicating a massive headroom for high-refresh-rate displays at lower resolutions.

Q: How does the combo perform at 4K Ultra settings?

A: At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the average FPS is 60, which is exactly at the threshold for smooth 60 Hz gaming. No minimum or maximum FPS values are recorded for this preset, but the average suggests it is playable but with no margin for frame drops.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more likely to bottleneck at 1080p?

A: The data suggests the CPU becomes the limiting factor at 1080p Low, where the average FPS of 318 is extremely high. The GPU’s 86th percentile ranking and the CPU’s 90th percentile ranking indicate both are strong, but the CPU’s single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4594) is what allows such high frame rates at low resolutions.

Q: What are the minimum FPS values recorded for Medium settings?

A: For Medium settings, the minimum FPS values are recorded as 212 at 1920x1080, 147 at 2560x1440, and 88 at 3840x2160. These figures show that even the lowest frame rates remain above 60 FPS at all resolutions, indicating consistent performance.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The i5-14600KF’s average benchmark score of 49394 is 0.3% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (49228) and 0.4% higher than the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (49196). It also outperforms the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 by 0.8% (48995) but is 0.8% behind the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 (49796).

Q: Does the GPU’s synthetic benchmark performance match its in-game FPS?

A: Not exactly. The RTX 4080’s average score of 54247 is 0.1% above the RTX 4080 SUPER (54209) but 2.6% below the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB (55698). Yet in Greedfall, the measured FPS are consistently high, suggesting the 4080’s real-world performance is better than its synthetic rank implies for this specific title.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides a clear path for the optimal settings preset. At 1920x1080, the High preset delivers an average of 226 FPS, which is more than sufficient for any 144 Hz or even 240 Hz monitor. The Medium preset at 249 FPS offers a marginal gain, but the difference is unlikely to be perceptible in most gameplay scenarios. The Low preset’s 318 FPS is overkill unless chasing maximum competitive frame rates, which is not a priority for an Action RPG. The Ultra preset at 145 FPS is still smooth, but the visual upgrade from High to Ultra may not justify the 36% performance drop. For 1080p, High is the recommended balance.

At 2560x1440, the High preset yields an average of 157 FPS, which is ideal for high-refresh-rate gaming. The Medium preset at 173 FPS provides a modest 10% boost, but the visual fidelity loss is often noticeable. The Ultra preset at 100 FPS is still well above the 60 FPS threshold, but the 57 FPS drop from High to Ultra—a 36% reduction—suggests diminishing returns. The Low preset at 220 FPS is unnecessary for most users. For 1440p, High is the sweet spot, offering a smooth experience without sacrificing visual quality.

At 3840x2160, the High preset achieves an average of 94 FPS, which is excellent for 4K gaming on a 60 Hz or even 120 Hz display. The Medium preset at 103 FPS is slightly faster, but the visual difference between Medium and High is often significant in Greedfall’s environments. The Ultra preset at 60 FPS is playable but leaves no headroom for frame drops, which can be problematic in combat-heavy scenes. The Low preset at 131 FPS is faster but compromises the game’s visual atmosphere. For 4K, High is the recommended preset, as it balances performance and fidelity, while Ultra is only advisable for those who prioritize visuals over frame rate stability.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The dataset provides average FPS for all four settings presets at three resolutions, with minimum and maximum values recorded only for the Medium preset. At 1920x1080, the progression is as follows: Low averages 318 FPS, Medium averages 249 FPS with a minimum of 212 and a maximum of 287, High averages 226 FPS, and Ultra averages 145 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 173 FPS, a 54% reduction, which indicates that the GPU is heavily taxed by the Ultra preset’s increased draw distances and shadow quality. The Medium preset’s minimum of 212 FPS ensures that even the most demanding scenes stay well above refresh-rate thresholds.

At 2560x1440, the FPS figures scale downward as expected. Low averages 220 FPS, Medium averages 173 FPS with a minimum of 147 and a maximum of 199, High averages 157 FPS, and Ultra averages 100 FPS. The drop from Low to Ultra is 120 FPS, a 55% reduction, mirroring the 1080p trend. The Medium preset’s minimum of 147 FPS is still comfortably above 144 Hz, making it a viable option for high-refresh-rate 1440p displays. The High preset at 157 FPS is nearly identical to Medium’s average, suggesting that the visual upgrade from Medium to High is relatively inexpensive in performance terms.

At 3840x2160, the scaling becomes more pronounced. Low averages 131 FPS, Medium averages 103 FPS with a minimum of 88 and a maximum of 119, High averages 94 FPS, and Ultra averages 60 FPS. The drop from Low to Ultra is 71 FPS, a 54% reduction, consistent with the other resolutions. The Medium preset’s minimum of 88 FPS is the lowest recorded in the entire dataset, but it remains above 60 FPS, ensuring a playable experience even in the most intense moments. The High preset at 94 FPS is a significant step down from Medium’s 103 FPS, but the visual fidelity gain is often worth the 9 FPS sacrifice. The Ultra preset’s 60 FPS average is exactly at the 60 Hz threshold, but without recorded minimums, frame drops below 60 FPS are a possibility.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-14600KF is a 14-core, 20-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. Its 24 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel memory support for DDR4 and DDR5 provide ample bandwidth for gaming workloads. The CPU’s 90th percentile ranking among all CPUs indicates it is a high-performance part, and its average benchmark score of 49394 places it in a tight cluster with its nearest rivals. In Greedfall, the CPU’s role is most evident at lower resolutions and settings, where frame rates exceed 300 FPS.

At 1080p Low, the average FPS of 318 is a clear indicator that the CPU is the primary driver. The GPU is capable of far higher frame rates, but the CPU’s single-thread performance—evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4594—becomes the bottleneck. This is a common scenario in older games like Greedfall, which are often limited by per-core performance rather than multi-threaded scaling. The CPU’s multi-core capabilities, such as a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32544, are less relevant in this title, as Greedfall does not effectively utilize more than a few threads.

As resolution increases to 1440p and 4K, the CPU’s influence diminishes. At 1440p High, the average FPS of 157 is still high enough that the CPU may play a role, but the GPU’s workload becomes more significant. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS of 60 is almost entirely GPU-limited, as the rendering resolution overwhelms the CPU’s ability to feed the GPU. The CPU’s 125 W TDP and 14 cores are more than sufficient for this game, and the data shows that the processor is never the limiting factor at higher settings. The CPU’s nearest rivals, such as the AMD Ryzen 9 7900, show a delta of only 0.3%, meaning that swapping to a comparable CPU would yield no meaningful FPS change in Greedfall.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS data reveals a consistent scaling pattern as resolution increases from 1080p to 4K. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 318 at 1920x1080 to 220 at 2560x1440 (a 31% reduction) and then to 131 at 3840x2160 (a 59% reduction from 1080p). This steep drop indicates that the GPU is heavily taxed by pixel count, even at the lowest settings. At High settings, the FPS drops from 226 at 1080p to 157 at 1440p (a 31% reduction) and then to 94 at 4K (a 58% reduction from 1080p). The consistent 31% and 58-59% reductions across settings suggest that the GPU is the primary scaling factor, with the CPU playing a minimal role as resolution increases.

The Ultra settings show a similar trend: 145 FPS at 1080p, 100 FPS at 1440p (a 31% reduction), and 60 FPS at 4K (a 59% reduction from 1080p). This uniformity across all four settings presets—Low, Medium, High, and Ultra—indicates that the limiting component shifts decisively to the GPU as resolution climbs. The 1080p to 1440p drop is consistently around 31%, while the 1440p to 4K drop is around 40%, reflecting the pixel count increase from 2.1 million to 8.3 million. The GPU’s 716.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth is sufficient for 4K, but the 60 FPS Ultra result shows that the card is nearing its limits at the highest settings.

The data also shows that the CPU’s influence is confined to the lower resolutions. At 1080p Low, the 318 FPS result is likely near the CPU’s maximum frame rate capability, as the GPU is not the bottleneck. At 4K Ultra, the 60 FPS result is a clear GPU limit, as the CPU has ample headroom. The scaling pattern is a textbook example of a GPU-bound scenario at high resolutions, with the CPU only becoming relevant at 1080p Low. For users aiming for 4K gaming, the RTX 4080 is the defining component, and the i5-14600KF is more than adequate to support it without introducing a bottleneck. The measured FPS at 1440p High (157) and 1080p High (226) show that the combo is well-balanced, but the resolution scaling makes it clear that the GPU is the star of the show.