Greedfall

# Greedfall Performance Analysis: Intel Core i5-9400 + AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT

This combination of an Intel Core i5-9400 and AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT delivers a measured performance profile in Greedfall that places it at rank 1069 out of 1705 tested combos, situating it in the lower-middle portion of the database. The CPU, a 6-core/6-thread Coffee Lake part with a 2.90 GHz base and 4.10 GHz boost clock, holds a 50th percentile ranking against all CPUs, while the GPU, built on RDNA 2.0 with 2048 shading units and a 2635 MHz boost clock, sits at the 72nd percentile against all GPUs. This asymmetry—a mid-pack CPU paired with a stronger GPU—shapes the frame rate behavior across resolutions, as the data reveals a system that scales predictably with settings but shows clear signs of CPU limitation at lower resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 1069 out of 1705 tested combinations represents a position in the 37th percentile of all tested pairings for Greedfall. This placement is notable because the GPU alone ranks at the 72nd percentile among all graphics cards, while the CPU sits at exactly the 50th percentile—the data suggests the processor is the constraining factor in this pairing. The average benchmark score for the CPU is 2305, while the GPU's average benchmark score is 29024, further reinforcing that the graphics hardware is the stronger component in this duo.

Looking at the CPU's nearest rivals provides context for its standing. The Intel Core i3-10305 scores 2300, a mere 0.2% below the i5-9400, while the Intel Core i3-1125G4 also scores 2299, again 0.2% lower. The Intel Xeon E-2134 trails by 0.4% with a score of 2295. On the other side, the Intel Core i7-8809G leads by 0.6% with a score of 2319. These tight margins—all within a single percentage point—indicate that the i5-9400 is performance-wise indistinguishable from several other mid-range processors, meaning the choice among them would not meaningfully alter Greedfall's frame rates.

The GPU's rival comparisons show a similar clustering. The AMD Radeon RX 6800M matches with a deltaPct of 0 and a score of 29011, while the AMD Radeon RX 470 is 0.1% behind at 28996. The Intel Arc A370M leads by 0.5% at 29175, and the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH is 0.6% ahead at 29197. This grouping suggests the RX 6650 XT's raw compute performance is well-established, yet in Greedfall, the combo's rank indicates that the CPU's 6-thread limit prevents the GPU from fully expressing its capability.

FAQ

Q: Why does this combo rank lower than the GPU's percentile might suggest?

A: The GPU holds a 72nd percentile ranking among all graphics cards, but the combo ranks 1069 out of 1705 in Greedfall. The CPU's 50th percentile standing and 6-thread/6-core configuration create a bottleneck that prevents the graphics card from achieving its full potential, especially at lower resolutions where the processor must feed frames more rapidly.

Q: What is the best settings configuration for 1080p gameplay?

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers 156.6 FPS average, which is the highest measured. Medium provides 126.7 FPS, High drops to 116 FPS, and Ultra falls to 70.8 FPS. The data shows that Ultra at 1080p costs more than half the frame rate of Low, indicating a steep performance penalty for maximum visual quality.

Q: How does 4K Ultra performance compare to 4K Low?

A: At 3840x2160, Ultra averages 29.1 FPS, which is below the 30 FPS threshold often considered the minimum for playable frame rates. Low at the same resolution averages 65 FPS, more than double the Ultra figure. The gap between Low and High at 4K is 15.5 FPS (65 vs 49.5), showing that even modest settings increases carry significant costs at this resolution.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor at 1440p?

A: The data indicates a hybrid situation. At 2560x1440, Low averages 108.8 FPS while High drops to 79.2 FPS—a 29.6 FPS difference that suggests GPU scaling. However, the CPU's 6-thread limitation becomes apparent when comparing 1080p Low (156.6 FPS) to 1440p Low (108.8 FPS), a drop that is larger than pure pixel-count scaling would predict, implying the CPU cannot fully saturate the GPU even at 1080p.

Q: What is the GPU's memory configuration and does it matter for Greedfall?

A: The RX 6650 XT features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 280.3 GB/s bandwidth. Memory clocks run at 2190 MHz (17.5 Gbps effective). Given that the game's Ultra preset at 4K only achieves 29.1 FPS, the 8 GB capacity appears sufficient for this title, as the frame rate collapse is more attributable to compute load than memory exhaustion.

Q: How does this combo's performance scale from 1080p to 4K?

A: At High settings, the average FPS drops from 116 at 1080p to 79.2 at 1440p (a 31.7% reduction) and further to 49.5 at 4K (a 57.3% reduction from 1080p). This scaling pattern is consistent with a GPU-bound scenario at higher resolutions, but the CPU's limitations at 1080p prevent the kind of linear scaling that would be seen with a stronger processor.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate progression across resolutions reveals a system that behaves differently depending on the settings preset. At Low settings, the average FPS goes from 156.6 at 1080p, to 108.8 at 1440p, to 65 at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 47.8 FPS (30.5%), while the drop from 1440p to 4K is 43.8 FPS (40.3%). This roughly proportional decline indicates that at Low settings, the workload scales with pixel count, and the GPU is the primary driver of performance—but the absolute numbers at 1080p (156.6 FPS) suggest the CPU is already near its limit, as a more powerful processor would likely push this figure higher.

At High settings, the pattern shifts. The average FPS from 1080p to 1440p drops from 116 to 79.2, a 36.8 FPS reduction (31.7%), and from 1440p to 4K drops to 49.5, a 29.7 FPS reduction (37.5%). The relative consistency of these percentage drops suggests that High settings impose a more balanced load, where both CPU and GPU contribute to the frame rate ceiling. At 1080p High, the 116 FPS figure is well below what the GPU could theoretically deliver, pointing to CPU limitation; at 4K High, the 49.5 FPS is close to what the GPU can handle, indicating a shift toward GPU-bound behavior.

Ultra settings tell a different story entirely. At 1080p, Ultra averages 70.8 FPS; at 1440p, it drops to 51.8 FPS (a 26.8% reduction); at 4K, it plummets to 29.1 FPS (a 43.8% reduction from 1440p). The increasingly steep percentage drops at higher resolutions demonstrate that Ultra settings amplify GPU workload disproportionately, making the graphics card the clear bottleneck at 4K Ultra, where the frame rate falls below playable thresholds.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full settings sweep shows: Low averages 156.6 FPS, Medium averages 126.7 FPS, High averages 116 FPS, and Ultra averages 70.8 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 29.9 FPS, between Medium and High is 10.7 FPS, and between High and Ultra is 45.2 FPS. This non-linear scaling indicates that Ultra's additional visual effects carry a disproportionate performance cost, while the step from Medium to High is relatively modest.

Moving to 2560x1440, the averages are: Low at 108.8 FPS, Medium at 88.8 FPS, High at 79.2 FPS, and Ultra at 51.8 FPS. The delta between Low and Medium here is 20 FPS, Medium to High is 9.6 FPS, and High to Ultra is 27.4 FPS. The pattern repeats—Ultra remains the most expensive setting tier—but the absolute differences shrink compared to 1080p, confirming that resolution increases compress the performance spread as the GPU becomes more heavily loaded.

At 3840x2160, the measured averages are: Low at 65 FPS, Medium at 52.1 FPS, High at 49.5 FPS, and Ultra at 29.1 FPS. Notably, the difference between Medium and High at 4K is only 2.6 FPS, suggesting that the GPU is saturated enough that the visual distinction between these presets has minimal frame rate impact. However, the jump from High to Ultra costs 20.4 FPS, a 41.2% reduction, demonstrating that Ultra's demands at 4K exceed what this combo can sustain.

The data shows that at any resolution, the Low preset offers the highest frame rate and Ultra the lowest, but the magnitude of the Ultra penalty grows with resolution. At 1080p, Ultra delivers 45.2% of Low's frame rate; at 1440p, it delivers 47.6%; at 4K, it delivers 44.8%. This consistency suggests that Ultra's additional load is uniformly heavy across resolutions, though the absolute frame rates at 4K make it impractical for smooth gameplay.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT brings 8 GB of GDDR6 memory with a 128-bit bus and 280.3 GB/s bandwidth, paired with clock speeds of 2055 MHz base, 2410 MHz game, and 2635 MHz boost. The memory runs at 2190 MHz, translating to 17.5 Gbps effective. These specifications place the GPU at the 72nd percentile among all graphics cards, with an average benchmark score of 29024 that sits nearly identical to the AMD Radeon RX 6800M (deltaPct 0).

In Greedfall, the GPU's role is dominant at higher resolutions and settings. At 4K Ultra, the 29.1 FPS average shows that the graphics card is overwhelmed by the combination of resolution and visual fidelity. The GPU's 2048 shading units and 128 texture mapping units are tasked with rendering the game's environments, and the 64 ROPs handle pixel output. The pixel rate of 168.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 337.3 GTexel/s provide theoretical ceilings that, combined with the 10.79 TFLOPS FP32 performance, explain why the card struggles at 4K Ultra.

However, at 1080p Low, the 156.6 FPS figure is likely limited by the CPU rather than the GPU. The RX 6650 XT's capabilities—as evidenced by its 72nd percentile ranking—should allow for higher frame rates, but the i5-9400's 6 threads and 42.7 GB/s memory bandwidth create a ceiling. The GPU's PCIe 4.0 x8 interface (running on a platform that may only support PCIe 3.0) could also introduce a minor bandwidth constraint, though the measured data does not isolate this factor.

The GPU's VRAM capacity of 8 GB appears adequate for Greedfall even at 4K, as the frame rate collapse at Ultra is more consistent with compute saturation than memory exhaustion. The 280.3 GB/s bandwidth provides sufficient throughput for the game's textures, and the lack of min FPS data prevents a deeper analysis of frame pacing. Overall, the RX 6650 XT is the stronger component in this pairing, but its performance is capped by the CPU at lower resolutions, while at 4K Ultra, it reaches its own architectural limits.