Greedfall

Greedfall on this system—an Intel Core i5-9400 paired with a GeForce RTX 4080—produces a lopsided performance profile. The data shows a CPU that is clearly the limiting factor at lower resolutions, while the GPU takes over the heavy lifting at 4K. The benchmark results indicate a system capable of high refresh rates at 1080p and 1440p, but with a significant performance cliff at the highest settings and resolution.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS values show how the workload shifts between components as resolution increases. At 1080p with High settings, the system averages 226 FPS. Moving to 1440p High, the average drops to 157 FPS, a 30.5% reduction in frame rate. Pushing further to 4K High, the average falls to 94 FPS, which is 58.4% lower than the 1080p result. This steep decline is a classic indicator that the RTX 4080 is becoming the primary bottleneck as pixel count rises.

The pattern is even more pronounced at Ultra settings. The system delivers 145 FPS at 1080p, 100 FPS at 1440p, and only 60 FPS at 4K. The 4K Ultra result is particularly telling—it represents a 58.6% drop from the 1080p Ultra figure. This suggests that at 4K Ultra, the combination of high resolution and maximum graphical fidelity saturates the GPU completely, leaving the CPU with ample headroom.

Conversely, at Low settings, the scaling behavior changes character. The system hits 269 FPS at 1080p, 220 FPS at 1440p, and 131 FPS at 4K. The 1440p Low result is 18.2% lower than 1080p Low, while 4K Low is 51.3% lower than 1080p Low. The gap between Low and High settings narrows at higher resolutions, which indicates that the CPU can push high frame rates at Low settings even at 1440p, but the GPU still dictates the ceiling at 4K regardless of preset.

The data points to a system where the RTX 4080 is the limiting component at 4K across all settings. At 1080p and 1440p, however, the i5-9400 begins to constrain performance, particularly at Low and Medium settings where the GPU could theoretically render even more frames. The fact that 1080p Low (269 FPS) is only 9.4% faster than 1080p High (226 FPS) suggests the CPU is capping the output, as the GPU has far more headroom to exploit at lower settings.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-9400 is a 6-core, 6-thread processor based on Coffee Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. Its benchmark scores position it as a mid-range part—it achieves 6629 points in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 935 points in single-core. The processor sits in the 47th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 2254. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 (deltaPct -0.2%), Intel Core i7-10710U (deltaPct 0.3%), and AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 (deltaPct 0.4%), indicating it performs within a tight band of similar processors.

In Greedfall, the CPU's impact is most visible at 1080p, where frame rates reach 269 FPS at Low settings. That figure represents the upper bound of what this processor can deliver in this game, regardless of how much GPU power is available. The RTX 4080 is capable of far more, but the i5-9400's six threads without hyper-threading create a ceiling. The 6-core/6-thread configuration is sufficient for this 2019 Action RPG, but the lack of additional threads means there is no reserve for background tasks or heavily threaded game logic.

The 4.10 GHz boost clock helps single-threaded performance, which is reflected in the 935 single-core score in Cinebench R23. Greedfall, like many titles from its era, relies on a few primary threads for game logic and draw call submission. The data shows that at 4K, the CPU is not the limiting factor—the 60 FPS at Ultra is clearly a GPU constraint. But at 1080p Medium, the 246 FPS result is only 8.6% higher than the 1080p High result, suggesting that the CPU is nearing its limit even as the GPU has more capacity to offer.

The processor's 9 MB of shared L3 cache and 42.7 GB/s memory bandwidth are modest figures by modern standards, but they are adequate for this game's requirements at the resolutions tested. The data indicates that while the i5-9400 is not a performance standout, it is sufficient to keep the RTX 4080 well-fed at 4K and only becomes a bottleneck at lower resolutions where frame rates exceed what the CPU can process.

FAQ

Q: Is the RTX 4080 being held back by the i5-9400?

A: At 4K, no—the GPU is the clear limiting factor, with performance dropping to 60 FPS at Ultra. At 1080p, the CPU constrains output, as evidenced by the small gap between Low (269 FPS) and High (226 FPS) settings, a difference of only 19%.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to achieve high refresh rates?

A: At 1440p High, the system averages 157 FPS, and at 1080p High, it averages 226 FPS. Both are well above 144 Hz thresholds. For 4K, the system delivers 94 FPS at High, which is playable but not high-refresh territory.

Q: Why does 4K Ultra drop to 60 FPS when 4K High runs at 94 FPS?

A: The Ultra preset imposes a significant additional GPU load. The 34 FPS difference between High and Ultra at 4K (94 vs. 60) indicates that the Ultra settings include effects or render features that heavily tax the RTX 4080, pushing it to its limits.

Q: How does the i5-9400 compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The i5-9400 has an average benchmark score of 2254. Its closest rival, the Intel Core i7-1068NG7, scores 2259 (deltaPct -0.2%), while the Intel Core i7-10710U scores 2248 (deltaPct 0.3%). Performance is effectively identical within a 0.4% band.

Q: Can this system maintain 60 FPS at 4K Ultra in Greedfall?

A: The data shows an average of 60 FPS at 4K Ultra. This meets the 60 FPS target, but with no min FPS data provided, there is no indication of frame pacing or dips below that average.

Q: What is the GPU's percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The RTX 4080 sits in the 86th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 54247. Its nearest rivals include the RTX 4080 SUPER (deltaPct 0.1%) and AMD Radeon Pro W5700X (deltaPct -1.1%).

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system produces its highest frame rates. Low settings yield an average of 269 FPS. Medium settings deliver 246 FPS, with a minimum of 209 FPS and a maximum of 283 FPS. High settings produce 226 FPS. Ultra settings drop to 145 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 124 FPS, indicating that the CPU is the limiting factor at the lower presets, while Ultra begins to engage the GPU more heavily.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates remain high but show a clear GPU influence. Low settings average 220 FPS. Medium settings average 173 FPS, with a minimum of 147 FPS and a maximum of 199 FPS. High settings produce 157 FPS. Ultra settings average 100 FPS. The difference between Low and High at 1440p is 63 FPS, which is larger than the 43 FPS difference at 1080p, showing the GPU starting to assert itself.

At 3840x2160, the GPU dominates. Low settings average 131 FPS. Medium settings average 103 FPS, with a minimum of 88 FPS and a maximum of 119 FPS. High settings produce 94 FPS. Ultra settings drop to 60 FPS. The difference between Low and High at 4K is 37 FPS, and between High and Ultra is 34 FPS. These figures demonstrate that the RTX 4080 is fully engaged at this resolution, with every increment in settings costing a meaningful number of frames.

The Medium settings data is notable because it is the only preset with min and max FPS values recorded. At 4K Medium, the minimum of 88 FPS and maximum of 119 FPS show a 31 FPS variance. At 1440p Medium, the range is 147 to 199 FPS (52 FPS variance). At 1080p Medium, the range is 209 to 283 FPS (74 FPS variance). The narrowing variance at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU smooths out frame delivery, while at 1080p, CPU-related bottlenecks cause wider swings.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 is a high-end part based on the AD103 chip with Ada Lovelace architecture, built on a 5 nm process. It features 9728 shading units, 304 texture mapping units, and 112 render output units. The GPU operates at a base clock of 2205 MHz and a boost clock of 2505 MHz, with 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus providing 716.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The card is rated for a 320 W TDP and requires a 700 W power supply.

In Greedfall, the RTX 4080's performance is substantial but not unlimited. The GPU's 86th percentile ranking places it among the top tier of GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 54247. Its nearest rivals are the RTX 4080 SUPER (54209, deltaPct 0.1%) and AMD Radeon Pro W5700X (54828, deltaPct -1.1%). The data shows that in this game, the RTX 4080 can push 269 FPS at 1080p Low, but that figure is likely CPU-limited, as the GPU's theoretical capabilities far exceed what the i5-9400 can feed.

The 16 GB VRAM capacity is more than sufficient for Greedfall at any resolution or setting. The game, released in 2019, does not stress memory capacity even at 4K Ultra. The 716.8 GB/s memory bandwidth provides ample throughput for texture streaming and geometry processing. The GPU's 48.74 TFLOPS of FP32 compute power is far beyond what this game requires, which is why the 4K Ultra result of 60 FPS seems low for such a powerful card—it suggests the game's engine has optimization limits that even this hardware cannot overcome.

The RTX 4080's 112 ROPs deliver a pixel rate of 280.6 GPixel/s, which is critical for 4K rendering. At 4K Ultra, the system averages 60 FPS, which translates to roughly 497 million pixels per second. The GPU's raw pixel throughput is more than capable of handling this, but the game's rendering pipeline at Ultra settings likely introduces effects that tax other portions of the GPU, such as the 76 RT cores or 304 tensor cores, even if ray tracing is not explicitly enabled. The 304 TMUs provide a texture rate of 761.5 GTexel/s, which is more than adequate for the game's texture-heavy environments.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data suggests that High settings provide the best balance of visual quality and performance across all resolutions. At 1080p High, the system delivers 226 FPS, which is 35.8% faster than Ultra (145 FPS) but only 15.9% slower than Low (269 FPS). The visual difference between High and Ultra is typically marginal in this game, but the performance cost of 81 FPS at 1080p is substantial. At 1440p High, the 157 FPS result is 57% faster than Ultra (100 FPS) and only 28.6% slower than Low (220 FPS). At 4K High, the 94 FPS average is 56.7% faster than Ultra (60 FPS) and 28.2% slower than Low (131 FPS).

Medium settings are a viable alternative if you need additional headroom, but the data shows diminishing returns. At 1080p Medium, the 246 FPS average is only 8.1% lower than Low (269 FPS) and 8.8% higher than High (226 FPS). At 1440p Medium, 173 FPS is 10.2% higher than High (157 FPS). At 4K Medium, 103 FPS is 9.6% higher than High (94 FPS). The performance gains from dropping from High to Medium are consistent at roughly 10% across resolutions, while the visual quality loss may be noticeable in shadows and texture filtering.

Ultra settings are only recommended for 1080p or 1440p gaming where you can accept lower frame rates. The 4K Ultra result of 60 FPS is exactly at the threshold for smooth gameplay, but it leaves no margin for dips. The data shows that the jump from High to Ultra costs 81 FPS at 1080p, 57 FPS at 1440p, and 34 FPS at 4K. These are substantial losses for what is typically a modest visual improvement. For 4K gaming, High settings at 94 FPS is the practical choice, providing a 56.7% performance advantage over Ultra while maintaining most of the visual fidelity.

For competitive play or maximum frame rates, Low settings at 1080p (269 FPS) or 1440p (220 FPS) are the only options that push beyond 240 Hz territory. However, the visual compromise is significant. The data indicates that the i5-9400 will cap performance around 269 FPS regardless of GPU, so chasing higher frame rates with this CPU is futile. The sweet spot for this system is 1440p High, which balances the CPU's capabilities with the GPU's strength, delivering 157 FPS with room to spare.