Greedfall

The Intel Core i7-13700K and AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT combination delivers a solid 1080p and 1440p experience in Greedfall, though 4K Ultra demands more than this GPU can provide. The pairing sits in the 63rd percentile for the GPU and 93rd for the CPU, with measured frame rates showing a clear pattern: excellent performance at lower resolutions and settings, with a steep drop-off when enabling Ultra presets. The data indicates this combo is best suited for high-refresh-rate 1080p gaming or smooth 1440p play on High settings, while 4K remains a stretch goal best reserved for less demanding titles.

FAQ

*Q: What is the combo’s overall rank in Greedfall?*

A: This CPU-GPU pairing ranks 1085th out of 1705 tested combinations, placing it in the lower-middle tier of all possible configs for this game.

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

A: The Core i7-13700K scores an average of 47282 across all benchmarks. It trails the Intel Core i7-13700KF by just 0.1% (47334) and the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 5945 by 0.5% (47527), while leading the AMD EPYC 4364P by 0.3% (47131) and the Intel Core i9-12900F by 0.4% (47081).

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest competitors?

A: The RX 7600 XT averages 20146 points. It is 0.6% behind the RX 7600 (20258) and 1.9% behind the RTX 2060 SUPER (19774), while edging out the RX 460 by 0.3% (20088) and the RTX 3070 Mobile by 1.9% (20534).

Q: What is the best 1080p result for this combo?

A: At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo achieves 155.9 FPS average. This drops to 112.4 FPS on High and 74.2 FPS on Ultra, showing a 52.4% reduction from Low to Ultra.

Q: Is 4K gaming viable with this setup?

A: Only at lower presets. The combo manages 68.2 FPS at 4K Low, but falls to 48.2 FPS at High and just 29.2 FPS at Ultra, indicating that 4K Ultra is not a playable option.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck the GPU in this game?

A: Data suggests not at standard resolutions. The CPU’s 3DMark max-thread score of 12412 and Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39000 provide ample headroom, as frame rates scale consistently with resolution and settings without anomalous drops.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 1085 out of 1705 tested configurations places it below the median for Greedfall. This position is driven primarily by the GPU’s 63rd percentile standing among all graphics cards, rather than the CPU, which sits in the 93rd percentile. The CPU’s 16 cores and 24 threads, with a 3.40 GHz base and 5.40 GHz boost clock, provide strong compute power—evidenced by a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39000—but the RX 7600 XT’s 22.57 TFLOPS FP32 throughput limits overall gaming performance.

In practical terms, this rank means the combo will outperform configurations with weaker GPUs but will fall short of pairings using higher-tier cards. The delta between the RX 7600 XT and its nearest rival, the RTX 2060 SUPER, is a mere 1.9%, yet that small gap translates into measurable FPS differences at 4K Ultra, where the combo struggles. The data shows that the CPU is not the limiting factor; the GPU’s 2048 shading units and 64 ROPs become the bottleneck at higher resolutions and quality presets. For a game like Greedfall, an Action RPG with dense environments, this rank indicates the combo is adequate for mainstream play but not for enthusiast-grade settings.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with a Navi 33 chip, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It packs 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth—a notable advantage for texture-heavy scenes. The GPU’s game clock is 2470 MHz, with a boost clock of 2755 MHz and a base clock of 1980 MHz. These clocks, combined with 2048 shading units, produce a pixel rate of 176.3 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 352.6 GTexel/s.

In Greedfall, the GPU’s memory capacity proves sufficient even at 4K, but the 128-bit bus limits bandwidth. The measured results show that at 3840x2160, the frame rate drops from 68.2 FPS on Low to 53.1 FPS on Medium, then to 48.2 FPS on High, and finally collapses to 29.2 FPS on Ultra. This pattern suggests that the GPU’s raw compute, not its VRAM, is the limiting factor at higher settings. The 16 GB frame buffer prevents texture streaming issues, but the 22.57 TFLOPS FP32 throughput cannot sustain the shader complexity of Ultra presets at 4K. At 1440p, the same pattern appears but with higher absolute numbers: 110.3 FPS on Low, 83.7 FPS on Medium, 76.5 FPS on High, and 48.1 FPS on Ultra. The GPU’s 63rd percentile ranking among all GPUs reflects this mid-range capability—it outperforms the RX 460 by 0.3% but trails the RX 7600 by 0.6%.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its strongest results. Low settings produce 155.9 FPS, which is more than double the 4K Ultra result. Medium yields 127.8 FPS, and High maintains a smooth 112.4 FPS. Ultra drops to 74.2 FPS, which is still playable but shows a significant 52.4% reduction from Low. The scaling from Low to Ultra is consistent, with each preset step costing roughly 15-20% performance.

At 2560x1440, the results remain strong for most presets. Low hits 110.3 FPS, Medium 83.7 FPS, and High 76.5 FPS—all above the 60 FPS threshold. Ultra, however, falls to 48.1 FPS, indicating that this resolution is best enjoyed on High or lower. The gap between High and Ultra at 1440p is 28.4 FPS, or 37.1%, which is steeper than the 1080p gap of 38.2 FPS (34.0%).

At 3840x2160, the situation becomes challenging. Low delivers 68.2 FPS, which is acceptable, but Medium drops to 53.1 FPS, and High falls to 48.2 FPS. Ultra is effectively unplayable at 29.2 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 4K represents a 57.2% loss in performance. The data shows that the GPU’s 288.0 GB/s bandwidth is insufficient for the memory traffic required by higher settings at this resolution. The 16 GB VRAM is not the issue—the bus width and clock speed are.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal experience depends on the target resolution. For 1920x1080, High settings at 112.4 FPS provide the best balance of visual fidelity and performance, as Ultra’s 74.2 FPS does not justify the 34.0% performance hit. Medium at 127.8 FPS is the choice for competitive play or high-refresh-rate monitors, while Low at 155.9 FPS maximizes frame rate for the most demanding scenarios.

At 2560x1440, High settings at 76.5 FPS offer the best overall experience, staying comfortably above 60 FPS while maintaining good image quality. Medium at 83.7 FPS is a safer choice for scenes with heavy action, as it provides a 9.4% buffer over High. Ultra at 48.1 FPS is not recommended, as the visual improvement does not compensate for the sub-60 FPS average. Low at 110.3 FPS works for players prioritizing frame rate over detail.

For 3840x2160, the data suggests avoiding Ultra entirely—29.2 FPS is well below playable thresholds. Low at 68.2 FPS is the only preset that consistently exceeds 60 FPS, but it sacrifices significant visual quality. Medium at 53.1 FPS is a compromise, though it risks drops in crowded scenes. High at 48.2 FPS is borderline. The recommendation is to use Low for 4K gaming or to reduce the resolution to 1440p and enable High settings, which yields a far superior experience at 76.5 FPS.

The core takeaway is that the combo’s sweet spot lies at 1440p High, where it delivers smooth, responsive gameplay without the steep penalties seen at 4K Ultra. Players with 1080p displays can push to High or even Ultra if they tolerate 74.2 FPS, but the data favors High for consistent performance. The 16 GB VRAM ensures no memory-related stutters, but the GPU’s compute limits make Ultra presets a luxury reserved for lower resolutions.