Greedfall

Greedfall is a 2019 Action RPG that scales heavily with GPU throughput, and the measured results for the Intel Core Ultra 5 135H paired with the AMD Radeon 8050S show a configuration that is playable at mainstream resolutions but struggles to maintain high refresh rates at 4K. The data indicates a clear hierarchy where the AMD Radeon 8050S, operating as an integrated-class part with a 55 W TDP, becomes the primary performance limiter as resolution increases. The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H provides a solid foundation with 14 cores and 18 threads, but its mobile-focused design (28 W TDP) and the GPU's shared memory architecture mean that the system's overall gaming performance is dictated by the graphics solution, not the processor. Benchmark results show that the combo achieves a peak average of 149 FPS at 1080p Low, but this drops dramatically to 44 FPS at 4K High, illustrating the GPU's bandwidth and compute constraints. This analysis interprets the measured FPS rows to provide a verdict on the CPU's role, answer common questions, and recommend optimal settings for this specific hardware pairing.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H is a 14-core, 18-thread mobile processor based on the Meteor Lake architecture, with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. Its 18 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory support (89.6 GB/s bandwidth) provide ample headroom for feeding a mid-range GPU in a game like Greedfall. However, the CPU’s benchmark percentile (81st vs all CPUs) and its average score of 29093, which is nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X (29123, delta -0.1%), suggest that it is not the bottleneck in this system. The processor’s Cinebench R23 multicore score of 11875.5 and single-core score of 1700 indicate solid compute capability for game logic and AI, but Greedfall’s performance is far more sensitive to pixel throughput and texture fill rates.

The data shows that the GPU, an AMD Radeon 8050S with RDNA 3.5 architecture and 2048 shading units, is the limiting component in this pairing. At 1080p, the CPU can feed the GPU enough data to reach 149 FPS on Low settings, but as resolution climbs to 1440p and 4K, the GPU’s 64 ROPs and 11.47 TFLOPS FP32 performance become the ceiling. The CPU’s role is to maintain consistent frame pacing, and the measured FPS drops between settings are consistent with a GPU-bound scenario: at 1080p, the delta between Low (149 FPS) and Ultra (68 FPS) is 81 FPS, while at 4K, the same settings delta is only 34 FPS (62 to 28 FPS). This compression at higher resolutions confirms that the CPU is not the limiting factor; the Radeon 8050S simply runs out of shader and memory bandwidth headroom.

The fact that this is a mobile CPU with a 28 W TDP and integrated Arc Xe-LPG graphics (96 EU) is irrelevant for the discrete GPU test, but it explains the system’s power envelope. The CPU’s PCIe Gen 5 interface with 8 lanes is sufficient for the GPU’s PCIe 5.0 x16 bus, but the GPU’s "System Shared" memory type means it relies on the same DDR5 pool as the CPU. This shared memory architecture is a key reason why 4K performance degrades so sharply; the memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s is shared between CPU and GPU workloads, starving the GPU at higher resolutions. In Greedfall, which features dense environments and dynamic lighting, the CPU’s 14 cores are more than enough to handle the game’s single-threaded and multi-threaded tasks, but the GPU’s inability to maintain high fill rates at 4K is the dominant factor in the measured results.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: Is this combo better suited for 1080p or 4K gaming in Greedfall?

A: The measured data strongly favors 1080p. At 1080p with High settings, the combo averages 106 FPS, while at 4K High, it drops to 44 FPS. The 4K Low preset (62 FPS) is barely playable, and 4K Ultra (28 FPS) is not a viable experience. The GPU’s shared memory architecture and 64 ROPs limit its ability to push high resolutions.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 5 135H compare to its nearest rivals in CPU benchmarks?

A: The CPU’s average benchmark score of 29093 is statistically tied with the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X (29123, delta -0.1%) and the Intel Core i5-13500HX (29270, delta -0.6%). It is slightly ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 5600XT (28940, delta 0.5%) and the Intel Xeon Phi 7210 (29245, delta -0.5%). This means the processor is not a performance outlier; it performs within 1% of its peer group.

Q: What is the best settings preset for a smooth 60+ FPS experience?

A: For 1080p, the Low preset delivers 149 FPS, Medium delivers 117 FPS, and High delivers 106 FPS, all well above 60 FPS. At 1440p, only Low (103 FPS) and Medium (81 FPS) exceed 60 FPS. At 4K, no preset reaches 60 FPS; the highest is Low at 62 FPS, which barely hits the threshold. The Medium preset at 1080p (117 FPS) offers the best balance of visual quality and frame rate.

Q: Does the GPU or CPU limit performance in Greedfall?

A: The GPU is the clear bottleneck. Evidence comes from the resolution scaling: at 1080p, the FPS difference between Low and Ultra is 81 FPS, but at 4K, it narrows to 34 FPS. This pattern indicates that the CPU is capable of handling the game’s logic, but the Radeon 8050S cannot maintain high frame rates as pixel count increases. The CPU’s percentile rank (81st) and near-parity with desktop rivals like the Ryzen 7 5800X confirm it is not the weak link.

Q: What is the combo’s ranking among all tested hardware combinations for this game?

A: The combo ranks 2155 out of 2938 tested combinations, placing it in the lower half of all systems. This rank reflects the GPU’s limitations; while the CPU is mid-range, the Radeon 8050S’s performance is comparable to laptop GPUs like the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M (delta 0.3%) but below the RX 7600M (delta -2.6%). The rank suggests this is a budget-friendly mobile setup, not a high-end gaming rig.

Q: Are the measured FPS values consistent across all settings, or are there notable drops?

A: The data shows a consistent pattern: each step up in settings from Low to Ultra reduces FPS by a similar margin. At 1080p, the drops are 32 FPS (Low to Medium), 11 FPS (Medium to High), and 38 FPS (High to Ultra). At 4K, the drops are 14 FPS (Low to Medium), 4 FPS (Medium to High), and 16 FPS (High to Ultra). The Ultra preset causes the most significant drop, especially at 1440p where it falls to 47 FPS from High’s 74 FPS.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data reveals a classic GPU-bound scaling curve. Moving from 1080p to 1440p at High settings, the average FPS drops from 106 to 74, a reduction of 30.2%. From 1440p to 4K High, it drops further to 44 FPS, another 40.5% reduction. This compounding decline indicates that the AMD Radeon 8050S is being overwhelmed by the increasing pixel count. At Low settings, the same resolution scaling shows a similar trend: 149 FPS at 1080p, 103 FPS at 1440p (a 30.9% drop), and 62 FPS at 4K (a 39.8% drop). The consistency of these percentage drops across settings is a hallmark of a GPU that is compute-bound, not memory-bound or CPU-bound.

If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect the FPS to remain relatively flat as resolution increases, because the CPU’s workload (game logic, draw calls) stays constant while the GPU’s workload scales with resolution. Instead, the FPS halves from 1080p to 4K at every preset, which shows that the GPU’s pixel fill rate (179.2 GPixel/s) and texture rate (358.4 GTexel/s) are the bottlenecks. The GPU’s 11.47 TFLOPS FP32 performance is modest for 4K gaming, especially in a game like Greedfall that uses deferred rendering and complex shaders.

The Ultra preset data reinforces this analysis. At 1080p Ultra, the combo manages 68 FPS, but at 1440p Ultra, it drops to 47 FPS, and at 4K Ultra, it collapses to 28 FPS. The 4K Ultra result is below the 30 FPS playability threshold, making it unplayable. The fact that the 4K Low preset (62 FPS) is only 10 FPS lower than the 1080p Ultra preset (68 FPS) shows that the GPU’s raw performance is the same, but the resolution scaling forces a choice between visual fidelity and frame rate. The shared memory system exacerbates this; at 4K, the GPU must access the same system DDR5 memory as the CPU, and the 89.6 GB/s bandwidth is insufficient for both workloads simultaneously. This is why the drop from 1440p to 4K is steeper than the drop from 1080p to 1440p.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS data, the Medium preset is the optimal choice for most users, but the recommendation varies by target resolution. At 1080p, the Medium preset delivers 117 FPS with a minimum of 99 FPS and a maximum of 135 FPS. This provides a smooth, high-refresh experience with better visual quality than Low (149 FPS) and only a 11 FPS penalty compared to High (106 FPS). The High preset at 1080p (106 FPS) is also excellent, but Medium offers a better safety margin for demanding scenes, as indicated by the min FPS of 99.

For 1440p, the Medium preset (81 FPS, min 69, max 93) is the only setting that balances quality and performance. The High preset (74 FPS) is playable, but the Medium preset’s higher average and min FPS make it more consistent. The Low preset (103 FPS) is overkill for most displays and sacrifices too much visual detail, while the Ultra preset (47 FPS) drops below the desired 60 FPS threshold. At 4K, no preset is truly recommended, but the Low preset (62 FPS) is the only one that reaches 60 FPS. The Medium preset (48 FPS) and High preset (44 FPS) are playable at lower refresh rates, but the Ultra preset (28 FPS) should be avoided.

The data suggests that the Medium preset is the "sweet spot" for this hardware. At 1080p, it provides a 117 FPS average, which is 8% faster than High and only 27% slower than Low. At 1440p, it maintains an 81 FPS average, which is 9% faster than High and 19% slower than Low. The min FPS values for Medium (99 at 1080p, 69 at 1440p) are also higher than the min FPS for High (not recorded) and indicate better frame pacing. For users with 144Hz displays, the 1080p Medium preset (117 FPS) is the best match, while for 60Hz displays, the 1440p Medium preset (81 FPS) offers the best visual fidelity without sacrificing smoothness.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H + AMD Radeon 8050S combo ranks 2155 out of 2938 tested combinations in Greedfall. This places it in the 27th percentile of all tested systems (calculated from the rank), meaning it outperforms roughly 27% of all hardware combos but falls behind the majority. This ranking is lower than the GPU’s standalone percentile (89th vs all GPUs) and the CPU’s percentile (81st vs all CPUs), which indicates that the GPU’s integrated-class performance in this specific game drags down the combo’s overall standing. The rank suggests that this is a mid-to-low-tier gaming setup, suitable for 1080p gaming but not competitive with dedicated desktop GPUs or higher-end mobile parts.

The GPU’s nearest rivals provide context for this rank. The AMD Radeon 8050S has an average benchmark score of 62108, which is 0.3% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M (61896) but 2.5% lower than the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 (63693) and 2.6% lower than the AMD Radeon RX 7600M (63775). In Greedfall, this translates to a combo that can handle 1080p Ultra (68 FPS) but struggles with 1440p Ultra (47 FPS). The combo’s rank of 2155 is consistent with a GPU that is positioned between professional mobile GPUs and mainstream gaming GPUs, but the shared memory architecture likely hurts it more in a game like Greedfall than in synthetic benchmarks.

Compared to the CPU’s rivals, the combo’s rank is not driven by the processor. The Core Ultra 5 135H is within 0.6% of the Intel Core i5-13500HX and within 0.1% of the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X in average CPU score, so swapping the CPU would not meaningfully change the combo’s rank. The GPU is the differentiator, and the data shows that the Radeon 8050S is the limiting factor. For context, if the combo were paired with a GPU that is 2.6% faster (like the RX 7600M), the rank would likely improve, but the current rank reflects the GPU’s modest fill rate and memory bandwidth constraints.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The following table breaks down the exact measured FPS values for each resolution and settings combination, as provided in the FACT PACK.

1080p (1920x1080):

• Low: 149 FPS average
• Medium: 117 FPS average, 99 FPS min, 135 FPS max
• High: 106 FPS average
• Ultra: 68 FPS average

1440p (2560x1440):

• Low: 103 FPS average
• Medium: 81 FPS average, 69 FPS min, 93 FPS max
• High: 74 FPS average
• Ultra: 47 FPS average

4K (3840x2160):

• Low: 62 FPS average
• Medium: 48 FPS average, 41 FPS min, 56 FPS max
• High: 44 FPS average
• Ultra: 28 FPS average

The data reveals a clear pattern of diminishing returns as settings increase. At 1080p, the jump from Low to Medium costs 32 FPS (149 to 117), but the jump from Medium to High only costs 11 FPS (117 to 106), and the jump from High to Ultra costs 38 FPS (106 to 68). This suggests that the High preset offers the best visual uplift per FPS cost at 1080p, but the Medium preset is the most balanced. At 1440p, the same pattern holds: Low to Medium costs 22 FPS (103 to 81), Medium to High costs 7 FPS (81 to 74), and High to Ultra costs 27 FPS (74 to 47). The Ultra preset is clearly the most demanding, with a 36% FPS penalty over High at 1440p and a 36% penalty at 4K (44 to 28).

The min FPS data for the Medium preset is particularly telling. At 1080p, the min FPS is 99, which is only 18 FPS below the average, indicating stable frame pacing. At 1440p, the min FPS is 69, which is 12 FPS below the average. At 4K, the min FPS is 41, which is 7 FPS below the average. This narrowing of the min-to-average gap at higher resolutions suggests that the GPU is consistently saturated, with less variance in frame times. The Low and High presets do not have min/max data in the FACT PACK, but the Medium preset’s min FPS confirms that 4K Medium (48 FPS average, 41 min) is playable but not smooth, while 1080p Medium (117 FPS average, 99 min) is a high-quality experience. The Ultra preset at 4K (28 FPS) is the only measured result below 30 FPS, making it the only unplayable configuration.