Greedfall

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and Intel Arc B580 pairing delivers a solid 1080p and 1440p experience in Greedfall, but it struggles to maintain playable frame rates at 4K on higher presets. The data shows a clear performance ceiling dictated by the graphics card, while the processor provides ample headroom for the game's logic and draw calls. This combination ranks in the 25th percentile of all tested combos, indicating that while it is not a top-tier performer, it offers a consistent and predictable frame rate curve across the tested settings.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 is a 14-core, 14-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC. Its base clock of 3.50 GHz can boost up to 5.10 GHz, and it carries 24 MB of shared L3 cache. In the context of Greedfall, an Action RPG with dense environments and AI-driven NPCs, the processor's job is to maintain a steady frame delivery pipeline. Benchmark data shows this CPU sits in the 90th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 48995.

Compared to its nearest rivals, the Core Ultra 5 245 is virtually tied with the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G, which scores 49196, a delta of -0.4%. It is also nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen 9 7900, which scores 49228, a delta of -0.5%. The Intel part is slightly ahead of the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H by 0.6% and the Intel Core i5-14600K by 0.8%. This clustering indicates that the CPU's raw compute power is not a differentiator in this game; instead, its consistent single-thread performance, as evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4648, ensures that the game's primary simulation thread is never the bottleneck at the resolutions tested.

The measured FPS data reinforces this conclusion. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves 147 FPS, which is more than sufficient to feed any display. Even when the settings are increased to Ultra, the average FPS drops to 67, but this is almost entirely a GPU-side effect. The CPU's 14 cores and 14 threads, while not a hyper-threaded design, provide enough parallel capacity for the game's background tasks, such as asset streaming and physics calculations. The lack of a significant FPS cliff between Low and Medium settings at 1080p (147 to 115 FPS) suggests the CPU is handling the increased draw calls without introducing stutter. The processor's 65W TDP and dual-channel DDR5 memory support with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for this workload, as the game does not appear to be memory-bandwidth sensitive in the measured rows.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Arc B580 is the clear limiting factor in this pairing. Based on the Xe2-HPG architecture, this GPU features 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing 456.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its boost clock is fixed at 2670 MHz, and it has 2560 shading units. The GPU's benchmark percentile is 68, with an average score of 23021, which places it in the mid-range tier. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080, and the NVIDIA P106-100, with delta percentages of -0.2%, 0.6%, -0.7%, and -1%, respectively. This indicates that the Arc B580's raw compute performance is comparable to a high-end card from several generations ago, but its modern feature set does not translate into a massive advantage in this older title.

The GPU's role is most evident when examining the 4K results. At 3840x2160, the average FPS drops to 43 on High settings and just 28 on Ultra. This is a steep decline that points directly to the GPU's fill rate and shader throughput being overwhelmed by the resolution's pixel count. The 12 GB of VRAM is not the issue here; even at 4K Ultra, the game likely does not exceed that capacity. Instead, the 13.67 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is insufficient to maintain high frame rates at that resolution with maximum detail. The GPU's texture rate of 427.2 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 213.6 GPixel/s are the theoretical limits, and the measured FPS shows that the card is hitting those walls. At 1440p, the GPU recovers significantly, with High settings yielding 73 FPS and Low settings hitting 102 FPS, showing that the card is well-suited for that resolution class.

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

The optimal settings for this combo depend heavily on the target resolution. For 1920x1080, the High preset at 105 FPS is the sweet spot, offering a 38 FPS improvement over Ultra while maintaining visual fidelity that is only marginally reduced. The Low preset at 147 FPS is unnecessarily high for most displays and sacrifices too much visual quality for a frame rate that exceeds the refresh rate of typical monitors. The Medium preset, at 115 FPS, is also viable, but High provides a better balance of image quality and performance for a modest 10 FPS difference.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset at 80 FPS is the recommended choice. It provides a smooth experience that is well above the 60 FPS threshold, with a minimum FPS of 68. The High preset at 73 FPS is also playable, but the 7 FPS difference does not justify the potential for more frequent dips in complex scenes. The Ultra preset at 46 FPS is not recommended, as it falls below the standard for smooth gameplay. Low at 102 FPS is only for competitive play or if the user prioritizes frame rate over all else.

At 3840x2160, the data suggests that only the Low preset at 61 FPS is viable for a playable experience. The Medium preset at 48 FPS with a minimum of 41 FPS is borderline, but the average is too low for consistent comfort. High at 43 FPS and Ultra at 28 FPS are not recommended for general play. Users wanting 4K should stick to Low or consider lowering the resolution. The measured rows show that the gap between Low and Medium at 4K is only 13 FPS, indicating diminishing returns for the extra graphical workload.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and Intel Arc B580 ranks 2190 out of 2938 tested combos in Greedfall. This places it in the 25th percentile, meaning that roughly three-quarters of all tested configurations deliver higher average frame rates. The ranking reflects the GPU's mid-range positioning; the CPU is not the limiting factor, as its 90th percentile CPU score is significantly higher than the GPU's 68th percentile score. This imbalance suggests that pairing this CPU with a more powerful GPU would yield substantially better results, while swapping the GPU for a weaker one would have a minimal impact on the overall rank.

The rank is consistent with the GPU's nearest rival comparisons. Since the Arc B580's average benchmark score is nearly identical to the RTX 2080 and RTX 3080, the in-game ranking is likely to be similar to those cards when paired with a comparable CPU. The 0.6% delta versus the RTX 2080 and -0.7% versus the RTX 3080 indicates that the performance is within a few percentage points of those older high-end cards. This means the combo is not a top-tier 4K solution, but it is a competent 1080p and 1440p performer. The rank of 2190 suggests that users should not expect high refresh rate gaming at 4K, but rather a stable experience at lower resolutions.

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

The FPS scaling across resolutions clearly identifies the GPU as the bottleneck. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 105 at 1080p to 73 at 1440p, a decrease of 32 FPS (30.5%). Moving to 4K, the FPS falls to 43, a further drop of 30 FPS (41.1%). This pattern shows that the performance loss is not linear; the transition from 1440p to 4K incurs a proportionally larger penalty, which is typical of a GPU that is running out of pixel pushing capability. The CPU is not the cause of this decline, as the core count and clock speeds are sufficient to handle the increased resolution without introducing new instruction bottlenecks.

At Low settings, the scaling is even more revealing. The FPS goes from 147 at 1080p to 102 at 1440p (a 30.6% drop) and then to 61 at 4K (a 40.2% drop from 1440p). This consistent percentage decrease across settings indicates that the GPU's fill rate is the primary constraint. If the CPU were the limit, we would expect the FPS to remain more constant at lower resolutions where the GPU has less work to do. Instead, the fact that 1080p Low yields 147 FPS, which is likely near the game's engine frame limit or the CPU's single-thread ceiling, suggests that the CPU is capable of more, but the GPU cannot keep up as the resolution increases. The data implies that to improve 4K performance, a GPU upgrade is necessary, not a CPU upgrade.

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

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of the combo's performance. At 1920x1080, the results are as follows: Low settings average 147 FPS, Medium settings average 115 FPS with a minimum of 98 and maximum of 133, High settings average 105 FPS, and Ultra settings average 67 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra is 80 FPS, showing a wide performance range that allows users to prioritize either frame rate or visual quality.

Moving to 2560x1440, the averages are: Low at 102 FPS, Medium at 80 FPS with a minimum of 68 and maximum of 92, High at 73 FPS, and Ultra at 46 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is consistent across all settings, with an average reduction of approximately 30%. The minimum FPS on Medium at 68 indicates that the game remains fluid, but the Ultra preset at 46 FPS is approaching the threshold where stutter becomes noticeable.

At 3840x2160, the results are: Low at 61 FPS, Medium at 48 FPS with a minimum of 41 and maximum of 55, High at 43 FPS, and Ultra at 28 FPS. The Medium preset's minimum of 41 FPS is below the 60 FPS target, making it a marginal experience. The Ultra preset at 28 FPS is not playable for most users. This breakdown confirms that the combo is best utilized at 1080p or 1440p, with 4K being viable only at the lowest settings. The data also shows that the game is well-optimized for the hardware, as the FPS scaling is smooth and predictable, with no anomalous spikes or crashes indicated in the max FPS values.