Greedfall

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT pairing lands in the lower-mid tier of tested combinations for Greedfall, placing 2170th out of 2938 total combos. That position puts it in roughly the 26th percentile of all tested systems, meaning roughly three-quarters of the combinations in the database deliver higher average frame rates in this Action RPG. The ranking reflects a substantial imbalance: the CPU is a high-end desktop part that sits in the 93rd percentile among all processors, while the GPU is a much older design that ranks in only the 59th percentile among all graphics cards. Benchmark results indicate the graphics card is the primary constraint on performance, and the combo’s overall rank is dragged down accordingly. The CPU’s strength does not translate into a higher combo position because Greedfall’s frame rates at the tested settings are overwhelmingly limited by the Radeon RX 5700 XT’s rendering throughput.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 2170 out of 2938 tested configurations places this system in the bottom quarter of the database for Greedfall. That is a modest result, and the data shows why: the measured average frame rates across all tested resolutions and settings top out at 148 FPS (1080p Low) but fall to as low as 28 FPS (4K Ultra). The rank is a holistic measure that weights all tested configurations, and a system that cannot hold 60 FPS at 1440p High — it averages 73 FPS there — is going to sit well behind faster GPU pairings. The CPU itself is not the issue; the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 has an average benchmark score of 64,640 across all tested workloads, placing it just 0.3% behind the AMD EPYC 4464P and 0.7% behind the AMD EPYC 7343. Those rival CPUs are server-class parts, and the Ultra 7 265 trades blows with them within a single percentage point. Its nearest rival on the upside is the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F, which scores 0.3% higher, and the AMD EPYC 9124 sits 0.7% ahead. None of these differences are meaningful in gaming; the gap between the Ultra 7 265 and its closest competitors is far smaller than the gap between the RX 5700 XT and even the next GPU up in the database. The GPU’s percentile rank of 59 versus the CPU’s 93 tells the story: this is a combo where the processor has plenty of headroom, but the graphics card runs out of steam long before the CPU does.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT is built on the RDNA 1.0 architecture with a Navi 10 chip manufactured on TSMC’s 7 nm process. It carries 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU’s base clock is 1605 MHz, with a game clock of 1755 MHz and a boost clock of 1905 MHz. Those clocks are relevant because Greedfall’s frame rates at higher settings and resolutions show classic signs of GPU-bound rendering. At 1080p Low, the combo averages 148 FPS, which is high, but the frame rate drops sharply as settings and resolution increase. At 1080p Ultra, the average falls to 68 FPS, a 54% reduction from Low. That drop is far steeper than what a CPU-bound system would show, because increasing graphical load from Low to Ultra taxes the GPU’s shading units, texture units, and pixel throughput — the RX 5700 XT has 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The pixel rate is 121.9 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 304.8 GTexel/s, which are modest figures by modern standards. The GPU’s FP32 throughput is 9.754 TFLOPS, and its PassMark G3D score is 16,277, putting it just 0.1% behind the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M and 0.3% behind the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell in aggregate benchmark scores. In practice, those close benchmark scores do not translate to identical gaming performance, but they do confirm that the RX 5700 XT is a mid-range part from an older generation. Its 8 GB VRAM is sufficient for Greedfall at 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K Ultra the GPU is clearly overwhelmed, averaging only 28 FPS.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and consistent scaling pattern across resolutions. At 1080p High, the combo averages 106 FPS. Moving to 1440p High drops that to 73 FPS, a 31% reduction. At 4K High, the average falls to 44 FPS, which is 58% lower than the 1080p figure. The same trend holds for other settings. Low settings go from 148 FPS at 1080p to 103 FPS at 1440p (down 30%) and 61 FPS at 4K (down 59%). Medium settings produce 117 FPS at 1080p, 81 FPS at 1440p, and 48 FPS at 4K, with the 4K result also showing a minimum of 41 FPS and a maximum of 55 FPS. Ultra settings are the most demanding: 68 FPS at 1080p, 47 FPS at 1440p, and 28 FPS at 4K. The pattern is consistent — each step up in resolution costs roughly 30% of the frame rate, and the drop from 1440p to 4K is the steepest. This scaling behavior is a strong indicator that the GPU is the limiting component. A CPU-bound system would show much smaller frame rate differences when resolution changes, because the CPU’s workload stays roughly constant while the GPU’s rendering load increases. Here, the frame rate falls nearly in proportion to the pixel count increase, which is the signature of a graphics card that is saturated. The CPU, with 20 cores and 20 threads running at a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, is not the bottleneck at any resolution. Even at 1080p Low, where the frame rate reaches 148 FPS, the CPU has enough headroom to feed the GPU; the fact that the frame rate drops so steeply with resolution confirms that the RX 5700 XT is working at its limit.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to play Greedfall with this combo?

A: The data shows that 1080p is the only resolution where the system consistently exceeds 60 FPS across all settings. At 1080p High, the average is 106 FPS, and even at 1080p Ultra it holds 68 FPS. At 1440p, only Low and Medium settings stay above 60 FPS (103 and 81 FPS respectively), while High dips to 73 FPS and Ultra falls to 47 FPS. At 4K, no setting reaches 60 FPS, with Low averaging 61 FPS and Ultra dropping to 28 FPS.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 4K?

A: At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 106 FPS at 1080p to 73 FPS at 1440p and then to 44 FPS at 4K. That represents a 31% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a further 40% drop from 1440p to 4K. Overall, the 4K High result is 58% lower than the 1080p High result. The pattern is similar for Low settings, which drop from 148 FPS at 1080p to 103 FPS at 1440p and 61 FPS at 4K.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 holding back the Radeon RX 5700 XT?

A: No. The CPU’s benchmark scores place it in the 93rd percentile among all processors, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42,216 and a single-core score of 5,960. The GPU, by contrast, sits in the 59th percentile. The frame rate scaling across resolutions — from 148 FPS at 1080p Low to 28 FPS at 4K Ultra — shows that the GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU has ample headroom to handle the game’s logic and draw calls.

Q: How does the RX 5700 XT compare to its nearest rivals in benchmark scores?

A: The GPU’s average benchmark score is 16,361. The AMD Radeon Pro 5600M scores 16,351, which is 0.1% lower. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell scores 16,408 (0.3% higher), and the AMD Radeon PRO W7500 scores 16,415 (0.3% higher). The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 is the closest higher-scoring rival at 16,504, which is 0.9% ahead. These are all very small margins, so the RX 5700 XT is effectively in the same performance class as those parts in aggregate synthetic benchmarks.

Q: What settings are playable at 1440p?

A: At 1440p, the Medium preset averages 81 FPS with a minimum of 69 FPS and a maximum of 93 FPS. Low averages 103 FPS. High averages 73 FPS, which is still above 60 FPS. Ultra is the only preset that falls below the 60 FPS threshold, averaging 47 FPS. So, for a 60 FPS target, High is the most demanding setting that still works at 1440p.

Q: Does the 8 GB VRAM cause issues at 4K?

A: The measured data does not indicate a VRAM capacity failure, but the 4K results are very low. At 4K Medium, the average is 48 FPS with a minimum of 41 FPS, and at 4K High it drops to 44 FPS. At 4K Ultra, the average is just 28 FPS. These low frame rates are more consistent with raw compute and memory bandwidth limits than with VRAM spills, since the 448.0 GB/s bandwidth is modest for 4K rendering.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a 20-core, 20-thread desktop processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process from TSMC. It has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, and it connects via PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. Its integrated graphics are an Arc Xe-LPG 32EU unit, but that is irrelevant for this discrete GPU pairing. In synthetic benchmarks, the Ultra 7 265 scores 42,216 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 5,960 in single-core. It also posts strong numbers in PassMark multithreaded tests, with a score of 49,682, and a single-thread score of 4,689. These results place the CPU in the 93rd percentile of all processors, and its average benchmark score of 64,640 is within 0.7% of the AMD EPYC 7343 and 0.3% of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F. For Greedfall, the CPU’s role is to feed the GPU with draw calls, physics, and game logic. The measured frame rates show that the CPU is never the limiting factor: the frame rate scales almost entirely with resolution and settings, which are GPU-bound variables. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 148 FPS, and the CPU can clearly handle that throughput. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rate would plateau at a similar value regardless of resolution — but the data shows a steady decline from 148 FPS at 1080p Low to 61 FPS at 4K Low, a 59% drop that tracks the GPU’s workload.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides a clear hierarchy of performance across presets and resolutions. At 1080p, every preset delivers playable frame rates. Low averages 148 FPS, Medium averages 117 FPS with a minimum of 99 FPS, High averages 106 FPS, and Ultra averages 68 FPS. For a 60 Hz display, Ultra is fine at 1080p, but for higher refresh rates, High or Medium are better choices. The Medium preset’s minimum of 99 FPS at 1080p means it will not dip below 60 FPS in demanding scenes, making it the safest choice for smooth gameplay. At 1440p, the options narrow. Low averages 103 FPS, Medium averages 81 FPS with a minimum of 69 FPS, and High averages 73 FPS. Ultra drops to 47 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold and should be avoided. For a 60 FPS target at 1440p, High is the best balance, as it stays above 60 FPS on average while offering better visual fidelity than Medium. If the user prefers a higher frame rate, Medium is the better option, with its minimum of 69 FPS ensuring no drops below 60 FPS. At 4K, the system struggles. Low averages 61 FPS, which is just above 60 FPS but will likely dip below in heavy scenes. Medium averages 48 FPS, High averages 44 FPS, and Ultra averages 28 FPS. None of these are ideal for a smooth experience. The best 4K option is Low, but even that is borderline. The data suggests that 1440p High is the sweet spot for this combo: it provides an average of 73 FPS, which is comfortably above 60 FPS, while still using the High preset that includes better textures and effects than Medium. For users who prioritize frame rate stability, 1080p Medium offers the highest minimum FPS (99) across all tested configurations, making it the most consistent experience. The Ultra preset is only recommended for 1080p, where it averages 68 FPS, and even then, the performance headroom is limited. Overall, the measured rows indicate that this system is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, with the 1440p High preset delivering the best combination of visual quality and performance.