Greedfall

Greedfall, a 2019 Action RPG, presents a demanding environment for mid-range hardware. This analysis examines the measured performance of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT across three resolutions and four quality presets. The data shows a configuration that is highly capable at 1080p, comfortable at 1440p, but challenged at 4K, with the GPU acting as the primary performance limiter in most scenarios.

FAQ

Q: What is the overall performance ranking of this CPU and GPU combination for Greedfall?

A: The combo ranks 1891 out of 2938 tested combinations in this game, placing it in the lower-middle portion of the field. This indicates that while it can run the game, many other hardware pairings deliver higher frame rates.

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

A: At 1920x1080, the combo achieves an average of 113 FPS on High settings and even reaches 158 FPS on Low. This makes 1080p the only resolution in the test set where the combo consistently breaks the 100 FPS barrier on most presets.

Q: How does the GPU perform in synthetic benchmarks compared to its closest rivals?

A: The Radeon RX 6650 XT has an average benchmark score of 19765. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA Tesla K40m, scores 19885, which is 0.6% higher. Conversely, the AMD FirePro D300 scores 19637, which is 0.7% lower than the RX 6650 XT.

Q: How does the CPU's multi-threaded performance compare to its nearest competitors?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 has an average benchmark score of 64640. It is 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F (score 64438) and 0.7% ahead of the AMD EPYC 7343 (score 64202). It trails the AMD EPYC 4464P by 0.3% (score 64823).

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded in the measured data for this combo?

A: The lowest minimum FPS recorded is 44 FPS, which occurs at 3840x2160 resolution with Medium settings. In contrast, the highest minimum FPS recorded is 105 FPS at 1920x1080 with Medium settings.

Q: Which component is more stressed at 4K Ultra settings?

A: The GPU is the clear bottleneck. The frame rate falls to an average of 30 FPS at 3840x2160 Ultra, a significant drop from the 72 FPS seen at 1920x1080 Ultra. The CPU is likely not the limiting factor at this resolution, as the workload becomes heavily GPU-bound.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture and the Navi 23 chip. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 280.3 GB/s. The GPU operates at a base clock of 2055 MHz and a boost clock of 2635 MHz, with a game clock of 2410 MHz. These specifications place the GPU in the 65th percentile of all GPUs, indicating it is a solid mid-range performer.

In the context of Greedfall, the GPU's role is critical. The measured frame rates show a clear pattern where performance scales directly with resolution. At 1920x1080, the GPU has enough headroom to push high frame rates, averaging 113 FPS on High settings. As the resolution increases to 2560x1440, the average FPS on High drops to 78. The most demanding scenario, 3840x2160 at Ultra settings, yields an average of only 30 FPS, making it unplayable for most users.

The GPU's memory configuration is also a factor. The 8 GB VRAM capacity is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p gaming, but at 4K with higher quality presets, it may become a limiting factor. The data shows a steep drop in performance from Medium (51 FPS) to Ultra (30 FPS) at 4K, suggesting that the combination of higher resolution and more demanding settings saturates the GPU's resources, leading to the significant frame rate reduction. The GPU's synthetic benchmark scores, such as 17166 in Passmark G3D and 10111 in Geekbench OpenCL, reflect its capabilities as a mid-range part.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture. It has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. The CPU has a 30 MB shared L3 cache and supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus. It sits in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, showing it is a high-end processor for desktop workloads.

In Greedfall, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with data and manage game logic. Given the high core count and boost clock, the Ultra 7 265 is unlikely to be a bottleneck at any of the tested resolutions. The evidence for this is in the frame rate scaling. When moving from 1080p to 1440p at High settings, the average FPS drops from 113 to 78. This drop of 31% is more consistent with a GPU limitation than a CPU one, as the CPU's workload does not increase significantly with resolution.

The CPU's strong synthetic performance, such as a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42216 and a single-core score of 5960, indicates it can handle complex simulations and draw calls. The benchmark results suggest that the CPU is not the limiting factor in this pairing for Greedfall. The frame rate is dictated almost entirely by the GPU's ability to render the scene at the chosen resolution and quality settings. The CPU is likely providing frames faster than the GPU can render them, making the GPU the performance bottleneck.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT ranks 1891 out of 2938 tested combos in Greedfall. This ranking places the pairing in the 36th percentile of all tested configurations, meaning that roughly 64% of tested combos perform better. This is a modest ranking, reflecting the fact that the RX 6650 XT is a mid-range GPU, despite the high-end CPU.

The ranking is likely dragged down by the GPU, which falls in the 65th percentile of all GPUs. When paired with a much more powerful CPU, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, preventing the combo from achieving higher frame rates, especially at higher resolutions. The CPU, while powerful, cannot compensate for the GPU's rendering limits in a graphically intensive game like Greedfall.

This pairing represents a significant imbalance. The CPU is a top-tier part, ranking in the 93rd percentile, while the GPU is a mid-range part. The combo's overall rank of 1891 suggests that many users with more balanced pairings, perhaps with a slightly weaker CPU and a stronger GPU, will see better performance in this game. The data shows that to improve this combo's rank, a more powerful GPU would be necessary.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend heavily on the target resolution and desired frame rate.

For a smooth 60 FPS experience, the data shows that 1920x1080 with High settings is the best option, yielding an average of 113 FPS. Even Medium settings at 1080p provide a very playable 124 FPS average. At 2560x1440, High settings produce a solid 78 FPS average, which is also suitable for most players. The Ultra preset at 1440p drops to 50 FPS, which may be acceptable but is not ideal.

At 3840x2160, the combination struggles. The only playable setting is Low, which averages 65 FPS. Medium settings at 4K average 51 FPS, with a minimum of 44 FPS, which may drop below the refresh rate of many monitors. High settings at 4K average 47 FPS, and Ultra settings are effectively unplayable at 30 FPS.

The best experience, balancing visual quality and performance, is achieved at 2560x1440 with High settings. This preset provides a high average frame rate of 78 FPS without the significant performance hit seen at 4K. For users prioritizing maximum frame rates, 1920x1080 with Low settings offers the highest average at 158 FPS. It is recommended to avoid the Ultra preset at 4K, as the 30 FPS average makes the game feel sluggish.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured data provides a clear picture of the combo's performance across all tested scenarios.

1920x1080: At this resolution, the combo is very strong. The average FPS ranges from 158 on Low to 72 on Ultra. High settings average 113 FPS, and Medium settings average 124 FPS. The Medium preset also recorded a minimum FPS of 105 and a maximum of 143, showing good frame time consistency.

2560x1440: Performance drops noticeably at 1440p. The average FPS ranges from 109 on Low to 50 on Ultra. High settings average 78 FPS, which is still a good experience. Medium settings average 86 FPS, with a minimum of 73 and a maximum of 99 FPS.

3840x2160: The GPU is heavily taxed at 4K. The average FPS ranges from 65 on Low to 30 on Ultra. High settings average 47 FPS, and Medium settings average 51 FPS. The Medium preset is the only one with a recorded minimum, which is 44 FPS.

The data shows a consistent pattern: each step up in resolution has a significant impact on performance, while the difference between quality presets is also substantial. The jump from 1080p to 1440p reduces the High preset average by 35 FPS. The jump from 1440p to 4K reduces the High preset average by another 31 FPS.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals the nature of the performance bottleneck. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 113 at 1920x1080 to 78 at 2560x1440, a 31% reduction. From 1440p to 4K, the average FPS drops from 78 to 47, a 40% reduction.

This scaling pattern is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario. The CPU's workload remains relatively constant as resolution increases, but the GPU's workload grows exponentially with the number of pixels. Since the Ultra 7 265 is a very powerful CPU, it is not the limiting factor. The frame rate drops are almost entirely attributable to the RX 6650 XT's rendering capabilities.

The data indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting component at all resolutions above 1080p. Even at 1080p, the GPU is likely the bottleneck on higher settings, as the frame rates are high but not limited by the CPU. The steep drop in performance at 4K, especially on Ultra settings where the average FPS falls to 30, confirms that the GPU is overwhelmed by the pixel count. This pairing is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, where the GPU can maintain playable frame rates, but it is not a viable option for 4K gaming with high-quality settings.