Greedfall

# Greedfall Performance Analysis: Intel Core Ultra 7 265K + Intel Arc B370

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K paired with the Intel Arc B370 delivers playable framerates at 1080p in Greedfall, but the integrated GPU becomes the dominant bottleneck as resolution climbs. Across all measured settings, the combo averages 54 FPS at 1080p High, drops to 38 FPS at 1440p High, and falls to 22 FPS at 4K High. The Arc B370 sits in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, with a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184, placing it within 1.4% of the AMD FirePro M2000 and 0.7% behind the AMD Radeon HD 7650M. This is an integrated graphics solution with a 25 W TDP, system-shared memory, and a 2400 MHz boost clock — numbers that explain the sharp performance cliff between 1080p and higher resolutions.

Resolution Scaling

The measured data reveals a steep, predictable decline in average FPS as resolution increases, indicating that the Intel Arc B370's rendering throughput is the limiting component in this configuration. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 76 FPS; moving to 1440p Low drops that to 53 FPS (a 30% reduction), and 4K Low falls further to 31 FPS (a 59% reduction from 1080p). This scaling pattern holds across every settings tier. At High settings, 1080p yields 54 FPS, 1440p gives 38 FPS (a 30% drop), and 4K produces 22 FPS (a 59% drop from 1080p). The consistency of these percentage drops — roughly 30% from 1080p to 1440p and another 40% from 1440p to 4K — strongly suggests the GPU's pixel throughput, not the CPU, is the constraint.

The Intel Arc B370's specifications reinforce this interpretation. Its pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s are modest figures for a modern gaming workload, and its FP32 performance of 6.144 TFLOPS is far below what discrete desktop GPUs typically offer. The GPU's 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs are small counts that directly limit how many pixels and textures the hardware can process per frame. The system-shared memory architecture, with bandwidth described as "System Dependent," means the GPU competes with the CPU for memory access, further constraining high-resolution performance where memory bandwidth demands grow exponentially.

At 4K Ultra, the combo manages only 14 FPS — a 54% drop from 4K High's 22 FPS and an 82% drop from 1080p Low's 76 FPS. This extreme scaling indicates that the Ultra preset's additional shading and post-processing effects overwhelm the already-limited GPU. The 1080p Medium measurement (60 FPS) with a minimum of 51 FPS and maximum of 69 FPS shows the system maintaining playable framerates at the most common resolution, but the data makes clear that 1440p is the practical ceiling for this configuration, and even then only at Low or Medium settings. The 4K numbers are uniformly below playable thresholds, with the best 4K result (31 FPS at Low) still falling short of smooth motion.

Settings Recommendations

For this specific hardware combination, the measured data supports a clear hierarchy of playable configurations. At 1080p, the Medium preset delivers 60 FPS average with a 51 FPS minimum and 69 FPS maximum — the most balanced experience in the dataset. The Low preset pushes to 76 FPS, which is smoother but sacrifices visual fidelity; the High preset at 54 FPS remains acceptable for action RPG gameplay, though the minimum frame time data is not recorded for that row. The Ultra preset at 1080p drops to 35 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target most players would prefer for a game with real-time combat.

At 1440p, the Low preset (53 FPS) is the only configuration that approaches smoothness, while Medium (41 FPS) and High (38 FPS) hover near the lower edge of playability. The 1440p Medium row includes a minimum of 35 FPS and maximum of 48 FPS, showing notable frame pacing variance that could manifest as stutter during crowded scenes. The 1440p Ultra result of 24 FPS is not recommended for any practical gameplay scenario. At 4K, no preset produces acceptable results — even Low's 31 FPS and Medium's 25 FPS (with a 21 FPS minimum) fall well below the threshold for responsive combat in an action RPG.

The optimal recommendation based purely on measured performance is 1080p Medium: it offers the best combination of average FPS (60), a recorded minimum above 50 FPS, and a maximum that reaches 69 FPS, suggesting headroom for occasional scene complexity. Players prioritizing smoothness over fidelity can choose 1080p Low for the highest average (76 FPS), while those wanting better visuals should note that 1080p High at 54 FPS is still viable. The data does not support any 4K configuration, and 1440p should only be attempted at Low settings where the 53 FPS average approaches the Medium preset's 1080p performance.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370's role in Greedfall performance is defined by its integrated design and modest compute resources. This GPU, built on Intel's Xe3-LPG architecture with a 3 nm process, operates at a 300 MHz base clock and 2400 MHz boost clock, with a TDP of just 25 W. Its memory configuration is "System Shared" — there is no dedicated VRAM, and bandwidth is "System Dependent," meaning performance scales with the host system's DDR5 memory implementation. The Core Ultra 7 265K supports DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 102.4 GB/s theoretical bandwidth, but the GPU must share this with the CPU's 20 cores and 20 threads.

The GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184 places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals are all legacy discrete parts from over a decade ago: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, 0.2% faster), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, 0.5% faster), AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192, 0.7% faster), and AMD FirePro M2000 (1168, 1.4% slower). These comparisons contextualize the Greedfall results: the Arc B370 is competing with 2010-era discrete GPUs, not modern desktop cards. Its 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1) are the raw compute ceilings that translate directly to the measured framerates.

The GPU's 10 RT cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support indicate feature completeness, but Greedfall — a 2019 title — does not require ray tracing or advanced DX12 features, so these capabilities do not meaningfully influence the results. The 20 ROPs are the primary constraint at high resolutions, as the 4K measurements show: the pixel fill rate of 48.00 GPixel/s is simply insufficient for 8.3 million pixels per frame at playable frame times. The texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s, while higher, still limits how quickly the GPU can sample and filter textures at 4K with High or Ultra settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

1080p (1920x1080): The lowest resolution tested yields the only fully playable results. Low settings produce 76 FPS average, the highest in the entire dataset. Medium settings follow at 60 FPS average, with a minimum of 51 FPS and maximum of 69 FPS. High settings deliver 54 FPS average, while Ultra drops to 35 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 41 FPS, representing a 54% performance reduction for the highest visual quality preset.

1440p (2560x1440): Performance falls into a marginal range. Low settings average 53 FPS, which is playable but not smooth by modern standards. Medium settings average 41 FPS with a minimum of 35 FPS and maximum of 48 FPS. High settings average 38 FPS, and Ultra falls to 24 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 29 FPS, with the Ultra preset delivering less than half the Low preset's framerate.

4K (3840x2160): No preset achieves playable performance. Low settings lead with 31 FPS average, followed by Medium at 25 FPS (minimum 21 FPS, maximum 28 FPS), High at 22 FPS, and Ultra at 14 FPS. The Ultra preset's 14 FPS is the lowest measured result across all resolutions and settings, representing a 55% drop from the Low preset at the same resolution and an 82% drop from the best overall result (1080p Low).

The data shows a consistent pattern: each settings tier costs roughly 15-20% performance at the same resolution, while each resolution step costs roughly 30-40% at the same settings. The 1080p Medium result of 60 FPS is the only configuration in the entire dataset that hits the 60 FPS target with a recorded minimum above 50 FPS. The 1080p Low result of 76 FPS suggests the CPU can feed the GPU fast enough at lower resolutions, but the GPU's limits become apparent immediately at 1440p.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this CPU+GPU combo in Greedfall?

A: Based on measured data, 1080p is the only resolution that delivers consistently playable framerates. The 1080p Medium preset averages 60 FPS with a 51 FPS minimum, while 1440p peaks at 53 FPS on Low settings and 4K never exceeds 31 FPS.

Q: Can this configuration handle Ultra settings in Greedfall?

A: Only at 1080p, where Ultra averages 35 FPS. At 1440p Ultra drops to 24 FPS, and at 4K Ultra falls to 14 FPS. The data does not support Ultra settings at any resolution above 1080p.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B370's 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1184 is 0.2% below the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186), 0.5% below the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190), 0.7% below the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192), and 1.4% above the AMD FirePro M2000 (1168). These are all legacy parts, reflecting the Arc B370's 5th percentile ranking.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K a bottleneck in this configuration?

A: The CPU's benchmarks — including a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 35850 and single-core score of 2020 — far exceed what Greedfall demands. The 30-40% FPS drops between resolutions indicate the GPU is the limiting component, not the CPU.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded across all tests?

A: The lowest minimum FPS in the dataset is 21 FPS, recorded at 4K Medium settings. The highest minimum is 51 FPS at 1080p Medium. Several rows lack minimum FPS data, so the true worst-case frame times may be lower.

Q: How does this combo rank overall for Greedfall?

A: The combination ranks 2699 out of 2938 tested combos for this game, placing it in the bottom 8% of all CPU+GPU pairings. This is consistent with the GPU's 5th percentile global ranking and the measured framerates.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K's role in this Greedfall configuration is to supply frames faster than the GPU can render them, which the data confirms it does successfully. This 20-core, 20-thread processor based on Arrow Lake architecture operates at a 3.90 GHz base clock and 5.50 GHz boost clock, with 30 MB of shared L3 cache. Its benchmark results are strong: Cinebench R23 multi-core scores 35850, single-core scores 2020, and Geekbench multi-core reaches 23085 with a single-core score of 2713. The passmark multi-thread score of 58594 and single-thread score of 4928 further establish this as a high-end desktop CPU, ranking in the 94th percentile of all processors.

Greedfall, released in 2019, does not require modern CPU performance. The game's threads are limited, and even the Core Ultra 7's modest 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth (shared with the GPU) proves adequate. The evidence for CPU headroom is the consistent FPS scaling pattern: if the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect similar framerates across resolutions, but the data shows a 54% drop from 1080p Low to 4K Low (76 to 31 FPS) and a 59% drop from 1080p High to 4K High (54 to 22 FPS). These drops track the GPU's pixel throughput limits, not CPU compute limits.

The CPU's 20 threads support the game's background processes and the integrated GPU's driver overhead without strain. Its 3 nm process node and 125 W TDP keep thermals manageable, allowing the 5.50 GHz boost clock to sustain performance during extended sessions. The nearest CPU rivals — Intel Xeon 6511P (0.2% faster), Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 (0.7% faster), Intel Core i7-14700KF (1% slower), and AMD Ryzen 7 9700F (1.3% slower) — all share similar average benchmark scores, but none of them would change this system's Greedfall results because the GPU is the definitive limiter.

The practical takeaway is that the Core Ultra 7 265K leaves substantial performance on the table with the Arc B370. In a system with a discrete GPU, the CPU's 20 cores and high boost clock would likely produce much higher Greedfall framerates. However, with the integrated Arc B370, the CPU's role is relegated to feeding a GPU that cannot keep up, making the 265K's performance characteristics largely irrelevant to the measured results. The 2699th rank out of 2938 combos reflects the GPU's constraint, not the CPU's capability.