Greedfall

# Greedfall with Intel Core Ultra 9 185H + AMD Radeon RX 7900M — Benchmark Analysis

This combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H and the AMD Radeon RX 7900M delivers a compelling 1080p and 1440p experience in Greedfall, while 4K Ultra remains a challenging target. The measured frame rates show a clear pattern: this system is capable of high-refresh gameplay at lower resolutions, but the GPU becomes the primary limiting factor as resolution climbs. The data set provides 12 measured FPS rows across three resolutions and four settings presets, offering a comprehensive view of how this laptop-class combo scales under load.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS degradation from 1080p to 4K is substantial across all settings, revealing where the bottleneck shifts. At High settings, average FPS drops from 145 at 1920x1080 to 101 at 2560x1440, then to 60 at 3840x2160. That represents a 30% reduction moving from 1080p to 1440p, and another 41% drop moving from 1440p to 4K. The total scaling from 1080p to 4K at High is a 59% loss in average frame rate, which is a steep curve indicative of a GPU-limited scenario at higher pixel counts.

Low settings tell a similar story but with higher absolute numbers. At 1920x1080 Low, the system pushes 204 FPS, dropping to 141 at 2560x1440 (a 31% reduction) and 84 at 3840x2160 (a 40% reduction from 1440p). The relative scaling is nearly identical to High settings, which suggests the performance curve is dominated by resolution-dependent factors rather than settings-dependent ones. This is a hallmark of a system where the Radeon RX 7900M's rendering throughput, rather than CPU-side geometry or draw calls, determines the ceiling.

Medium settings provide the most granular data, as it is the only preset with min and max FPS values recorded. At 1080p Medium, the average is 160 FPS with a min of 136 and max of 184. Moving to 1440p Medium, the average drops to 111 FPS with min/max of 94/128. At 4K Medium, the average falls to 66 FPS with min/max of 56/76. The spread between min and max FPS narrows as resolution increases — from a 48 FPS range at 1080p to a 34 FPS range at 1440p to a 20 FPS range at 4K. This tightening of the frame time distribution at higher resolutions suggests the workload becomes more consistent (and more GPU-bound), with less variation from CPU-side spikes.

Ultra settings exhibit the most dramatic scaling penalty. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 93 FPS, which is already below the 1080p Medium average by 42%. At 1440p Ultra, the average drops to 64 FPS, and at 4K Ultra it collapses to 38 FPS. The jump from 1080p Ultra to 4K Ultra represents a 59% performance loss, identical to the High settings scaling. This consistency across presets reinforces that resolution, not settings, is the dominant variable in the performance equation for this combo.

The data implies that Greedfall's engine is heavily pixel-bound. The 16 GB of GDDR6 memory and 576.0 GB/s bandwidth on the RX 7900M are sufficient to feed the renderer well into 4K, but the raw shader throughput (38.52 TFLOPS FP32) becomes the constraint. The 84 FPS at 4K Low versus 60 FPS at 4K High shows that even at minimum settings, the GPU cannot fully overcome the pixel fill demands, with a 40% uplift from Low to High relative to the base.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 185H brings 16 cores and 22 threads to the table, with a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. In Greedfall, an Action RPG that typically relies on single-threaded game logic and multi-threaded asset streaming, this hybrid configuration appears well suited. The CPU's benchmark scores place it in the 85th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 35670. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350, scores 35719, a delta of -0.1%, meaning the Ultra 9 185H is essentially tied with that chip in aggregate CPU performance.

The CPU's L3 cache is 24 MB shared, with 112 KB L1 and 2 MB L2 per core. For a game like Greedfall, which was released in 2019 and does not demand extreme core counts, the 16-core/22-thread configuration is likely overkill for most scenes. The data supports this: at 1080p Low, the system achieves 204 FPS, which is well beyond typical display refresh rates and indicates the CPU is not holding back the GPU at this resolution. However, the question arises whether the CPU's single-thread performance is sufficient to maintain those high frame rates in complex scenes; the Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1810.5 and Geekbench single-core score of 1794 suggest it is capable, but the data does not include per-scene CPU utilization metrics.

The CPU's Memory bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s (dual-channel DDR5), which is modest compared to the GPU's 576.0 GB/s. This disparity could become a factor in open-world sections where the CPU must stream assets to the GPU, but the measured FPS at 1080p High (145) and 1440p High (101) show no signs of stutter or frame drops in the average data. The absence of min FPS data for High settings makes it hard to assess worst-case scenarios, but the Medium preset's min FPS at 1080p (136) and 1440p (94) suggest the CPU maintains acceptable frame pacing.

When comparing to rivals, the CPU's nearest competitors are all within a narrow band: the Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 (-0.1%), Intel Core 7 250H (-0.2%), AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 (-0.4%), and AMD Ryzen 7 7700X (-0.7%). This clustering indicates that the Ultra 9 185H is not a standout in raw compute, but its 5.10 GHz boost clock likely provides the single-thread headroom that Greedfall's game logic needs. The fact that the CPU scores 85th percentile while the GPU scores 94th percentile suggests the GPU is the stronger component in this pairing, which aligns with the resolution scaling analysis.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 1235th out of 2938 tested combinations in Greedfall, placing it in the top 42% of all tested systems. This ranking is notable because it combines a high-percentile GPU (94th) with a solid CPU (85th), yet the game-specific ranking is lower than either component's individual percentile. This discrepancy suggests that Greedfall may not fully utilize the strengths of this particular hardware pairing, or that the game's engine has characteristics that do not scale perfectly with such high-end components.

The rank of 1235 out of 2938 means there are 1703 combos that perform worse and 1234 that perform better. Given that the GPU is in the 94th percentile and the CPU in the 85th, one might expect a higher game-specific rank. The data implies that Greedfall's optimization or its specific workload profile does not reward the RX 7900M's architecture as much as other games might. The nearest GPU rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro VII (+0.4% avg score), NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 (-4.3%), AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 (+5.4%), and NVIDIA RTX A4500 (+6.3%). These are all workstation-class cards, not gaming GPUs, which suggests the RX 7900M's raw compute is competitive with professional silicon but that gaming performance in Greedfall is a different matter.

The combo's ranking relative to the 2938 total combos indicates that there is significant headroom in the database for better-performing systems. The fact that this combo sits just below the median (1235 is slightly above halfway through 2938) suggests that while the hardware is capable, other combinations of CPUs and GPUs achieve higher frame rates in this specific title. This could be due to driver optimizations, CPU-GPU bottleneck dynamics, or the game's preference for certain architectures. The data does not provide per-combo breakdowns, so the exact reasons remain speculative, but the resolution scaling analysis points to the GPU as the primary limiter at 4K, while the CPU appears sufficient at lower resolutions.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to maintain 60 FPS or higher?

A: The data shows that at 2560x1440, all settings except Ultra achieve over 60 FPS average: High at 101 FPS, Low at 141 FPS, and Medium at 111 FPS. At 3840x2160, only Low (84 FPS) and Medium (66 FPS) exceed 60 FPS, while High is exactly 60 FPS and Ultra falls to 38 FPS.

Q: How does the Ultra 9 185H compare to its closest CPU rivals in aggregate performance?

A: The Ultra 9 185H has an average benchmark score of 35670. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350, scores 35719, which is only 0.1% higher. The Intel Core 7 250H scores 35728 (0.2% higher), the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 scores 35802 (0.4% higher), and the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X scores 35909 (0.7% higher). All are within 1% of each other.

Q: What is the frame time consistency at Medium settings across resolutions?

A: At 1920x1080 Medium, the min FPS is 136 and max is 184, giving a 48 FPS range. At 2560x1440 Medium, the range narrows to 34 FPS (94 to 128). At 3840x2160 Medium, the range tightens further to 20 FPS (56 to 76). The data shows frame times become more consistent as resolution increases.

Q: Does the RX 7900M's 16 GB VRAM cause any limitations in Greedfall?

A: The measured FPS data does not indicate VRAM-related stuttering or performance degradation. The GPU's 16 GB GDDR6 memory with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth appears sufficient for this 2019 title, as even the lowest average FPS (38 at 4K Ultra) is more likely limited by compute throughput than memory capacity.

Q: How does this combo's game-specific rank compare to its component percentiles?

A: The CPU is in the 85th percentile and the GPU is in the 94th percentile, but the combo ranks 1235th out of 2938 combos (top 42%). This indicates the game-specific performance is lower than what the individual component percentiles might suggest, implying Greedfall does not fully leverage the strengths of this hardware pairing.

Q: What are the measured FPS values at 4K Ultra, and what does that imply?

A: At 3840x2160 Ultra, the average FPS is 38, with no min or max values recorded. This is the lowest measured performance in the dataset and falls below the 60 FPS threshold, indicating that 4K Ultra is not playable at smooth frame rates with this combo.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7900M is a mobile GPU based on the Navi 31 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It features 4608 shading units, 288 TMUs, and 192 ROPs, with 72 ray tracing cores. The base clock is 1825 MHz, boosting to 2090 MHz, and the memory runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) across a 256-bit bus, yielding 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 16 GB GDDR6 frame buffer is ample for Greedfall's textures, and the GPU's 38.52 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is substantial.

In the measured data, the GPU's role is clearly dominant at higher resolutions. The 4K results, particularly at Ultra (38 FPS), show that the GPU's pixel fill rate (401.3 GPixel/s) and texture rate (601.9 GTexel/s) are the limiting factors. The 4K Low result of 84 FPS, which is 121% higher than 4K Ultra, demonstrates that reducing settings on the GPU side dramatically improves throughput, but even at Low, the 4K pixel count (8.3 million pixels) exceeds what the GPU can render at high frame rates.

The GPU's benchmark scores place it in the 94th percentile, with an average benchmark score of 97487. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon Pro VII (97131, +0.4% delta), NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 (101872, -4.3%), AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 (92466, +5.4%), and NVIDIA RTX A4500 (91671, +6.3%). The RX 7900M outperforms most of these rivals in aggregate, but its gaming performance in Greedfall is subject to the game-specific workload. The GPU's 180 W TDP and "IGP" slot width indicate it is a mobile part, and the data suggests it delivers desktop-class performance in this title at 1080p and 1440p.

The GPU's 5 nm process and 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die are architectural strengths, but the game's engine appears to be more sensitive to raw fill rate than to compute features like ray tracing (72 RT cores) or geometry throughput. The 1080p to 4K scaling curve, which shows a near-consistent 59% performance loss from 1080p to 4K across High and Ultra settings, suggests that the GPU's memory bandwidth and ROP throughput are the key determinants of frame rate at higher resolutions.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the ideal settings preset depends on the target resolution and desired frame rate. At 1920x1080, all settings achieve above 90 FPS, with Low at 204 FPS, Medium at 160 FPS, High at 145 FPS, and Ultra at 93 FPS. For 1080p gaming, Medium or High are the best choices, as they offer a balance of visual quality and frame rate well above the 60 FPS threshold, with only Ultra dipping below 100 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the story changes. Low (141 FPS) and Medium (111 FPS) are excellent, while High (101 FPS) remains very playable. Ultra drops to 64 FPS, which is still above 60 FPS but with less headroom for frame time spikes (the data shows no min FPS for Ultra, but the Medium min FPS of 94 at 1440p suggests the engine can have variability). For 1440p, High settings are the most balanced, offering 101 FPS average with likely better visual fidelity than Medium, while Ultra at 64 FPS is acceptable for gamers who prioritize visuals over smoothness.

At 3840x2160, the choices are more constrained. Low (84 FPS) and Medium (66 FPS) are playable, with Medium providing a better visual experience at 66 FPS, which is above the common 60 FPS target. High sits exactly at 60 FPS, which is playable but leaves no margin for demanding scenes, and the lack of min FPS data for High makes it a riskier choice. Ultra at 38 FPS is not recommendable for smooth gameplay. The best experience per the measured rows is 4K Medium, which offers 66 FPS average with a min of 56 FPS, indicating occasional drops below 60 but overall acceptable performance.

The data suggests that the combo excels at 1080p and 1440p, where it can push high refresh rates, while 4K requires a compromise on settings to achieve playable frame rates. For the best overall experience, 1440p High (101 FPS) provides a strong balance, while 4K Medium (66 FPS) is the optimal choice for 4K users.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS values are as follows: Low settings deliver 204 FPS, Medium delivers 160 FPS (with a min of 136 and max of 184), High delivers 145 FPS, and Ultra delivers 93 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 111 FPS, with Ultra being 54% slower than Low. The Medium preset's min/max range of 48 FPS indicates some frame time variability, but all settings are well above the 60 FPS target.

At 2560x1440, the average FPS values are: Low at 141 FPS, Medium at 111 FPS (min 94, max 128), High at 101 FPS, and Ultra at 64 FPS. The performance drop from 1080p to 1440p is consistent across settings: Low falls by 31%, Medium by 31%, High by 30%, and Ultra by 31%. This uniformity reinforces the resolution-bound nature of the workload. The Medium min FPS of 94 at 1440p is still above 60, suggesting good frame pacing.

At 3840x2160, the average FPS values are: Low at 84 FPS, Medium at 66 FPS (min 56, max 76), High at 60 FPS, and Ultra at 38 FPS. The drop from 1440p to 4K is steeper: Low falls by 40%, Medium by 41%, High by 41%, and Ultra by 41%. The 4K Medium min FPS of 56 is below the 60 FPS target, indicating that even the recommended 4K preset can stutter in demanding scenes. The 4K Ultra performance of 38 FPS is 59% slower than 1080p Ultra, highlighting the extreme pixel cost at this resolution.

The data shows that the combo's performance scales predictably with resolution, with an approximate 30% penalty from 1080p to 1440p and an additional 40% penalty from 1440p to 4K across all settings. The Medium preset provides the only min/max data, offering insight into frame time consistency: the range narrows from 48 FPS at 1080p to 34 FPS at 1440p to 20 FPS at 4K, suggesting the workload becomes more stable (but also more GPU-bound) at higher resolutions.