Greedfall

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H compare to its closest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The average benchmark score for the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H is 35,670. It trails the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 by just 0.1%, the Intel Core 7 250H by 0.2%, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 by 0.4%, and the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X by 0.7%. The differences are minimal, indicating performance parity within a narrow band.

Q: What is the performance percentile ranking for this CPU and GPU?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 185H sits in the 85th percentile of all CPUs, meaning it outperforms 85% of tested processors. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 sits in the 61st percentile of all GPUs, which is notably lower, suggesting the GPU is a more mid-range component relative to the CPU.

Q: How does the RTX 4060's benchmark score compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RTX 4060's average benchmark score is 17,639. It is effectively tied with the AMD Radeon HD 7790, which scores 17,666 (0.2% higher). The RTX 4060 is ahead of the AMD Radeon 780M by 0.3%, the AMD Radeon Pro 560 by 0.5%, and the AMD Radeon Pro 460 by 0.7%. These deltas are tiny, indicating very close performance clustering.

Q: What is the combo rank for this CPU/GPU pairing in Greedfall?

A: The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 ranks 2,262 out of 3,703 tested combos in Greedfall. This places it in the lower-middle portion of the overall ranking distribution.

Q: Which resolution yields the highest average FPS for this combo?

A: At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo achieves an average of 160 FPS. This is the highest recorded average across all tested resolutions and settings. The same resolution at Ultra drops to 73 FPS.

Q: Does the data include minimum and maximum FPS for all settings?

A: No, minimum and maximum FPS values are only provided for Medium settings at each resolution. At 3840x2160 Medium, the range is 44 to 60 FPS; at 2560x1440 Medium, it is 74 to 100 FPS; and at 1920x1080 Medium, it is 107 to 145 FPS. All other settings only report average FPS.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The chip, designated AD107, contains 18,900 million transistors on a 159 mm² die. The GPU operates with a base clock of 1830 MHz and a boost clock of 2460 MHz. Memory runs at 2125 MHz with 17 Gbps effective speed. The 8 GB of GDDR6 memory is accessed via a 128-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 272.0 GB/s.

In Greedfall, the GPU's memory configuration appears to be a significant factor. The data shows that at 3840x2160, the average FPS drops from 66 on Low settings to 30 on Ultra settings. This steep decline suggests that higher settings increase the memory and compute demands substantially. The 8 GB VRAM capacity may be a limiting factor at 4K with Ultra presets, given that the average FPS falls to 30. The benchmark results indicate that the GPU is the primary performance constraint at higher resolutions, where the gap between Low and Ultra settings is 36 FPS.

The RTX 4060's compute capabilities are defined by 3072 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, and 48 raster output pipelines. The GPU also features 24 ray tracing cores and 96 tensor cores. The pixel rate is 118.1 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 236.2 GTexel/s. Floating point performance is rated at 15.11 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16. These specifications translate into a passmark G3D score of 19,545, which places the GPU in the 61st percentile of all GPUs.

The GPU's benchmark performance relative to its nearest rivals is remarkably close. The RTX 4060's average score of 17,639 is within 0.7% of four other GPUs (AMD Radeon HD 7790, AMD Radeon 780M, AMD Radeon Pro 560, and AMD Radeon Pro 460). This tight clustering suggests that the RTX 4060 delivers performance that is competitive with a range of older and integrated solutions, despite being a dedicated discrete GPU. The data implies that in Greedfall, the GPU's 8 GB memory and 272.0 GB/s bandwidth are more impactful than raw compute throughput.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 185H is a mobile processor from the Core Ultra Series 1, built on the Meteor Lake architecture using a 7 nm process at Intel. It features 16 cores and 22 threads, with a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The thermal design power is 45 W. Cache hierarchy includes 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is DDR5, with dual-channel configuration providing 89.6 GB/s bandwidth.

In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU shows strong multi-threaded performance. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 17,984.5, while the single-core score is 1,810.5. Geekbench results show a multi-core score of 11,657 and a single-core score of 1,794. Passmark multi-thread score is 29,376, with a single-thread score of 3,697. These figures place the CPU in the 85th percentile of all processors.

For Greedfall, the CPU's role is less prominent than the GPU's, based on the FPS patterns. At 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the average FPS ranges from 73 on Ultra to 160 on Low. The high FPS at Low settings (160) suggests the CPU can feed frames quickly enough when the GPU is not heavily taxed. However, at 3840x2160, the average FPS on Low drops to 66, indicating that even at low settings, the GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

The CPU's nearest rivals in benchmark scores are all within 0.7% of its average score. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 scores 35,719 (0.1% higher), the Intel Core 7 250H scores 35,728 (0.2% higher), the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 scores 35,802 (0.4% higher), and the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X scores 35,909 (0.7% higher). This parity suggests that the Ultra 9 185H is not a bottleneck in Greedfall, as its performance is comparable to other capable processors.

The CPU's boost clock of 5.10 GHz provides strong single-thread performance, which is relevant for Greedfall's game logic and AI. However, the data does not show a clear CPU bottleneck at any resolution: the FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K follows a pattern consistent with GPU limitation. The CPU's 16 cores and 22 threads are likely more than sufficient for this action RPG, which typically does not scale perfectly beyond a handful of threads.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 ranks 2,262 out of 3,703 tested combos in Greedfall. This rank places the combo in the 61st percentile of all tested combinations (calculated as 1 - 2262/3703). This positioning is interesting because the CPU alone ranks in the 85th percentile, while the GPU ranks in the 61st percentile. The combo rank is closer to the GPU's percentile, suggesting that the GPU is the dominant factor in determining this combo's position in the game.

The rank of 2,262 out of 3,703 means that roughly 1,441 combos perform better, while 2,262 perform worse. This places the combo in the lower-middle tier of performance. For context, the CPU's nearest rivals have average benchmark scores ranging from 35,719 to 35,909, all within 0.7% of the Ultra 9 185H's score. The GPU's nearest rivals have scores from 17,509 to 17,666, also within 0.7%. The combo's rank suggests that in Greedfall, this pairing delivers playable but not exceptional performance, particularly at higher resolutions.

The data implies that if a user were to pair the Ultra 9 185H with a more powerful GPU, the combo rank would likely improve significantly, as the CPU is clearly capable of supporting higher frame rates. Conversely, pairing the RTX 4060 with a weaker CPU would probably not change the rank much, as the GPU is the limiting factor in most scenarios. This asymmetry is a key insight from the rank data.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of resolution scaling. At 1920x1080, the average FPS across all settings ranges from 73 (Ultra) to 160 (Low). At 2560x1440, the range narrows to 51 (Ultra) to 111 (Low). At 3840x2160, the range compresses further to 30 (Ultra) to 66 (Low).

The scaling factors are instructive. Moving from 1080p to 1440p, the FPS drops by roughly 30% at Low settings (from 160 to 111), 31% at High (from 114 to 79), and 30% at Ultra (from 73 to 51). Moving from 1440p to 4K, the drops are more severe: 41% at Low (from 111 to 66), 41% at High (from 79 to 47), and 41% at Ultra (from 51 to 30). The consistent ~40% drop from 1440p to 4K across all settings strongly indicates GPU limitation, as the pixel count increases by 2.25x but the FPS drops by less than that, suggesting some headroom in the GPU's compute but a hard memory bandwidth constraint.

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K is non-linear. At Low settings, FPS drops by 59% from 1080p to 4K (from 160 to 66). At Ultra settings, the drop is 59% as well (from 73 to 30). This consistency across settings suggests that the resolution scaling is independent of graphics preset, which points to a fundamental GPU bottleneck, likely related to the 128-bit memory bus and 272.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4060's 8 GB VRAM may also cause texture thrashing at 4K Ultra, but the data shows the FPS drop is uniform across settings, indicating that memory bandwidth rather than capacity is the primary limiter.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers the following average FPS:

• Low: 160
• Medium: 126 (min 107, max 145)
• High: 114
• Ultra: 73

At 2560x1440, the average FPS drops:

• Low: 111
• Medium: 87 (min 74, max 100)
• High: 79
• Ultra: 51

At 3840x2160, the average FPS is significantly lower:

• Low: 66
• Medium: 52 (min 44, max 60)
• High: 47
• Ultra: 30

The data shows that the gap between Low and Ultra settings widens with resolution. At 1080p, the gap is 87 FPS (from 160 to 73). At 1440p, the gap is 60 FPS (from 111 to 51). At 4K, the gap is 36 FPS (from 66 to 30). This narrowing gap indicates that at higher resolutions, even Low settings push the GPU to its limits, reducing the headroom for higher quality presets.

For Medium settings, where min and max FPS are available, the variance is notable. At 1080p Medium, the range is 107 to 145 FPS, a spread of 38 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the range is 74 to 100 FPS, a spread of 26 FPS. At 4K Medium, the range is 44 to 60 FPS, a spread of 16 FPS. The decreasing variance with resolution suggests that at lower resolutions, the CPU occasionally causes frame dips, while at higher resolutions, the GPU is consistently saturated, leading to more stable frame times.

The jump from High to Ultra settings is particularly steep. At 1080p, High delivers 114 FPS while Ultra drops to 73 FPS, a 36% reduction. At 1440p, High gives 79 FPS and Ultra drops to 51 FPS, a 35% reduction. At 4K, High gives 47 FPS and Ultra drops to 30 FPS, a 36% reduction. This consistent ~36% penalty for Ultra over High suggests that Ultra settings enable effects that are disproportionately expensive, likely related to the GPU's ray tracing cores or memory-intensive features.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the user's target frame rate and resolution. For 1080p, all settings are playable, with Low at 160 FPS, Medium at 126 FPS, High at 114 FPS, and Ultra at 73 FPS. For a smooth experience on a standard 60 Hz display, High settings at 1080p provide excellent visual quality while maintaining 114 FPS, well above the refresh rate threshold. Ultra is only recommended for users with high-refresh displays who prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate, as 73 FPS is still playable but not ideal for fast-paced action.

At 1440p, the recommendation shifts. High settings deliver 79 FPS, which is above 60 FPS and suitable for most displays. Medium settings provide 87 FPS, which may be a better choice for users who want a safety margin. Ultra at 51 FPS is borderline, dipping below 60 FPS, and is not recommended for smooth gameplay. Low at 111 FPS is excessive unless the user has a 100 Hz+ display and prioritizes frame rate over visuals.

At 4K, the choices are more constrained. High settings deliver 47 FPS, which is below 60 FPS but still playable for a slower-paced action RPG. Medium settings provide 52 FPS, a slight improvement. Low settings give 66 FPS, which is the only preset at 4K that consistently exceeds 60 FPS. Ultra at 30 FPS is not recommended, as it falls below the playable threshold for most users. For 4K, Low settings offer the best balance of playability and visual quality, given the GPU's limitations.

The Medium settings data, which includes min and max FPS, provides additional insight. At 1080p Medium, the minimum FPS is 107, which is still very high. At 1440p Medium, the minimum is 74 FPS, which is acceptable. At 4K Medium, the minimum is 44 FPS, which can cause noticeable stutters. This suggests that Medium is a viable setting at 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K, the min FPS drops too low for consistent smoothness.

The best overall experience per the measured rows appears to be High settings at 1440p. This configuration delivers 79 FPS average, which is above 60 FPS, while providing good visual quality. For users with 1080p displays, High settings at 114 FPS are equally compelling. For 4K enthusiasts, Low settings at 66 FPS are the only way to maintain playable frame rates without compromising too heavily on resolution. Ultra settings are generally not recommended at any resolution, as the FPS penalty is severe and the visual gains may not justify the performance cost.