The profile depiction is diabolical
I think you're being overly generous. The devil plays fairer than that.
Not only are the 1760 and 1120 numbers depicted at the wrong end of the segment, but the profile appears to descend from 11d. No level is given for the FAF. That makes it even more plausible that the 1760 number is the minimum height at the 10d FAF rather than at the 6.5d SDF as is really the case.