Doom

Similar Performance Alternatives

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F sits in a tight performance cluster based on aggregate benchmark scores. Its nearest CPU rivals are nearly identical in average score: the Intel Core i5-14600T trails by just 0.1%, the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H is 0.2% behind, and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H leads by 0.2%. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 is 0.3% slower. In practical terms, any of these four processors would deliver nearly indistinguishable frame pacing in Doom when paired with the same GPU, because the game’s CPU load at high frame rates is minimal.

On the GPU side, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090’s average benchmark score of 60347 places it among a set of professional and workstation cards. The Intel Arc Pro A60 matches it exactly with a 0% delta, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 is 0.3% ahead. The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M is 2.5% faster, and the AMD Radeon PRO V710 is 2.9% slower. These deltas are small, but the RTX 4090’s gaming-specific architecture (Ada Lovelace, 16384 shading units, 512 TMUs, 176 ROPs) gives it a distinct advantage in a title like Doom, which relies heavily on raw rasterization throughput. The nearest rivals, by contrast, are not gaming-focused parts.

For this specific combo, a user swapping the 7400F for any of its four CPU rivals would see no measurable change in Doom’s output at any resolution, because the GPU is the bottleneck. Swapping the RTX 4090 for any of its four GPU rivals, however, would alter performance by roughly ±3% at best — a difference that falls within run-to-run variance for a game that already exceeds 90 FPS at 4K Ultra.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data shows a clear division of labor for this combo in Doom. At 1920x1080, the CPU has more influence because the GPU is not saturated at lower pixel counts. The average FPS climbs from 267 at Ultra to 385 at Low — a 118 FPS spread, or roughly 44% more performance from lowering settings. This indicates that at 1080p, the Ryzen 5 7400F’s single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3072) is sufficient to feed the RTX 4090, but the GPU still has headroom that settings changes can exploit.

At 2560x1440, the GPU begins to take over. The spread between Low (287 FPS) and Ultra (173 FPS) is 114 FPS, but the absolute numbers are lower than at 1080p. The RTX 4090’s 1.01 TB/s memory bandwidth and 82.58 TFLOPS FP32 throughput become the limiting factors as pixel count rises. The Medium preset delivers 250 FPS average, which is 63% of the Low preset’s output — a smaller proportional drop than at 1080p, where Medium (367 FPS) is 95% of Low (385 FPS). This suggests that at 1440p, the GPU is doing more work per frame, and CPU stalls are less frequent.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is unambiguously the dominant component. The average FPS drops to 156 at Low and 94 at Ultra — a 62 FPS spread, or 40% less performance from maxing settings. The Medium preset’s 136 FPS average is only 87% of Low, and the min FPS at Medium (115) is exactly equal to the High preset’s average (115). This compression of frame rates at 4K confirms that the RTX 4090 is fully saturated, and the Ryzen 5 7400F’s six cores and 12 threads are never the limiting factor. Even at 4K Ultra, the combo maintains 94 FPS average, which is well above the 60 FPS playable threshold.

The scaling pattern across resolutions is consistent: every preset loses roughly 30-40% of its average FPS when moving from 1080p to 1440p, and another 30-40% from 1440p to 4K. The CPU’s role diminishes as resolution increases, while the GPU’s role grows proportionally. For this game, the RTX 4090 is the performance ceiling, and the 7400F is merely a capable companion that never bottlenecks.

How This Combo Ranks

Among 3712 tested CPU-GPU combinations in Doom, this pairing ranks 131st. That places it in the top 3.5% of all tested combos, which is an elite tier. The rank is driven almost entirely by the RTX 4090’s position — the GPU ranks in the 88th percentile among all GPUs, while the CPU ranks in the 83rd percentile among all CPUs. Neither component is the absolute fastest available, but their combination produces a system that outperforms the vast majority of tested hardware.

The ranking makes sense when considering the game’s release date (2016-05-12) and its age. Doom’s engine is well-optimized for high frame rates, and modern high-end GPUs can push it far beyond what was possible at launch. The 131st position out of 3712 combos means there are 130 other pairings that achieve higher average FPS, but those likely include newer top-tier CPUs (e.g., Ryzen 9 7950X3D or Core i9-14900KS) paired with the same or faster GPUs. For a mid-range CPU like the 7400F with a flagship GPU, this rank is respectable and indicates no CPU-induced bottleneck at any tested resolution.

The gap between this combo and the very top of the leaderboard is small in absolute terms. At 1080p Ultra, this combo hits 267 FPS; the top combos might reach 300+ FPS, but the difference is imperceptible on any current display. At 4K Ultra, 94 FPS is already far beyond the 60 FPS threshold, so the rank is more academic than practical. The combo’s percentile placement (83rd for CPU, 88th for GPU) suggests that both components are well above average, and their synergy is strong.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Doom at 4K Ultra settings above 60 FPS?

A: Yes. At 3840x2160 Ultra, the combo averages 94 FPS, which is 34 FPS above the 60 FPS playable threshold. The High preset averages 115 FPS, and Low averages 156 FPS.

Q: What is the best setting at 1440p for maximum visual quality while staying above 60 FPS?

A: The Ultra preset at 2560x1440 averages 173 FPS, making it the best visual setting that remains far above the 60 FPS threshold. All four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) are playable at this resolution.

Q: How does the Ryzen 5 7400F compare to its nearest CPU rivals in aggregate performance?

A: The 7400F’s average benchmark score of 32750 is 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i5-14600T, 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H, 0.3% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360, and 0.2% behind the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H. These are negligible differences for gaming.

Q: Is the RTX 4090’s performance close to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The RTX 4090’s average score of 60347 matches the Intel Arc Pro A60 (0% delta), trails the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 by 0.3%, trails the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M by 2.5%, and leads the AMD Radeon PRO V710 by 2.9%. The W6600M is the fastest of this group.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, Low averages 385 FPS, while Ultra averages 267 FPS — a difference of 118 FPS, or 44% higher performance from Low settings. Medium (367 FPS) and High (327 FPS) sit in between.

Q: Does the combo maintain 60 FPS at all resolutions and settings?

A: Yes. The lowest recorded average is 94 FPS at 4K Ultra. Every other combination of resolution and preset achieves at least 115 FPS average (4K High), with 1080p Low reaching 385 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its highest frame rates. Low settings produce an average of 385 FPS, Medium 367 FPS (min 312, max 422), High 327 FPS, and Ultra 267 FPS. The Medium preset’s min FPS of 312 is higher than the Ultra preset’s average, illustrating how much headroom remains at lower settings. The spread from Low to Ultra is 118 FPS, and even the most demanding preset stays well above any high-refresh display’s capability.

At 2560x1440, performance remains extremely high but scales down predictably. Low averages 287 FPS, Medium 250 FPS (min 213, max 288), High 211 FPS, and Ultra 173 FPS. The Medium min FPS (213) is nearly identical to the High average (211), showing that the Medium preset’s worst frames match the High preset’s typical frames. The gap between Low and Ultra is 114 FPS, similar to 1080p but at lower absolute values.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is fully taxed. Low averages 156 FPS, Medium 136 FPS (min 115, max 156), High 115 FPS, and Ultra 94 FPS. The Medium preset’s min FPS (115) exactly equals the High preset’s average (115), indicating that Medium’s worst-case frame rate is identical to High’s typical frame rate. The Ultra preset’s 94 FPS average is the only result below 100 FPS across all measurements. The spread between Low and Ultra is 62 FPS, less than half the spread at 1080p.

The data shows a consistent pattern: min FPS values are only recorded for Medium settings at each resolution, and they consistently hover near the next-higher preset’s average. This suggests that Medium is a stable middle ground, while Low and High presets show more variance without recorded minimums.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset is the best choice, averaging 267 FPS. This is 207 FPS above the 60 FPS threshold, meaning there is no reason to lower settings for playability. Even the most demanding preset delivers more than four times the required frame rate.

At 2560x1440, Ultra remains the best setting, averaging 173 FPS. This is 113 FPS above the threshold, leaving ample headroom for any display with a 144Hz or 165Hz refresh rate. Lowering to High (211 FPS) or Medium (250 FPS) would only be necessary for extreme refresh rates like 240Hz or 360Hz.

At 3840x2160, Ultra is still playable at 94 FPS average, which is 34 FPS above the 60 FPS threshold. This makes Ultra the best setting at 4K, though users targeting 120Hz displays would need to drop to High (115 FPS) or Medium (136 FPS) to stay above 120 FPS consistently. The High preset’s 115 FPS average is 21 FPS above the 4K Ultra result, while Medium’s 136 FPS provides a 42 FPS buffer over Ultra.

In all cases, the most demanding preset (Ultra) remains above 60 FPS, so the recommendation is straightforward: use Ultra at every resolution. The only caveat is for 120Hz+ 4K displays, where High or Medium would be preferable to maintain a consistent frame rate above the display’s refresh rate.