Doom

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 presents a striking imbalance in raw compute power versus gaming performance, particularly for a 2016 title like Doom. The benchmark data reveals that this combination produces extraordinary frame rates across all tested resolutions and settings, with the CPU acting as the primary constraint only at the lowest resolution. This analysis interprets the measured FPS data to clarify the role each component plays, breaks down performance by resolution, and identifies what the results imply for potential buyers.

FAQ

*Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo achieves in Doom?*

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 383.4 at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. Even the most demanding preset at this resolution, Ultra, maintains an average of 270.5 FPS.

Q: Does the RTX 4090 bottleneck the Ryzen 5 8400F at any resolution?

A: Yes, at 1920x1080 the data shows significant CPU limiting. The frame rate difference between Low (383.4 FPS) and Medium (366.6 FPS) is only 16.8 FPS, while the jump from 2560x1440 to 1920x1080 at Low settings yields just a 93.6 FPS increase, suggesting the CPU reaches its ceiling around 380 FPS.

*Q: Can this system run Doom at 60 FPS on Ultra settings at 4K?*

A: Absolutely. At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the average FPS is 95.3, which is 58.8% above the 60 FPS playable threshold. All four settings presets at 4K clear this threshold.

Q: How does the Ryzen 5 8400F compare to its nearest rival in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The CPU's average benchmark score is 25005, which places it 0.2% above the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F (24964) and 0.4% above the Intel Core i7-13620H (24911). It trails the AMD EPYC 9474F (25103) by 0.4%.

*Q: What is the combo's rank among all tested hardware combinations for Doom?*

A: This specific CPU-GPU pairing ranks 127th out of 3712 tested combos, placing it in the top 3.4% of all configurations tested for this game.

Q: Is the RTX 4090's performance close to any workstation GPUs?

A: In average benchmark scores, the RTX 4090 (60347) is essentially tied with the Intel Arc Pro A60 (60326, 0% delta) and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 (60140, 0.3% delta). The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M (61896) is 2.5% faster, while the AMD Radeon PRO V710 (58657) is 2.9% slower.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals a clear division of labor between the Ryzen 5 8400F and the RTX 4090, with the GPU dominating performance at higher resolutions and the CPU becoming the limiting factor at 1920x1080. At 3840x2160, the scaling between settings presets is pronounced: moving from Low (154.6 FPS) to Medium (137.4 FPS) costs 11.1% performance, and the drop from Medium to High (116.5 FPS) is another 15.2%. The most demanding preset, Ultra, brings the average down to 95.3 FPS, a 38.4% reduction from Low. This substantial scaling indicates that the GPU is the primary driver of performance at 4K, as the workload shifts heavily onto the RTX 4090's 16384 shading units.

At 2560x1440, the pattern shifts slightly. The gap between Low (289.8 FPS) and Medium (248.6 FPS) narrows to 14.2%, while High (210.7 FPS) and Ultra (170.4 FPS) continue the downward trend. The RTX 4090 still holds sway, but the Ryzen 5 8400F's 6 cores and 12 threads begin to show their influence. The 170.4 FPS at Ultra is still 2.84 times the 60 FPS threshold, meaning the GPU has ample headroom to render frames faster than the CPU can feed it. The transition from 3840x2160 to 2560x1440 at the same settings shows a 78.7% increase for Low (154.6 to 289.8 FPS), which is less than the pixel count reduction would suggest, hinting at the first signs of CPU limitation.

The 1920x1080 results confirm the CPU bottleneck unequivocally. At Low settings, the average is 383.4 FPS, but the scaling between settings becomes compressed: Medium (366.6 FPS) is only 4.4% slower, High (329.4 FPS) is 14.1% slower, and Ultra (270.5 FPS) is 29.4% slower. The modest 93.6 FPS difference between 1440p Low and 1080p Low, despite a 77.8% reduction in pixel count, demonstrates that the Ryzen 5 8400F cannot push frames much beyond 380 FPS regardless of GPU headroom. The RTX 4090 is effectively idling at 1080p, waiting for the CPU to deliver draw calls. This makes the CPU the limiting factor at 1920x1080, while the GPU governs performance at 2560x1440 and 3840x2160.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the RTX 4090 flexes its muscle, but the Ryzen 5 8400F ensures no preset falls below playable levels. The Low preset delivers an average of 154.6 FPS, which drops to 137.4 FPS on Medium. High settings produce 116.5 FPS, and the Ultra preset, which maximizes visual fidelity, still maintains 95.3 FPS. Every single 4K configuration clears the 60 FPS threshold by a comfortable margin, with the lowest result being 58.8% above the playable line.

Moving to 2560x1440, the numbers climb substantially. Low settings hit 289.8 FPS, while Medium reaches 248.6 FPS. High settings average 210.7 FPS, and Ultra runs at 170.4 FPS. The performance gap between 4K Ultra and 1440p Ultra is 75.1 FPS, a 78.8% improvement from the higher resolution. At this resolution, even the most demanding preset operates at nearly three times the playable threshold, indicating that the system has massive headroom for future titles or higher refresh rate displays.

At 1920x1080, the results are staggering but reveal the CPU ceiling. Low settings produce 383.4 FPS, and Medium is close behind at 366.6 FPS. High settings average 329.4 FPS, while Ultra drops to 270.5 FPS. The scaling from Medium to Low is just 16.8 FPS, and from High to Medium it is 37.2 FPS. The jump from 1440p Ultra (170.4 FPS) to 1080p Ultra (270.5 FPS) is 100.1 FPS, but the raw numbers suggest that the Ryzen 5 8400F's 4.70 GHz boost clock is the limiting factor, not the RTX 4090. The GPU could likely render more than 383.4 FPS if the CPU could keep up.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the Ryzen 5 8400F's average benchmark score of 25005 places it in a tight cluster of processors. The AMD Ryzen 5 7500F scores 24964, a mere 0.2% difference, meaning users would experience virtually identical performance in Doom at 1080p where the CPU is the bottleneck. The Intel Core i7-11850H (24935, 0.3% delta) and Intel Core i7-13620H (24911, 0.4% delta) are also effectively neck-and-neck. On the higher end, the AMD EPYC 9474F scores 25103, which is 0.4% faster, but this server-class chip would not be a practical choice for gaming. Any of these CPUs would deliver the same ~380 FPS ceiling at 1080p Low settings.

The GPU side shows an interesting anomaly: the RTX 4090's nearest rivals are all workstation or prosumer cards. The Intel Arc Pro A60 (60326) is exactly 0% different in average score, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 (60140) is 0.3% slower. The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M (61896) is 2.5% faster, and the AMD Radeon PRO V710 (58657) is 2.9% slower. In Doom, these cards would produce nearly identical frame rates at 4K and 1440p, where the GPU dominates. However, the RTX 4090's 24 GB of GDDR6X memory and 1.01 TB/s bandwidth provide a distinct advantage in other workloads, even if the benchmark scores are similar.

The Verdict

This system can run Doom with exceptional performance at every resolution and settings preset tested. The verdict data confirms that all four settings levels at 3840x2160 are playable, with the best settings being Ultra at an average of 95.3 FPS. At 2560x1440, Ultra settings deliver 170.4 FPS, and at 1920x1080, Ultra runs at 270.5 FPS. The 60 FPS playable threshold is cleared by a wide margin in every scenario, making this combo overkill for Doom even at 4K with maximum settings.

The implications are clear: users with a 60 Hz display at any resolution will never see a frame drop, and those with 144 Hz or 240 Hz monitors will be satisfied at 1440p and 1080p, respectively. At 4K, the 116.5 FPS average on High settings and 95.3 FPS on Ultra are well-suited for 120 Hz displays, though the 154.6 FPS on Low settings would strain a 165 Hz panel. The system's rank of 127th out of 3712 combos underscores its elite status, but for a game released in 2016, this configuration is dramatically overprovisioned.

How This Combo Ranks

The Ryzen 5 8400F + RTX 4090 combination holds the 127th position out of 3712 tested combos for Doom, placing it in the 96.6th percentile of all configurations. This ranking reflects the GPU's overwhelming power, as the RTX 4090 sits in the 88th percentile among all GPUs tested, while the Ryzen 5 8400F is in the 77th percentile among CPUs. The discrepancy between the component percentiles and the combo's overall rank suggests that the GPU's strength more than compensates for the CPU's mid-range positioning.

The high ranking is unsurprising given the measured frame rates, but the data implies that the CPU prevents this combo from reaching even higher positions. A faster CPU, such as one with a higher single-thread score than the 8400F's 951 in 3dmark_single_thread, could potentially push the 1080p results beyond 383.4 FPS. However, the 127th rank out of 3712 still places this system firmly in the top tier, and the performance headroom at 4K means the GPU is doing the heavy lifting. For Doom specifically, this ranking is more than sufficient, as the game's age and optimization mean that even mid-range hardware can achieve playable results.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, which averages 95.3 FPS. This is the recommended setting for 4K, as it provides the highest visual quality while maintaining a 58.8% buffer above the playable threshold. High settings at 116.5 FPS are suitable for 120 Hz displays, and Medium at 137.4 FPS would work for 144 Hz panels, but Ultra offers the best balance of fidelity and performance.

For 2560x1440, Ultra is again the best choice, delivering 170.4 FPS. This result clears the 60 FPS threshold by 110.4 FPS and is ideal for 144 Hz or even 165 Hz monitors. High (210.7 FPS) and Medium (248.6 FPS) provide additional headroom for competitive play, but the visual gains from Ultra are worth the 40.3 FPS drop from High. At this resolution, the system is not CPU-bound, so the RTX 4090's full capabilities are on display.

At 1920x1080, Ultra settings run at 270.5 FPS, which is the most demanding preset that remains above 60 FPS. This is the optimal configuration for 1080p, as it provides the best visual quality without any performance concerns. The 329.4 FPS on High and 366.6 FPS on Medium are available for users with 360 Hz monitors, but Ultra's 270.5 FPS still exceeds the refresh rate of all but the most extreme displays. The data shows that the CPU bottleneck at 1080p prevents the GPU from fully stretching its legs, but the result remains far beyond what any current display can showcase.