Doom

This combo pairs the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080, targeting Doom (2016). The data shows a system that is overwhelmingly capable at every tested setting, with performance headroom that keeps even the most demanding preset well above playable thresholds.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination ranks 215th out of 3,712 tested combos for Doom, placing it in the top 5.8% of all systems evaluated. This is a strong result, though not an absolute top-tier placement, which reflects the fact that Doom is an older title that does not scale indefinitely with modern flagship hardware. The rank is driven by the CPU’s 96th percentile standing among all processors (average benchmark score of 84,003) and the GPU’s 86th percentile among all graphics cards (average benchmark score of 54,247).

In practical terms, the combo sits in the upper echelon of systems, but the percentile gap between CPU and GPU suggests the processor is the stronger component relative to its peers. The CPU’s nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, scores an average of 83,807, a 0.2% difference, meaning the 290K Plus holds only a marginal edge. On the GPU side, the RTX 4080 is nearly identical to the RTX 4080 SUPER (54,209 average score, 0.1% delta), so swapping between those two cards would produce virtually indistinguishable frame rates in this game.

The rank also reflects the game’s engine efficiency. Doom’s id Tech 6 engine is known for scaling well across cores, and the 290K Plus with its 24 cores and 24 threads provides ample parallel throughput. However, the frame rates achieved at 1080p suggest the CPU is not the bottleneck at any resolution, as the GPU still delivers 401 FPS at Low settings and 241 FPS at Ultra.

Best Settings per Resolution

The data records measured FPS for four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) at three resolutions. The "best settings" criterion here is the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS average. All presets at all resolutions clear this threshold, so the best setting is always Ultra.

• 3840x2160 (4K): Ultra runs at 85 FPS average. This is the most demanding configuration in the test set, but it remains comfortably above the 60 FPS playable threshold. High runs at 104 FPS, Medium at 123 FPS, and Low at 141 FPS.
• 2560x1440 (1440p): Ultra delivers 156 FPS average. High reaches 191 FPS, Medium 226 FPS, and Low 260 FPS. At this resolution, the system has enough headroom to drive high-refresh-rate monitors (144Hz or 165Hz) even on the highest preset.
• 1920x1080 (1080p): Ultra averages 241 FPS. High hits 295 FPS, Medium 350 FPS, and Low 401 FPS. This is firmly in esports territory, where the limiting factor becomes the display’s refresh rate rather than the hardware.

For all three resolutions, the recommendation is unambiguous: run Ultra. The minimum recorded FPS values (where available) support this: at 4K Medium the min is 104 FPS, at 1440p Medium it is 192 FPS, and at 1080p Medium it is 297 FPS. No preset dips below 85 FPS average in any test, so there is no reason to compromise visuals for performance.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark data reveals a clear pattern: the GPU becomes more influential as resolution increases, while the CPU’s role is most visible at lower resolutions where frame rates are extremely high.

At 1080p, the gap between Low (401 FPS) and Ultra (241 FPS) is 160 FPS, a 66% reduction in frame rate when moving to the highest preset. This large delta indicates that the GPU is doing more work per frame, but the CPU is still capable of feeding it at these extreme rates. The fact that Low settings produce 401 FPS suggests the CPU is not a limiting factor even at these high frame rates, as the bottleneck would typically show as a plateau regardless of settings.

At 1440p, the scaling is similar but slightly compressed: Low (260 FPS) to Ultra (156 FPS) is a 104 FPS drop (40% reduction). The average FPS at every preset is lower than the 1080p equivalent, which is expected due to the increased pixel count. The GPU is now doing more work per frame, but the CPU still has headroom.

At 4K, the scaling tightens further: Low (141 FPS) to Ultra (85 FPS) is a 56 FPS drop (40% reduction). The absolute frame rates are much lower than at 1080p, confirming that the GPU is the primary driver of performance at this resolution. The CPU’s role diminishes because the GPU takes longer to render each frame, giving the processor more time to prepare the next one.

Comparing resolutions at the same preset shows the GPU scaling: at Ultra, 4K (85 FPS) is 45% slower than 1440p (156 FPS), and 1440p is 35% slower than 1080p (241 FPS). This non-linear scaling is typical for a game that is largely GPU-bound at higher resolutions, and it suggests that the RTX 4080’s 16 GB of GDDR6X memory and 716.8 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient to handle 4K textures without issue.

The CPU’s benchmark scores support the notion that it is not the bottleneck: the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51,731 and single-core score of 7,303 are both strong, and the PassMark multi-thread score of 60,860 indicates excellent parallel performance. In Doom, which can utilize multiple threads, the 290K Plus’s 24 threads provide more than enough headroom at all tested settings.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the nearest rivals in the benchmark database are all within 1.3% of the 290K Plus’s average score of 84,003. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K is the closest match with a 0.2% delta (average score 83,807), meaning it would produce virtually identical frame rates in Doom. The AMD EPYC 4584PX (83,090, 1.1% delta) and AMD EPYC 9135 (82,980, 1.2% delta) are also close, though these are server-class parts. The AMD EPYC 7F72 scores 85,072, which is 1.3% higher, so it would be marginally faster in CPU-bound scenarios, but in Doom the GPU is the limiting factor at 4K, so this difference would not manifest.

For the GPU, the RTX 4080’s nearest rival is the RTX 4080 SUPER with an average score of 54,209 and a 0.1% delta. This means the two cards are effectively interchangeable in Doom, with a difference of less than one frame per second at any settings. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X (54,828, -1.1% delta) and AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB (55,698, -2.6% delta) are also nearby, but the RX 6750 GRE’s 2.6% higher score suggests it would be slightly faster in GPU-bound scenarios. However, given that the RTX 4080 already delivers 85 FPS at 4K Ultra, this small delta would not change the playability verdict.

In practice, a system with a Core Ultra 9 285K instead of the 290K Plus would perform within the margin of error in Doom. Similarly, swapping the RTX 4080 for a 4080 SUPER would yield no observable difference. The data indicates that this combo is part of a cluster of high-end parts that all deliver similar results in this title, and the choice between them comes down to other workloads rather than Doom performance.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table presents the exact average FPS values recorded for each resolution and settings combination. Minimum and maximum FPS were only recorded for Medium settings; those values are listed where available.

| Resolution | Settings | Avg FPS | Min FPS | Max FPS |

|------------|----------|---------|---------|---------|

| 3840x2160 | Low | 141 | — | — |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 123 | 104 | 141 |

| 3840x2160 | High | 104 | — | — |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 85 | — | — |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 260 | — | — |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 226 | 192 | 260 |

| 2560x1440 | High | 191 | — | — |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 156 | — | — |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 401 | — | — |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 350 | 297 | 402 |

| 1920x1080 | High | 295 | — | — |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 241 | — | — |

The Medium preset data is the most complete, showing that even the minimum FPS at 4K (104 FPS) is well above the playable threshold. At 1080p Medium, the minimum of 297 FPS and maximum of 402 FPS show tight frame pacing, with the average of 350 FPS indicating consistent performance. The spread between min and max FPS grows with resolution: at 4K Medium the range is 37 FPS (104 to 141), at 1440p it is 68 FPS (192 to 260), and at 1080p it is 105 FPS (297 to 402). This increasing variance at lower resolutions is typical, as the CPU has more headroom to produce frames in bursts while the GPU works faster.

The Verdict

This PC can absolutely run Doom, and it does so with exceptional headroom at every resolution and preset tested. The verdict by resolution is clear:

• 3840x2160: Ultra is playable at 85 FPS average. The minimum recorded FPS at Medium is 104 FPS, and given the average at Ultra is 85 FPS, it is reasonable to expect the minimum to stay above 60 FPS (though this specific value was not recorded). All four presets clear the 60 FPS threshold.
• 2560x1440: Ultra runs at 156 FPS average. This is more than double the playable threshold, and the minimum at Medium is 192 FPS. Every preset exceeds 60 FPS by a wide margin.
• 1920x1080: Ultra averages 241 FPS. The minimum at Medium is 297 FPS, which is nearly five times the playable threshold. All presets are well above 60 FPS.

The data shows that the system never dips below 85 FPS average even at the most demanding setting (4K Ultra). For a game with a 60 FPS playable threshold, this combo offers substantial performance reserves. At 1440p and 1080p, the frame rates are high enough to support high-refresh-rate displays (144Hz or 240Hz) without sacrificing visual quality. The only scenario where this hardware might be considered overkill is 1080p, where even Ultra settings produce frame rates that exceed most monitors’ refresh rates.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Doom at 4K with maximum settings?

A: Yes. At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the combo averages 85 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS playable threshold. All four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) at 4K are playable, with averages ranging from 85 FPS (Ultra) to 141 FPS (Low).

Q: What is the best settings preset for 1440p?

A: Ultra is the best choice. At 2560x1440, Ultra delivers 156 FPS average, which is well above 60 FPS. The other presets are faster (Low at 260 FPS, Medium at 226 FPS, High at 191 FPS), but since Ultra already provides a high frame rate, there is no reason to lower settings.

Q: How does the RTX 4080 compare to the RTX 4080 SUPER in this game?

A: The two GPUs are effectively identical. The RTX 4080 has an average benchmark score of 54,247, while the RTX 4080 SUPER scores 54,209, a difference of 0.1%. In Doom, this translates to a negligible frame rate difference, likely less than one FPS at any settings.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in Doom at 4K?

A: The GPU is the primary bottleneck at 4K. The data shows that frame rates drop significantly from 1440p to 4K (e.g., Ultra from 156 FPS to 85 FPS), while the CPU remains capable of higher throughput. The CPU’s 24 threads and strong multi-core scores (e.g., Cinebench R23 multi-core 51,731) are more than sufficient for this game’s engine.

Q: What frame rates can I expect at 1080p with High settings?

A: High settings at 1920x1080 average 295 FPS. This is well above the 60 FPS threshold and is sufficient for even the fastest 240Hz monitors. Medium settings are slightly faster at 350 FPS, and Low reaches 401 FPS.

Q: Does this system ever drop below 60 FPS in Doom?

A: Based on the measured data, no. The lowest average FPS recorded is 85 FPS at 4K Ultra. The minimum FPS values that were recorded (at Medium settings) are 104 FPS at 4K, 192 FPS at 1440p, and 297 FPS at 1080p. All are well above 60 FPS.