Doom

Settings Recommendations

For this combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 3600 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER running Doom, the measured data reveals a clear hierarchy across the four available presets. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers a 148 FPS average, which is the highest recorded figure for this combo at any resolution. However, the Medium preset still produces 129 FPS average while providing materially better visual quality, and its recorded minimum of 110 FPS indicates that even the worst-case frame pacing remains comfortably above typical 60 Hz display refresh rates. The High preset at 109 FPS average is also viable, but the step from Medium to High costs 20 FPS for what is a modest visual uplift in this title. The Ultra preset drops to 89 FPS average, which is a significant 31% reduction from the Medium preset's frame rate.

The optimal experience per the measured rows is the Medium preset at 1920x1080. This configuration balances the 129 FPS average against the 110 FPS minimum, ensuring that the game remains fluid during intense combat sequences. The gap between the Low preset's 148 FPS and Medium's 129 FPS is only 19 FPS, but the visual fidelity gains from Medium are substantial in Doom's fast-paced environments where texture detail and lighting effects matter. At 2560x1440, the Medium preset again appears to be the sweet spot, producing an 83 FPS average with a 71 FPS minimum. This remains playable on standard 60 Hz panels, though the margin narrows considerably compared to the 1080p result. The High preset at 1440p yields 70 FPS average, which is still acceptable but leaves less headroom for demanding scenes.

For users with 3840x2160 displays, the situation becomes more constrained. The Medium preset produces a 45 FPS average with a 38 FPS minimum, which falls below the 60 FPS threshold that most competitive players prefer. The Low preset at 52 FPS average is the only 4K configuration that approaches fluid gameplay, though it still cannot sustain a locked 60 FPS. Given the measured data, the straightforward recommendation is Medium at 1080p for the best combination of visual quality and frame rate stability. Users prioritizing maximum refresh rate should select Low at 1080p, while those with 1440p displays should accept Medium as the balanced choice.

GPU Role

The GTX 1660 SUPER is built on the Turing architecture using the TU116 chip, manufactured on a 12 nm process at TSMC. The GPU contains 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing 336.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth. Its clock configuration starts at a 1530 MHz base and boosts to 1785 MHz, with memory running at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The shader configuration includes 1408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 48 raster output pipelines. These specifications produce a pixel rate of 85.68 GPixel/s, a texture rate of 157.1 GTexel/s, and 5.027 TFLOPS of FP32 compute performance.

In Doom, the GPU's role is heavily influenced by resolution scaling. The measured FPS data shows that this card is the primary limiting component at higher resolutions. At 4K, even the Low preset only achieves 52 FPS average, and the Ultra preset falls to 31 FPS average. This behavior is consistent with a GPU that has sufficient memory capacity (6 GB is ample for Doom's textures at 1080p and 1440p) but lacks the raw fill rate and compute throughput to sustain high frame rates at 4K. The 336.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is adequate for the game's asset streaming at lower resolutions, but the 192-bit bus width becomes a constraint when pixel throughput demands increase at 4K.

The GPU's benchmark scores place it in the 53rd percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 12986. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (0.4% ahead), the AMD Radeon RX 580 (0.4% ahead), and the AMD Radeon 740M (0.9% behind). This positioning indicates that the GTX 1660 SUPER sits in the middle of the performance curve, capable of handling esports titles like Doom at high frame rates in 1080p but not designed for 4K gaming at maximum settings. The measured FPS data confirms this: the card delivers 148 FPS at 1080p Low but only 31 FPS at 4K Ultra, a clear demonstration of its resolution-dependent performance envelope.

FAQ

Q: What is the best preset to use with this combo at 1080p?

A: The Medium preset provides the best balance, delivering a 129 FPS average with a 110 FPS minimum. This maintains fluid gameplay while offering better visual quality than Low, which achieves 148 FPS but with reduced detail.

Q: Can this combo handle 4K gaming in Doom?

A: The measured data shows that 4K gameplay is marginal. The Low preset achieves 52 FPS average, Medium drops to 45 FPS average, and Ultra falls to 31 FPS average. None of these configurations reach the 60 FPS threshold for smooth play.

Q: How does the GTX 1660 SUPER compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score of 12986 places it just 0.4% behind the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile and RX 580, while it sits 0.9% ahead of the Radeon 740M. This indicates near-parity with those competing products.

Q: Is the 6 GB VRAM sufficient for Doom?

A: The 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus appears sufficient for this title, as the measured FPS data does not indicate VRAM-related performance cliffs. The bottleneck at 4K is more likely related to compute throughput and fill rate rather than memory capacity.

Q: What frame rate can users expect at 1440p with this combo?

A: At 2560x1440, the Medium preset produces an 83 FPS average with a 71 FPS minimum. The High preset achieves 70 FPS average, and Low reaches 96 FPS average. These figures are playable but require accepting Medium settings for stable performance.

Q: How does the CPU's performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Ryzen 5 3600 has an average benchmark score of 17035, placing it 0.2% ahead of the Core i7-1260P and EPYC 7742, while sitting 0.2% behind the Core i5-11400 and EPYC 7573X. This puts it in the 71st percentile among all CPUs.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data for this combo covers three resolutions and four quality presets. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers the highest average at 148 FPS. The Medium preset produces 129 FPS average with a minimum of 110 FPS and maximum of 148 FPS. The High preset achieves 109 FPS average, while Ultra drops to 89 FPS average. This progression shows a consistent degradation of approximately 19-20 FPS per preset step from Low to Medium, then Medium to High, and finally High to Ultra.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset reaches 96 FPS average. The Medium preset produces 83 FPS average with a minimum of 71 FPS and maximum of 96 FPS. High achieves 70 FPS average, and Ultra falls to 58 FPS average. The step from Low to Medium costs 13 FPS, Medium to High costs another 13 FPS, and High to Ultra costs 12 FPS. This indicates a relatively even performance distribution across presets at this resolution, with each step consuming roughly the same performance budget.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset achieves 52 FPS average. Medium produces 45 FPS average with a minimum of 38 FPS and maximum of 52 FPS. High reaches 38 FPS average, and Ultra drops to 31 FPS average. The performance deltas here are 7 FPS from Low to Medium, 7 FPS from Medium to High, and 7 FPS from High to Ultra. This uniform step pattern at 4K suggests the GPU is consistently bandwidth or fill-rate limited across all presets, with each quality reduction yielding the same absolute performance gain.

The most notable observation from the breakdown is the minimum FPS data. Only the Medium preset at each resolution includes recorded minimum values (110 at 1080p, 71 at 1440p, 38 at 4K). These minimums are consistently 13-15% below the average FPS, indicating that Doom's engine maintains relatively stable frame pacing when using the Medium preset. The maximum FPS values for Medium match the Low preset averages at each resolution, suggesting that Medium's ceiling is equivalent to Low's average performance.

Resolution Scaling

The resolution scaling behavior of this combo reveals important insights about the limiting component. Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 at Medium settings, the average FPS drops from 129 to 83, a 35.7% reduction. Moving from 2560x1440 to 3840x2160, the average drops from 83 to 45, a 45.8% reduction. The total scaling from 1080p to 4K at Medium is a 65.1% FPS decrease, from 129 down to 45.

This scaling pattern is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario. The pixel count increases by 77.8% from 1080p to 1440p, and the FPS drops by 35.7%. From 1440p to 4K, the pixel count increases by 125%, and FPS drops by 45.8%. The FPS reduction is proportionally less than the pixel increase at each step, which indicates that the GPU is not purely fill-rate limited but also involves other bottlenecks such as memory latency or shader complexity.

At Low settings, the scaling is similar: 148 FPS at 1080p drops to 96 FPS at 1440p (35.1% reduction), then to 52 FPS at 4K (45.8% reduction from 1440p). The consistency of these percentages across presets suggests that the limiting component remains the same regardless of quality settings. The CPU, with its 6 cores and 12 threads running at 3.60 GHz base and 4.20 GHz boost, is not the bottleneck at any resolution. Evidence for this comes from the fact that even at 1080p Low, where the GPU load is lowest, the FPS reaches 148 but does not scale to extreme values that would indicate CPU limitation.

The data indicates that the GTX 1660 SUPER is the primary constraint at all measured resolutions. The GPU's 5.027 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 85.68 GPixel/s pixel rate define the upper bound for frame generation. As resolution increases, the pixel throughput demand grows faster than the GPU's ability to process it, resulting in the observed FPS degradation. The CPU's capabilities, including its 32 MB shared L3 cache and 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth, are sufficient to feed the GPU without becoming a limiting factor in this title.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 3600 is a 6-core, 12-thread processor from the 3000 series, based on the Zen 2 architecture with the Matisse codename. It operates at a 3.60 GHz base clock and 4.20 GHz boost clock, with a 65 W TDP. The processor is manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC, containing 3,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die. Its cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is DDR4 via a dual-channel interface with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth.

In Doom, the CPU's role appears secondary to the GPU based on the measured FPS data. The game's engine is well-optimized for multi-threaded processing, and the Ryzen 5 3600's 12 threads provide ample headroom. The CPU's benchmark results support this interpretation: its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 15045 and single-core score of 2124 indicate strong per-thread performance, while the PassMark multithread score of 17700 confirms solid multi-threading capability. The 3DMark scores show scaling from 1361 in 2-thread tests to 4603 in max-thread tests, demonstrating that the processor efficiently utilizes additional threads.

The CPU's average benchmark score of 17035 places it in the 71st percentile among all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-1260P (0.2% ahead), Intel Core i5-11400 (0.2% behind), AMD EPYC 7573X (0.2% behind), and AMD EPYC 7742 (0.2% ahead). This tight clustering indicates that the Ryzen 5 3600 sits at a performance parity point with several competing architectures, which is consistent with its role in this combo.

The absence of CPU-bound behavior in the measured data is notable. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 148 FPS, which is not an extreme value that would expose CPU limitations. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS would plateau at a similar value regardless of resolution or settings. Instead, the data shows consistent FPS scaling with resolution changes, confirming that the GPU is the performance limiter. The CPU's 4.20 GHz boost clock and 32 MB L3 cache provide sufficient single-thread performance for Doom's game logic and physics, while the 12 threads handle background tasks without interfering with frame rendering.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo of AMD Ryzen 5 3600 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER ranks 3168 out of 3712 tested combinations in Doom. This places it in the lower portion of the distribution, at approximately the 15th percentile from the bottom (or 85th percentile from the top). This ranking reflects the GPU's mid-tier position (53rd percentile among all GPUs) combined with the CPU's above-average position (71st percentile among all CPUs). The disparity between CPU and GPU percentiles suggests that the combo's overall ranking is dragged down by the GPU's performance ceiling.

The rank of 3168 out of 3712 indicates that the vast majority of tested combos outperform this configuration in Doom. This is expected given the GTX 1660 SUPER's position relative to modern GPUs. The GPU's nearest rivals include the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (0.4% faster) and RX 580 (0.4% faster), both of which are also mid-range parts. The fact that the GPU sits only slightly above the 50th percentile means that many combos with higher-tier GPUs will naturally achieve better frame rates in this title.

However, the ranking should be interpreted in context. Doom is a well-optimized game that runs well on modest hardware, as evidenced by the measured frame rates. Even at 1440p Medium, this combo achieves 83 FPS, which is playable. The ranking of 3168 out of 3712 reflects the absolute performance hierarchy, but the actual gameplay experience remains satisfactory for many users. The combo's position is consistent with its component choices: a capable mid-range CPU paired with a mid-range GPU from the previous generation, resulting in a balanced system that handles 1080p gaming with ease and 1440p gaming with reasonable settings adjustments.

The data suggests that the combo rank is primarily determined by the GPU. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the rank would likely be higher relative to the component positions. Instead, the CPU's 71st percentile ranking is masked by the GPU's 53rd percentile ranking, pulling the overall combo down. This is typical for gaming systems where the GPU dominates frame rate performance. The measured FPS data confirms this dynamic, showing that resolution scaling has a more pronounced effect on performance than any CPU-related variable.