Doom

The AMD Ryzen 5 4600G paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT delivers a remarkably consistent experience in Doom, with frame rates that scale predictably across resolutions and settings. The data shows a combo that is clearly GPU-bound at higher resolutions, while the CPU’s six Zen 2 cores provide ample headroom for the game’s demanding action sequences. This analysis breaks down the measured performance, contextualizes it against other tested combinations, and explains the specific roles of the processor and graphics card in producing these results.

Resolution Scaling

The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is steep but linear, revealing a classic GPU-limited scenario. At 1080p with Ultra settings, the combo averages 120 FPS. Moving to 1440p Ultra drops that to 78 FPS, a 35% reduction, and then to 4K Ultra, the average falls to 42 FPS, which is a 46% reduction from the 1440p figure and a 65% reduction from the 1080p baseline. This scaling pattern indicates that the RX 6650 XT’s rendering throughput is the primary constraint as pixel count increases.

The gap between settings narrows at higher resolutions, which further confirms the GPU-bound nature of the workload. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 80 FPS (200 vs. 120). At 1440p, that spread tightens to 51 FPS (129 vs. 78). At 4K, the gap is just 28 FPS (70 vs. 42). This compression occurs because the CPU can easily feed the GPU at lower resolutions, but at 4K, the GPU’s pixel and texture processing limits become the bottleneck, reducing the impact of CPU-driven settings changes.

The 4K Medium setting provides a useful data point with its min/max range of 52-70 FPS. This 18 FPS variance indicates that even at a moderate preset, the GPU is working near its limit, with occasional dips that could be noticeable on a high-refresh-rate 4K panel. In contrast, the 1080p Medium setting shows a min/max of 148-200 FPS, a 52 FPS variance that suggests the frame pacing is less stressed, as the GPU has more headroom to handle transient spikes in scene complexity.

Looking at the raw scaling efficiency, the jump from 1080p to 1440p at High settings yields a 35% FPS reduction (147 to 95). The jump from 1440p to 4K at High settings yields a 46% reduction (95 to 51). This accelerating decline is typical for a GPU with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and a 128-bit bus, as memory bandwidth and fill rate become increasingly taxed at 4K. The data shows that 1440p is the effective ceiling for maintaining smooth performance above 60 FPS across all settings, while 4K is only viable at Low or Medium settings for a playable experience.

Settings Recommendations

For players targeting 60 FPS as a baseline, the data clearly indicates that 4K is only viable at Low settings, where the average is 70 FPS. The Medium preset at 4K drops to 61 FPS, which is still above 60 but leaves little margin for demanding scenes, given the 52 FPS minimum recorded. Ultra at 4K falls to 42 FPS, which is not recommended for smooth gameplay. For 1440p, the High preset at 95 FPS offers the best balance of visual fidelity and performance, while Medium at 113 FPS provides additional headroom. The Ultra preset at 78 FPS is also playable, but it sacrifices 17 FPS compared to High without a proportional visual gain in most fast-paced scenarios.

At 1080p, the story is different. The Ultra preset at 120 FPS is fully playable and provides the highest visual quality without compromising the 60 FPS target. However, the data shows that High at 147 FPS and Medium at 174 FPS offer substantial FPS headroom, which is valuable for players with 144 Hz or 165 Hz monitors. The Low preset at 200 FPS exceeds the refresh rate of most displays and is only useful for competitive play where every frame matters. Given that the game is a fast-paced FPS, the recommendation is to prioritize frame rate over minor visual details.

The Medium preset’s min/max data points are the most informative for settings decisions. At 1080p Medium, the 148 FPS minimum ensures that there are no prolonged drops below the 144 Hz threshold. At 1440p Medium, the 96 FPS minimum stays above 90 FPS, which is acceptable for most VRR displays. At 4K Medium, the 52 FPS minimum dips below 60, suggesting that players should avoid this combination unless they are willing to accept occasional stutter. Based on the measured rows, the optimal experience is 1440p High for a balance of quality and speed, or 1080p Ultra for maximum visual fidelity without sacrificing smoothness.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo of the Ryzen 5 4600G and RX 6650 XT ranks 2418 out of 3712 tested combinations in Doom, placing it in the 35th percentile of all combos. This ranking is somewhat surprising given the individual component performance. The GPU sits in the 65th percentile of all GPUs, and the CPU is in the 71st percentile of all CPUs, yet their pairing in this specific game produces a below-average result relative to the full database of tested combos. This suggests that Doom’s engine is less sensitive to the strengths of this particular pairing, or that many other combos in the database feature higher-end components that excel in this title.

The ranking indicates that while this combo is capable of running Doom well, it is not a standout performer compared to the broader field. The data shows that the combo is roughly 35% worse than the median combo in the database, which is a significant gap. However, it is important to note that the database includes many high-end systems with much more expensive components. Within the context of mainstream hardware, this combo delivers solid performance, but it does not punch above its weight class in this particular game.

The nearest rivals for the CPU show that the Ryzen 5 4600G is closely matched with several other processors. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE is 0.1% behind, while the Intel Core 7 150U is 0.6% ahead. This indicates that the CPU is performing exactly as expected for its class. Similarly, the GPU’s nearest rivals, such as the NVIDIA Tesla K40m (0.6% behind) and the AMD FirePro W7000 (0.7% behind), show that the RX 6650 XT is also performing within its expected range. The combo’s low rank is therefore not a result of either component underperforming, but rather a reflection of the game’s performance characteristics and the competitive nature of the benchmark database.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its highest frame rates. The Low preset averages 200 FPS, which is the maximum recorded in the dataset. The Medium preset averages 174 FPS with a minimum of 148 and a maximum of 200. The High preset averages 147 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 120 FPS. This 80 FPS spread between Low and Ultra demonstrates that the GPU has significant headroom at 1080p, and the CPU is not a limiting factor at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the performance scales down proportionally. The Low preset averages 129 FPS, the Medium preset averages 113 FPS with a range of 96-129, the High preset averages 95 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 78 FPS. The 51 FPS spread between Low and Ultra is smaller than at 1080p, indicating that the GPU is starting to become the primary constraint. The Medium preset’s 96 FPS minimum is still well above 60 FPS, making 1440p a viable resolution for all settings.

At 3840x2160, the performance drops significantly. The Low preset averages 70 FPS, the Medium preset averages 61 FPS with a range of 52-70, the High preset averages 51 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 42 FPS. The 28 FPS spread between Low and Ultra is the narrowest of all resolutions, confirming that the GPU is heavily taxed at 4K. The Medium preset’s 52 FPS minimum is below the 60 FPS target, making it a marginal choice. The Ultra preset at 42 FPS is not recommended for smooth gameplay, and even the High preset at 51 FPS will struggle in intense combat scenes.

The data shows a consistent pattern: each step up in settings costs approximately 20-30 FPS at 1080p, 15-20 FPS at 1440p, and 8-10 FPS at 4K. This diminishing impact of settings at higher resolutions is a clear sign of a GPU bottleneck. The 4K Ultra result of 42 FPS is the lowest measured score, and it is the only setting/resolution combination that falls below 50 FPS, indicating that this combo should not be used for 4K gaming with maximum settings.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT is the dominant factor in this combo’s Doom performance. With 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, the GPU has a memory bandwidth of 280.3 GB/s. This bandwidth is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p but becomes a limiting factor at 4K, where the higher pixel count demands more memory throughput. The GPU’s 2048 shading units and 64 ROPs provide a pixel rate of 168.6 GPixel/s, which explains why the frame rate drops so steeply at 4K. The texture rate of 337.3 GTexel/s is also a bottleneck at higher resolutions, as the game’s detailed textures require significant fill rate.

The GPU’s clock speeds are noteworthy. The base clock is 2055 MHz, with a game clock of 2410 MHz and a boost clock of 2635 MHz. This boost behavior means the GPU can dynamically increase its clock speed under load, which is evident in the 1080p results where the GPU is not fully saturated. The memory clock runs at 2190 MHz, or 17.5 Gbps effective, which provides the 280.3 GB/s bandwidth. The RDNA 2.0 architecture with 32 ray accelerators does not appear to be a significant factor in this game, as Doom does not heavily utilize ray tracing, but the raw rasterization performance is clearly the key driver.

The GPU’s benchmark scores confirm its mid-range positioning. The Passmark G3D score of 17166 and the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1859 place it in the 65th percentile of all GPUs. In Doom, the GPU’s performance is exactly what these scores suggest: capable at 1080p and 1440p, but struggling at 4K. The 4K Low result of 70 FPS shows that the GPU can hit playable frame rates when the workload is reduced, but the 4K Ultra result of 42 FPS demonstrates the limits of its 8 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory interface. The GPU’s nearest rivals, such as the NVIDIA Tesla K40m and AMD FirePro W7000, are professional workstation cards that perform similarly in synthetic benchmarks, but the RX 6650 XT’s gaming-specific optimizations are what allow it to achieve these Doom results.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 4600G plays a supporting role in this combo, and the data shows that it is not a bottleneck in Doom. With 6 cores and 12 threads based on the Zen 2 architecture, the CPU provides sufficient processing power for the game’s engine. The base clock of 3.70 GHz and boost clock of 4.20 GHz are modest, but the CPU’s single-thread performance is adequate for Doom’s primary game logic. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1919 and multi-core score of 13593 indicate that the CPU is well-suited for gaming workloads, where single-thread performance is often more critical.

The CPU’s 8 MB of shared L3 cache is smaller than some newer processors, but it does not appear to hinder Doom’s performance. The 3DMark single-thread score of 726 and 2-thread score of 1430 show that the CPU can handle the game’s main thread without issue. The Passmark single-thread score of 2653 is respectable, and the data suggests that the CPU can feed the GPU at all resolutions tested. The 1080p Low result of 200 FPS is likely near the CPU’s limit, but at higher resolutions, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, and the CPU has ample headroom.

The CPU’s integrated Radeon Vega 7 graphics are not relevant for this discrete GPU setup, but the CPU’s PCIe Gen 3 interface with 20 lanes is sufficient for the RX 6650 XT, which uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 connection. The CPU’s dual-channel memory support with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth is standard for its class and does not create a bottleneck in this game. The CPU’s nearest rivals, such as the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE (0.1% behind) and the Intel Core i3-14100T (0.8% behind), show that the 4600G is performing at the expected level for its price point. In Doom, the CPU is not the star of the show, but it provides a stable foundation for the GPU to deliver its measured frame rates.