Doom

This analysis covers Doom (released May 12, 2016) using an AMD Ryzen 5 4600G paired with an AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT. The measured FPS dataset spans three resolutions—1920×1080, 2560×1440, and 3840×2160—and four quality presets: Low, Medium, High, and Ultra. Average frame rates are reported for every combination, providing a clean view of how this specific CPU‑GPU pair scales with load.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Radeon RX 7900 XT is a large dual‑slot GPU built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 31 chip. It carries 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 320‑bit bus, producing a maximum memory bandwidth of 800.0 GB/s. The memory operates at 2500 MHz (20 Gbps effective). The core clock profile lists a base of 1387 MHz, a game clock of 2025 MHz, and a boost clock of 2394 MHz. It contains 5376 shading units, 336 texture mapping units, and 192 ROPs, with a pixel rate of 459.6 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 804.4 GTexel/s.

In Doom, the GPU’s raw throughput is the deciding factor at high resolutions. At 3840×2160 on High, the card averages 87 FPS; on Low, it reaches 119 FPS. The difference between these two presets is 32 FPS, which points to fill‑rate pressure rather than memory bandwidth—since even 4K Low requires 4,096 pixels per line, and the 800 GB/s does not become a wall at these settings. The large VRAM (20 GB) is not taxed by Doom, but its capability also explains why the Ultra preset has only a moderate 71 FPS at 4K.

The boost clock matters more scores *, such as the 1920×1440 Medium run which hits 191 FPS, because the GPU can sustain high enough frequencies to saturate the RX ‑at 2394 MHz in short steering bursts. In truth, the GPU is underutilized at 1920×1080: even Ultra settings return 203 FPS, and Low reaches 277 FPS. The data shows that the 7900 XT is never the limiting component at 1080p; the CPU appears to cap the maximum frame rate in that territory.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Ryzen 5 4600G provides 6 physical cores with 12 threads, running at a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost of up to 4.20 GHz. It uses a 7‑nm Zen 2 (Renoir) design mounted to AMD Socket AM4, with 8 MB of shared L3 cache and a dual‑channel DDR4 memory interface delivering 51.2 GB/s. The CPU’s synthetic benchmark scores include: Cinebench R23 multi‑core 13593, single‑core 1919; Ge‑bench multi‑core 6637; and Passmark multi‑thread 15992. Aggregate, the 4600G holds a 71st percentile among all tested CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 17507.

Given 12 threads, Doom can use most of them, but the game still shows performance sensitivity to single‑thread speed. The data at 1920×1080 Low (277 FPS) and High (249 FPS) suggests that the CPU’s single‑core throughput is only partially enough for 275+ FPS. The single‑core Cinebench R23 score of 1919 is modest, and the 3.70 GHz base clock produces a ceiling. At 1080p, the variance between Low and High is just 28 FPS, whereas at 4K, the gap between Low and High grows to 32 FPS, meaning the CPU binds less as pixel load increases.

A subtle observation: At 1440p, the FPS drops from 191 (Medium) to 161 (High), while at 1080p it drops from 264 (Medium) to 249 (High)—these are 20‑31‑ish deltas. The CPU’s score, however, remains sufficient to feed the GPU even at 4K, where the 4K family sizes the GPU. The CPU is not the decisive element in this combo; the data credits the GPU for the high numbers at 1440p and 4K.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination’s in‑game rank is 811 out of 3,712 tested combinations, placing it it the 78.5th percentile of tested scoring—out of 3,712, a rank of 811 places it above 2,901 other mixes. As a point of reference, the CPU itself is in the 60th⁒ percentile of all CPUs (71), and the GPU at the 48th percentile of all GPUs (55) in the same dataset. It is not at the very top—ultra‑high‑end pairings such as twin‑7900XT SLI configs would beat it—but it reflects a very competent mid‑range CPU married to a high‑end GPU.

Seen through the nearest‑rival pairs, the CPU’s average score (17507) is within 0.1% of the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE, 0.6% lower than the AMD Ryzen 3 8300GE, and within 0.8% of the Intel Core i3‑14100T and 0.6% of the Intel Core 7 150U. This means the 4600G is not a performance outlier; it fits squarely among its direct competitors. For the GPU, the 7900 XT’s average score of 13745 is only 1.5% below the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT, and 0.5% below both the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile and the AMD Radeon 660M. The GPU is not overshadowed by its immediate rivals, but it is not a new‑generation standout. Still, the 811st rank confirms that the qualitative combination of a 6‑core Zen 2 and a high‑VRAM RX 7900 XT is enough to place the system ahead of the large majority of tested hardware pairs.

Resolution Scaling

The resolution scaling is evidenced by the average FPS figures crossing three resolutions. On the High preset, the values are: 1920×1080 – 249 FPS → 2560×1440 – 161 FPS → 3840×2160 – 87 FPS. That is a drop from 249 to 87 FPS, which is a ~66% reduction from base (not a given percentage, just observed). For the Medium row, the drop is 264 → 191 → 103. For Low, it is 277 → 219 → 119. For Ultra, it is 203 → 132 → 71.

The shape of the scaling is consistent—out of 1080p to 1440p the loss is roughly 44–62%, but the biggest loss happens from 1440p to 4K, which claims another ~34–47% of the leftover FPS. That means pixel count is the dominant variable. At 1080p, the 7900 XT is not saturated; the numbers are far above any realistic monitor frequency, limited positively by the CPU. At 4K, the GPU’s pixel count begins to be the limiting factor, and the average FPS settles well above 60.

Specifically, between 1080p Low (277) and 4K Low (119), the wall is 42.9% of the original value, reinforcing that the improvement margin changes dramatically with resolution. The CPU’s impact is most visible in the 277 FPS at 1070p Low – a value clearly above the usual display refresh rates. Because the GPU’s raw output declines only when polygons per pixel rise, the scaling pattern is a classic signature of GPU‑bound behavior at 4K, CPU‑bound at 1080p.

One notable point is the Medium preset’s numbers: at 1440p, Medium 191, High 161, Ultra 132. At 4K, Medium 103, High 87, Ultra 71. The spread between settings narrows slightly at 4K, but shifts remain broad, indicating that the 7900 XT’s memory bandwidth and shading threads are the primary arms.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to run Doom with this combo?

A: If you match the 7900 XT’s large VRAM and speed, 2560×1440 on Ultra yields 132 FPS, which is an excellent balance. At 4K, Ultra drops to 71 FPS, while High at 4K yields 87 FPS; both are above 60, so 1440p Ultra gives the most headroom.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck the GPU at 1080p?

A: Yes, likely. At 1920×1080 on Low, the average FPS is 277, but on Ultra it falls to 203 – a 74 FPS span within the same resolution. Because the GPU is wildly faster, the CPU’s 6-12 threads seem to limit at higher presets, though the game still runs at framerates above 200 FPS.

Q: How much of a difference does the Medium preset make compared to High?

A: Medium out‑r eats High. At 1080p, Medium averages 264 FPS, High 249 – a 15 FPS gain. At 1440p, Medium (191) is 30 FPS faster than High (161), and at 4K, Medium (103) is 16 FPS faster than High (87). So switching from High to Medium is a modest tuning step.

Q: Are there any sequence changes, such as presets being uncapped?

A: The Ultra preset is the heaviest, with 71 FPS at 4K, which is 74% of the Medium output at the same resolution. At 1080p, that gap compresses (208 vs 203 – a 3 FPS difference), indicating that Ultra’s extra settings penalize the higher resolutions.

Q: Is the RX 7900 XT a threat to handle 4K nicely?

A: The data shows 87 FPS at 4K High and 71 FPS at Ultra, which is clearly playable. Given this Doom’s age, and the GPU’s high memory/clock throughput is not the limit, 100 FPS is the baseline even at 4K Low.

Q: Should I prefer Low over High for competitive play?

A: At 1080p, Low yields 277 FPS versus High’s 249, a 28 FPS advantage. At 1440p, the gain is from 161 to 219 FPS. If you have a 144 Hz monitor, the difference is irrelevant outside of hardcore, but the CPU that holds the 4600G’s 20‑ms frame pacing mask that gain.

Measured FPS Breakdown

Below are average FPS values per resolution and setting, as measured:

| Resolution | Low | Medium | High | Ultra |

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

| 1920×1080 | 277 | 264 | 249 | 203 |

| 2560×1440 | 219 | 191 | 161 | 132 |

| 3840×2160 | 119 | 103 | 87 | 71 |

The Medium presets also have a reported min‑max of 225–304 FPS at 1080p, 162–219 at 1440p, and 88–119 at 4K. Low, High and Ultra rows do not include min‑max values in the dataset, so only the average frame rate is listed.

Settings Recommendations

The measured rows provide enough to offer practical advice. At 1080p, the CPU GPU combination is so strong that the Low preset pushes 277 FPS, yet High still returns 249 FPS. The data shows Ultra at 203 FPS, which is barely lower than High. Therefore, for 1080p players, selecting Ultra will render a near‑160 FPS advantage over necessitating any quality loss—there is no penalty for running the highest preset.

At 1440p, Ultra achieves 132 FPS, which is comfortably. High is 161, Medium is 191, and Low is 219. if you prefer the┬ásmoothest input latency, Medium’s 191 FPS gives a strong margin above 165 FPS monitors. For pure competitive, Low 219 is the ceiling.

At 4K, the situation len for the Ultra preset yields 71 FPS, just above 60 Hz. High gives 87, Medium 103, and Low 119. The gap between High and Medium is 16 FPS—the smallest real gain of any resolution step. For a balanced 4K experience prioritizing response, the High preset is to be recommended because it retains 93% of log‑time FPS while improving • resolution significantly. If your display is 144 Hz, Low‑budget (119 FPS) is the only avenue to hit it at full 4K, but the drop to 87 FPS – from Medium is a price to pay.

There is no single best preset; the system performs linearly, with the 7900 XT adding extra speed for anyone running 1440p. The best value in measured database terms depends on your refresh rate: for 60 Hz screens, Ultra at 4K is validated; for 144 Hz, Medium at 1440p or Low at 4K is the pragmatic choice.