Doom

Doom on the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F and Intel Arc B370 combination presents a challenging performance profile. The data shows a system that is strictly bound by its integrated graphics solution, with frame rates that scale predictably with resolution but struggle to maintain high refresh rates even at 1080p. This analysis breaks down the measured results to explain what settings and resolutions are viable for this specific hardware pairing.

Settings Recommendations

The benchmark data for this combination indicates that the "Low" preset is the only viable path to a consistently playable experience, particularly at the lower end of the resolution scale. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 96 FPS, which is the only measured configuration that approaches high-refresh-rate territory. The Medium preset at the same resolution drops to 84 FPS, which is still acceptable for many players, but the gap widens considerably at higher resolutions. For a consistent experience without major frame rate swings, the Low preset is the recommended starting point, as it provides the highest average frame rate and best ensures the frame time stays within a reasonable range.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset still manages an average of 62 FPS, which is technically playable but less fluid than the 1080p result. The Medium preset at this resolution yields 54 FPS, which is on the edge of what many would consider smooth. The data suggests that users should avoid the High and Ultra presets entirely, as they push the average frame rate below 50 FPS at 1440p. The Ultra preset, which delivers only 37 FPS at 1440p, is not recommended for any scenario where responsiveness is a priority.

The situation becomes more restrictive at 3840x2160. Here, even the Low preset only achieves an average of 34 FPS, which is below the threshold for a comfortable gaming experience in a fast-paced FPS. The Medium preset at this resolution yields 29 FPS, with a minimum of 25 FPS and a maximum of 34 FPS, indicating significant frame pacing issues. The High preset drops to 25 FPS, and the Ultra preset falls to 20 FPS. Based on these results, the only settings that provide a semblance of playability are Low and Medium at 1080p, with Low being the clear winner for overall smoothness. The data indicates that higher settings are not merely a performance hit; they are a fundamental barrier to a functional frame rate.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is the primary bottleneck in this system. This is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a TDP of just 25 W, which immediately signals its limited capacity for demanding workloads like gaming. The chip is based on the Xe3-LPG architecture and features 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster output units. Its boost clock is rated at 2400 MHz, with a base clock of 300 MHz. While the clock speeds are respectable for an IGP, the sheer number of execution units is low compared to discrete solutions.

The GPU's memory configuration is "System Shared," meaning it relies on the system's main memory rather than dedicated VRAM. This has a significant impact on performance, as the memory bandwidth is "System Dependent." In this case, the CPU is paired with DDR4 memory, which has a theoretical bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. While this is sufficient for the CPU, the GPU competing for the same memory bus for both texture data and frame buffer operations introduces latency and reduces effective throughput. The benchmark results confirm this limitation; the GPU's average benchmark score is 1184, placing it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals, such as the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 and ATI Radeon HD 5770, show only marginal performance differences, with delta percentages of -0.2% and -0.5% respectively. This places the Arc B370's raw compute capability in the same league as graphics hardware from over a decade ago.

The GPU's compute capabilities are rated at 6.144 TFLOPS for FP32 operations. While this number seems high on paper, the shared memory architecture and low fillrate (48.00 GPixel/s pixel rate, 96.00 GTexel/s texture rate) severely hamper real-world gaming performance. The data shows that even at the lowest settings, the GPU struggles to maintain high frame rates at 1080p, suggesting that the bottleneck is not just memory bandwidth but also the raw shader and texture processing power. This is a classic case where the GPU's theoretical capabilities are far ahead of its practical gaming performance due to architectural constraints.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling across resolutions is a clear indicator of a GPU-bound system. Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440, the average frame rate on the Low preset drops from 96 FPS to 62 FPS, a reduction of 35%. This is a significant loss that aligns with the increase in pixel count, which is roughly 78% more pixels. The fact that the frame rate does not halve suggests that the CPU is providing some relief, but the GPU is still the primary constraint.

Scaling from 1440p to 3840x2160 is even more punishing. At the Low preset, the average frame rate drops from 62 FPS to 34 FPS, a 45% reduction. The pixel count increases by 125% from 1440p to 4K, but the frame rate does not drop proportionally, indicating that the GPU is hitting a hard computational limit. The data shows that the performance degradation is not linear; it is steeper at higher resolutions because the GPU's fixed-function units (ROPs and TMUs) are saturated.

This pattern confirms that the limiting component is the GPU. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see more consistent frame rates across different resolutions, as the CPU's workload does not change with resolution. Instead, the frame rate drops dramatically as resolution increases, which is the signature behavior of a GPU that is overwhelmed by pixel fill and shading demands. The Ryzen 5 5600F, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, is more than capable of feeding this GPU; the bottleneck is entirely on the graphics side.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the results are as follows: the Low preset achieves an average of 96 FPS, with no recorded minimum or maximum. The Medium preset averages 84 FPS, with a minimum of 71 FPS and a maximum of 96 FPS. The High preset averages 71 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 58 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra is 38 FPS, showing that settings have a moderate impact at this resolution, but the GPU's ceiling is still low.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 62 FPS. The Medium preset averages 54 FPS, with a minimum of 46 FPS and a maximum of 62 FPS. The High preset averages 46 FPS, and the Ultra preset drops to 37 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra here is 25 FPS, indicating that the GPU is becoming more sensitive to settings as resolution increases.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 34 FPS. The Medium preset averages 29 FPS, with a minimum of 25 FPS and a maximum of 34 FPS. The High preset averages 25 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 20 FPS. At this resolution, the performance is uniformly poor, and the settings have a smaller relative impact on the average frame rate, as the GPU is already at its limits even on Low.

The data shows a consistent pattern: for every setting tier, the frame rate drops by roughly 30-40% when moving from 1080p to 1440p, and then another 45-50% when moving from 1440p to 4K. This is a steep cliff that makes 4K gaming unfeasible for this hardware combination.

FAQ

Q: What is the best settings preset for this CPU/GPU combo at 1080p?

A: The Low preset is the best choice, delivering an average of 96 FPS. The Medium preset is a secondary option at 84 FPS, but the Low preset provides the highest frame rate and the best chance of maintaining a stable experience.

Q: Can this system play Doom at 4K resolution?

A: No. At 3840x2160, even the Low preset only achieves an average of 34 FPS, which is below the threshold for a playable FPS experience. The Ultra preset falls to 20 FPS, making it unplayable.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B370 has an average benchmark score of 1184. Its closest rival, the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, scores 1186, which is 0.2% higher. The AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192, 0.7% higher, and the AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168, which is 1.4% lower.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the main bottleneck in this system?

A: The GPU is the main bottleneck. The frame rate drops significantly as resolution increases, which is a classic sign of GPU limitation. The CPU, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, is not the limiting factor.

Q: What is the average frame rate difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 62 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 37 FPS. This is a 25 FPS difference, showing that the GPU's performance is heavily impacted by graphical fidelity.

Q: Does the GPU have dedicated video memory?

A: No. The Intel Arc B370 uses "System Shared" memory, meaning it relies on the system's DDR4 memory for all graphics data. This shared architecture contributes to the low performance ceiling.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600F is a capable processor that is not the limiting factor in this gaming scenario. It is a 6-core, 12-thread part based on the Zen 3 architecture, with a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.00 GHz. It features 32 MB of shared L3 cache, which is ample for modern games. The CPU's benchmark scores are solid, with a multithread score of 19236 and a single-thread score of 2872. Its average benchmark score is 36945, placing it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs, which indicates it is a strong performer for its class.

In comparison to its nearest rivals, the Ryzen 5 5600F is essentially tied with the Intel Core Ultra 5 225, which has an average score of 36938 (0% delta). It is also very close to the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D, which scores 37018 (a -0.2% delta), and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 at 37093 (a -0.4% delta). These results show that the 5600F is on par with these other mid-range parts, offering no significant CPU bottleneck for the low-end GPU it is paired with.

The CPU's memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s is sufficient for its own needs, but it becomes a shared resource for the GPU. This means that while the CPU can process game logic and physics without issue, the GPU's performance is indirectly impacted by the CPU's memory traffic. However, the data from the measured FPS shows that the GPU is the definitive bottleneck. The frame rates scale with resolution in a way that is characteristic of a GPU-bound workload, and the CPU's high percentile ranking suggests it has plenty of headroom. In this configuration, the CPU is waiting on the GPU, not the other way around. The system's overall rank of 2696 out of 2930 combos in Doom further underscores that the integrated GPU is dragging down the entire experience.