Doom

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

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor built on the Zen 3 architecture (Vermeer codename) using TSMC's 7 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.00 GHz, drawing a 65 W TDP. The chip carries 32 MB of shared L3 cache, with 512 KB L2 and 64 KB L1 per core, and it supports dual-channel DDR4 memory at 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. This is a desktop-class part with PCIe Gen 4 connectivity (20 lanes from the CPU) and no integrated graphics.

In this benchmark database, the 5600F achieves a PassMark single-thread score of 2872 and a multithread score of 19236. Its average benchmark score of 36945 places it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs tested. The nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 5 225, scores 36938, a delta of 0%, meaning the 5600F is statistically neck-and-neck with that part. The AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D is 0.2% ahead (37018), while the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 trails by 0.4% (37093), and the Intel Core i9-12900T is 0.5% ahead (37112). These tiny deltas (all within 0.5%) indicate that in synthetic CPU workloads, the 5600F sits in a tightly packed performance cluster.

For Doom, the CPU's role is primarily to feed the GPU with draw calls and game logic. The game is a 2016 FPS title, and its engine is known for being well-optimized on modern hardware. The 5600F's 6 cores and 12 threads provide ample parallelism for the game's threading model. The single-thread score of 2872 is crucial here, as Doom's renderer relies heavily on a few main threads for scene management. With a boost clock of 4.00 GHz and Zen 3's strong IPC, the 5600F handles these single-threaded tasks with ease, as evidenced by the measured FPS numbers in the data.

The multithread score of 19236 and the PassMark physics score of 1043 suggest the CPU can also handle background tasks and physics simulations without bottlenecking. However, the data shows that at lower resolutions (1080p), the FPS values reach as high as 271 (Low settings), which indicates the CPU is capable of driving very high frame rates. The fact that the 5600F's nearest rivals are all within 0.5% of its average score means that swapping to any of those parts would yield virtually identical CPU-bound performance in this game.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 1080p Ultra settings for this combo?

A: The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings is 163 FPS. This is the highest settings preset at the lowest resolution, and it still delivers a very high frame rate.

Q: How does the CPU's single-thread performance compare to its rivals?

A: The Ryzen 5 5600F has a PassMark single-thread score of 2872. Its nearest rivals, the Intel Core Ultra 5 225, AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D, AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450, and Intel Core i9-12900T, all have average scores within 0.5% of the 5600F's 36945 average, indicating essentially identical single-thread capability for gaming.

Q: What is the best measured FPS in the entire dataset?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 271 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. The maximum FPS observed in any row is 272 FPS, which appears in the 1080p Medium settings row (maxFps field).

Q: Is the GPU or CPU the limiting factor at 4K Ultra settings?

A: At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the average FPS drops to 57. Given that the 5600F has sufficient single-thread performance (2872 score) and the GPU is a mid-to-high-end part, the data indicates the GPU is the primary bottleneck at this resolution and preset, as the frame rate falls below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How does the combo rank among all tested combinations in Doom?

A: The combo rank for this CPU-GPU pair in Doom is 999 out of 2930 tested combos. This places it in the top 34% of all combinations tested, meaning there are 998 combos that perform better and 1931 that perform worse.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Low settings yield an average of 176 FPS, while Ultra settings yield 106 FPS. This represents a 70 FPS drop (approximately 40% reduction) when moving from the lowest to the highest preset at this resolution.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of resolution scaling across all settings presets. Starting at 1080p, the combo delivers extremely high frame rates: 271 FPS at Low, 236 FPS at Medium, 200 FPS at High, and 163 FPS at Ultra. Moving to 1440p, these numbers drop to 176 FPS (Low), 153 FPS (Medium), 129 FPS (High), and 106 FPS (Ultra). At 4K (3840x2160), the scores fall further to 95 FPS (Low), 83 FPS (Medium), 70 FPS (High), and 57 FPS (Ultra).

The scaling from 1080p to 1440p shows an average reduction of approximately 35% across all settings. From 1440p to 4K, the average reduction is approximately 46%. This is consistent with the pixel count increases: 1440p has 78% more pixels than 1080p, and 4K has 225% more pixels than 1440p. The fact that FPS does not drop proportionally to pixel count indicates that the system is not purely GPU-bound at lower resolutions.

At 1080p Low (271 FPS), the CPU is likely the limiting factor, as the GPU has headroom to render more frames but the CPU cannot issue draw calls fast enough. The single-thread score of 2872 supports this, as higher single-thread performance would push this number higher. As resolution increases to 4K, the GPU becomes the dominant bottleneck. At 4K Ultra (57 FPS), the GPU's rendering load is substantial, and the CPU has ample time to prepare frames. The GPU's 8 GB of GDDR6X memory and 608.3 GB/s bandwidth are taxed heavily at this resolution.

The data also shows that the gap between Low and Ultra settings widens as resolution decreases. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 108 FPS (271 vs 163). At 4K, the difference is only 38 FPS (95 vs 57). This is a classic sign of GPU-bound behavior at higher resolutions: settings changes have less absolute impact because the GPU is already saturated with pixel work. Conversely, at 1080p, the CPU can feed frames quickly, and the GPU's settings load becomes more noticeable.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank for this AMD Ryzen 5 5600F + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti pairing in Doom is 999 out of 2930 tested combos. This places it in the 66th percentile of all tested combinations, meaning it outperforms roughly two-thirds of the tested systems. The rank of 999 is notable because it places this combo just outside the top 1000, which is a competitive position given the large number of possible CPU-GPU pairings.

To contextualize this rank, consider the individual components' standings. The CPU sits in the 85th percentile of all CPUs (average benchmark score 36945), while the GPU sits in the 75th percentile (average benchmark score 29945). The combo rank of 999/2930 (66th percentile) is lower than both individual percentiles, which suggests that Doom's specific workload does not fully utilize the strengths of this pairing. The game's engine favors high single-thread performance (which the 5600F has) and high memory bandwidth (which the RTX 3070 Ti provides at 608.3 GB/s), but the 8 GB VRAM capacity might be a limiting factor at higher resolutions and settings.

The nearest rival GPUs give context: the RTX 3070 Ti's average score of 29945 is nearly identical to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Mobile (29928, delta 0.1%), the AMD Radeon RX 6800 (30095, delta -0.5%), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti (29783, delta 0.5%). The AMD Radeon RX 6700 is 1.6% behind (30433). This tight clustering means that swapping the RTX 3070 Ti for any of these GPUs would change Doom's performance by less than 2% in synthetic benchmarks, but the measured FPS in this game could differ due to architectural preferences.

The rank of 999 also indicates that there are 1931 combos that perform worse than this pairing. For a 6-core CPU and an 8 GB GPU, this is a solid result. The data does not provide a breakdown of which specific combos rank higher or lower, but the percentile positions of the components suggest that this combo is well-balanced for the game, with neither component dramatically outclassing the other.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings preset depends on the target frame rate and resolution. For a 60 FPS target, all four settings presets at 1080p and 1440p exceed this threshold, and even 4K Low (95 FPS) and 4K Medium (83 FPS) comfortably surpass it. The only preset that falls below 60 FPS is 4K Ultra (57 FPS), which is just under the threshold.

For a 144 Hz monitor at 1080p, the Medium preset (236 FPS) provides a significant margin over the refresh rate, while High (200 FPS) and Low (271 FPS) also exceed 144 FPS. Ultra at 1080p (163 FPS) still clears 144 Hz, making it a viable choice if visual fidelity is prioritized. At 1440p with a 144 Hz display, only Low (176 FPS) and Medium (153 FPS) exceed the target; High (129 FPS) and Ultra (106 FPS) fall short, so a 120 Hz or 100 Hz display would be more appropriate for those presets.

For 4K gaming at 60 FPS, the Low (95 FPS) and Medium (83 FPS) presets provide headroom, while High (70 FPS) is still above 60 FPS. Ultra (57 FPS) would require a variable refresh rate display to avoid judder, as it sits below the 60 FPS line. The data shows a consistent pattern: Medium settings offer the best balance between visual quality and performance across all resolutions. At 4K Medium, the average FPS is 83, which is 46% higher than Ultra (57 FPS) and only 12 FPS lower than High (70 FPS). The min FPS at 4K Medium is 70, ensuring that even the worst-case frame times stay above 60 FPS.

Given the measured rows, the recommendation is to use Medium settings for the best experience. It delivers 236 FPS at 1080p, 153 FPS at 1440p, and 83 FPS at 4K. These numbers are all well above playable thresholds, and the min FPS values (201 at 1080p, 130 at 1440p, 70 at 4K) indicate smooth frame pacing without severe drops.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured FPS dataset for this combo in Doom is as follows:

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: average 271 FPS
• Medium: average 236 FPS, min 201 FPS, max 272 FPS
• High: average 200 FPS
• Ultra: average 163 FPS

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: average 176 FPS
• Medium: average 153 FPS, min 130 FPS, max 176 FPS
• High: average 129 FPS
• Ultra: average 106 FPS

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: average 95 FPS
• Medium: average 83 FPS, min 70 FPS, max 95 FPS
• High: average 70 FPS
• Ultra: average 57 FPS

The data shows a monotonic decrease in FPS as both resolution and settings quality increase. At each resolution, the step from Low to Medium incurs a smaller penalty than the step from High to Ultra. For example, at 1080p, Low to Medium is a 35 FPS drop (271 to 236), Medium to High is a 36 FPS drop (236 to 200), and High to Ultra is a 37 FPS drop (200 to 163). At 4K, the drops are 12 FPS (Low to Medium), 13 FPS (Medium to High), and 13 FPS (High to Ultra). This relative consistency suggests that each settings tier adds a similar computational load, regardless of resolution.

The min and max FPS values are only provided for the Medium preset at each resolution. At 1080p Medium, the range is 201 to 272 FPS, indicating a 71 FPS spread. At 1440p Medium, the range is 130 to 176 FPS, a 46 FPS spread. At 4K Medium, the range is 70 to 95 FPS, a 25 FPS spread. The narrowing range at higher resolutions indicates that the frame time variance decreases as the GPU becomes the bottleneck, resulting in more consistent frame pacing.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti is built on the Ampere architecture using Samsung's 8 nm process, with 17,400 million transistors on a 392 mm² die. It features 6144 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs, along with 48 RT cores and 192 tensor cores. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1575 MHz and a boost clock of 1770 MHz. Memory consists of 8 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus, providing 608.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock is 1188 MHz (19 Gbps effective). The GPU's FP32 performance is rated at 21.75 TFLOPS, with a pixel rate of 169.9 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 339.8 GTexel/s.

In synthetic benchmarks, the RTX 3070 Ti achieves a PassMark G3D score of 23356 and a PassMark GPU compute score of 11601. Its average benchmark score of 29945 places it in the 75th percentile of all GPUs. The nearest rivals are tightly clustered: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Mobile (29928, delta 0.1%), the AMD Radeon RX 6800 (30095, delta -0.5%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti (29783, delta 0.5%), and the AMD Radeon RX 6700 (30433, delta -1.6%). All of these are within 1.6% of the RTX 3070 Ti's average score, indicating that the GPU is well-matched against its direct competitors.

In Doom, the GPU's role is heavily tied to resolution and settings. The 8 GB VRAM capacity is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p at all settings, and it handles 4K Low through High without issues. At 4K Ultra, the 8 GB VRAM may be nearing its limit, which could contribute to the 57 FPS average. The high memory bandwidth (608.3 GB/s) is beneficial for Doom's texture streaming, as the game frequently loads large assets during fast-paced movement.

The GPU's clock speeds (1575 MHz base, 1770 MHz boost) are moderate for the 30-series, but the 21.75 TFLOPS FP32 performance provides ample compute for the game's lighting and particle effects. The RT cores (48) and tensor cores (192) are not utilized by Doom, as the game does not support ray tracing or DLSS. Therefore, the GPU's raw rasterization performance is what drives the measured FPS.

Compared to its rivals, the RTX 3070 Ti's performance in Doom is consistent with its synthetic standing. The deltaPct values of 0.1% to -1.6% against rivals suggest that any of the listed GPUs would deliver nearly identical frame rates in this game. The 4K Ultra result of 57 FPS is the only instance where the GPU fails to maintain 60 FPS, and this is a common challenge for 8 GB GPUs at this resolution and preset.