Doom

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and AMD Radeon RX 9060 pairing produces a highly capable system for Doom, delivering strong frame rates across all tested resolutions. This analysis breaks down the measured performance data, contextualizes the combo's standing against other tested configurations, and provides actionable settings guidance based strictly on the recorded benchmarks.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 is the primary driver of frame rate in this pairing, and its specifications directly shape the observed results. The GPU operates with a base clock of 1700 MHz, a game clock of 2400 MHz, and a boost clock of 2990 MHz, providing a wide dynamic range for performance scaling. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus delivers 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. In Doom, a title from 2016 built on id Tech, this memory configuration proves sufficient, but the data suggests that the GPU’s 1792 shading units and 64 ROPs are the decisive factors at higher settings. The GPU’s pixel rate of 191.4 GPixel/s and texture rate of 334.9 GTexel/s indicate a design balanced for 1080p and 1440p gaming, which aligns with the measured FPS.

The RX 9060’s role becomes more evident when examining the frame rate drops as settings increase. At 1080p, the GPU’s compute power is the clear bottleneck, as the CPU’s 6 cores and 12 threads are more than adequate for Doom’s engine. The GPU’s FP32 performance of 21.43 TFLOPS is substantial, but the memory bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s is a limiting factor at 4K Ultra, where the demand for texture data outpaces the bus width. The 8 GB VRAM capacity is not directly challenged at the tested settings, but the 128-bit bus width creates a bandwidth ceiling that manifests at higher resolutions. The GPU’s RDNA 4.0 architecture, built on a 4 nm process from TSMC, provides the efficiency to sustain high clocks, but the data shows that the RX 9060 is best utilized when paired with settings that do not overwhelm its memory subsystem.

The CPU’s contribution is secondary but not negligible. The Ryzen 5 8400F, with a base clock of 4.20 GHz and boost clock of 4.70 GHz, ensures that the GPU is fed with data. Its 16 MB of L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory support with 83.2 GB/s bandwidth prevent CPU-side stalls. In Doom, which is not heavily threaded, the CPU’s single-thread performance, evidenced by a 3DMark single-thread score of 951, is sufficient to avoid bottlenecking the GPU at any tested setting. The data indicates that the GPU is the limiting component, as the FPS scales predictably with resolution and settings changes, a signature of GPU-bound performance.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Ryzen 5 8400F and RX 9060 achieves a combo rank of 1686 out of 2930 tested combinations in Doom. This places the pairing in the upper-middle tier of the database, indicating that it outperforms a majority of tested systems but is not at the very top of the performance hierarchy. The rank reflects the GPU’s position relative to its peers; the RX 9060 sits at the 59th percentile against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 16014. This is a solid mid-range standing, but it is not a flagship performer.

Looking at the GPU’s nearest rivals provides context for this rank. The RX 9060’s average benchmark score of 16014 is just 0.7% below the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, which scores 16129. This proximity suggests that in Doom, the RX 9060 would trade blows with the RTX 3060 Ti, with the difference being within the margin of error. The RX 9060 is 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon R9 370X and the AMD Radeon RX 7700, which score 15862 and 15852 respectively. The delta against the Radeon Pro W5500 is larger at 2.1%, with the RX 9060 ahead. These rivalries explain the combo rank: the system is competitive with mid-range GPUs from previous generations, but it lacks the raw power to climb into the top percentile of combinations.

The CPU’s ranking reinforces this assessment. The Ryzen 5 8400F sits at the 77th percentile against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 25005. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F, scores 24964, a delta of just 0.2%, meaning the 8400F is effectively tied with its sibling. The Intel Core i7-11850H and i7-13620H are also within 0.4% of the 8400F’s score. This CPU performance is more than sufficient for Doom, so the combo’s rank is almost entirely determined by the GPU. The data shows that the combo rank of 1686 is a direct consequence of the RX 9060’s mid-range standing; systems ranked higher are likely paired with faster GPUs, while lower-ranked systems have weaker graphics cards. The 8400F does not drag the combo down, but it also does not boost it.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data reveals a clear scaling pattern across resolutions, which confirms the GPU as the primary bottleneck. From 1080p to 1440p, the average frame rate drops consistently across all settings, and the drop from 1440p to 4K is even more pronounced. This behavior is classic GPU-bound scaling, where the CPU’s frame generation capacity is not reached, and the GPU’s rendering workload dictates the output.

At High settings, the average FPS drops from 155 at 1080p to 101 at 1440p, a 34.8% decrease, and then to 54 at 4K, a further 46.5% decrease from the 1440p figure. This steep decline at 4K indicates that the RX 9060’s memory bandwidth and pixel throughput are severely taxed at that resolution. The Low settings show a similar trend, with 211 FPS at 1080p dropping to 137 at 1440p and then to 74 at 4K. The Medium settings follow suit, with 184 FPS at 1080p, 119 at 1440p, and 65 at 4K. The Ultra settings exhibit the most significant drop, from 127 at 1080p to 82 at 1440p and finally to 45 at 4K.

The scaling ratios are telling. For High settings, the 4K FPS is 34.8% of the 1080p FPS. For Ultra settings, the 4K FPS is 35.4% of the 1080p FPS. This consistency across settings suggests that the resolution scaling is uniform, which points to a fixed hardware limit rather than a software or driver anomaly. The fact that the FPS does not drop more steeply at 4K Ultra compared to 4K High indicates that the GPU is not running out of memory or hitting a compute cliff; it is simply limited by its memory bandwidth and ROP throughput. The CPU, with its high single-thread score, is not the limiting factor, as the FPS scales purely with the GPU’s workload. The data strongly suggests that to maintain higher frame rates at 4K, a GPU with greater memory bandwidth or a wider bus would be required, but for 1080p and 1440p gaming, the RX 9060 is well-matched to the 8400F.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the target resolution and desired smoothness. The data shows that the Medium preset offers the best balance of visual quality and performance across all three resolutions. At 1080p, Medium delivers an average of 184 FPS with a minimum of 156 FPS, ensuring a buttery-smooth experience on high-refresh-rate monitors. At 1440p, Medium yields 119 FPS with a minimum of 101 FPS, which is excellent for 120Hz displays. Even at 4K, Medium manages an average of 65 FPS with a minimum of 55 FPS, which is playable and above the 60 FPS threshold for most of the time, albeit with occasional dips.

The High preset is a viable alternative for those prioritizing visual fidelity over raw frame rate. At 1080p, High provides 155 FPS, which is still very smooth, but at 1440p, it drops to 101 FPS, which is borderline for 144Hz monitors. At 4K, High averages 54 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target, so it is not ideal for competitive play. The Ultra preset is the most demanding, and the data shows that it is only suitable for 1080p, where it averages 127 FPS. At 1440p, Ultra drops to 82 FPS, and at 4K, it falls to 45 FPS, making it unsuitable for smooth gameplay at higher resolutions.

The Low preset is not recommended for this combo, as it sacrifices too much visual quality for marginal performance gains. At 1080p, Low delivers 211 FPS, but the difference between Low and Medium is 27 FPS, which is not worth the visual downgrade. At 1440p, Low hits 137 FPS, but Medium’s 119 FPS is still well above 100 FPS. The data indicates that Medium is the sweet spot, offering a significant visual improvement over Low while maintaining frame rates that are 80-90% of Low’s performance. For players with 144Hz monitors at 1080p or 120Hz monitors at 1440p, Medium is the clear choice. For 4K displays, Medium is the only preset that consistently stays above 55 FPS, making it the default recommendation.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The following breakdown details the exact average FPS figures from the measured data for each resolution and settings combination.

1920x1080:

• Low: 211 FPS average
• Medium: 184 FPS average, with a minimum of 156 FPS and a maximum of 212 FPS
• High: 155 FPS average
• Ultra: 127 FPS average

At 1080p, the combo is exceptionally fast. The Low preset produces the highest frame rate, but even the Ultra preset maintains 127 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS baseline. The Medium preset’s minimum of 156 FPS ensures no stutter even in intense scenes.

2560x1440:

• Low: 137 FPS average
• Medium: 119 FPS average, with a minimum of 101 FPS and a maximum of 137 FPS
• High: 101 FPS average
• Ultra: 82 FPS average

At 1440p, the performance is still strong. The Low preset stays above 137 FPS, and the Medium preset keeps the minimum above 100 FPS. The High preset’s average of 101 FPS is acceptable, but the Ultra preset’s 82 FPS average is starting to feel less fluid for fast-paced action.

3840x2160:

• Low: 74 FPS average
• Medium: 65 FPS average, with a minimum of 55 FPS and a maximum of 74 FPS
• High: 54 FPS average
• Ultra: 45 FPS average

At 4K, the GPU’s limitations are exposed. The Low preset is the only one that stays comfortably above 60 FPS, while the Medium preset hovers around the 60-65 FPS mark with dips to 55 FPS. The High and Ultra presets fall below 60 FPS, making them less ideal for a consistent experience.

The data shows a clear hierarchy: Low > Medium > High > Ultra in terms of FPS, with the gap between each preset widening as resolution increases. The Medium preset’s minimum FPS values are particularly noteworthy, as they indicate frame pacing stability. At 1080p, the minimum is 156 FPS, at 1440p it is 101 FPS, and at 4K it is 55 FPS. These minimums are significantly higher than the averages of the next-lower preset, suggesting that Medium provides a more stable experience than High or Ultra.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: What is the combo's overall rank in the database for Doom?

A: The combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and AMD Radeon RX 9060 ranks 1686 out of 2930 tested combos in Doom. This places it in the upper-middle tier of all tested systems.

Q: How does the RX 9060 compare to its nearest GPU rivals in terms of average benchmark score?

A: The RX 9060 has an average benchmark score of 16014. It is 0.7% below the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, which scores 16129. It is 1% ahead of both the AMD Radeon R9 370X and the AMD Radeon RX 7700, which score 15862 and 15852, respectively.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 1440p gaming based on the data?

A: The Medium preset is the best choice at 2560x1440, delivering an average of 119 FPS with a minimum of 101 FPS. This provides a smooth experience on 120Hz monitors while maintaining better visual quality than the Low preset.

Q: Does the CPU or GPU limit performance in Doom at 4K?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the limiting component at 4K. The average FPS drops from 127 at 1080p Ultra to 45 at 4K Ultra, a 64.6% decrease, which is consistent with GPU-bound scaling. The CPU’s high single-thread benchmark score (951 in 3DMark) suggests it is not a bottleneck.

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

A: At 1920x1080 with Ultra settings, the combo achieves an average of 127 FPS. This is the highest resolution and settings combination that stays well above the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How much faster is the Low preset compared to the High preset at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 137 FPS, while the High preset averages 101 FPS. The Low preset is 35.6% faster than the High preset, representing a significant performance difference of 36 FPS.