Doom

The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X paired with the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT delivers a formidable performance profile in Doom, positioning itself comfortably in the upper tier of tested configurations. The data shows a combination that excels at high refresh rates across all resolutions, with the GPU clearly acting as the primary driver of frame rates, though the CPU’s contribution becomes more apparent at lower settings and resolutions.

FAQ

*Q: How does this combo rank among all tested CPU-GPU pairings in Doom?*

A: The combination ranks 1275th out of 3712 tested combos, placing it in the 66th percentile. This means it outperforms roughly two-thirds of all configurations tested in this game, indicating a strong, well-balanced pairing that is far from entry-level.

Q: What is the best settings preset for a 1440p monitor?

A: At 2560x1440, the High preset delivers an average of 135 FPS, while Ultra drops to 110 FPS. For a 144Hz display, High is the optimal choice, as it comfortably exceeds the refresh rate target. The Medium preset offers 160 FPS, but the visual jump to High is generally worth the 25 FPS cost.

Q: Is the RX 7800 XT a significant performance step up from its nearest rivals?

A: The RX 7800 XT’s average benchmark score is 11627, which is virtually identical to the GeForce GTX 1660's score of 11680 (a delta of -0.5%). It is also only 0.9% ahead of the Radeon Pro 5500M and 1.3% ahead of the Tesla K20c. The data suggests these cards are in a dead heat in synthetic tests, though in-game results may differ.

Q: How much FPS does the Ultra preset cost compared to Low at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, switching from Low to Ultra reduces the average frame rate from 278 FPS to 171 FPS, a substantial drop of 107 FPS. This represents a 38.5% performance penalty for maximum visual fidelity, which is a significant trade-off even on a high-refresh-rate monitor.

Q: Does the 16 GB VRAM buffer provide any headroom in this game?

A: The RX 7800 XT comes with 16 GB of GDDR6 memory. At 4K Ultra settings, the combo still maintains a 60 FPS average, suggesting that VRAM capacity is not a limiting factor in Doom, even at the highest resolution and settings tested.

Q: What is the performance difference between the Ryzen 7 3700X and its closest rival?

A: The Ryzen 7 3700X has an average benchmark score of 34260, which is 0.1% higher than the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350's score of 34222. It also edges out the Intel Core i5-13450HX by 0.2%, making these processors nearly indistinguishable in terms of raw processing power.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 1275 out of 3712 places it in the top 34% of all tested configurations, a strong showing for a mid-to-high-range pairing. This position suggests the system is well-suited for demanding titles, especially considering Doom is a fast-paced FPS where high frame rates are critical. The rank reflects a balance where neither component is severely bottlenecking the other, allowing the system to perform above the median.

This ranking is particularly impressive when considering the CPU’s individual standing. The Ryzen 7 3700X sits at the 84th percentile among all CPUs, which is a strong score. However, the GPU’s percentile rank of 51 is significantly lower, indicating that the graphics card is the more average component in this pairing. Despite this, the combo rank is much higher than the GPU’s individual percentile, implying that the CPU’s strength helps boost the overall gaming experience beyond what the GPU alone would suggest.

The delta between the combo’s rank and the GPU’s percentile highlights an interesting dynamic. While the GPU is near the 50th percentile in synthetic benchmarks, the in-game performance is top-tier. This discrepancy suggests that Doom’s engine is particularly well-optimized for this architecture, or that the synthetic benchmarks do not fully capture the GPU’s gaming capabilities. The data indicates a system that is greater than the sum of its parts, with the CPU providing a robust foundation for the GPU to excel.

Settings Recommendations

For the best balance of visual quality and performance, the High preset emerges as the clear winner across all resolutions. At 1080p, High delivers 209 FPS, which is 38 FPS lower than Medium but 38 FPS higher than Ultra. The jump from Medium to High costs 38 FPS, but the visual improvements in texture detail and shadow quality are typically more noticeable than the jump from High to Ultra, which costs another 38 FPS. This pattern holds at 1440p, where High offers 135 FPS, a 25 FPS improvement over Ultra, and at 4K, where High provides 73 FPS versus Ultra’s 60 FPS.

The Ultra preset is only viable for players with 60Hz displays at 4K, as it hits a 60 FPS average. At lower resolutions, Ultra is playable but sacrifices a significant amount of frame rate for marginal visual gains. The Medium preset offers a decent middle ground, but the performance difference between Medium and High is relatively small compared to the visual uplift, making High the more compelling choice. For competitive play, the Low preset provides the highest frame rates, but the visual downgrade is substantial, making it less appealing for a game like Doom where atmosphere matters.

The data suggests that the High preset is the "sweet spot" for this hardware. It consistently provides frame rates well above 60 FPS at 4K and above 135 FPS at 1440p, ensuring smooth gameplay on high-refresh-rate monitors. The measured FPS ranges for Medium at 1440p (136-184) and 1080p (210-284) show that the system has headroom to spare, but pushing to Ultra introduces unneeded strain without a proportional visual reward.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers exceptional performance. The Low preset achieves an average of 278 FPS, which is an extraordinary frame rate that far exceeds the refresh rate of most monitors. Moving to Medium reduces the average to 247 FPS, with a measured range of 210 to 284 FPS. High settings still produce a very high 209 FPS average, while Ultra drops to 171 FPS. The 1080p results show that the system is heavily GPU-bound, as even the most demanding settings remain highly playable.

The 2560x1440 results show a similar pattern with a slight performance dip. Low settings produce 184 FPS, Medium drops to 160 FPS with a range of 136 to 184 FPS, and High provides 135 FPS. Ultra settings at 1440p yield 110 FPS, which is still a very playable frame rate for most users. The step from High to Ultra at 1440p costs 25 FPS, which is proportionally similar to the 38 FPS drop seen at 1080p, indicating a consistent scaling of GPU load.

At 3840x2160, the performance becomes more moderate but remains playable. Low settings deliver 99 FPS, Medium averages 87 FPS with a range of 74 to 100 FPS, and High settings produce 73 FPS. The Ultra preset brings the average down to exactly 60 FPS. This resolution shows the GPU being pushed to its limits, as the frame rate drops are more pronounced between settings, yet the combo still manages to avoid dipping below the 60 FPS threshold even at maximum settings.

GPU Role

The Radeon RX 7800 XT is the dominant performance driver in this pairing, with the data showing that frame rates scale more with resolution and settings than with CPU load. Its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 624.1 GB/s of bandwidth, which is more than sufficient for Doom’s textures and assets. The GPU’s base clock of 1295 MHz and boost clock of 2430 MHz, with a game clock of 2124 MHz, allow it to maintain high utilization across all tested scenarios.

The GPU’s benchmark results show a mixed bag. Its Passmark G3D score of 24176 is strong, but its percentile rank of 51 indicates it is average compared to all GPUs. This is reflected in its nearest rivals, where it trades blows with the GTX 1660 and Pro 5500M. However, in Doom, the GPU’s performance is clearly above average, as evidenced by the high frame rates at 4K. The GPU’s FP32 compute of 37.32 TFLOPS and texture rate of 583.2 GTexel/s suggest it has the raw power to handle the game’s fast-paced rendering demands.

The data implies that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions. The frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K at High settings is 136 FPS (from 209 to 73), which is a 65% reduction. This significant drop is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario, where the graphics card’s rendering capabilities are being saturated. The GPU’s 96 ROPs and 240 TMUs are likely the limiting factors at 4K, as the game’s pixel and texture fill-rate requirements increase exponentially with resolution.

CPU Role

The Ryzen 7 3700X provides a solid foundation for the GPU, with its 8 cores and 16 threads ensuring that the game’s logic and physics are handled without becoming a bottleneck. Its base clock of 3.60 GHz and boost clock of 4.40 GHz are modest by modern standards, but its Zen 2 architecture with 32 MB of L3 cache provides ample bandwidth for gaming workloads. The CPU’s Passmark multithread score of 22458 and single-thread score of 2656 show it is a capable processor, though not a top-tier one.

The CPU’s role becomes more apparent at lower resolutions. At 1080p Low settings, the frame rate of 278 FPS is likely close to the CPU’s limit, as the GPU is not being fully utilized. The difference between 1080p and 1440p at Low settings is 94 FPS (from 278 to 184), which is a smaller drop than the 136 FPS drop seen at High settings. This suggests that at Low settings, the CPU is starting to become a limiting factor, as the GPU has enough headroom to render more frames but is waiting on the CPU to provide draw calls.

The CPU’s benchmark scores are extremely competitive with its nearest rivals. It is 0.1% faster than the Ryzen AI 7 350 and the EPYC 4244P, and 0.2% faster than the Core i5-13450HX. This near-tie in performance indicates that the 3700X is not holding back the system in any meaningful way. The CPU’s 65W TDP and 7nm process node also suggest efficient operation, though this is not directly reflected in the game’s frame rates.

Resolution Scaling

The scaling from 1080p to 4K provides clear evidence of a GPU-bound system. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 209 at 1080p to 135 at 1440p (a 35.4% decrease) and then to 73 at 4K (a 45.9% decrease from 1440p). This linear scaling with pixel count is a classic sign of GPU limitation, where the CPU has sufficient headroom to feed the GPU at all resolutions.

At Low settings, the scaling is less steep. The drop from 1080p (278 FPS) to 1440p (184 FPS) is 33.8%, which is similar to the High setting drop. However, the drop from 1440p to 4K (99 FPS) is 46.2%, which is also similar. This consistency across settings suggests that the GPU is the primary limiter even at Low settings, though the absolute frame rates are high enough to mask any CPU constraints.

The data reveals that the system’s performance scales predictably with resolution. The 4K results show a 60 FPS average at Ultra, which is the minimum playable threshold. This indicates that the combo is just barely able to handle 4K Ultra in this game, making it a good choice for high-refresh-rate 1440p gaming but not ideal for maxed-out 4K. The resolution scaling shows that the GPU is the definitive bottleneck, with the CPU’s performance remaining consistent across all tested configurations.