Doom

Resolution Scaling

The measured frames per second across resolutions tell a clear story about where this system’s limits lie. At 1080p with Low settings, the AMD Ryzen 7 5700 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 combination delivers 301 FPS. Moving to 1440p drops that to 195 FPS, a reduction of 106 frames. At 4K, the same Low preset yields 105 FPS. The scaling pattern here is steep: each resolution step roughly halves the frame rate, which strongly indicates the GPU is the primary bottleneck as pixel count rises.

What is more revealing is the gap between settings at each resolution. At 1080p, the spread from Low (301 FPS) to Ultra (181 FPS) is 120 FPS — a massive range that shows the CPU can feed the GPU enough data even at high detail levels. At 1440p, that spread narrows to 78 FPS (195 to 117), and at 4K it shrinks further to 42 FPS (105 to 63). This tightening delta as resolution increases is the classic signature of a GPU-bound scenario. The RTX 3080’s shading units and texture rate are being taxed more heavily at higher resolutions, while the Ryzen 7 5700’s eight cores and sixteen threads have ample headroom to keep up.

The data also shows that Doom’s engine scales almost linearly with resolution when settings are held constant. For example, High settings produce 221 FPS at 1080p, 143 FPS at 1440p, and 78 FPS at 4K. That is roughly a 1.55x drop per resolution step, which is close to the pixel-count ratio. This suggests the game is well optimized and not suffering from any unusual memory bandwidth or cache bottlenecks. The RTX 3080’s 760.3 GB/s memory bandwidth appears sufficient to feed the GA102 chip’s 8704 shading units without stalling.

Interestingly, the Medium preset at 4K shows a minimum FPS of 78 and a maximum of 106, with an average of 92. This is the only preset at 4K that reports min/max values, and the 28-frame variance indicates some scenes are more demanding than others. At 1440p Medium, the min is 144 and max 195, a 51-frame spread. At 1080p Medium, min is 223 and max 301, a 78-frame swing. The relative variance (max/min ratio) stays fairly consistent around 1.35 across resolutions, suggesting the frame pacing is stable rather than spiky.

What does this imply for the limiting component? At 1080p, the CPU’s single-thread performance — evidenced by a 3dmark_single_thread score of 901 — is likely the ceiling for the 301 FPS Low result. The GPU is underutilized at that resolution. By 4K, the situation flips: the GPU’s pixel rate of 164.2 GPixel/s and FP32 throughput of 29.77 TFLOPS are the constraining factors. The RTX 3080’s percentile rank of 68 among all GPUs, while respectable, means it is not a top-tier part in this database’s broader context.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo achieves at 1080p?

A: The maximum measured average is 301 FPS at 1080p with Low settings. The next best is 262 FPS at Medium, followed by 221 FPS at High, and 181 FPS at Ultra.

Q: Does the RTX 3080 bottleneck the Ryzen 7 5700 at 4K?

A: Yes, the data strongly suggests a GPU bottleneck at 3840x2160. The frame rate drops from 105 FPS at Low to 63 FPS at Ultra, a 42 FPS reduction, while the CPU has ample headroom given its 8-core, 16-thread configuration. The scaling pattern across resolutions confirms this.

Q: How does the Medium preset compare to High in terms of FPS?

A: At every resolution, Medium outperforms High. At 1080p, Medium averages 262 FPS versus 221 FPS for High. At 1440p, the gap is 170 FPS to 143 FPS. At 4K, Medium hits 92 FPS while High manages 78 FPS. The difference narrows as resolution increases.

Q: What is the combo’s overall rank in this game?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 5700 + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 combination ranks 1054 out of 3712 tested combos for Doom. This places it in the upper-middle tier of all configurations tested.

Q: Is the Ryzen 7 5700’s boost clock relevant for high FPS gaming?

A: The CPU’s boost clock is 4.60 GHz, and its single-thread benchmark scores (901 in 3dmark_single_thread, 3296 in PassMark single-thread) indicate strong per-core performance. This is likely why 1080p Low can reach 301 FPS — the CPU can issue draw calls fast enough.

Q: Are there any settings where the 4K experience is playable?

A: Yes, all four presets at 4K average above 60 FPS. Low averages 105, Medium 92, High 78, and Ultra 63. Even the Ultra preset, with its 63 FPS average, clears the 60 FPS threshold, though it leaves little headroom for demanding scenes.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data points to Medium as the optimal balance for this hardware combination. At 1080p, Medium delivers 262 FPS, which is 41 FPS higher than High and only 39 FPS lower than Low. The visual quality improvement from Low to Medium is substantial in most games, and the frame rate remains far beyond any display’s refresh rate capabilities. At 1440p, Medium’s 170 FPS average with a 144 FPS minimum ensures smooth gameplay even in heavy scenes, while High drops to 143 FPS average — still playable but closer to the edge. At 4K, Medium’s 92 FPS average with an 78 FPS minimum is the sweet spot; High’s 78 FPS average offers diminishing returns for the 14 FPS loss.

Ultra settings are the least attractive option. At 1080p, Ultra’s 181 FPS is still high, but the 120 FPS gap versus Low suggests the extra detail is expensive. At 1440p, Ultra averages 117 FPS, which is 53 FPS below Medium. At 4K, Ultra’s 63 FPS average barely exceeds 60 FPS, and any demanding scene could push it lower. Notably, the data shows no min/max values for Ultra at any resolution, which means the frame pacing data is incomplete — but the averages alone suggest this preset is for screenshots, not sustained play.

High settings occupy a middle ground that is hard to recommend. At 1080p, High’s 221 FPS is excellent, but Medium’s 262 FPS is measurably better with presumably minimal visual loss. At 1440p, High’s 143 FPS average is below the 144 Hz refresh rate that many monitors target, while Medium’s 170 FPS clears it comfortably. At 4K, High’s 78 FPS is playable but Medium’s 92 FPS is noticeably smoother. The only scenario where High makes sense is if the visual differences between Medium and High are critical to the user, but the data cannot quantify that subjective trade-off.

For competitive play where frame rate is paramount, Low at 1080p (301 FPS) or 1440p (195 FPS) would be the choice. For single-player immersion, Medium at 4K (92 FPS) offers the best combination of resolution and fluidity. The data does not include any ray tracing or DLSS information, so those features cannot be evaluated here.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full settings ladder is recorded. Low averages 301 FPS, Medium 262 FPS with a minimum of 223 and maximum of 301, High 221 FPS, and Ultra 181 FPS. The 120 FPS difference between Low and Ultra represents a 66% performance penalty for maximum detail. The Medium preset’s 78 FPS variance (223 to 301) is the widest recorded at any resolution, indicating that scene complexity heavily influences the frame rate at this setting.

At 2560x1440, Low averages 195 FPS, Medium 170 FPS with a 144 minimum and 195 maximum, High 143 FPS, and Ultra 117 FPS. The Medium preset’s 51 FPS variance is proportionally similar to 1080p. The drop from Low to Ultra is 78 FPS, a 40% reduction. Notably, the 144 FPS minimum at Medium means this setting never dips below a 144 Hz refresh rate, making it a reliable choice for high-refresh displays.

At 3840x2160, Low averages 105 FPS, Medium 92 FPS with a 78 minimum and 106 maximum, High 78 FPS, and Ultra 63 FPS. The Medium preset’s 28 FPS variance is the tightest of any resolution, suggesting the GPU is consistently saturated. The 42 FPS gap between Low and Ultra is the smallest across resolutions, reinforcing that the GPU is the limiting factor at 4K. All presets stay above 60 FPS on average, but Ultra’s 63 FPS leaves only 3 FPS of headroom.

The min/max data is sparse — only Medium presets report these values at each resolution. This is a limitation of the measurement methodology, but the available numbers show a consistent trend: the spread between minimum and maximum FPS narrows as resolution increases. This is expected behavior for a GPU-bound workload, where frame time variance is compressed when the render pipeline is fully utilized.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is the dominant component in this pairing, and its specifications explain the scaling behavior observed. The GA102 chip contains 8704 shading units, 272 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, with a base clock of 1440 MHz and boost clock of 1710 MHz. The FP32 throughput of 29.77 TFLOPS and texture rate of 465.1 GTexel/s are substantial, yet the 4K Ultra result of 63 FPS shows that even this hardware is stressed by maximum detail at 3840x2160.

The 10 GB GDDR6X memory runs at 1188 MHz with a 19 Gbps effective rate, providing 760.3 GB/s of bandwidth across a 320-bit bus. This bandwidth appears sufficient for Doom’s needs — the frame rate drops are proportional to pixel count, not texture memory pressure. If VRAM were a bottleneck, the 4K results would show more severe degradation at High and Ultra settings. Instead, the 78 FPS at 4K High and 63 FPS at 4K Ultra suggest compute and fill-rate limits rather than memory starvation.

The GPU’s benchmark scores place it at the 68th percentile among all GPUs. Its PassMark G3D score of 25086 and 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 4407 are respectable but not class-leading. The nearest rivals listed are the NVIDIA P106-100 (0.3% lower score), AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 (0.3% lower), AMD Radeon RX 6600M (0.4% lower), and AMD Radeon R9 M290X (0.4% lower). These comparisons are within a 0.4% band, indicating the RTX 3080 sits in a tightly contested performance tier.

The pixel rate of 164.2 GPixel/s is likely the key constraint at 4K. At 3840x2160, there are 8.3 million pixels per frame. With a fill-rate limit, the GPU can theoretically output around 19,800 frames per second of raw pixel work, but in practice, shading and texture operations reduce this dramatically. The 63 FPS at Ultra suggests the shader workload is the bottleneck, not pure pixel throughput. The RTX 3080’s tensor cores (272) and RT cores (68) are present but unused in this non-ray-traced title, meaning the full GPU is dedicated to rasterization.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700 provides the foundation for this system, and its 8 cores and 16 threads at a 3.70 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost clock are more than adequate for Doom. The CPU’s benchmark results show a strong single-thread score of 901 in 3dmark_single_thread and 3296 in PassMark single-thread, which is critical for a game engine that relies on a main render thread. The multi-thread scores are equally robust: 20655 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 24303 in PassMark multithread, with a 3dmark_max_threads score of 6617.

The CPU’s cache hierarchy — 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3 — provides ample on-die storage for Doom’s level geometry and texture streaming needs. The 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth over a dual-channel DDR4 interface is not a limiting factor at any resolution tested. The CPU’s percentile rank of 78 among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 25517, places it slightly above the AMD Ryzen 5 6600H (0.1% higher) and AMD Ryzen 7 5825U (0.3% higher), and marginally below the Intel Xeon D-2752TER (0.1% lower).

At 1080p Low, the 301 FPS result approaches the practical limit for many game engines, and the CPU’s single-thread performance is likely the ceiling. The fact that 1080p Ultra drops to 181 FPS — a 40% reduction — indicates the GPU is taking on more work as settings increase, but the CPU still keeps up. At 1440p and 4K, the CPU has significant headroom; the frame rates are dictated by GPU rendering time, not CPU draw-call submission.

The CPU’s 65 W TDP and 7 nm TSMC process node (Cezanne architecture) mean it runs efficiently, but the data does not include temperature or power measurements during gaming. The 3dmark_16_threads score of 6628 and 3dmark_8_threads score of 5585 suggest that Doom, which is not heavily multi-threaded, will primarily benefit from the CPU’s strong single-core performance rather than its 16 threads.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 5700 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 ranks 1054 out of 3712 tested combos in Doom. This places it in the 28.4th percentile of all combinations — meaning roughly 72% of tested combos perform better in this specific game. Given that the CPU ranks in the 78th percentile and the GPU in the 68th percentile individually, the combo’s lower rank highlights that Doom is particularly sensitive to certain hardware attributes that this pairing does not maximize.

The rank of 1054 suggests that while both components are competent, neither is top-tier for this title. The RTX 3080’s nearest GPU rivals all score within 0.4% of it on average, yet the combo rank implies that pairing this GPU with a stronger CPU (or vice versa) could yield better results. The data does not specify which combos rank above this one, but the implication is that Doom rewards higher single-thread CPU performance and possibly higher GPU fill rates.

Compared to the CPU’s nearest rivals — the Intel Xeon D-2752TER, AMD Ryzen 5 7640U, AMD Ryzen 5 6600H, and AMD Ryzen 7 5825U — the Ryzen 7 5700 is within 0.3% in average benchmark score. This tight grouping suggests the CPU is not a differentiator at this performance level. The GPU’s nearest rivals are similarly clustered within 0.4%, meaning the RTX 3080 is also not a standout part in this database’s context.

The measured FPS data, however, tells a more positive story. At 1440p Medium, the combo delivers 170 FPS with a 144 FPS minimum, which is excellent for a 144 Hz monitor. At 4K Medium, 92 FPS is well above the 60 FPS standard for console-like smoothness. The rank of 1054 may reflect the database’s broader mix of hardware, including more expensive or newer components, but the actual gameplay experience for this combo in Doom is strong. The 3712 tested combos span a wide range of capabilities, and being in the top 28% is respectable for a mid-generation CPU paired with a previous-generation high-end GPU.