Doom

FAQ

Q: What average frame rate does this combo achieve at 1080p with Ultra settings?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 7700 with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti delivers an average of 142 FPS at 1920x1080 on Ultra settings. This is the most demanding preset tested at this resolution, and it still remains comfortably above the 144 Hz refresh rate threshold for many displays.

Q: How does the CPU's multi-threaded performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Ryzen 7 7700 scores 18,760 in Cinebench R23 multi-core. Its average benchmark score of 40,081 places it 0.1% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 (40,048) and 0.2% behind the Intel Core 5 221E (40,144). The data shows a tightly contested field at this performance tier.

Q: What is the GPU's memory configuration and how does it impact 4K performance?

A: The RTX 3060 Ti features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. At 3840x2160 with High settings, the combo averages 61 FPS, while Ultra drops to 50 FPS, suggesting the memory capacity and bandwidth are sufficient for this game's demands at 4K but limit the highest preset.

Q: Which resolution offers the largest performance leap relative to 4K?

A: Moving from 3840x2160 to 2560x1440 on High settings increases the average frame rate from 61 FPS to 113 FPS, an 85% improvement. The jump from 1440p to 1080p is smaller in percentage terms, going from 113 FPS to 174 FPS, which is a 54% increase.

Q: How does the GPU's DirectX 12 benchmark score compare to its nearest competitors?

A: The RTX 3060 Ti scores 78 in the Passmark DirectX 12 test. Its overall average benchmark score is 16,129, which is 0.7% lower than the AMD Radeon RX 9060 (16,014) and 1.4% lower than both the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M (16,351) and the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT (16,361).

Q: What is the combo's overall ranking among all tested configurations for this game?

A: The combination of the Ryzen 7 7700 and RTX 3060 Ti ranks 1,839 out of 3,712 tested combos in Doom. This places it in the upper half of all configurations, with the data indicating solid mid-to-high-tier performance for this title.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti is the primary driver of frame rates in Doom, and the measured results reflect a GPU that scales predictably with settings changes. The card operates with a base clock of 1410 MHz and a boost clock of 1665 MHz, built on the Ampere architecture with 4,864 shading units. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus delivers 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which proves adequate for this game's texture-heavy environments.

The GPU's compute capabilities include 16.20 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which the benchmark data shows translates into playable frame rates even at 4K. At 3840x2160 with High settings, the combo averages 61 FPS, indicating the card can handle the game's demands at that resolution when not maxing out every visual feature. The drop from High to Ultra at 4K is significant — from 61 FPS down to 50 FPS — suggesting the Ultra preset introduces effects that heavily tax the GPU's resources.

The RTX 3060 Ti's Passmark G3D score of 20,349 places it in the 59th percentile of all GPUs, and its DirectX 11 score of 163 indicates strong legacy API performance. The card's 80 ROPs and 152 TMUs contribute to a pixel rate of 133.2 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 253.1 GTexel/s, which the data shows is sufficient to maintain high frame rates at lower resolutions. At 1080p, even Ultra settings produce 142 FPS on average, demonstrating the GPU has headroom when pixel count is reduced.

The GPU's nearest rivals in aggregate benchmarks include the AMD Radeon RX 9060, which scores 16,014 (0.7% lower than the RTX 3060 Ti's 16,129 average), and the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT at 16,361 (1.4% higher). These close margins in synthetic tests do not necessarily translate to identical gaming performance, but the measured FPS data provides a clearer picture of real-world capability. The RTX 3060 Ti's 8 GB memory capacity appears to be a limiting factor at 4K Ultra, where the 50 FPS average suggests the card is struggling with memory-intensive effects rather than raw compute throughput.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data across four presets at three resolutions reveals a clear hierarchy of playability. For players targeting a smooth 60 FPS experience, the High preset at 3840x2160 delivers exactly 61 FPS on average, making it the optimal 4K choice from the data. At this resolution, Medium also works with an average of 72 FPS, but the additional visual fidelity of High at nearly the same frame rate makes it the superior option.

At 2560x1440, the data shows that High settings provide 113 FPS on average, which is an excellent balance for high-refresh-rate monitors. The Ultra preset drops to 92 FPS, still playable but with diminishing returns on visual quality relative to the frame rate cost. The Medium preset at 1440p offers 133 FPS, while Low reaches 153 FPS — the latter two are better suited for competitive play where maximum frame rates take priority over visual fidelity.

For 1920x1080, the benchmark results indicate that Ultra settings at 142 FPS remain highly playable, but the Medium preset at 206 FPS offers a substantial boost for esports-style responsiveness. The High preset at 174 FPS sits between these two, providing a reasonable middle ground. The data suggests that the sweet spot for this combo is High settings at either 1080p or 1440p, as both configurations exceed 100 FPS while maintaining strong visual quality.

The Ultra preset's performance cost is consistent across resolutions: at 1080p it reduces frame rates by 18% compared to High, at 1440p by 19%, and at 4K by 18%. This uniform penalty indicates the Ultra preset adds a consistent load on the GPU regardless of resolution. Players who prioritize visual fidelity should note that 4K Ultra is the only configuration that falls below 60 FPS, hitting 50 FPS on average. For the best overall experience, the data supports using High at 1440p, which yields 113 FPS while retaining most of the graphical features that make Doom's environments visually striking.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo demonstrates substantial performance headroom. The Low preset achieves 236 FPS on average, while Medium reaches 206 FPS with a minimum of 175 FPS and maximum of 237 FPS. High settings produce 174 FPS on average, and Ultra still maintains 142 FPS. These figures indicate that 1080p is well within the capabilities of this hardware, with even the most demanding preset remaining far above the 100 FPS threshold.

At 2560x1440, the performance scales down predictably. Low settings deliver 153 FPS on average, Medium achieves 133 FPS with a range of 113 to 153 FPS, High produces 113 FPS, and Ultra drops to 92 FPS. The 1440p resolution represents a balanced middle ground, where High settings remain competitive with 1080p Ultra performance, and even the Ultra preset stays above 90 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the data reveals the GPU's limits. Low settings achieve 83 FPS on average, Medium delivers 72 FPS with a minimum of 61 FPS and maximum of 83 FPS, High produces 61 FPS, and Ultra falls to 50 FPS. The 4K results show a consistent pattern where each preset step costs roughly 10-11 FPS, indicating a linear scaling of GPU workload with visual quality settings.

The Medium preset's min/max values at each resolution provide insight into frame time consistency. At 1080p, the range spans from 175 to 237 FPS, a 62 FPS spread that suggests some scenes are significantly more demanding than others. At 1440p, the range narrows to 40 FPS (113 to 153), and at 4K it tightens further to 22 FPS (61 to 83). This narrowing range at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU becomes the consistent bottleneck, reducing the relative impact of scene complexity on frame rates.

Comparing across resolutions, the 1080p Low preset at 236 FPS is nearly three times faster than the 4K Ultra preset at 50 FPS. The 1440p High preset at 113 FPS sits almost exactly halfway between these extremes. The data shows that High settings at 1440p offer 85% of the frame rate of 1080p High but with 78% more pixels, making it an efficient scaling point.

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti ranks 1,839 out of 3,712 tested combinations in Doom, placing it in the 50.5th percentile of all configurations. This position indicates that while the combo is not among the top performers, it solidly occupies the middle of the pack, with more powerful GPUs and CPUs ahead of it but a substantial number of less capable systems behind.

The CPU's aggregate performance contributes to this ranking through its 87th percentile standing among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 40,081. The Ryzen 7 7700's nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365, scores 40,048, representing a 0.1% difference that is effectively negligible in real-world performance. The Intel Core 5 221E scores 40,144, putting it 0.2% ahead of the Ryzen 7 7700, while the AMD Ryzen 9 270 at 40,246 is 0.4% ahead.

The GPU's 59th percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average score of 16,129, is the more limiting factor in this combo's overall position. The RTX 3060 Ti's nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 9060, scores 16,014, which is 0.7% lower, while the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M and AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT both score 16,351 and 16,361 respectively, each 1.4% higher.

The combination of a high-percentile CPU with a mid-tier GPU creates a system where the processor has significant headroom to feed the graphics card. This is reflected in the game's performance scaling, where the GPU is clearly the limiting factor at higher resolutions. The 1,839 rank out of 3,712 suggests that many combos with similar GPUs but slower CPUs achieve comparable results, while combos with faster GPUs pull ahead significantly.

The data implies that upgrading the GPU would yield larger performance gains in Doom than upgrading the CPU, as the Ryzen 7 7700's 87th percentile ranking indicates it has ample compute capability to support a more powerful graphics card. Conversely, pairing this CPU with a weaker GPU would likely result in a rank closer to the bottom quartile, as the GPU would become the dominant bottleneck.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700 provides substantial processing power that the benchmark data shows is more than sufficient for Doom's requirements. With 8 cores and 16 threads running at a base clock of 3.80 GHz and boosting up to 5.30 GHz, the CPU delivers strong single-threaded and multi-threaded performance. Its Zen 4 architecture, built on a 5 nm process, includes 32 MB of shared L3 cache and 1 MB of L2 cache per core.

The CPU's single-threaded performance is particularly relevant for this game, as FPS titles often rely heavily on a few cores. The Geekbench single-core score of 2,525 and the 3DMark single-thread score of 1,049 indicate strong per-core capability. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1,930 further confirms this, suggesting the CPU can handle the game's primary thread without becoming a bottleneck.

Multi-threaded performance is also robust, with Cinebench R23 multi-core scoring 18,760 and Geekbench multi-core reaching 15,371. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 8,484 and max-thread score of 8,479 show consistent scaling across thread counts. Passmark multi-thread results of 34,470 and floating-point math at 66,246 indicate the CPU handles complex calculations efficiently.

The Ryzen 7 7700's memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s via dual-channel DDR5 support ensures the GPU receives data promptly. The 65W TDP and 5 nm process node demonstrate efficiency, while the PCIe Gen 5 interface with 24 lanes provides ample bandwidth for the GPU's PCIe 4.0 x16 connection. The CPU's 87th percentile ranking among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 40,081, places it well above the median, confirming its capability to support demanding gaming workloads.

The benchmark data suggests the CPU is not the limiting factor in this combo's Doom performance. At 1080p Low settings, where CPU overhead is most likely to surface, the combo achieves 236 FPS, indicating the processor keeps up with high frame rates. The 3DMark 2-thread score of 2,043 and 4-thread score of 3,931 show that even under lighter thread loads, the CPU maintains strong performance, which is critical for games that may not fully utilize all 16 threads.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals how this combo's performance scales across resolutions, providing insight into which component becomes the bottleneck. From 1080p to 1440p on High settings, the average frame rate drops from 174 FPS to 113 FPS, a 35% reduction. From 1440p to 4K, the drop is from 113 FPS to 61 FPS, a 46% reduction. This increasing rate of decline indicates that the GPU's workload grows disproportionately with pixel count.

The scaling pattern is consistent across all settings. At Low, the frame rates are 236 FPS at 1080p, 153 FPS at 1440p, and 83 FPS at 4K, representing drops of 35% and 46% respectively. Ultra settings show 142 FPS at 1080p, 92 FPS at 1440p, and 50 FPS at 4K, with drops of 35% and 46% as well. This uniformity suggests that resolution scaling affects all presets equally, reinforcing that pixel count is the primary driver of performance changes.

The data indicates that the GPU becomes progressively more dominant as the bottleneck at higher resolutions. At 1080p, the CPU's strong single-thread performance allows frame rates to reach 236 FPS on Low, a figure that likely approaches the game's engine limits. At 4K, the GPU's compute and memory bandwidth constraints become apparent, with even Low settings producing only 83 FPS.

The 4K results show a notable compression of frame rates across settings. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 94 FPS (236 vs 142). At 1440p, this gap narrows to 61 FPS (153 vs 92). At 4K, the gap shrinks further to 33 FPS (83 vs 50). This compression suggests that at higher resolutions, the GPU is so heavily loaded that settings changes have relatively less impact on absolute frame rates, as the pixel throughput dominates the performance equation.

The measured data implies that players seeking to maximize frame rates should prioritize resolution reduction over settings reduction. Moving from 4K Ultra (50 FPS) to 1440p Ultra (92 FPS) yields an 84% improvement, while the same settings change at 4K from Ultra to Low only provides a 66% improvement. The most efficient path to high frame rates is to drop resolution first, as the GPU's pixel-processing capabilities are the primary constraint across all settings at 4K.