Doom

Doom, a 2016 FPS built on the id Tech 6 engine, presents a demanding scenario for the pairing of an AMD Ryzen 7 7700X processor with an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 graphics card. The benchmark data reveals a system where the CPU's substantial processing power is consistently held back by the GPU's output limits, particularly at higher resolutions. The Ryzen 7 7700X, an 8-core, 16-thread processor from the 7000 series, operates on the Zen 4 architecture with a base clock of 4.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. In contrast, the GTX 1650 is an end-of-life product built on the older Turing architecture, a 12 nm chip with a base clock of 1485 MHz and a boost clock of 1665 MHz. This analysis will interpret the measured FPS data to understand the performance ceiling, scaling behavior, and the most viable settings for this combination.

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

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700X is a high-end desktop processor, evidenced by its benchmark scores. It falls in the 85th percentile when compared to all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 35909. Its performance is closely matched by rivals such as the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845, which scores 35802 (a 0.3% difference), and the Intel Core 7 250H at 35728 (0.5% difference). This places the processor in a strong position to handle the computational demands of any modern game, including Doom. With 8 cores and 16 threads, the CPU's architecture is designed for high multi-threaded throughput. In the Cinebench R23 multi-core test, it achieves a score of 19088, and in the single-core test, it scores 1987, indicating robust per-thread performance that is crucial for game logic and physics.

However, the measured FPS in Doom suggests the CPU's capabilities are largely underutilized. The data shows that this processor, paired with the GTX 1650, produces a maximum average of 92 FPS at 1080p Low settings. The CPU's potential, as measured by its 3DMark 2-thread score of 2112 or its 4-thread score of 4074, is far beyond what is being asked of it here. The bottleneck is not the processor's ability to feed the GPU with draw calls or handle game simulation; it is the GPU's ability to render frames.

The Ryzen 7 7700X's specifications, such as its 32 MB of shared L3 cache and support for DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s, are all top-tier. These features ensure that the CPU will not be a limiting factor in frame generation. The data suggests that even at 1080p, where CPU load is typically highest, the GTX 1650 is the primary constraint. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 8859 and the 8-thread score of 7057 further indicate the processor's immense headroom. The performance difference between the CPU and GPU is stark, with the GTX 1650 sitting in the 40th percentile for all GPUs, with an average score of 7472. This is a clear mismatch, where the CPU's role is to ensure a stable frame delivery, but the GPU cannot produce frames fast enough to utilize it.

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

Q: What is the best average FPS this combo can achieve in Doom, and at what settings?

A: The highest average FPS is 92, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This is the peak performance point in the measured data.

Q: How does the performance at 1440p compare to 1080p for this system?

A: At 2560x1440, the average FPS drops significantly. For example, at High settings, the average FPS falls from 68 at 1080p to 44 at 1440p, a decrease of 24 FPS. Similarly, at Low settings, it drops from 92 to 59 FPS.

Q: Is the GTX 1650's 4 GB VRAM a limiting factor in this game?

A: The data does not explicitly show VRAM capacity as the bottleneck. The FPS scales consistently with resolution and settings, suggesting the GPU's compute and memory bandwidth, which is 128.1 GB/s, are the limiting factors rather than a sudden VRAM capacity issue.

Q: What is the performance difference between the "Low" and "Ultra" presets at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the average FPS drops from 92 on Low settings to 55 on Ultra settings. This represents a 37 FPS decrease, or about a 40% reduction in frame rate when moving to the highest graphical preset.

Q: How does this CPU compare to its closest rivals in terms of overall processing power?

A: The Ryzen 7 7700X has an average benchmark score of 35909. Its closest rival, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845, has an average score of 35802, which is a 0.3% difference. Another rival, the Intel Core 7 250H, scores 35728, a 0.5% difference. This indicates the CPU is in a tightly contested performance tier.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for this combo at 1440p Medium settings?

A: At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the minimum FPS recorded is 44, while the maximum is 60, with an average of 52 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is ranked 3585 out of 3712 tested combos in Doom. This places the system in the bottom 3.4% of all tested configurations. This low ranking is a direct consequence of the GPU's performance limitations relative to the CPU. The Ryzen 7 7700X is a processor that scores in the 85th percentile for all CPUs, but the GTX 1650 scores in the 40th percentile for all GPUs. This pairing creates a massive imbalance.

The rank of 3585 out of 3712 is not a reflection of the CPU's capability but rather the system's overall game performance. A system with a more balanced, lower-tier CPU paired with a stronger GPU would likely rank much higher. The data suggests that the GTX 1650, which is an end-of-life product, is the sole determinant of this poor ranking. The CPU's high benchmark scores, such as the Geekbench multicore score of 12451 and the Passmark multithread score of 35686, cannot compensate for the GPU's low frame output. This ranking serves as a clear indicator that for gaming purposes, this CPU-GPU combination is severely constrained by the graphics card. The system's position in the ranking confirms how a powerful processor can be rendered ineffective by a weak GPU in a graphically intensive title like Doom.

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

The measured FPS data provides a detailed look at the performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the system's performance is at its best. The Low preset yields an average of 92 FPS. Moving to Medium, the average drops to 80 FPS, with a minimum of 68 and a maximum of 92. The High preset yields an average of 68 FPS. The Ultra preset is the most demanding, resulting in an average of 55 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the performance decreases noticeably. The Low preset produces an average of 59 FPS. The Medium preset averages 52 FPS, with a minimum of 44 and a maximum of 60. High settings drop the average to 44 FPS. The Ultra preset yields an average of 36 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles to maintain playable frame rates. The Low preset yields an average of 32 FPS. The Medium preset averages 28 FPS, with a minimum of 24 and a maximum of 32. The High preset drops to an average of 24 FPS. The Ultra preset is the most demanding, resulting in an average of 19 FPS.

This breakdown shows a clear and predictable pattern. Each increase in resolution or settings preset results in a significant FPS drop, highlighting the GPU's limited processing power. The difference between 1080p Low and 4K Ultra is stark, representing a 73 FPS difference in average frame rate.

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

The scaling of FPS from 1080p to 4K reveals the nature of the system's bottleneck. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 92 at 1080p to 59 at 1440p, a 35.9% decrease. Moving from 1440p to 4K, the average FPS drops further from 59 to 32, a 45.8% decrease. This pattern is consistent across all settings. At High settings, the FPS drops from 68 at 1080p to 44 at 1440p (35.3% decrease) and then to 24 at 4K (45.5% decrease).

The consistent and significant FPS drops at each resolution step indicate that the GPU is the limiting factor. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS would remain relatively constant as resolution increases, because the CPU's workload would not change much. Instead, the frame rate drops in near-proportion to the increase in pixel count. For instance, moving from 1080p (2.1 million pixels) to 4K (8.3 million pixels) quadruples the pixel count. The FPS at Low settings drops by roughly 65%, which is less than the 75% that a perfect scaling would suggest, but it still demonstrates the GPU's struggle to fill the additional pixels.

The GTX 1650's specifications support this conclusion. Its pixel rate is 53.28 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 93.24 GTexel/s. These are fixed hardware limits. As the resolution increases, the GPU must process more pixels and textures per frame, and its fixed throughput cannot keep up, leading to lower FPS. The CPU, with its high single-thread score of 1090 in 3DMark and a Passmark single-thread score of 4190, is more than capable of processing the game logic at any resolution. The data clearly shows a GPU-bound system.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the user's target resolution and desired frame rate. For a smooth 60+ FPS experience, the only viable options are at 1920x1080. The Low preset is the only one that offers a comfortable margin above 60 FPS, averaging 92 FPS. The Medium preset, averaging 80 FPS, also provides a smooth experience and is a better visual choice than Low, as it offers higher graphical fidelity while maintaining a frame rate well above 60 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset, with an average of 59 FPS, is the only setting that approaches a 60 FPS target. The Medium preset, at 52 FPS, is playable but not as smooth. For users with a 60 Hz monitor, the Low preset at 1440p is the best balance of visual clarity and performance.

At 3840x2160, no settings preset provides a playable experience by modern standards. The highest average FPS is 32 on Low settings, which is below the threshold for smooth motion. The Ultra preset at 4K yields an average of 19 FPS, which is not recommended.

The best overall experience, balancing visual quality and performance, is the Medium preset at 1920x1080. This setting provides an average of 80 FPS, which is smooth, while offering a significant visual upgrade over the Low preset. The data shows that the system's performance headroom at 1080p Medium is sufficient for a good experience. The Ultra preset at 1080p, at 55 FPS, is also playable but may feel less responsive than the Medium preset.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the definitive bottleneck in this system. Its performance, as measured by the average benchmark score of 7472, places it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs. This is a stark contrast to the CPU's 85th percentile ranking. The GPU's nearest rivals, such as the Intel Arc A310 with a score of 7550 (a -1% difference), highlight its position in the low-end performance tier.

The GPU's clock speeds are 1485 MHz base and 1665 MHz boost. These clocks, while not the sole determinant of performance, are indicative of its modest processing power. The GPU has 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Its FP32 performance is rated at 2.984 TFLOPS. These figures are all relatively low for a modern graphics card, which explains the observed FPS limits.

The GPU's memory configuration is a 4 GB GDDR5 buffer on a 128-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s. The memory clock is 2001 MHz, with an effective data rate of 8 Gbps. While 4 GB of VRAM is sufficient for Doom at most settings, the low memory bandwidth is a significant constraint. The game's textures and framebuffer require constant data transfer, and the 128.1 GB/s bandwidth becomes a limiting factor, especially at higher resolutions and settings. The GPU's DirectX 12 score in Passmark is 35, and its DirectX 11 score is 58, which are low and reflect its inability to handle complex graphical workloads efficiently.

The data shows a direct correlation between the GPU's modest specifications and the FPS results. The GTX 1650 is simply not powerful enough to drive Doom at high frame rates, particularly at resolutions above 1080p. Its end-of-life status and low performance percentile make it the clear limiting component in this pairing. The CPU's massive processing power is left idle, waiting for the GPU to deliver frames.