Doom

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

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700X is an 8-core, 16-thread desktop processor built on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge), manufactured on a 4 nm process by TSMC. It ships with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, drawing a 65 W TDP. The chip features 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 32 MB L3 cache. Memory support is dual-channel DDR5, with a rated bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The CPU connects via PCIe Gen 5 with 24 lanes and includes integrated Radeon Graphics, though this game pairing relies on the dedicated GPU.

In synthetic CPU benchmarks, the 9700X posts a single-thread score of 1280 in 3DMark, 346 in Cinebench R15 single-core, 2211 in Cinebench R23 single-core, and 3023 in Geekbench single-core. Multi-threaded results are stronger: 3DMark 16-thread score is 9824, max-thread score is 9771, Cinebench R15 multicore is 3178, R23 multicore is 20485, and Geekbench multicore is 17906. PassMark multithread score is 37161, with integer math at 120142 and floating-point math at 78999. The CPU's average benchmark score is 37943, placing it at the 86th percentile among all CPUs.

For a game like Doom (2016), which is an FPS title, the CPU's high single-thread performance matters more than raw core count. The 9700X's boost clock of 5.50 GHz and strong single-core scores ensure that game logic, physics, and draw call processing won't bottleneck the GPU at high frame rates. The 8-core/16-thread configuration also provides headroom for background tasks and streaming, though Doom's engine is not heavily threaded. The measured FPS data confirms this: at 1080p Low, the combo reaches 314 FPS average, which is far above what the GPU alone would deliver if the CPU were weak.

The CPU's nearest rivals by average benchmark score include the Intel Core i9-14901E (delta 0.1% ahead), AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 (0.1% ahead), Intel Core 5 211E (0.3% ahead), and AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 (0.4% ahead). These deltas are negligible, meaning the 9700X is effectively at parity with those chips in general compute. For this game, the CPU is not the limiting factor; the GPU is.

FAQ

Q: Is the Ryzen 7 9700X strong enough for Doom at high frame rates?

A: Yes. The CPU's single-thread score of 3023 in Geekbench and 2211 in Cinebench R23 single-core, combined with a 5.50 GHz boost clock, supports frame rates well above 300 FPS at 1080p Low settings, as shown by the 314 FPS average in the measured data.

Q: How does the 9700X compare to its closest rivals in terms of overall performance?

A: The 9700X averages 37943 across all benchmark tests, which is 0.1% behind the Intel Core i9-14901E and AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core 5 211E, and 0.4% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132. These differences are within noise.

Q: Does the 9700X have integrated graphics that could run Doom without the RX 9070 XT?

A: Yes, it includes Radeon Graphics, but the measured FPS data in this page comes from the dedicated Radeon RX 9070 XT. The integrated GPU is not intended for gaming at these performance levels, and no FPS data is available for it in this game.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the 9700X, and does it matter for Doom?

A: The CPU supports dual-channel DDR5 with 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth. For Doom, which is not memory-bandwidth-sensitive at typical settings, this is sufficient. The GPU's 644.6 GB/s bandwidth is far more relevant.

Q: How does the 9700X's thread count affect Doom's performance?

A: Doom is not heavily multithreaded, so the 8-core/16-thread setup is more than enough. The CPU's 3DMark 2-thread score of 2525 and 4-thread score of 4869 indicate that even fewer threads deliver strong performance, leaving ample headroom.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 9700X and AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT ranks 895th out of 3712 tested combos in Doom. This places the combo in the top 24% of all tested pairings for this game. Given that the GPU's percentile versus all GPUs is only 55 (meaning it sits near the median), the rank is respectable but not top-tier.

The GPU's average benchmark score is 13543, with a PassMark G3D score of 26795 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 7260. The GPU's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 7770M (0.1% ahead), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570 (0.2% ahead), NVIDIA P106-090 (0.5% ahead), and AMD Radeon Pro 555 (1% ahead). These are older, lower-end cards, which is surprising given the RX 9070 XT's modern architecture (RDNA 4.0, Navi 48) and specs. The GPU's benchmark percentile is dragged down by its average score being close to those older parts, but in Doom, the measured FPS tells a different story.

The combo's rank benefits from the CPU's high percentile (86th) and the game's ability to leverage the GPU's raw throughput. At 1080p, the combo hits over 300 FPS on Low, which is far above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth play. The rank of 895 out of 3712 suggests that while there are faster combos (likely with higher-end GPUs), this pairing is solidly mid-pack to upper-mid-pack.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, 3840x2160) and four settings presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra). All values are average FPS unless noted; some rows include min/max FPS.

1080p (1920x1080):

• Low: 314 FPS average
• Medium: 273 FPS average (min 232, max 314)
• High: 231 FPS average
• Ultra: 189 FPS average

1440p (2560x1440):

• Low: 203 FPS average
• Medium: 177 FPS average (min 150, max 203)
• High: 149 FPS average
• Ultra: 122 FPS average

4K (3840x2160):

• Low: 110 FPS average
• Medium: 96 FPS average (min 81, max 110)
• High: 81 FPS average
• Ultra: 66 FPS average

The data shows a clear drop as resolution increases. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 314 FPS, which is nearly three times the 110 FPS at 4K Low. The Medium preset at each resolution shows the min and max FPS figures, indicating consistency: at 1080p Medium, the range is 232-314 FPS; at 1440p Medium, 150-203 FPS; and at 4K Medium, 81-110 FPS. These ranges are tight, suggesting stable frame pacing.

For 60 FPS gaming, every setting and resolution combination exceeds 60 FPS, even 4K Ultra at 66 FPS. For 144 Hz monitors, 1440p High (149 FPS) and below are viable, while 1080p Ultra (189 FPS) also qualifies. For 240 Hz displays, only 1080p Low (314 FPS) and Medium (273 FPS) reach that threshold, with 1080p High (231 FPS) close but slightly under.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is significant and reveals the bottleneck. At Low settings, the transition from 1080p (314 FPS) to 1440p (203 FPS) is a 35% reduction, and from 1440p to 4K (110 FPS) is another 46% reduction. From 1080p to 4K Low, the FPS drops by 65%. At Medium settings, the drop is similar: 273 FPS at 1080p, 177 at 1440p (35% lower), and 96 at 4K (65% lower from 1080p). At High, 231 to 149 (36% lower) to 81 (65% lower overall). At Ultra, 189 to 122 (35% lower) to 66 (65% lower overall).

The consistent ~35% drop from 1080p to 1440p and ~65% overall from 1080p to 4K indicates that the GPU is the limiting component. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS would not scale so predictably with resolution. The GPU's 16 GB of GDDR6 memory with 644.6 GB/s bandwidth and 4096 shading units handle the increased pixel load, but the frame rate halves as pixel count quadruples (1080p to 4K is 4x the pixels, yet FPS drops to ~35% of the 1080p value). This is typical for a GPU-bound scenario.

The GPU's pixel rate of 380.2 GPixel/s and texture rate of 760.3 GTexel/s explain why 4K Ultra still hits 66 FPS: the card has enough fill rate for that workload. The RT cores (64) are not heavily used in Doom's non-ray-traced rendering, so traditional rasterization performance is what matters here.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data shows that the best experience depends on the target refresh rate and resolution. For 4K, the Ultra preset delivers 66 FPS average, which is above the 60 FPS console-standard but not enough for high-refresh displays. Dropping to High at 4K yields 81 FPS, a 23% improvement over Ultra, while Medium gives 96 FPS (45% better than Ultra). For 4K gaming, Medium or High is the sweet spot: Medium at 96 FPS is smooth on 90-100 Hz monitors, and High at 81 FPS is still playable on 75-80 Hz displays. Low at 4K (110 FPS) is only for those who prioritize frame rate over visuals, and the visual quality loss from Ultra to Low is substantial.

At 1440p, the situation is better. Ultra hits 122 FPS, which is above 120 Hz, making it the recommended preset for high-refresh 1440p monitors. High at 149 FPS is even better for 144 Hz panels, and Medium at 177 FPS suits 165-180 Hz displays. Low at 203 FPS is for competitive play where every frame counts, but the graphical downgrade is noticeable. For most 1440p users, High or Ultra is the best balance.

At 1080p, the card is overkill. Ultra still delivers 189 FPS, which is above 144 Hz and close to 165 Hz. High at 231 FPS exceeds 240 Hz, and Medium at 273 FPS is well above that. Low at 314 FPS is only useful for extreme esports scenarios. For 1080p, the recommendation is to max out to Ultra (189 FPS) or High (231 FPS) if the monitor supports higher refresh rates. There is no reason to drop below High at 1080p unless chasing 300+ FPS.

In summary, the best experience per the measured rows is: 4K Medium (96 FPS) for a balance of quality and smoothness; 1440p High (149 FPS) for high-refresh gaming; and 1080p Ultra (189 FPS) for maximum visual fidelity without sacrificing frame rate. The combo's performance is GPU-limited, so CPU settings are not a concern.