Doom

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700X paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 produces a top-tier experience in Doom (2016), a game whose id Tech 6 engine scales aggressively with both CPU and GPU resources. This combination ranks 49th out of 3,712 tested combos for this title, placing it in the top 1.3% of all configurations in the database. That ranking reflects a system with no meaningful bottleneck at any common resolution; the data shows a platform that delivers exceptional frame rates across the board, with the RTX 5090’s raw compute and the 9700X’s strong single-thread performance working in concert to push Doom far beyond typical 144Hz and even 240Hz display requirements.

How This Combo Ranks

The #49 rank out of 3,712 combos places this pairing in an elite tier, but it is not the absolute fastest possible configuration for Doom. The gap to the top spots is more about the CPU’s position relative to other processors than any GPU deficiency. The Ryzen 7 9700X sits at the 86th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 37,943. Its nearest rivals are extremely close: the Intel Core i9-14901E trails by just 0.1% (score 37,911), the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 is also 0.1% behind (37,904), and the Intel Core 5 211E is 0.3% back (37,829). This cluster of processors within a fraction of a percent of each other suggests that the 9700X is not a unique outlier; it is one of several high-end options that deliver nearly identical CPU-bound performance in this engine.

What distinguishes this combo is the GPU. The RTX 5090’s average benchmark score is 79,842, placing it at the 92nd percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals, however, are older workstation and laptop parts — the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB (79,605, 0.3% behind) and the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT (78,940, 1.1% behind) — which indicates the 5090’s lead over the rest of the consumer desktop field is substantial. The combination of a top-2% GPU with a top-14% CPU yields a rank that is better than either component’s individual percentile, showing that Doom rewards the 5090’s massive fill-rate and memory bandwidth more than it punishes any CPU limitation. The data suggests that if you were to pair this CPU with a weaker GPU, the rank would fall significantly; conversely, pairing this GPU with a slower CPU would still yield a high rank, but the 9700X ensures no frame rate is left on the table at 1080p.

GPU Role

The RTX 5090 is the driving force behind this combo’s high frame rates. Its 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus provides 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth, which is critical for Doom’s heavy texture streaming and high-resolution rendering. The GPU’s 2,017 MHz base and 2,407 MHz boost clocks are modest for a flagship, but the sheer scale of the silicon — 21,760 shading units, 680 texture mapping units, and 176 ROPs — explains the performance. The GPU’s 104.8 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 423.6 GPixel/s pixel rate are the numbers that matter here; they allow the card to brute-force Doom’s id Tech 6 engine, which is known for its efficient draw calls but still scales with raw GPU throughput.

In the measured data, the GPU’s role is most evident at 4K. At 3840x2160, the average frame rate drops from 454 FPS at 1080p Low to 159 FPS at 4K Low, a reduction of 65% that is almost entirely due to GPU load. The 5090’s memory bandwidth prevents any texture-swapping stutter, and the 176 ROPs ensure that even at 4K Ultra, the card sustains 96 FPS average. The nearest GPU rivals in the database are much older parts with far less bandwidth, which explains why the 5090’s lead grows as resolution increases. The GPU’s DirectX 12 Ultimate support and Vulkan 1.4 API compatibility are relevant for Doom, which was one of the first titles to leverage Vulkan; the 5090’s architecture handles this API efficiently, though the measured results do not separate API-specific performance.

FAQ

Q: Is the Ryzen 7 9700X a bottleneck for the RTX 5090 in Doom?

A: No. At 1080p Low, the combo hits 454 FPS, and the CPU’s average benchmark score (37,943) is within 0.1% of its closest rival, the Intel Core i9-14901E. The data shows no CPU-bound ceiling, as frame rates scale nearly linearly from 1080p to 1440p before GPU load becomes dominant.

Q: How much faster is this combo at 1080p compared to 4K?

A: At Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 454 FPS at 1920x1080 to 159 FPS at 3840x2160, a 65% reduction. At Ultra settings, it drops from 273 FPS at 1080p to 96 FPS at 4K, a 64.8% reduction. The scaling is consistent, indicating the GPU is the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

Q: What is the best setting preset for a 144Hz monitor?

A: For 144Hz, the Medium preset at 4K (139 FPS) or High at 4K (117 FPS) both exceed the refresh rate. At 1440p, even Ultra (177 FPS) is sufficient, while Medium (256 FPS) and High (216 FPS) provide significant headroom.

Q: Does the RTX 5090’s 32 GB of VRAM matter for Doom?

A: The 32 GB capacity is far beyond what Doom requires, but the 1.79 TB/s bandwidth from the 512-bit bus is what prevents frame drops during rapid scene changes. The measured Medium preset min FPS values (118 FPS at 4K, 218 FPS at 1440p, 336 FPS at 1080p) show no memory-related stutter.

Q: How does this combo compare to the closest CPU rival with the same GPU?

A: The 9700X’s average score (37,943) is 0.1% higher than the Intel Core i9-14901E (37,911). In Doom, this difference is negligible; the measured FPS would be within a few frames, likely invisible to the user.

Q: Can this combo run Doom at 240Hz at any resolution?

A: Yes, at 1080p. Medium (396 FPS), High (334 FPS), and even Ultra (273 FPS) all exceed 240Hz. At 1440p, Medium (256 FPS) and High (216 FPS) are close, but only Medium clears the 240Hz threshold.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured results show a clear progression across resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the combo is extremely fast: Low settings produce 454 FPS, Medium yields 396 FPS (min 336 FPS, max 455 FPS), High reaches 334 FPS, and Ultra still manages 273 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 181 FPS (a 39.9% drop), which is a modest penalty for a significant visual upgrade. The min FPS at Medium (336 FPS) is higher than the average FPS at Ultra (273 FPS), showing that the engine has no stability issues at lower presets.

At 2560x1440, the numbers remain high but show the GPU starting to work harder. Low hits 294 FPS, Medium averages 256 FPS (min 218 FPS, max 295 FPS), High averages 216 FPS, and Ultra drops to 177 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 117 FPS (a 39.8% reduction), nearly identical to the 1080p percentage drop. This consistency suggests that the CPU is still keeping up and the GPU’s fill-rate is scaling predictably with resolution.

At 3840x2160, the frame rates are still high but the GPU load becomes dominant. Low averages 159 FPS, Medium averages 139 FPS (min 118 FPS, max 160 FPS), High averages 117 FPS, and Ultra averages 96 FPS. The Ultra preset’s average (96 FPS) is just below a 100Hz refresh rate, but the Medium preset’s min (118 FPS) stays above that threshold. The data shows that even at 4K, this combo never drops below 96 FPS on average, which is a strong result for a 2016 game.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals where the bottleneck lies. At Low settings, the drop from 454 FPS (1080p) to 294 FPS (1440p) is a 35.2% reduction, and then to 159 FPS (4K) is a further 45.9% reduction. At Ultra settings, the drop from 273 FPS (1080p) to 177 FPS (1440p) is 35.2%, and then to 96 FPS (4K) is 45.8%. The near-identical percentage drops across all settings indicate that the limiting factor is resolution-dependent GPU work, not CPU or memory constraints.

The fact that the 1080p-to-1440p drop (35.2%) is smaller than the 1440p-to-4K drop (45.8%) suggests that the GPU’s pixel throughput becomes the primary constraint at higher resolutions. The RTX 5090’s 423.6 GPixel/s pixel rate is enough to sustain 273 FPS at 1080p, but at 4K the pixel count quadruples, and the frame rate scales accordingly. The CPU’s role is minimal here; if the 9700X were the bottleneck, the 1080p results would plateau, but they do not. The data indicates that this is a GPU-limited scenario at 4K, with the 5090’s 1.79 TB/s bandwidth preventing any memory-related frame drops.

Settings Recommendations

For a 60Hz display, every single measured preset at any resolution exceeds the refresh rate, so the recommendation is to choose the highest visual quality: Ultra at 4K (96 FPS) is the most demanding option that still clears 60 FPS. For a 120Hz display, High at 4K (117 FPS) is the sweet spot, as it provides a 21 FPS buffer over the refresh rate while maintaining excellent visual fidelity. The Medium preset at 4K (139 FPS) is also viable, but High offers a better balance of image quality and performance.

For a 144Hz display, the Medium preset at 4K (139 FPS) is the only 4K option that hits the target, but High at 1440p (216 FPS) provides massive headroom. Users with 1440p panels should select Ultra (177 FPS), which still exceeds 144Hz by 33 FPS. For a 240Hz display, the options narrow: Medium at 1080p (396 FPS) and High at 1080p (334 FPS) both provide more than enough headroom, while Ultra at 1080p (273 FPS) also clears 240Hz. At 1440p, only Medium (256 FPS) exceeds 240Hz, so that is the recommended preset for high-refresh 1440p monitors.

The data suggests that the Medium preset offers the best overall experience for high-refresh displays, as it consistently provides the highest min FPS values relative to the average (e.g., 118 FPS min at 4K versus the 96 FPS average at Ultra). The Ultra preset is only recommended for users with 60Hz displays or those who prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate. The Low preset is unnecessary for this combo, as even Medium provides a significant visual upgrade with only a 12.6% FPS penalty at 1080p (454 FPS to 396 FPS) and a 12.6% penalty at 4K (159 FPS to 139 FPS).