Doom

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data for Doom with the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D and AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT reveals a clear pattern across all three resolutions: the Medium preset delivers the most balanced experience. At 1920x1080, Medium produces 254 FPS average, which sits comfortably between the 292 FPS of Low and the 215 FPS of High. The gap between Medium and High is 39 FPS, while the jump from Medium to Low is 38 FPS, suggesting Medium captures most of the performance headroom while likely providing noticeably better visual fidelity than Low.

At 2560x1440, the story repeats itself. Medium achieves 165 FPS average, with Low at 189 FPS and High at 139 FPS. The Medium preset here shows a 26 FPS advantage over High, which is substantial for competitive play. The 1440p Medium result also maintains a 140 FPS minimum, which is critical for avoiding noticeable stutter during intense combat sequences.

The 3840x2160 results make the Medium recommendation even more compelling. At 4K, Medium produces 89 FPS average with a 76 FPS minimum and 103 FPS maximum. This is the only 4K preset where the minimum FPS is recorded, and it stays above the 60 FPS threshold that most players consider playable. High at 4K drops to 75 FPS average, while Ultra falls to 62 FPS, which is dangerously close to the edge of smooth gameplay.

Ultra settings are the least favorable across the board. At 1080p, Ultra delivers 176 FPS, which is 78 FPS below Medium. At 1440p, Ultra produces 114 FPS, a 51 FPS deficit from Medium. At 4K, Ultra manages only 62 FPS, which is 27 FPS below Medium and the only preset at that resolution dipping below the 75 FPS mark. The data suggests that Ultra's additional visual features come at a steep performance cost that may not justify the marginal image quality improvement in a fast-paced FPS.

Given that Doom is a fast-paced shooter where frame rate directly impacts gameplay responsiveness, the Medium preset at any resolution appears to be the sweet spot. It consistently outperforms High and Ultra while staying close enough to Low's performance to ensure smooth operation. For players prioritizing maximum frame rates, Low is the obvious choice, but Medium offers the best compromise between visual quality and the high refresh rates that this game rewards.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS progression from 1080p to 4K reveals important information about where the bottleneck lies in this system. At Medium settings, the average FPS drops from 254 at 1920x1080 to 165 at 2560x1440, a 35% reduction. Moving from 1440p to 4K, the average drops from 165 to 89, a 46% reduction. This accelerating decline as resolution increases is a classic sign of GPU-bound performance.

The Low preset shows a similar pattern. At 1080p, Low achieves 292 FPS. At 1440p, it drops to 189 FPS, a 35% decrease. At 4K, it falls to 102 FPS, a 46% drop from 1440p. The consistent percentage drops across different settings suggest that the GPU is the primary limiting factor, as the CPU's workload does not scale significantly with resolution changes in this game.

High settings follow the same trend: 215 FPS at 1080p, 139 FPS at 1440p (35% decrease), and 75 FPS at 4K (46% decrease). Ultra settings show 176 FPS at 1080p, 114 FPS at 1440p (35% decrease), and 62 FPS at 4K (46% decrease). The uniformity of these percentage drops across all four settings is striking and indicates that the resolution scaling is independent of the graphics preset chosen.

The fact that 1080p frame rates are extremely high — over 250 FPS at Medium — suggests that the CPU is not a limiting factor at lower resolutions. If the CPU were constraining performance, we would expect to see frame rates plateau or increase less than proportionally when moving from 1440p to 1080p. Instead, the data shows a consistent scaling pattern that points squarely at the GPU as the bottleneck.

At 4K, the system still delivers playable frame rates on Medium and High, but the margin for error shrinks considerably. The 62 FPS average at Ultra 4K indicates that this resolution is pushing the RX 6800 XT to its limits, while 1080p and 1440p leave ample headroom for high-refresh-rate displays.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT with its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth appears well-suited to Doom's demands. The GPU's 4608 shading units and 128 ROPs, combined with a boost clock of 2250 MHz, provide the raw throughput needed for the high frame rates observed. The 20.74 TFLOPS FP32 performance figure gives context for why this card can push 292 FPS at Low 1080p.

The 16 GB VRAM capacity is more than sufficient for this game, even at 4K Ultra settings. The fact that the card does not appear to run out of memory at any tested configuration suggests that VRAM is not a limiting factor in these results. The memory bandwidth of 512.0 GB/s, delivered over a 256-bit bus with GDDR6 running at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective), provides ample data throughput for the texture-heavy environments typical of Doom.

The GPU's benchmark scores reinforce its capability. Its PassMark G3D score of 24980 places it in the 85th percentile of all GPUs, and its average benchmark score of 48477 puts it within 3% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti and AMD Radeon RX Vega 64, according to the nearestRivals data. The RX 6800 XT also trails the Intel Arc A550M by only 2.5 percentage points in average score, indicating it sits in a competitive performance tier.

At 4K, the GPU becomes the clear limiting factor. The 62 FPS at Ultra settings versus 102 FPS at Low shows a 40 FPS swing purely from settings changes, which is a GPU-centric effect. The card's RDNA 2.0 architecture with 72 ray accelerators and support for DirectX 12 Ultimate ensures it can handle modern rendering techniques, though Doom's 2016 release predates many of these features.

The GPU's end-of-life production status and 300 W TDP suggest it is a mature product that has been well-optimized in drivers over time. The measured performance in Doom indicates that the RX 6800 XT remains a strong choice for this title, particularly at 1080p and 1440p where it consistently delivers well above 100 FPS at most settings.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D and AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT ranks 866 out of 2930 tested combos in Doom, placing it in the top 30% of all configurations in the database. This ranking reflects the system's ability to deliver high frame rates, though it is not among the elite combinations that achieve the absolute highest performance in this game.

This mid-upper tier ranking makes sense given the individual components' positions. The CPU ranks in the 91st percentile of all processors, while the GPU ranks in the 85th percentile of all graphics cards. The combination of two above-average components results in a system that performs well but does not reach the very top of the rankings, likely because some competing combos pair even more powerful GPUs with similar high-end CPUs.

The ranking suggests that for Doom specifically, the GPU is the more important determinant of overall combo performance. The RX 6800 XT's 85th percentile GPU ranking is slightly below the CPU's 91st percentile, meaning the GPU is the limiting factor in most scenarios. A combo with a higher-ranked GPU would likely achieve a better overall rank, even if paired with a slightly less powerful CPU.

The fact that this combo sits at 866 out of 2930 indicates that there is substantial headroom for improvement. The 2930 total combos represent a wide range of hardware, and being in the top 30% is respectable, but it also means that 2064 other configurations outperform this one in Doom. This is consistent with the GPU being a mid-to-high-end part rather than a flagship.

For players considering this combination, the rank suggests that it will handle Doom with ease at most settings and resolutions. The system's performance is strong enough for competitive play at 1080p and 1440p, and it remains playable at 4K with settings adjustments. The rank reflects a balanced system that delivers a good experience without being at the absolute modern.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D brings substantial processing power to this combination. With 12 cores and 24 threads based on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge), this CPU is a high-end desktop part designed for demanding workloads. Its base clock of 4.40 GHz and boost clock of 5.50 GHz provide excellent single-threaded performance, which is often crucial for game logic and physics calculations.

The CPU's benchmark results underscore its capability. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 47737 and single-core score of 6739 place it among the faster processors available. The Geekbench multicore score of 22884 and single-core score of 3041 further confirm its strength. In the PassMark tests, the CPU achieves a multithread score of 56154 and a single-thread score of 4646, with particularly strong showings in integer math (179727) and floating-point math (119622).

The 128 MB of L3 cache is a notable feature of the 9900X3D, and while this game was released in 2016, the large cache can still benefit modern game engines that rely on data locality. The CPU's 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth over dual-channel DDR5 provides ample data transfer rates for feeding the GPU with game data.

In Doom, the CPU's role appears secondary to the GPU, as evidenced by the consistent resolution scaling patterns. At 1080p, where CPU bottlenecks are most likely to appear, the system achieves 292 FPS at Low settings. This extremely high frame rate suggests the CPU is not limiting performance, as even the strongest CPUs typically struggle to exceed this range in most games.

The CPU's percentile ranking of 91st among all processors, with an average benchmark score of 54762, places it in a competitive tier. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF, which scores 55093 (0.6% higher), and the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K, which scores 54053 (1.3% lower). This tight grouping indicates the 9900X3D is well-positioned among its peers, though not the absolute fastest.

Given that the GPU is the bottleneck in this combination, the CPU's high core count and fast clock speeds ensure it will not hold back performance in Doom. The 12-core, 24-thread configuration provides more than enough processing power for this game, even at the highest frame rates observed.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Doom?

A: The data shows 1080p delivers the highest frame rates, with 254 FPS average at Medium settings. For players with high-refresh-rate monitors, 1080p or 1440p are the best choices, as both maintain averages above 165 FPS at Medium settings.

Q: Does this system support 4K gaming in Doom?

A: Yes, 4K gaming is playable. At 4K Medium settings, the system achieves 89 FPS average with a 76 FPS minimum. Even at 4K High, the average stays at 75 FPS, though Ultra drops to 62 FPS, which may be borderline for some players.

Q: Why is the Medium preset recommended over Low?

A: Medium provides substantially higher frame rates than High or Ultra while staying close to Low's performance. At 1080p, Medium delivers 254 FPS versus 292 FPS for Low, a difference of only 38 FPS, while likely offering better visual quality. The trade-off favors Medium for most players.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between 1080p and 4K?

A: At Medium settings, the average FPS drops from 254 at 1080p to 89 at 4K, a 65% reduction. At Low settings, the drop is from 292 to 102 FPS, also a 65% reduction. This consistent scaling indicates the GPU is the limiting factor.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to other tested configurations?

A: This combination ranks 866 out of 2930 tested combos in Doom, placing it in the top 30% of all configurations. The rank reflects a balanced system with a high-end CPU and mid-to-high-end GPU that performs well but is not at the absolute top.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU the bottleneck in this system?

A: The GPU is the primary bottleneck. Evidence includes the consistent 35% FPS drop from 1080p to 1440p and 46% drop from 1440p to 4K across all settings. The CPU's high benchmark scores and the extremely high 1080p frame rates confirm it is not limiting performance.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its highest frame rates across all settings. Low settings produce 292 FPS average, Medium achieves 254 FPS with a 216 FPS minimum and 292 FPS maximum, High reaches 215 FPS, and Ultra manages 176 FPS. The gap between settings ranges from 39 FPS (Low to Medium) to 39 FPS (Medium to High) and 39 FPS (High to Ultra), showing a remarkably consistent performance drop per settings tier.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain strong but show the expected reduction. Low settings deliver 189 FPS average, Medium achieves 165 FPS with a 140 FPS minimum and 189 FPS maximum, High produces 139 FPS, and Ultra reaches 114 FPS. The consistency in performance deltas persists, with each settings tier costing approximately 25 FPS on average.

At 3840x2160, the system begins to show its limits. Low settings produce 102 FPS average, Medium achieves 89 FPS with a 76 FPS minimum and 103 FPS maximum, High delivers 75 FPS, and Ultra drops to 62 FPS. The performance gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is 40 FPS, highlighting the significant impact of settings at this resolution.

The Medium preset is the only one with recorded minimum and maximum FPS values at all three resolutions. At 1080p, the minimum is 216 FPS with a maximum of 292 FPS. At 1440p, the minimum is 140 FPS with a maximum of 189 FPS. At 4K, the minimum is 76 FPS with a maximum of 103 FPS. These ranges indicate stable performance without significant frame time spikes.

Across all resolutions and settings, the system maintains frame rates well above playable thresholds. The lowest recorded average is 62 FPS at 4K Ultra, while the highest is 292 FPS at 1080p Low. This wide performance envelope gives players significant flexibility in choosing their preferred balance between visual quality and frame rate.