Doom

The GeForce GTX 1050 Ti paired with the Core i5-10400F presents a classic bottleneck scenario in Doom, where the GPU’s age and 4 GB frame buffer dominate the experience. Benchmark results place this combination at rank 3652 out of 3712 tested configurations, a position that reflects the GPU’s 25th percentile standing among all graphics cards. The data shows a system that is capable of smooth 1080p play at moderate settings, but one that collapses under the weight of higher resolutions. This analysis breaks down the measured frame rates, the role of each component, and the practical settings that deliver the best experience.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a steep penalty as resolution increases, confirming that the GTX 1050 Ti is the primary limiting factor. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the system averages 74 FPS, which drops to 48 FPS at 2560x1440 and then to 26 FPS at 3840x2160. This represents a 65% performance loss from 1080p to 4K at the lowest preset. The scaling is even more aggressive at High settings, where the 55 FPS average at 1080p falls to 35 FPS at 1440p and just 19 FPS at 4K—a 65% reduction overall. These numbers indicate that the GPU’s 112.1 GB/s memory bandwidth and 2.138 TFLOPS of FP32 compute are simply insufficient for the pixel throughput demanded by 4K.

The pattern holds across all four settings presets. At Medium, the 1080p average of 65 FPS drops to 42 FPS at 1440p and 23 FPS at 4K. Ultra settings show the same trajectory: 45 FPS at 1080p, 29 FPS at 1440p, and 16 FPS at 4K. The consistent ~65% drop from 1080p to 4K across presets suggests that the bottleneck is purely fill-rate and memory-bandwidth bound, not CPU limited. If the Core i5-10400F were the constraint, the scaling between resolutions would flatten as the CPU becomes the ceiling; instead, the monotonic decline points squarely at the GPU.

Notably, the gap between 1080p and 1440p is smaller than the gap between 1440p and 4K. For example, at Low settings, the 74 FPS at 1080p falls to 48 FPS at 1440p (a 35% drop), but then falls further to 26 FPS at 4K (a 46% drop from 1440p). This non-linear scaling is characteristic of a GPU that runs out of memory bandwidth and shading capacity as pixel count quadruples. The 4 GB GDDR5 frame buffer, operating at 7 Gbps effective, is also likely causing spills to system memory at 4K, further depressing frame rates. For any user targeting 4K, the data shows this combo is unplayable, with the best-case average of 26 FPS at Low settings falling below acceptable thresholds.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured data, the optimal balance of visual quality and playability resides at 1920x1080 with Medium settings, which yields a 65 FPS average with a minimum of 55 FPS. This preset delivers a smooth experience that stays within a narrow frame-time window, as the measured min-max range of 55–74 FPS indicates consistency. Dropping to Low settings at 1080p improves the average to 74 FPS, but the visual fidelity loss is significant for a game like Doom, where fast-paced action benefits from clearer textures and lighting. High settings at 1080p still hold 55 FPS, which is playable but leaves less headroom for intense combat scenes.

For users willing to compromise on resolution, 2560x1440 at Low settings provides a 48 FPS average, which is borderline but workable for slower exploration. However, the Medium preset at 1440p drops to 42 FPS with a 36 FPS minimum, suggesting noticeable stutter during heavy action sequences. The data shows that Ultra settings are only viable at 1080p, where the 45 FPS average is still below the 60 FPS target that many players prefer. At 4K, no preset achieves a playable frame rate—even Low settings average just 26 FPS, and Ultra falls to 16 FPS.

The measured min and max values for Medium settings provide insight into frame pacing. At 1080p Medium, the range is 55–74 FPS, a tight 19 FPS spread. At 1440p Medium, the range expands to 36–48 FPS, a 12 FPS spread that indicates less stability. At 4K Medium, the range is 19–26 FPS, which is both low and volatile. This pattern suggests that the game engine’s dynamic resolution scaling, if present, is unable to compensate for the GPU’s limitations at higher resolutions. The recommendation is clear: stick to 1080p and choose Medium for the best experience, or drop to Low if frame rate stability is paramount.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution for this GPU/CPU combo in Doom?*

A: Based on the measured data, 1920x1080 is the only resolution where all settings presets produce playable frame rates. The Low preset averages 74 FPS, Medium 65 FPS, High 55 FPS, and Ultra 45 FPS, making 1080p the sweet spot for this configuration.

*Q: Can this system handle 4K in Doom?*

A: No. The measured averages at 3840x2160 range from 26 FPS at Low settings to 16 FPS at Ultra settings. Even the best-case 4K result falls well below the minimum threshold for smooth gameplay, indicating the GPU is insufficient for 4K rendering in this title.

Q: How does the GTX 1050 Ti compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The GPU’s average benchmark score of 4193 places it just 0.6% above the AMD Radeon R5 M330 and 1% above the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M, while sitting 1.1% below the Quadro K3000M and 1.8% below the AMD Radeon Vega 3. These are minuscule deltas, indicating that the 1050 Ti is at the very bottom of the performance stack.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The data shows the GPU is the bottleneck. The Core i5-10400F has a 68th percentile ranking among all CPUs, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 10283, while the GPU sits at the 25th percentile. The steep FPS drops with resolution confirm that the graphics card, not the processor, is constraining performance.

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 1440p with Medium settings?

A: The measured average is 42 FPS, with a minimum of 36 FPS and a maximum of 48 FPS. This is below the 60 FPS target and may experience visible stutter during intense combat sequences.

Q: Does the 4 GB VRAM affect performance at higher resolutions?

A: The 4 GB GDDR5 frame buffer, paired with a 128-bit memory bus, likely contributes to the severe performance drop at 4K. The 112.1 GB/s bandwidth is insufficient for the texture and geometry data required at 3840x2160, leading to the observed 16-26 FPS averages.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured FPS table for the Intel Core i5-10400F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti combination is as follows:

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 26 FPS average
• Medium: 23 FPS average, 19 FPS minimum, 26 FPS maximum
• High: 19 FPS average
• Ultra: 16 FPS average

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 48 FPS average
• Medium: 42 FPS average, 36 FPS minimum, 48 FPS maximum
• High: 35 FPS average
• Ultra: 29 FPS average

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 74 FPS average
• Medium: 65 FPS average, 55 FPS minimum, 74 FPS maximum
• High: 55 FPS average
• Ultra: 45 FPS average

The data shows a clear tiered structure. At 1080p, every preset stays above 45 FPS, with Low and Medium exceeding the 60 FPS threshold. At 1440p, only the Low preset manages to approach 50 FPS, while Medium and High fall into the 35-42 FPS range. At 4K, all presets fall below 30 FPS, rendering the resolution unplayable. The min/max data for Medium settings across resolutions illustrates the increasing frame-time variance: the 1080p spread is 19 FPS, the 1440p spread is 12 FPS, and the 4K spread is 7 FPS. This narrowing range at lower frame rates suggests the game becomes more consistent but at the cost of overall performance.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti is the dominant factor in these results, and its specifications explain why. The GPU is built on the Pascal architecture using a 14 nm process at Samsung, featuring 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. The base clock runs at 1291 MHz, boosting to 1392 MHz, while the 4 GB of GDDR5 memory operates at 1752 MHz (7 Gbps effective) across a 128-bit bus, yielding 112.1 GB/s of bandwidth. These numbers are modest by modern standards, and the GPU’s 25th percentile ranking among all graphics cards confirms its position near the bottom.

Synthetic benchmarks reinforce this picture. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 305 is exceptionally low, and the PassMark G3D score of 6340 places it in the same tier as much older mobile parts. The nearest rivals in the database—AMD Radeon R5 M330 (0.6% higher score), Quadro K2100M (1% higher), Quadro K3000M (1.1% lower), and Radeon Vega 3 (1.8% lower)—are all entry-level or legacy components. This context explains why Doom struggles above 1080p: the GPU simply lacks the raw compute and memory throughput to feed modern game engines at higher pixel counts.

The FP32 performance of 2.138 TFLOPS is the key metric for Doom’s rendering workload. The game’s id Tech 6 engine relies heavily on fill-rate and shading, and the 44.54 GPixel/s pixel rate and 66.82 GTexel/s texture rate are insufficient for 4K. The 4 GB VRAM is another constraint; at 3840x2160, texture sets and geometry can easily exceed this capacity, forcing the GPU to swap data to system memory via the PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, which further degrades performance. The 75 W TDP and lack of external power connectors indicate a design optimized for low power consumption, not high performance.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-10400F plays a supporting role in this configuration, and the data suggests it is not the bottleneck. This 6-core, 12-thread processor from the Comet Lake architecture runs at a 2.90 GHz base clock with a 4.30 GHz boost, using a 14 nm process. It has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. Its memory bandwidth is rated at 42.7 GB/s over a dual-channel DDR4 interface, which is ample for gaming workloads.

The CPU’s benchmark results are respectable, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 10283 and a single-core score of 1451. The Geekbench multi-core score of 6257 and single-core score of 1420 further demonstrate that the processor is capable of handling modern game logic. Its 68th percentile ranking among all CPUs is a stark contrast to the GPU’s 25th percentile, indicating that the processor is not the weak link. The nearest CPU rivals—Intel Xeon 6756E (0.2% higher score), Core 7 160UL (0.3% lower), EPYC 7552 (0.5% higher), and Ryzen 3 7320C (0.6% lower)—are all within a 1% margin, showing that the i5-10400F performs as expected for its class.

In Doom, the CPU’s role is to handle game logic, physics, and draw call submission. The measured FPS scaling with resolution—where performance drops by roughly 65% from 1080p to 4K—proves that the GPU is saturated before the CPU becomes a constraint. If the CPU were limiting, the frame rate would plateau at higher resolutions, but the data shows continued decline. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 4748 and PassMark multithread score of 12115 indicate sufficient multi-threaded throughput for the id Tech 6 engine, which is well-optimized for modern processors. The 12 MB L3 cache also helps maintain consistent frame times, as evidenced by the tight min-max ranges at 1080p Medium (55-74 FPS).