Doom

Doom, id Software’s 2016 demon-slaying shooter, remains a demanding title for older hardware, and the pairing of the Intel Core i5-13400F with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti illustrates a classic bottleneck scenario. The data for this combination reveals a system where the GPU’s age and 4 GB VRAM capacity are the primary constraints, while the modern 10-core CPU sits largely underutilized. This analysis examines the measured frame rates across resolutions and settings to identify the limiting components and provide actionable recommendations based solely on the provided benchmark data.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a steep and predictable decline as resolution increases, confirming that the GTX 1050 Ti is the dominant limiting factor in this configuration. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves 74 FPS, but this drops to 48 FPS at 1440p and further to 26 FPS at 4K—a reduction of approximately 35% from 1080p to 1440p and another 46% from 1440p to 4K. This scaling pattern is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario, where the rendering workload grows exponentially with pixel count, overwhelming the Pascal architecture’s 2.138 TFLOPS of FP32 compute.

The transition from Medium to High settings at each resolution further emphasizes the GPU’s struggle. At 1080p, the drop from 65 FPS (Medium) to 55 FPS (High) is a 15% performance hit, while at 4K, the same settings change reduces average FPS from 23 to 19. This consistent penalty across resolutions indicates that the GTX 1050 Ti’s shading units and texture units are saturated, with no headroom left for increased visual fidelity. The 4K Ultra preset delivers just 16 FPS, which is essentially unplayable, highlighting that the GPU’s 112.1 GB/s memory bandwidth and 4 GB GDDR5 buffer are insufficient for the game’s high-resolution textures.

Interestingly, the CPU’s performance is not a factor in this scaling. The i5-13400F’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 22604 and single-core score of 3191 suggest ample processing power, yet the frame rates are entirely dictated by the GPU’s render output. The data implies that even at 1080p Low, where the CPU would typically be more involved, the 74 FPS ceiling is set by the GTX 1050 Ti’s 44.54 GPixel/s pixel rate and 66.82 GTexel/s texture rate, not by the processor’s 10 cores and 16 threads.

How This Combo Ranks

The benchmark database places this specific CPU-GPU pairing at rank 3652 out of 3712 tested combos for Doom, placing it in the bottom 1.6% of all configurations. This low percentile ranking reflects the severe imbalance between the modern CPU and the aging GPU, as the GTX 1050 Ti’s average benchmark score of 4193 places it at the 25th percentile among all GPUs, while the i5-13400F sits at the 77th percentile among CPUs. The combination’s rank is dragged down almost entirely by the GPU’s performance ceiling.

Comparing the GPU to its nearest rivals in the database shows how marginal its performance is even within its own tier. The GTX 1050 Ti scores 0.6% higher than the AMD Radeon R5 M330 and 1% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M, but it is 1.1% slower than the Quadro K3000M and 1.8% slower than the AMD Radeon Vega 3. These deltas are within a narrow band, indicating that the 1050 Ti is at the very bottom of the performance hierarchy for discrete GPUs. For Doom specifically, this means the card is only capable of producing playable frame rates at the lowest settings and resolutions, as evidenced by the measured FPS data.

The CPU’s nearest rivals tell a different story. The i5-13400F’s average benchmark score of 25292 is virtually identical to the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS (25284, 0% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 7 6800H (25201, 0.4% delta), while slightly trailing the Intel Core 5 120 (25362, -0.3%) and AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D (25365, -0.3%). This parity suggests that the CPU is more than capable of feeding any modern GPU, but with the 1050 Ti, its potential is entirely wasted in Doom’s GPU-bound workloads.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti is a Pascal-generation part built on a 14 nm process at Samsung, featuring 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. Its base clock of 1291 MHz and boost clock of 1392 MHz are modest by modern standards, but the card’s fundamental limitation is its memory subsystem: 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 112.1 GB/s of bandwidth. In Doom, a game known for its large texture sets and fast-paced action, this VRAM capacity and bandwidth are the primary bottlenecks, especially at higher resolutions where texture data exceeds the 4 GB buffer.

The measured FPS data at 4K Ultra (16 FPS) versus 4K Low (26 FPS) shows a 62% performance delta, which is far larger than the settings change alone would suggest. This indicates that the GPU is not just compute-limited but also memory-limited, as higher settings require more VRAM and bandwidth, causing the card to thrash. The similar pattern at 1440p—Ultra at 29 FPS versus Low at 48 FPS—reinforces this conclusion, with the card’s 44.54 GPixel/s pixel rate unable to keep up with the fill-rate demands of higher-quality textures and effects.

The GPU’s benchmark results further contextualize its role. Its Passmark G3D score of 6340 and Geekbench OpenCL score of 18129 are indicative of a card designed for 1080p gaming at medium settings in older titles, not for modern AAA shooters at high resolutions. The DirectX 12 score of 26 in Passmark is particularly low, suggesting that the card’s feature set (DirectX 12_1) is outdated for Doom’s Vulkan-based rendering, which the GPU supports via API version 1.4. This combination of low VRAM, limited bandwidth, and aging architecture means the GPU is the unequivocal weak link in this pairing.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The dataset provides exact average FPS for twelve configurations, spanning three resolutions and four quality presets. At 1920x1080, the combo delivers 74 FPS on Low, 65 FPS on Medium (with min 55 and max 74), 55 FPS on High, and 45 FPS on Ultra. These figures show that 1080p is the only resolution where the game approaches playability, with Low and Medium exceeding the 60 FPS threshold, while High and Ultra fall below it. The min FPS for Medium at 1080p is 55, indicating some frame dips but no catastrophic stutters.

Moving to 2560x1440, performance drops significantly: 48 FPS on Low, 42 FPS on Medium (min 36, max 48), 35 FPS on High, and 29 FPS on Ultra. None of these settings achieve 60 FPS, and the min FPS of 36 on Medium suggests that even mid-range settings can produce noticeable hitches during intense combat sequences. The 1440p data strongly implies that this resolution is beyond the GTX 1050 Ti’s capabilities for smooth gameplay, regardless of settings.

At 3840x2160, the results are largely unplayable: 26 FPS on Low, 23 FPS on Medium (min 19, max 26), 19 FPS on High, and 16 FPS on Ultra. These frame rates are below the threshold for a fluid first-person shooter, and the min FPS of 19 on Medium confirms that the experience would be choppy and frustrating. The 4K data serves as a clear indicator that the GPU is not designed for such resolutions, with the 4 GB VRAM being insufficient for even Low settings to maintain a consistent 30 FPS.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend heavily on the user’s resolution and frame rate priorities. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset offers the best balance, delivering 65 FPS average with a min of 55 FPS, which is close to the 60 FPS target for smooth gameplay. The Low preset at 74 FPS provides higher headroom for competitive play, but Medium’s visual improvements are substantial enough to justify the 13% performance reduction. High at 55 FPS is playable but risks dipping below 60 FPS during action, while Ultra at 45 FPS is not recommended due to the noticeable smoothness loss.

For users constrained to 2560x1440, the data suggests that only the Low preset (48 FPS) is viable for single-player exploration, but it will struggle in fast-paced combat. The Medium preset’s 42 FPS average with a 36 FPS min is risky, and High or Ultra (35 and 29 FPS respectively) are not recommended for a game that requires quick reflexes. At 3840x2160, no preset is playable, with even Low failing to reach 30 FPS; users should avoid this resolution entirely with this GPU.

The 1080p Medium preset is the clear winner in the dataset, as it provides the highest average FPS (65) that still maintains a min above 50, which is critical for Doom’s fast-paced action. This recommendation is supported by the fact that the GPU’s VRAM at 4 GB is likely sufficient for Medium textures at 1080p, avoiding the stuttering seen at higher settings. For a smoother experience, the Low preset’s 74 FPS is the safest choice, but it sacrifices visual fidelity for a margin that is often imperceptible on standard monitors.

FAQ

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

A: The measured data shows that 1920x1080 is the only resolution where the combo achieves playable frame rates, with the Medium preset delivering 65 FPS and Low at 74 FPS. At 1440p, the highest average FPS is 48 on Low, and at 4K, even Low only reaches 26 FPS.

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

A: The GPU’s average benchmark score of 4193 is 0.6% higher than the AMD Radeon R5 M330 and 1% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M, but it is 1.1% slower than the Quadro K3000M and 1.8% slower than the AMD Radeon Vega 3. This places it at the bottom of its performance tier.

Q: Is the Intel Core i5-13400F the bottleneck in this system?

A: No. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 25292 is nearly identical to rival processors like the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS (25284), and its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 22604 indicates ample performance. The measured FPS scaling points to the GPU as the sole limiting factor.

Q: What settings provide the highest FPS at 1080p?

A: The Low preset provides the highest average FPS at 74, followed by Medium at 65 FPS, High at 55 FPS, and Ultra at 45 FPS. The Medium preset also has a min FPS of 55, which is better for consistency.

Q: Can this combo run Doom at 4K?

A: The data shows no. At 3840x2160, the highest average FPS is 26 on Low, with Ultra dropping to 16 FPS. These frame rates are far below what is needed for a smooth first-person shooter experience.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested configurations?

A: It ranks 3652 out of 3712 combos for Doom, placing it in the bottom 1.6% of all tested pairings. This low rank is primarily due to the GPU’s 25th percentile standing among all GPUs.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-13400F is a Raptor Lake-S architecture processor with 10 cores (likely 6 performance and 4 efficiency) and 16 threads, operating at a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. Its cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 20 MB L3 cache. In synthetic benchmarks, it achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 22604 and a single-core score of 3191, placing it at the 77th percentile among all CPUs. These figures indicate a processor capable of handling modern gaming loads with ease.

However, in this Doom configuration, the CPU’s role is minimal due to the GPU’s limitations. The measured FPS at 1080p Low (74 FPS) is likely close to the CPU’s maximum frame output for this game, but the fact that the same 74 FPS is the ceiling at 1080p Low, while 4K Low drops to 26 FPS, confirms that the GPU is the bottleneck. The CPU’s 16 threads and 10 cores are vastly overprovisioned for a game like Doom, which typically utilizes fewer cores, and the data shows no evidence of CPU throttling or frame dips attributable to processor limitations.

The CPU’s nearest rivals in the database—AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS, Intel Core 5 120, AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D, and AMD Ryzen 7 6800H—all have nearly identical average benchmark scores, with deltas of less than 0.5%. This parity suggests that swapping the i5-13400F for any of these CPUs would produce no measurable difference in Doom’s frame rates given the same GPU. The processor’s launch MSRP of $196 positions it as a mid-range part, but its performance is clearly not the deciding factor in this pairing’s low rank. In essence, the CPU is waiting for a more powerful GPU to unlock its potential, as evidenced by the fact that even the most demanding 4K Ultra setting yields only 16 FPS, a number that is entirely GPU-bound.