Doom

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

The Intel Core i5-14400F is a 10-core, 16-thread desktop processor built on the Raptor Lake architecture, fabricated on Intel's 10 nm process. It carries a 2.50 GHz base clock and a 4.70 GHz boost clock, with a 65 W TDP. Cache layout includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 20 MB L3 pool. This is a locked multiplier part (no overclocking), and it supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory through a dual-channel bus. The CPU uses Intel Socket 1700 and offers PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU.

In synthetic benchmarks, the i5-14400F posts a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21645 and a single-core score of 3055. Geekbench results show 11268 multi-core and 2058 single-core. The PassMark multi-thread score is 25470, with a single-thread score of 3701. Its average benchmark score across all tests is 32279, placing it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs. Compared to its nearest rivals, the data shows it is 0.1% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U, 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core i9-11900, 0.5% ahead of the Intel Core i7-12800H, and 0.2% behind the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS. These deltas are all within a hair of parity, meaning the i5-14400F trades blows with those chips in aggregate compute performance.

For Doom, the CPU's role is less about raw multi-core throughput and more about maintaining consistent frame pacing. Doom's id Tech 6 engine scales well across multiple threads, but the critical path for high FPS is single-core performance and memory latency. The i5-14400F's 4.70 GHz boost clock and 20 MB L3 cache provide the necessary headroom to feed a high-refresh GPU. The measured FPS data shows that at 1080p Low, this combo reaches 230 FPS average, which suggests the CPU is not bottle-necking even when the GPU is less stressed. At 4K Ultra, the average drops to 49 FPS, which is entirely GPU-bound territory, but the CPU still holds its end by delivering consistent minimums where recorded (60 FPS at 4K Medium, 110 FPS at 1440p Medium, 170 FPS at 1080p Medium). The 10 cores and 16 threads are more than adequate for Doom's workload, and the 83rd percentile ranking reflects a chip that sits above most desktop CPUs in general-purpose performance. The closest rival data confirms that the i5-14400F is effectively a mid-pack high-tier processor, but for Doom specifically, the boost clock matters more than the core count.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with the Navi 22 chip, manufactured on TSMC's 7 nm process. It packs 17,200 million transistors on a 335 mm² die, with a transistor density of 51.3M per mm². The GPU has 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, along with 40 ray tracing cores. Clock speeds are a 2321 MHz base, 2424 MHz game clock, and 2581 MHz boost. Memory consists of 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, running at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective), producing a bandwidth of 384.0 GB/s. The card's pixel rate is 165.2 GPixel/s, texture rate is 413.0 GTexel/s, and FP32 performance is 13.21 TFLOPS (with FP16 at 26.43 TFLOPS via 2:1 ratio). TDP is 230 W with a suggested PSU of 550 W, and it uses dual-slot cooling with 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connectors. The card supports PCIe 4.0 x16 and outputs 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

In synthetic GPU benchmarks, the RX 6700 XT scores 19786 in PassMark G3D, 9336 in PassMark GPU Compute, 93500 in Geekbench Vulkan, and 130896 in Geekbench Metal. Its average benchmark score is 27425, placing it in the 72nd percentile of all GPUs. The nearest rival comparison shows it is effectively tied with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile (0% delta), 0.5% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090, 1.1% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell, and 1.5% behind the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20. These numbers indicate the RX 6700 XT sits in a competitive tier, though the RTX 3090 comparison is notable: a flagship desktop card from the same era is only 0.5% ahead in average benchmark score, which speaks to the efficiency of RDNA 2.0.

For Doom, the GPU's 12 GB VRAM is more than sufficient since the game's textures at 4K Ultra fit comfortably within that capacity. The 384.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is a key factor: Doom's fast-paced environments stream textures aggressively, and the bandwidth prevents stuttering. The measured FPS data shows a clear scaling pattern tied to GPU load. At 4K Ultra, the card averages 49 FPS; dropping to High raises that to 59 FPS; Medium hits 70 FPS with a 60 FPS minimum; Low reaches 81 FPS. At 1440p, the same settings progression yields 90, 110, 130 (with 110 min), and 149 FPS. At 1080p, the card delivers 138, 169, 200 (with 170 min), and 230 FPS. The gap between Ultra and High is consistent at roughly 15-20% across resolutions, suggesting that Ultra settings impose a heavy shading load that the 2560 shading units struggle with, while High relaxes that load enough to recover performance. The 12 GB VRAM is never a limiting factor, as even the 4K Ultra row does not show a min FPS collapse that would indicate VRAM overflow.

FAQ

Q: Does this combo achieve 60 FPS at 4K?

A: Yes, but only on Medium settings, where the average FPS is 70 with a 60 FPS minimum. At High, the average drops to 59 FPS, which is just below the 60 FPS threshold. Ultra falls to 49 FPS average.

Q: What is the best resolution for 144 Hz gaming with this pairing?

A: At 1440p, High settings deliver 110 FPS average, which is close to 144 Hz but not quite there. For a locked 144 Hz experience, you would need to use Low settings at 1440p, which yields 149 FPS average. At 1080p, High hits 169 FPS, so that resolution and settings combo comfortably exceeds 144 Hz.

Q: How does the RX 6700 XT compare to the RTX 3090 in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The RX 6700 XT's average benchmark score is 27425, while the RTX 3090's average is 27565. That puts the RX 6700 XT 0.5% behind the RTX 3090 in aggregate benchmark performance, which is a negligible difference in the data.

Q: Is the i5-14400F a bottleneck for the RX 6700 XT in Doom?

A: The measured data shows no significant bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the combo reaches 230 FPS average, which is near the upper limit of most displays. The CPU's 83rd percentile ranking and 4.70 GHz boost clock are sufficient to keep the GPU fed, even at lower resolutions where CPU load is relatively higher.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The FACT PACK includes minimum FPS data for three rows: 60 FPS at 4K Medium, 110 FPS at 1440p Medium, and 170 FPS at 1080p Medium. All other rows do not have min FPS values recorded.

Q: How does the i5-14400F's multi-core performance compare to its nearest rival?

A: The i5-14400F has an average benchmark score of 32279, and its closest rival, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U, has an average score of 32233. That makes the i5-14400F 0.1% faster, which is effectively a tie. The Intel Core i9-11900 is 0.2% slower, and the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS is 0.2% faster.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions (4K, 1440p, 1080p) across four settings presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra). The full table of average FPS is as follows:

• 3840x2160: Low 81, Medium 70 (min 60, max 81), High 59, Ultra 49
• 2560x1440: Low 149, Medium 130 (min 110, max 149), High 110, Ultra 90
• 1920x1080: Low 230, Medium 200 (min 170, max 230), High 169, Ultra 138

The scaling pattern is consistent. At 4K, the delta from Low to Ultra is 32 FPS (81 down to 49), representing a 39% performance drop. At 1440p, the delta is 59 FPS (149 down to 90), a 40% drop. At 1080p, the delta is 92 FPS (230 down to 138), a 40% drop. This uniformity suggests that the settings presets impose a similar relative load across resolutions, and the GPU's compute units (2560 shading units) scale predictably with resolution.

The step from Ultra to High is the most significant single drop. At 4K, High is 59 FPS and Ultra is 49 FPS, a 10 FPS difference (17% improvement when dropping from Ultra to High). At 1440p, the same step yields 110 vs 90 FPS, a 20 FPS difference (22% improvement). At 1080p, it's 169 vs 138 FPS, a 31 FPS difference (22% improvement). The Medium to High step is smaller: 70 vs 59 FPS at 4K (16% improvement), 130 vs 110 FPS at 1440p (18% improvement), 200 vs 169 FPS at 1080p (18% improvement). The Low to Medium step is the smallest: 81 vs 70 FPS at 4K (16% improvement), 149 vs 130 FPS at 1440p (15% improvement), 230 vs 200 FPS at 1080p (15% improvement).

The minimum FPS values, where recorded, are close to the averages. At 4K Medium, the min is 60 FPS against a 70 FPS average, which is a 14% deviation. At 1440p Medium, the min is 110 FPS against a 130 FPS average (15% deviation). At 1080p Medium, the min is 170 FPS against a 200 FPS average (15% deviation). This consistent deviation suggests the engine's frame pacing is stable, with no sudden spikes or drops that would indicate a CPU or VRAM bottleneck.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of Intel Core i5-14400F and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT ranks at position 1951 out of 3712 tested combos in Doom. That places it in the 47.4th percentile of all CPU-GPU pairings tested for this game. The rank of 1951 means there are 1950 combos that perform better in Doom, and 1761 combos that perform worse. Given that the CPU sits in the 83rd percentile and the GPU in the 72nd percentile individually, the combo's mid-pack ranking reflects the fact that Doom is a highly optimized game where even mid-tier hardware can achieve high frame rates, so the relative spread is compressed.

The rank is data-measured, not estimated, which means the FPS values are from actual test runs. The fact that this combo lands just below the midpoint of all tested combos is notable because the individual components are above-average in their respective fields. This suggests that Doom's engine rewards certain GPU features more than raw compute power. The RX 6700 XT's 12 GB VRAM and 384.0 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for the game, but the 2560 shading units may be the limiting factor at higher settings, as evidenced by the 40% FPS drop from Low to Ultra across all resolutions. The i5-14400F, despite its strong single-core performance, cannot compensate for the GPU's shading limitations at Ultra presets.

Compared to the nearest rival combos, the data does not provide direct FPS comparisons, but the synthetic benchmark deltas offer context. The GPU is 0.5% behind the RTX 3090 in average benchmark score, yet the RTX 3090 likely appears in higher-ranking combos due to its larger memory bus and higher shader count. The CPU's 0.5% lead over the i7-12800H in average score is negligible, meaning the combo rank is driven almost entirely by GPU performance in Doom. The 1951 rank out of 3712 is a solid mid-pack result: not a top-tier performer, but far from the bottom, and the measured FPS data shows this combo can handle 1440p High at 110 FPS, which is a playable and smooth experience for most users.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the best experience-per-preset depends on your target refresh rate and resolution. For 4K, the only playable option is Medium, which delivers 70 FPS average with a 60 FPS minimum. That is a stable 60 Hz experience, but not ideal for high-refresh displays. If you have a 4K 60 Hz monitor, Medium is the clear choice. High at 4K dips to 59 FPS average, which will cause occasional frame drops below 60, so it is not recommended unless you cap the frame rate at 59 or lower. Ultra at 4K is not viable for smooth play, as the 49 FPS average will feel sluggish in a fast-paced FPS.

For 1440p, High is the sweet spot. The 110 FPS average is well above 60 Hz and approaches 100+ Hz territory, making it smooth for most players. If you have a 144 Hz monitor, you can drop to Low to get 149 FPS average, which will keep you near the refresh ceiling most of the time. Medium at 1440p offers 130 FPS average with a 110 FPS minimum, which is a good compromise if you want some visual fidelity without sacrificing smoothness. Ultra at 1440p averages 90 FPS, which is still playable but noticeably less smooth than High.

For 1080p, the data shows that even Ultra yields 138 FPS average, which is a high frame rate. However, High at 169 FPS and Medium at 200 FPS offer progressively smoother experiences. If you have a 144 Hz display, High at 1080p is the best choice: it provides 169 FPS average, leaving headroom above the refresh rate to avoid drops. If you have a 240 Hz display, Low at 230 FPS is the only preset that gets close to that ceiling. Medium at 200 FPS is also strong and provides better visuals than Low.

The overall recommendation is to prioritize High settings at 1080p or 1440p, depending on your monitor. High offers a significant visual upgrade over Medium and Low, while the FPS cost is modest (about 15-22% compared to Medium). Ultra is not worth the performance hit, as the difference between Ultra and High is roughly 20% in FPS, which translates to a tangible loss in smoothness without a proportional visual gain in a fast-paced game like Doom. For 4K, stick with Medium, as it is the only preset that maintains a 60 FPS minimum.