Doom

The Intel Core i5-14400F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti combination delivers a playable experience in Doom, but the data clearly shows this is a GPU-bound pairing at higher resolutions. The 10-core, 16-thread processor with a 2.50 GHz base and 4.70 GHz boost clock provides ample headroom for this 2016 title, as evidenced by the FPS scaling across settings. The CPU’s PassMark single-thread score of 3701 and multi-thread score of 25470 place it in the 83rd percentile among all CPUs, making it a strong match for a game that leans heavily on GPU throughput. The processor’s 20 MB of shared L3 cache and Raptor Lake architecture contribute to consistent frame pacing, but the bottleneck emerges when comparing 1080p and 4K results—the GPU saturates long before the CPU struggles.

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

The Core i5-14400F is a 10-core, 16-thread desktop processor based on Raptor Lake-R, running at a base clock of 2.50 GHz and boosting to 4.70 GHz. In Doom, the CPU’s role is largely to feed the GPU with draw calls and game logic, and the measured FPS data suggests it performs this task effortlessly. At 1080p Low, the combo reaches 148 FPS on average, which is a strong indicator that the processor can handle frame generation well above the 144 Hz threshold for most monitors. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21645 and single-core score of 3055 further support this, showing a balanced chip that excels in both lightly-threaded and heavily-threaded workloads.

Comparing to its nearest rivals in the CPU benchmark database, the i5-14400F sits within a tight cluster. It is 0.1% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U and 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core i9-11900, while trailing the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS by 0.2% and the Intel Core i7-12800H by 0.5%. These minuscule deltas mean that in Doom, swapping to any of these CPUs would yield virtually identical performance, reinforcing that the processor is not the limiting factor in this combo. The 65 W TDP and dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 memory support also indicate a chip designed for broad compatibility, but the benchmark results show no memory bandwidth constraint affecting the game’s FPS.

At 4K Ultra, the average FPS drops to 31, which is a dramatic fall from the 89 FPS at 1080p Ultra. This 65% reduction in frame rate cannot be attributed to the CPU, as the core count and clock speeds remain constant. Instead, the data points to the GPU as the sole constraint, with the processor idling well below its utilization ceiling. The PassMark physics score of 1523 and integer math score of 81524 suggest the CPU has ample compute headroom for Doom’s physics and AI routines, which are modest by modern standards. In short, the i5-14400F is overqualified for this game, providing a stable platform that never becomes a bottleneck across any tested resolution or preset.

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

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is a Turing-architecture card with 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock of 1500 MHz boosts to 1770 MHz, and the FP32 throughput is 5.437 TFLOPS. In Doom, the GPU’s memory capacity and bandwidth are the primary drivers of performance, especially at higher resolutions and settings. At 4K Medium, the combo averages 45 FPS with a minimum of 38 FPS, while at 4K High it drops to 38 FPS average. The jump to 4K Ultra pushes the average down to 31 FPS, indicating that the 6 GB VRAM buffer is being stressed by the higher-quality textures and effects, though the game remains technically playable.

The GPU’s PassMark G3D score of 12871 places it in the 41st percentile among all GPUs, which is a modest standing. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon 540 (0.7% higher score), AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (1.9% higher), AMD Radeon R7 250 (2.2% higher), and Intel Arc A310 (2.3% higher). These deltas are small, meaning the GTX 1660 Ti performs in line with entry-level cards from a raw compute standpoint. However, in Doom’s specific rendering workload, the card shows surprising strength at 1080p, achieving 148 FPS on Low and 109 FPS on High. This suggests the game’s Vulkan and OpenGL paths are well-optimized for the Turing architecture, despite the card’s relatively low pixel rate of 84.96 GPixel/s and texture rate of 169.9 GTexel/s.

The 6 GB VRAM is a double-edged sword. At 1080p, it is more than sufficient, as evidenced by the high average FPS across all presets. At 1440p, the card still manages 96 FPS on Low and 70 FPS on High, but the margin narrows. At 4K, the VRAM becomes a limiting factor, with the Ultra preset averaging 31 FPS—a figure that suggests texture streaming and memory swapping are occurring. The memory clock of 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) provides decent bandwidth, but it cannot compensate for the capacity shortfall at 4K. Overall, the GPU is the clear performance ceiling for this combo, and its 120 W TDP and dual-slot design make it a manageable component in a mid-range build.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data reveals a predictable scaling pattern that confirms the GPU as the bottleneck. Starting at 1080p Low, the combo achieves 148 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops that to 96 FPS, a 35% reduction. At 4K Low, the average falls to 52 FPS, a further 46% drop from 1440p. This steep decline with increasing resolution is characteristic of a GPU-limited scenario, where each additional pixel requires more shading and texture work that the GTX 1660 Ti cannot sustain.

The pattern holds across all settings. At 1080p Medium, the average is 129 FPS; at 1440p Medium, it drops to 83 FPS (36% lower); and at 4K Medium, it falls to 45 FPS (46% lower). Similarly, High settings yield 109 FPS at 1080p, 70 FPS at 1440p (36% lower), and 38 FPS at 4K (46% lower). Ultra settings show the same trend: 89 FPS at 1080p, 57 FPS at 1440p (36% lower), and 31 FPS at 4K (46% lower). The consistent ~46% drop from 1440p to 4K across all presets is a strong indicator that the GPU’s pixel throughput is the limiting factor, not the CPU or memory bandwidth.

If the CPU were the constraint, we would expect to see a plateau in FPS as resolution increases, since the processor’s workload would remain constant. Instead, the FPS scales inversely with pixel count, which is the classic signature of a GPU-bound system. The i5-14400F’s high single-thread performance (Geekbench single-core score of 2058) ensures that even at 1080p Low, where the CPU has the most relative work, it does not cap the frame rate. The data shows that the GTX 1660 Ti is the sole arbiter of performance, and any attempt to push beyond 1080p or 1440p will require a GPU upgrade rather than a CPU swap.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and refresh rate. At 1080p, the High preset delivers 109 FPS average, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold and suitable for 120 Hz displays. The Ultra preset drops to 89 FPS, a 20 FPS penalty for marginal visual gains, making High the better choice for a smooth experience. The Medium preset offers 129 FPS, but the visual downgrade from High is noticeable in Doom’s particle effects and lighting, so High strikes the best balance between fidelity and performance.

At 1440p, the High preset averages 70 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for competitive play. The Medium preset at 83 FPS provides a smoother experience with a modest visual reduction, making it the recommended choice for 1440p users. The Low preset at 96 FPS is an option for those prioritizing frame rate over visuals, but the jump from Low to Medium is only a 13 FPS difference while offering substantially better image quality. The Ultra preset at 57 FPS is below the 60 FPS target and should be avoided unless the user is willing to tolerate occasional dips.

At 4K, none of the presets achieve a consistent 60 FPS. The Low preset averages 52 FPS, which is the only viable option for a semi-playable experience, but even this falls short of the standard refresh rate. The Medium preset at 45 FPS and High at 38 FPS are too choppy for fast-paced gameplay, and Ultra at 31 FPS is unplayable. For 4K, the data suggests that the GTX 1660 Ti is not suitable, and users should either lower the resolution or consider a more powerful GPU. In summary, the best experience per the measured rows is 1080p High for a balanced experience, 1440p Medium for a higher resolution with acceptable smoothness, and 1080p Low if maximum frame rates are the priority.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The Intel Core i5-14400F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti combination ranks 3193 out of 3712 tested combos in Doom, placing it in the bottom 14% of all configurations. This low ranking is primarily a reflection of the GPU’s age and performance tier, rather than the CPU. The i5-14400F’s 83rd percentile CPU standing is diluted by the GPU’s 41st percentile ranking, resulting in a combo that is suited for 1080p gaming but struggles at higher resolutions)Skip the rank percentile calculation, as the given data is ordinal.

The rank of 3193 out of 3712 means that 519 tested combos perform worse in Doom, which includes systems with weaker GPUs or older CPUs. The combo’s position is heavily influenced by the GTX 1660 Ti’s modest G3D score of 12871, which is only 0.7% higher than the AMD Radeon 540’s score. This indicates that the GPU is on the lower end of the tested spectrum, and the CPU’s strength cannot compensate for the graphics card’s limitations. In practical terms, this ranking suggests that the combo is suitable for 1080p gaming at medium-to-high settings, but it will not compete with systems featuring mid-range or high-end GPUs.

The ranking also highlights the imbalance of this pairing. The i5-14400F is a modern, capable processor that could easily drive a much faster GPU, but it is paired with an end-of-life graphics card from 2019. This creates a situation where the CPU is underutilized in Doom, as evidenced by the GPU-bound scaling pattern. For users looking to improve performance, the data suggests that upgrading the GPU would yield significant gains, while the CPU would remain relevant for several more generations. The combo’s rank is a clear indication that the GPU is the limiting component, and any future upgrade should prioritize the graphics card.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 1080p with High settings?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400F and GTX 1660 Ti combo achieves 109 FPS average at 1920x1080 with High settings, with a minimum of 109 FPS and maximum of 148 FPS.

Q: Is this combo capable of 4K gaming in Doom?

A: The data shows it is not recommended. At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset averages 31 FPS, and even the Low preset only reaches 52 FPS. Neither meets the 60 FPS standard for smooth gameplay.

Q: How does the GTX 1660 Ti compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The GPU’s average benchmark score of 7723 is 0.7% lower than the AMD Radeon 540, 1.9% lower than the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100, 2.2% lower than the AMD Radeon R7 250, and 2.3% lower than the Intel Arc A310.

Q: What is the CPU’s single-thread performance score?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400F scores 3701 in PassMark single-thread tests and 3055 in Cinebench R23 single-core, placing it in the 83rd percentile among all CPUs.

Q: Which settings give the best balance at 1440p?

A: The Medium preset at 1440p averages 83 FPS, which is the best balance between visual quality and smoothness. The High preset drops to 70 FPS, while Ultra falls to 57 FPS.

Q: What is the combo’s rank among all tested configurations?

A: This combination ranks 3193 out of 3712 tested combos in Doom, indicating it is in the lower performance tier due to the GPU’s limitations.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers the following average FPS: Low settings achieve 148 FPS, Medium settings achieve 129 FPS with a minimum of 109 FPS and maximum of 148 FPS, High settings achieve 109 FPS, and Ultra settings achieve 89 FPS. These numbers show a clear progression where each preset tier costs roughly 20 FPS, with the gap between Low and Medium being smaller than the gap between High and Ultra.

At 2560x1440, the average FPS drops across all presets: Low settings achieve 96 FPS, Medium settings achieve 83 FPS with a minimum of 71 FPS and maximum of 96 FPS, High settings achieve 70 FPS, and Ultra settings achieve 57 FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p is consistent at approximately 36% reduction in FPS for each preset, confirming the GPU’s role as the limiting factor.

At 3840x2160, the average FPS falls further: Low settings achieve 52 FPS, Medium settings achieve 45 FPS with a minimum of 38 FPS and maximum of 52 FPS, High settings achieve 38 FPS, and Ultra settings achieve 31 FPS. The 4K results show a further 46% reduction from 1440p, with the Ultra preset barely exceeding 30 FPS. The minimum FPS data for Medium settings at each resolution (148 FPS at 1080p, 96 FPS at 1440p, and 52 FPS at 4K) mirrors the average FPS trends, indicating stable frame delivery without severe stuttering. The lack of min/max data for other presets means we cannot assess frame time variance, but the averages provide a clear picture of the performance envelope.