Doom

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

The measured FPS data for Doom reveals a steep and consistent performance decline as resolution climbs from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160, but the shape of that curve tells a story about which component is doing the heavy lifting. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo posts 444 FPS average; stepping up to 2560x1440 Low drops that to 287 FPS, a reduction of roughly 35%. Moving further to 3840x2160 Low yields 156 FPS, which is about 46% lower than the 1440p result and 65% below the 1080p figure. This pattern—where each resolution step costs a large chunk of performance—suggests the game is becoming increasingly pixel-bound as the render target expands.

Looking at the High preset, the same trend holds but with lower absolute numbers. At 1080p High, the combo hits 327 FPS average; at 1440p High, it falls to 211 FPS; at 4K High, it settles at 115 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is roughly 35%, and the drop from 1440p to 4K is about 45%. That consistent proportional loss across resolution steps is a hallmark of a GPU-limited scenario—the CPU has enough headroom to feed frames at 1080p, but the RTX 4090's fill rate and memory bandwidth become the bottleneck as the pixel count quadruples from 1440p to 4K.

The Ultra preset reinforces this interpretation. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 267 FPS; at 1440p Ultra, it drops to 173 FPS; at 4K Ultra, it falls to 94 FPS. Note that 1080p Ultra is still far below the 1080p Low result of 444 FPS, meaning the graphics settings themselves impose a significant render cost independent of resolution. The gap between Low and Ultra at each resolution grows as resolution increases: at 1080p, the difference is 177 FPS (444 vs. 267); at 1440p, it's 114 FPS (287 vs. 173); at 4K, it's 62 FPS (156 vs. 94). This narrowing delta indicates that at higher resolutions, the GPU is so saturated that settings changes have less relative impact—another sign of GPU-bound operation.

What does this imply about the limiting component? The data strongly suggests the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 is the primary constraint across all tested configurations. The Intel Core i5-14600K, with its 14 cores and 20 threads, appears to provide sufficient frame generation capacity even at 1080p Low where the GPU is being fed 444 frames per second. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see a plateau or diminishing returns as resolution decreases—but instead, FPS scales almost linearly with pixel count, which is characteristic of a GPU-limited workload. The 4K Medium result of 136 FPS average, with a min of 115 and max of 156, further illustrates that the GPU is working hard to maintain frame pacing at high pixel densities.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded for this combo in Doom?

A: The highest measured average is 444 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: How does the combo perform at 4K with Ultra settings?

A: At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the average FPS is 94, which is the lowest recorded figure across all tested resolution and settings combinations.

Q: What is the frame range at 1440p Medium settings?

A: At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the average FPS is 250, with a minimum of 213 and a maximum of 288.

Q: Does the combo rank high among all tested combinations for this game?

A: Yes, the combo ranks 88th out of 3712 tested combinations, placing it in the top 2.4% of all combos for Doom.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, Low settings produce 444 FPS average while Ultra produces 267 FPS, a difference of 177 FPS.

Q: Is the 4K High result above or below the 1440p Ultra result?

A: The 4K High result is 115 FPS, which is significantly below the 1440p Ultra result of 173 FPS, despite High being a lower graphics preset than Ultra.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 brings substantial hardware to this title, and the measured FPS data reflects its capabilities. The GPU features 24 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 384-bit bus, providing 1.01 TB/s of memory bandwidth. For a game like Doom, which was released in 2016, this memory configuration is far beyond what the title requires at any tested resolution—even 4K Ultra with its heavy texture loads would struggle to exceed 8-10 GB of VRAM usage. The bandwidth figure is more relevant: 1.01 TB/s ensures that texture streaming and memory access never become a limiter, allowing the GPU's compute units to stay busy.

The clock speeds are equally telling. The base clock is 2235 MHz with a boost clock of 2520 MHz, and memory runs at 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective). These clocks, combined with the 16,384 shading units and 512 texture mapping units, explain why the GPU can push 444 FPS at 1080p Low. The 176 ROPs handle pixel output, and at 4K Ultra the GPU still manages 94 FPS—a figure that would be impossible if the memory subsystem or clock speeds were insufficient. The transistor count of 76,300 million on a 609 mm² die, manufactured on a 5 nm process by TSMC, gives the RTX 4090 raw throughput that Doom's id Tech 6 engine can exploit well.

The RTX 4090's passmark G3D score of 38,194 and its percentile ranking of 88th among all GPUs indicate that it sits near the top of the performance hierarchy. In Doom, the data shows that the GPU's role shifts from being overkill at 1080p to being the primary bottleneck at 4K. At 1080p Low, the GPU is delivering 444 FPS but the CPU could likely feed even more frames if the render pipeline allowed; at 4K Ultra, the GPU is working near its limits, as evidenced by the 94 FPS average and the fact that settings changes have diminishing returns. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 9,223 and the Geekbench Vulkan score of 271,631 further confirm that this GPU is built for high-resolution, high-settings workloads, which is exactly where the Doom data shows it performing most efficiently relative to its own capabilities.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combo of Intel Core i5-14600K and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 ranks 88th out of 3,712 tested combinations in Doom. That places this pairing in the top 88 of nearly four thousand configurations, which is an elite tier by any measure. To put that rank in context, being 88th means there are only 87 combos that achieve higher average FPS across the tested matrix—a very small group that likely consists of newer or more specialized hardware. The rank of 88 out of 3,712 corresponds to approximately the top 2.4% of all combos, which suggests this pairing is exceptionally well-suited for Doom's engine.

The CPU's nearest rivals in general benchmarks provide some context for its contribution. The Intel Xeon Gold 5318H scores 48,698 average with a delta of -0.2% against the i5-14600K's 48,618; the AMD EPYC 4345P scores 48,470 with a delta of +0.3%; the Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX scores 48,287 with a delta of +0.7%. These are all within 1% of each other, meaning the i5-14600K is not an outlier in CPU performance—its rank in Doom is therefore more attributable to the GPU and the combination's overall balance. The GPU's nearest rivals show a similar tight grouping: the Intel Arc Pro A60 scores 60,326 (delta 0%), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 scores 60,140 (delta +0.3%), and the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M scores 61,896 (delta -2.5%). The RTX 4090's average benchmark score of 60,347 is in line with these, yet its Doom performance clearly benefits from the specific architecture.

The rank of 88th is noteworthy because it is not 1st—there are 87 faster combos, which implies that Doom's engine can scale beyond what this pairing delivers, likely with higher-end CPUs or multi-GPU setups that were tested. However, the fact that this combo achieves 444 FPS at 1080p Low and 327 FPS at 1080p High suggests that for most practical gaming scenarios, the rank understates the real-world experience. The combination's percentile of 90th among all CPUs and 88th among all GPUs indicates that both components are near the top of their respective charts, and their pairing in Doom yields a result that is better than either component's individual percentile would suggest—a sign of good synergy rather than a bottleneck.

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

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of how settings impact performance at each resolution, and the optimal choice depends on whether the priority is maximum frame rate or visual fidelity. At 1920x1080, all presets deliver well above 240 FPS, with Low hitting 444, Medium at 387, High at 327, and Ultra at 267. The minimum FPS for Medium at 1080p is 329, which means even the lowest frame in that preset stays above 300 FPS. For competitive play or high-refresh-rate monitors (144Hz or 240Hz), Low or Medium would be the safest choices, as they provide headroom above the refresh rate. Ultra at 1080p still offers 267 FPS, which is above 240Hz, but the jump from High to Ultra costs 60 FPS (327 to 267), which is a significant trade-off for visual improvements that may be subtle in a fast-paced shooter.

At 2560x1440, the situation tightens. Low produces 287 FPS, Medium 250, High 211, and Ultra 173. The Medium preset's minimum of 213 FPS ensures that frame pacing stays smooth on a 144Hz or 165Hz monitor, while High dips to 211 FPS average—still above 144Hz but closer to the threshold. Ultra at 173 FPS is acceptable for 144Hz displays, but the 77 FPS gap between Ultra and Low (173 vs. 287) suggests that if you want to preserve high frame rates, Medium or High is the better balance. For 1440p, Medium appears to be the sweet spot: it delivers 250 FPS average with a 213 minimum, which is comfortably above 144Hz and leaves room for occasional dips.

At 3840x2160, the choice becomes more constrained. Low delivers 156 FPS, Medium 136, High 115, and Ultra 94. The Medium preset's minimum is 115 FPS, which is just above 60Hz but below 120Hz. For a 60Hz display, all presets except Ultra are sufficient, with Low and Medium providing headroom. For 120Hz or 144Hz displays, only Low (156 FPS) comes close to sustaining the refresh rate, and even that is marginal. The data suggests that at 4K, the best experience per the measured rows is Low if you want to approach 144Hz, or Medium if you prioritize visual quality while staying above 60 FPS. Ultra at 4K is only recommended for 60Hz displays, as the 94 FPS average is still above 60 but leaves no headroom for demanding scenes.

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

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its highest performance across all settings. Low settings produce an average of 444 FPS. Medium settings yield an average of 387 FPS, with a minimum of 329 and a maximum of 445. High settings show an average of 327 FPS. Ultra settings produce an average of 267 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra is linear in terms of settings tier, but the FPS drop accelerates: Low to Medium costs 57 FPS, Medium to High costs 60 FPS, and High to Ultra costs 60 FPS, showing a consistent penalty for each settings step.

At 2560x1440, performance scales down proportionally but remains high. Low settings achieve an average of 287 FPS. Medium settings produce an average of 250 FPS, with a minimum of 213 and a maximum of 288. High settings deliver an average of 211 FPS. Ultra settings yield an average of 173 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 114 FPS, which is smaller than the 177 FPS gap at 1080p, indicating that the GPU is becoming more of a constraint at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the performance envelope tightens significantly. Low settings produce an average of 156 FPS. Medium settings deliver an average of 136 FPS, with a minimum of 115 and a maximum of 156. High settings achieve an average of 115 FPS. Ultra settings hit an average of 94 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 62 FPS, which is the smallest absolute gap across all resolutions, confirming that the GPU is heavily saturated at 4K. Interestingly, the Medium preset's maximum FPS of 156 matches the Low preset's average, suggesting that Medium can occasionally hit the same peaks as Low but with more variance (min 115 vs. Low's likely higher minimum). The 4K Medium min of 115 FPS is exactly equal to the 4K High average, which shows how settings tiers converge at this resolution.

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

The Intel Core i5-14600K is a 14-core, 20-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. Its 24 MB of shared L3 cache and 2 MB per-core L2 cache provide ample capacity for the game's data. For Doom, which is known for its efficient multi-threading, the CPU's core count and clock speed are more than sufficient to feed the RTX 4090 at most settings. The data supports this: at 1080p Low, the combo reaches 444 FPS, which is a frame rate that would expose CPU limitations if the processor were weak. Since the FPS continues to climb as resolution decreases, the CPU is not the limiting factor in any tested configuration.

The CPU's benchmark scores further contextualize its role. In Cinebench R23 multicore, it scores 24,491, and in single-core it scores 2,064. The single-core performance is particularly relevant for game engines that rely on a primary thread for physics or game logic, and Doom's id Tech 6 engine does use multiple threads but still benefits from strong single-thread throughput. The Geekbench single-core score of 2,491 and multicore score of 16,673 indicate that the CPU can handle both the main game thread and background tasks without bottlenecking. The Passmark multithread score of 38,682 and single-thread score of 4,270 show that the CPU's per-thread performance is high, which is critical for maintaining high frame rates in scenes with many draw calls.

The CPU's percentile of 90th among all CPUs means it outperforms 90% of processors, and its nearest rivals in general benchmarks are all within 1% of its average score. However, in Doom, the CPU's role is secondary to the GPU. The 4K Ultra result of 94 FPS is a GPU limitation, not a CPU one—if the CPU were the bottleneck, the 1080p Low result would not be 444 FPS. The 14 cores and 20 threads ensure that even with other applications running alongside the game, there is enough processing headroom. The 125W TDP and Intel Socket 1700 platform are standard for a desktop CPU, and the 10 nm process node (Intel's own foundry) contributes to the clock speeds that drive the single-thread performance. In summary, the i5-14600K provides a solid foundation that never holds back the RTX 4090 in Doom, as evidenced by the linear FPS scaling with resolution and settings.