Doom

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

The measured FPS data for Doom shows a clear scaling pattern as resolution increases, with the drop from 1080p to 4K being substantial across all settings presets. At Low settings, the average FPS falls from 198.6 at 1920x1080 to 130.4 at 2560x1440, then further to 68.6 at 3840x2160. This represents a 65.5% reduction from 1080p to 4K, indicating that the rendering load scales heavily with pixel count. The pattern is even more pronounced at Ultra settings, where the average drops from 118.5 at 1080p to 77.6 at 1440p, and finally to 39.5 at 4K — a 66.7% decline from the lowest to highest resolution tested.

The scaling behavior suggests that the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT becomes the limiting factor as resolution climbs. The GPU's 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 280.3 GB/s bandwidth is adequate for 1080p and 1440p, but the 4K Ultra result of 39.5 FPS shows the graphics processor struggling with the combined demands of high pixel count and maximum settings. The gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is 29.1 FPS (68.6 versus 39.5), which is narrower in absolute terms than the 80.1 FPS gap at 1080p (198.6 versus 118.5). This compression of the settings spread at higher resolutions is typical of a GPU-bound scenario, where the pixel throughput limits performance regardless of the quality preset.

Interestingly, the CPU does not appear to be the bottleneck here. The Intel Core i7-14700F, with its 20 cores and 28 threads, delivers robust synthetic performance — its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 35443 and single-core score of 5003 place it in the 94th percentile of all CPUs. Even at 1080p Low, where the CPU has the most headroom to become limiting, the frame rate reaches 198.6 FPS, which is well above the threshold where most processors would cap out. The data therefore points to the GPU as the primary constraint across all tested configurations, with the CPU providing ample overhead for the game's demands.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with the Navi 23 chip, manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC. Its boost clock of 2635 MHz and game clock of 2410 MHz are relatively high for the segment, and the memory runs at 2190 MHz with 17.5 Gbps effective speed. These clock speeds translate into a pixel rate of 168.6 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 337.3 GTexel/s, which are the raw throughput figures that determine how quickly the GPU can fill frames with geometry and texture data. The FP32 performance of 10.79 TFLOPS provides the compute headroom for the game's shading and lighting calculations.

The 8 GB VRAM capacity is a critical factor in this game's results. Doom, released in 2016, was designed for hardware of that era, and 8 GB is sufficient for its texture and geometry loads at 1080p and 1440p. However, the 4K Ultra result of 39.5 FPS suggests that memory bandwidth and capacity may be contributing to the performance ceiling. The 128-bit bus width is narrow for a card aiming at 4K, and the 280.3 GB/s bandwidth, while respectable, limits how quickly textures can be streamed to the render pipeline at high resolutions. The benchmark results show a steady decline from Low to Ultra at every resolution: at 1440p, the spread is 130.4 to 77.6 FPS, and at 4K, it is 68.6 to 39.5 FPS. This consistent scaling with settings indicates that the GPU's shading units and ROPs (64 total) are being exercised progressively harder as quality increases.

The GPU's synthetic benchmark scores place it in the 72nd percentile of all GPUs, with a Passmark G3D score of 17166 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1859. Its nearest rivals in the aggregate benchmark data include the AMD Radeon RX 6800M (deltaPct 0) and the AMD Radeon RX 470 (deltaPct 0.1), which indicates that the 6650 XT sits in a narrow performance band relative to those parts. The fact that the RX 470, a much older card, is within 0.1% in average benchmark score underscores that the 6650 XT's raw compute capabilities are not extraordinary — it relies on its modern architecture and clock speeds to deliver competitive gaming performance.

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

The Intel Core i7-14700F is a Raptor Lake Refresh part with 20 cores and 28 threads, running at a base clock of 2.10 GHz and boosting to 5.40 GHz. This combination of high core count and high boost frequency makes it a formidable processor for both multithreaded and single-threaded workloads. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 33 MB of shared L3, which provides substantial on-die storage for frequently accessed game data. The CPU supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration, with PCIe Gen 5 connectivity providing 16 lanes for the GPU.

For Doom, the CPU's role is primarily to feed the GPU with draw calls and physics calculations. The game's engine is known for being well-optimized, and the measured FPS data shows that the i7-14700F is more than capable of keeping up with the RX 6650 XT. At 1080p Low, where CPU load is typically highest relative to GPU load, the system achieves 198.6 FPS — a figure that would stress many processors but is comfortably handled by the i7-14700F's 5.40 GHz boost clock and strong single-thread performance. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 5003 and multi-core score of 35443 demonstrate the CPU's balanced capability, and its Passmark single-thread score of 4261 confirms that it can sustain high frame rates without becoming a bottleneck.

The synthetic benchmarks show the i7-14700F performing within 1.7% of its nearest rivals, with the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X at a deltaPct of -0.6 and the AMD EPYC 7313P at 1.7. This places the CPU in a competitive position relative to other high-end desktop parts, though the data does not show any game-specific CPU bottleneck emerging in Doom. The 94th percentile ranking across all CPUs reinforces that this processor is not the limiting component in this configuration. Instead, the FPS scaling with resolution and settings mirrors what would be expected from a GPU-bound system, confirming that the CPU has ample headroom for this game.

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

Examining the measured FPS data across all settings presets, the Medium preset emerges as the most balanced choice for most users. At 1080p, Medium delivers 177 FPS, which is only 21.6 FPS lower than Low but provides significantly better visual quality. At 1440p, Medium achieves 114.4 FPS, comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay, and even at 4K, Medium maintains 61.8 FPS — just above the playability line. The High preset offers marginal visual improvements over Medium but costs 31.9 FPS at 1080p (145.1 versus 177) and 17.2 FPS at 1440p (97.2 versus 114.4). At 4K, High drops to 55.1 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS ideal but still playable for many users.

The Ultra preset is only recommended for users with displays that can justify the visual fidelity and who prioritize image quality over frame rate. At 1080p, Ultra still delivers a respectable 118.5 FPS, but at 1440p it falls to 77.6 FPS, and at 4K it drops to 39.5 FPS — a level that would be considered too low for competitive or fast-paced gameplay. The Low preset, while offering the highest frame rates at every resolution (198.6 at 1080p, 130.4 at 1440p, and 68.6 at 4K), sacrifices too much visual quality for the marginal frame rate gains over Medium at lower resolutions.

For a 1080p monitor, Medium or High are both excellent choices, with Medium providing a 21.6 FPS advantage over High. For 1440p, Medium is the sweet spot, offering 114.4 FPS with good visual fidelity. For 4K, Medium is the only preset that reliably stays above 60 FPS, and even then it is close at 61.8 FPS. Users with 4K displays may prefer to use Low for the highest frame rates, but the visual trade-off is substantial. The data suggests that Medium is the best compromise across all resolutions, balancing frame rate and image quality without dipping below playable thresholds.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Intel Core i7-14700F and AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT ranks 1076 out of 1681 tested combos in Doom. This places it in the lower-middle portion of the ranking, which is somewhat surprising given the strong synthetic benchmark scores of both components. The i7-14700F sits in the 94th percentile of all CPUs, and the RX 6650 XT is in the 72nd percentile of all GPUs, yet their combined gaming performance in this title does not crack the top half of the rankings. This discrepancy can be attributed to the GPU's limitations at higher resolutions and settings, which drag the overall ranking down despite the CPU's ample headroom.

The ranking of 1076 out of 1681 corresponds to roughly the 64th percentile of tested combos, meaning that about 36% of tested configurations perform worse than this pairing. The fact that the combo does not rank higher is likely due to the RX 6650 XT's position relative to other GPUs in the database — its nearest rivals in aggregate benchmarks include the RX 6800M and RX 470, both of which are within 0.1% of its average score. This indicates that the GPU is not a standout performer, and in a game like Doom where the GPU is the primary bottleneck, the combo's ranking reflects the graphics card's mid-tier status rather than any CPU deficiency.

The data suggests that upgrading the GPU would yield the most significant improvement in this combo's ranking, as the CPU has demonstrated it can support higher frame rates without becoming a constraint. The 20-core, 28-thread processor with a 5.40 GHz boost clock is overkill for Doom's requirements, and the measured FPS at 1080p Low (198.6) shows that the CPU is not limiting even at the lowest settings. The combo's rank is therefore a direct reflection of the GPU's performance ceiling in this game.

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

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the system achieves its highest frame rates. Low settings produce an average of 198.6 FPS, Medium delivers 177 FPS, High reaches 145.1 FPS, and Ultra drops to 118.5 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 80.1 FPS, with each settings tier costing a significant but diminishing amount of performance. The gap between Low and Medium is 21.6 FPS, between Medium and High is 31.9 FPS, and between High and Ultra is 26.6 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the mid-range resolution, the frame rates remain highly playable across all settings. Low settings average 130.4 FPS, Medium delivers 114.4 FPS, High reaches 97.2 FPS, and Ultra drops to 77.6 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 52.8 FPS, which is narrower than at 1080p due to the increased GPU load. The transition from 1080p to 1440p costs 68.2 FPS at Low, 62.6 FPS at Medium, 47.9 FPS at High, and 40.9 FPS at Ultra. These reductions show that the GPU's pixel throughput becomes more constraining as resolution rises.

At 3840x2160, the highest resolution tested, the frame rates drop significantly across all settings. Low settings average 68.6 FPS, Medium delivers 61.8 FPS, High reaches 55.1 FPS, and Ultra drops to 39.5 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 29.1 FPS, the narrowest of any resolution, confirming that the GPU is the dominant bottleneck at 4K. The transition from 1440p to 4K costs 61.8 FPS at Low, 52.6 FPS at Medium, 42.1 FPS at High, and 38.1 FPS at Ultra. These numbers show that the RX 6650 XT is only marginally capable of 4K gaming, with Medium being the only preset that stays above 60 FPS, and even that is close at 61.8 FPS. The data overall indicates that this combo is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, with 4K requiring significant settings compromises to achieve playable frame rates.