Doom

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H paired with the AMD Radeon 880M ranks 2,858 out of 2,930 tested combos in Doom. That places this configuration in the bottom 2.5% of all tested systems, a result that firmly establishes it as an entry-level pairing for this title. The ranking reflects the fundamental imbalance between the two components: the CPU is a mobile processor with strong synthetic scores, but the GPU is an integrated graphics solution that struggles to keep pace with even modest rendering demands.

The data indicates this combo sits near the very bottom of the performance pool, with only 72 tested configurations ranked lower. This is not a system built for high-refresh-rate competitive play, nor is it suited for maximum visual fidelity. Instead, the benchmark results show a configuration that can deliver playable frame rates at lower resolutions and settings, but which quickly falls apart as graphical demands increase. The combination of a 14-core mobile CPU with an integrated GPU creates a scenario where the processor is rarely the limiting factor; rather, the iGPU becomes the bottleneck at every resolution tested.

What makes this ranking particularly notable is the contrast between the CPU's and GPU's individual standings. The processor sits at the 81st percentile among all CPUs, while the graphics solution languishes at the 43rd percentile among all GPUs. This 38-percentage-point gap underscores the mismatch: the CPU is capable of feeding a far more powerful discrete GPU, but the integrated Radeon 880M cannot translate that processing headroom into meaningful frame rate gains. In Doom, a game from 2016 that is generally well-optimized, this combo still lands near the bottom of the charts, which tells a clear story about the GPU's limitations.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Doom at 1080p with playable frame rates?

A: Yes, but only at lower settings. The measured data shows 90 FPS at Low settings, 78 FPS at Medium, 66 FPS at High, and 54 FPS at Ultra for 1920x1080 resolution. All four presets exceed the 30 FPS threshold typically considered minimum for playability, though only Low and Medium offer the smoothness most players expect from a fast-paced FPS.

Q: How does the Radeon 880M compare to its closest GPU rivals in raw benchmark scores?

A: The Radeon 880M has an average benchmark score of 8,436, which is 0.1% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX's 8,427 and 0.3% lower than the NVIDIA GeForce MX330's 8,458. It also trails the AMD Radeon HD 8870M by 0.3% (8,462) but leads the AMD Radeon R9 M375X by 1.3% (8,325). These are all older or lower-tier parts, confirming the 880M's entry-level positioning.

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

A: According to the measured frame rates, 1920x1080 is the only resolution where this system consistently delivers smooth performance across all settings. At 2560x1440, frame rates range from 35 FPS at Ultra to 58 FPS at Low, which is playable but not ideal. At 3840x2160, the system falls below 32 FPS at every setting, making 4K impractical for anything beyond screenshots.

Q: How does the processor's synthetic benchmark performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H has an average benchmark score of 29,093, which is 0.1% lower than the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X's 29,123 and 0.5% lower than the Intel Xeon Phi 7210's 29,245. It outperforms the AMD Ryzen 5 5600XT by 0.5% (28,940) and trails the Intel Core i5-13500HX by 0.6% (29,270). The CPU is competitive with desktop parts from a few generations ago.

Q: Does the game favor CPU or GPU performance for this specific combo?

A: The benchmark data strongly indicates GPU limitation. As resolution increases from 1080p to 1440p to 4K, frame rates drop sharply at every settings level, which is the classic signature of a GPU-bound scenario. The CPU's high percentile ranking (81st) relative to the GPU's (43rd) further supports this conclusion.

Q: What is the difference between the measured FPS at 1080p Low versus 4K Ultra?

A: The difference is substantial. The system achieves 90 FPS at 1080p Low but only 19 FPS at 4K Ultra, a 71 FPS drop that represents a 78.9% reduction in performance. This demonstrates how quickly the integrated GPU becomes overwhelmed as pixel count and visual complexity increase.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H is a 14-core, 18-thread mobile processor from the Core Ultra Series 1, built on Intel's 7 nm process with the Meteor Lake architecture. It has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, with a thermal design power of 28 W. The cache hierarchy includes 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The processor supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s and connects via PCIe Gen 5 with 8 lanes.

In the context of Doom, this CPU's role is largely one of enabling rather than limiting. The processor's synthetic scores are respectable: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 11,875.5 and a single-core score of 1,700, with a Passmark single-thread score of 3,521. These numbers place it at the 81st percentile among all CPUs, meaning it outperforms the vast majority of processors in general computing tasks. For a game like Doom, which was released in 2016 and is known for efficient multi-threading, this CPU has ample headroom to handle game logic, physics, and draw call submission.

The 18 threads provide substantial parallel processing capability, and the 4.60 GHz boost clock ensures strong single-thread performance for the primary game thread. However, the benchmark results show that this processing power is largely underutilized in this pairing. The nearest rival comparisons confirm the CPU's strength: it sits within 0.6% of the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X, a well-regarded desktop processor, and slightly ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 5600XT. The Intel Core i5-13500HX, another mobile part, edges it out by 0.6%, but the differences are negligible in real-world gaming terms.

The practical implication is that the CPU is not the constraint in this system. If a discrete GPU were paired with this processor, Doom would likely run at far higher frame rates than what the measured data shows. The integrated Arc Xe-LPG graphics with 96 execution units is the component that determines the system's gaming ceiling, and that ceiling is low. For this combo, the CPU's role is to ensure that the GPU is always fed with data and that frame pacing remains consistent, which it does admirably given its performance class.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data for Doom reveals a consistent pattern across all resolutions: performance scales predictably with settings, and the system's limitations become more pronounced as resolution increases. At 1920x1080, the lowest tested resolution, the combo delivers 90 FPS at Low settings, 78 FPS at Medium, 66 FPS at High, and 54 FPS at Ultra. The Medium preset shows a minimum of 66 FPS and a maximum of 90 FPS, indicating that frame times are reasonably stable at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates drop by roughly a third across all settings. Low settings produce 58 FPS, Medium delivers 51 FPS, High falls to 43 FPS, and Ultra drops to 35 FPS. The Medium preset at this resolution shows a minimum of 43 FPS and a maximum of 58 FPS, which mirrors the 1080p Medium range but shifted downward. This resolution remains playable, but the margin for error shrinks, particularly at High and Ultra where frame rates dip below the 45 FPS threshold that many players consider minimum for smooth gameplay.

At 3840x2160, the system's limitations become starkly apparent. Low settings yield just 31 FPS, Medium drops to 27 FPS, High falls to 23 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 19 FPS. The Medium preset at 4K shows a minimum of 23 FPS and a maximum of 31 FPS, which is the only 4K row with min/max data, and even the best case scenario barely reaches 31 FPS. These numbers are below the 30 FPS playability threshold for most titles, making 4K gaming impractical for this combo.

The pattern across all resolutions is consistent: Low is the fastest, followed by Medium, then High, with Ultra being the slowest. The gaps between presets are also consistent, with roughly 12-16 FPS between Low and Medium, 12-16 FPS between Medium and High, and 12-16 FPS between High and Ultra at 1080p. At 1440p, the gaps narrow slightly to 7-8 FPS between presets, while at 4K the gaps shrink to 4 FPS between each step. This compression at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU is becoming the dominant bottleneck, leaving less room for settings to influence performance.

Resolution Scaling

The resolution scaling behavior of this combo provides clear evidence of GPU-bound performance. When moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440, the frame rates drop by approximately 35-37% across all settings. For example, at Low settings, the system goes from 90 FPS at 1080p to 58 FPS at 1440p, a 32 FPS reduction. At Medium, the drop is from 78 to 51 FPS, a 27 FPS reduction. At High, it falls from 66 to 43 FPS, a 23 FPS drop, and at Ultra, it declines from 54 to 35 FPS, a 19 FPS reduction.

The transition from 2560x1440 to 3840x2160 is even more punishing in relative terms. Low settings drop from 58 to 31 FPS, a 46.6% reduction. Medium falls from 51 to 27 FPS, a 47.1% drop. High decreases from 43 to 23 FPS, a 46.5% reduction, and Ultra goes from 35 to 19 FPS, a 45.7% decline. These near-uniform percentage drops across all settings at each resolution step are a textbook indication that the GPU's pixel throughput is the limiting factor.

The pixel count increase from 1080p to 1440p is 77.8%, while the frame rate drops by roughly 35%, which is less than proportional. This suggests that at 1080p, the system has some headroom that isn't fully utilized, possibly due to CPU or memory bandwidth constraints at lower resolutions. However, the jump from 1440p to 4K represents a 125% increase in pixel count, and the frame rate drops by approximately 46%, which is closer to proportional. This indicates that at 4K, the GPU is fully saturated and the system is operating at its absolute limit.

The data suggests that the Radeon 880M's 16 ROPs and 48 TMUs are the limiting factors as resolution increases. The GPU's pixel rate of 46.40 GPixel/s and texture rate of 139.2 GTexel/s are insufficient for 4K rendering, as evidenced by the sub-32 FPS results at every 4K preset. Even at 1440p, the system is pushing against the GPU's limits, with only Low settings managing to exceed 55 FPS. The system memory bandwidth, listed as "System Dependent," likely also plays a role, as shared memory architectures can suffer from bandwidth contention between CPU and GPU workloads.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend heavily on the user's display resolution and performance priorities. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset offers the best balance of visual quality and performance. The 78 FPS average with a 66 FPS minimum provides smooth gameplay that exceeds the 60 FPS target most players prefer, while still delivering improved visual fidelity over Low settings. The High preset at 66 FPS is also viable, but the jump from Medium to High costs 12 FPS, which may be noticeable in fast-paced combat scenarios.

For users with 2560x1440 displays, the Low preset at 58 FPS is the safest choice, as it maintains frame rates above 55 FPS and ensures consistent performance. The Medium preset at 51 FPS is playable, but the 43 FPS minimum could result in occasional stutter during intense scenes. High and Ultra at 1440p are not recommended, as both fall below 45 FPS, which is the rough threshold where gameplay responsiveness begins to suffer in a fast-paced FPS like Doom.

At 3840x2160, the data makes it clear that no setting provides a truly playable experience. The best case is Low at 31 FPS, which barely crosses the 30 FPS minimum but will feel sluggish and unresponsive. Medium at 27 FPS, High at 23 FPS, and Ultra at 19 FPS are all below acceptable thresholds. Users with 4K displays should either lower the resolution to 1440p or accept that this combo cannot deliver a satisfactory Doom experience at native 4K.

For the best overall experience, the 1080p Medium preset is the recommended configuration. It delivers a 78 FPS average with a 66 FPS minimum, which provides smooth, responsive gameplay that takes full advantage of the system's capabilities. The 90 FPS at 1080p Low is technically faster, but the visual quality trade-off is significant for only a 12 FPS gain. Conversely, the 54 FPS at 1080p Ultra is not worth the 24 FPS loss from Medium, especially given that the visual differences between Medium and Ultra in a 2016 title are often subtle. The data supports Medium as the sweet spot: it maintains high frame rates while preserving enough visual detail to enjoy the game's atmospheric environments.