Doom

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 7600 delivers a robust 1080p experience in Doom, with performance scaling predictably as resolution increases. The data reveals a system that is firmly GPU-limited at higher resolutions, while the CPU provides ample headroom at lower settings. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS across resolutions and settings, contextualizes the combo’s rank, and offers actionable settings guidance based solely on the provided benchmark data.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and consistent decline as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160, which is typical for a GPU-bound scenario. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 142 at 1080p to 92 at 1440p, and finally to 50 at 4K. This represents a 35% performance hit when moving from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 46% drop from 1440p to 4K. The scaling is not linear, indicating that the GPU’s pixel throughput becomes the primary bottleneck as the pixel count quadruples from 1080p to 4K.

The pattern is consistent across all settings presets. At Low settings, the average FPS falls from 193 at 1080p to 125 at 1440p, and then to 68 at 4K. The 4K result is notably lower relative to the 1440p figure, reinforcing that the RX 7600’s rendering capabilities are stretched thin at 4K. The drop from 1440p to 4K is 46%, identical to the High preset drop, which suggests that the resolution scaling penalty is independent of the quality preset.

Interestingly, the Ultra preset shows the steepest relative decline. Starting at 116 FPS at 1080p, it falls to 75 at 1440p, and then plummets to 41 at 4K. The 4K Ultra result is the lowest measured value in the entire dataset, indicating that the combination of maximum quality settings and 4K resolution overwhelms the GPU. The data implies that while the CPU can keep up at 1080p, the GPU’s fill rate and memory bandwidth become the limiting factors as resolution climbs.

The Medium preset offers a useful midpoint for observing scaling. It records 168 FPS at 1080p, 109 at 1440p, and 59 at 4K. The percentage drops are 35% and 46% respectively, mirroring the High preset almost exactly. This consistency across presets strongly indicates that resolution scaling is governed by the GPU’s fixed hardware resources—specifically its 128-bit memory bus and 8 GB of VRAM—rather than by software-level settings changes.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7600, built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, is the clear performance driver in this combo. Its specifications reveal why the 4K results are modest. The GPU features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This memory configuration is a limiting factor at 4K, where texture data and frame buffers demand more capacity and bandwidth than at lower resolutions. The measured 4K averages of 50 FPS (High) and 41 FPS (Ultra) suggest that the GPU is hitting memory-related bottlenecks.

The GPU’s clock speeds are relatively high, with a base clock of 1720 MHz and a boost clock of 2655 MHz. The game clock is rated at 2250 MHz. These clocks allow the GPU to sustain solid performance at 1080p, where the 193 FPS Low result indicates that the shading units (2,048) and texture mapping units (128) are being utilized effectively. However, the boost clock does not compensate for the narrow memory bus at higher resolutions.

The GPU’s compute capabilities, measured at 21.75 TFLOPS FP32, are substantial for a mid-range card. Yet, the 4K results show that raw compute is not the sole determinant of performance. The pixel rate of 169.9 GPixel/s and texture rate of 339.8 GTexel/s are adequate for 1080p and 1440p, but the 4K Ultra preset’s 41 FPS average indicates that the render output units (64 ROPs) are saturated.

The GPU’s VRAM capacity of 8 GB is worth scrutinizing. At 4K with Ultra settings, the average FPS drops to 41, which is 36% lower than the High preset’s 50 FPS. This gap is larger than the difference between presets at 1080p, where Ultra (116) is only 18% lower than High (142). This suggests that at 4K, the Ultra preset may be exceeding the VRAM capacity, forcing additional memory traffic and reducing performance. The data implies that the RX 7600 is not intended for 4K gaming, but rather excels at 1080p and handles 1440p reasonably well.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations, this specific pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 and the AMD Radeon RX 7600 achieves a comboRankInGame of 1991 out of 2930 total combos. This places it in the 68th percentile of all tested configurations for Doom. The rank is relatively mid-to-low, which aligns with the measured FPS data showing that the combo is capable but not top-tier.

The rank suggests that while this combo delivers playable framerates at 1080p and 1440p, there are many other pairings that achieve higher average FPS in this game. The GPU’s percentileVsAllGpus of 57 indicates that the RX 7600 is slightly above the median GPU in overall benchmark scores, but it is not a high-end part. The CPU’s percentileVsAllCpus of 85 shows that the Ultra 5 225 is a strong processor, but the combo’s overall rank is dragged down by the GPU’s mid-range positioning.

When compared to the GPU’s nearest rivals, the RX 7600’s average benchmark score of 15171 is nearly identical to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM, which scores 15199 (a -0.2% delta). This close competition in synthetic benchmarks does not directly translate to Doom performance, but it contextualizes the GPU’s tier. The AMD Radeon 680M, an integrated solution, scores 15270 (-0.7% delta), showing that the discrete RX 7600 is not far ahead of some integrated graphics in raw compute, though the dedicated memory bandwidth likely helps in real gaming scenarios.

The combo’s rank of 1991 implies that for Doom, users seeking higher framerates at 4K or maximum settings would need a more powerful GPU. The data indicates that the CPU is not the limiting factor, as its high percentile rank (85) suggests it can feed frames faster than the GPU can render them.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of performance across three resolutions and four quality presets. At 1920x1080, the combo delivers excellent framerates across all settings. The Low preset averages 193 FPS, which is the highest measured value in the entire dataset. The Medium preset averages 168 FPS, with a minimum of 143 and maximum of 193. The High preset averages 142 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 116 FPS. All 1080p results are above the 60 FPS threshold, with even Ultra providing a smooth experience.

Moving to 2560x1440, performance remains strong but drops noticeably. The Low preset averages 125 FPS, which is still very playable. The Medium preset averages 109 FPS, with a minimum of 92 and maximum of 125. The High preset averages 92 FPS, which is exactly the minimum of the Medium preset, suggesting that the Medium preset’s min FPS is a good indicator of High’s average. The Ultra preset drops to 75 FPS, which is still above 60 FPS but shows the performance cost of maximum settings.

At 3840x2160, the combo struggles to maintain high framerates. The Low preset averages 68 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for a fast-paced FPS. The Medium preset averages 59 FPS, with a minimum of 50 and maximum of 68. The High preset averages 50 FPS, which is borderline for smooth gameplay. The Ultra preset averages 41 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target and may result in noticeable stuttering.

The data shows a clear tiering: 1080p is the sweet spot for this combo, 1440p is viable with settings adjustments, and 4K is only playable at Low settings. The Medium preset at 1440p (109 FPS) offers a good balance, while the High preset at 1080p (142 FPS) is the recommended configuration for most users seeking high quality without sacrificing smoothness.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the target resolution and desired framerate. For 1920x1080, the Ultra preset at 116 FPS is the clear recommendation. This provides the best visual quality while maintaining a framerate well above the 60 FPS threshold. The data shows that even at Ultra, the combo has headroom, so users can enjoy the maximum settings without performance concerns.

For 2560x1440, the High preset at 92 FPS offers an excellent experience. This balances visual fidelity with a smooth framerate. The Ultra preset at 75 FPS is also viable, but the 20% FPS drop from High may not be worth the marginal visual improvement. The Medium preset at 109 FPS is a better choice for competitive players who prioritize framerate over graphics.

For 3840x2160, the Low preset at 68 FPS is the only option that consistently stays above 60 FPS. The Medium preset at 59 FPS is borderline, and the High and Ultra presets at 50 and 41 FPS respectively are not recommended for a smooth experience. Users with 4K displays should accept the Low preset or consider lowering the resolution to 1440p for a better experience.

The data indicates that the Medium preset provides the most consistent performance across all resolutions, with averages of 168 (1080p), 109 (1440p), and 59 (4K). This preset offers a good balance between quality and performance, and its min FPS values (143 at 1080p, 92 at 1440p, 50 at 4K) suggest it avoids severe frame drops. For a general recommendation, the Medium preset is a safe choice, but users with high-refresh-rate 1080p monitors should opt for Ultra to fully utilize their display.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 is the optimal resolution, with all presets averaging above 116 FPS. 2560x1440 is also viable, with the Low preset averaging 125 FPS, but 4K performance is limited, with only the Low preset averaging above 60 FPS at 68 FPS.

Q: How does the Ultra preset affect performance at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset averages 41 FPS, which is the lowest measured value in the dataset. This is a 39% drop from the High preset’s 50 FPS, indicating that the Ultra preset at 4K overwhelms the GPU’s memory bandwidth and render output units.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this combo?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the primary bottleneck. The CPU has a percentile rank of 85 vs all CPUs, while the GPU has a percentile rank of 57 vs all GPUs. The 1080p Low preset achieves 193 FPS, indicating the CPU can feed frames quickly, but the GPU cannot maintain that performance at higher resolutions.

Q: What framerate can I expect at 1440p with High settings?

A: The measured average FPS at 2560x1440 with High settings is 92 FPS. This provides a smooth experience, though it is 35% lower than the 1080p High result of 142 FPS.

Q: Does the Medium preset offer consistent framerates?

A: Yes, the Medium preset shows the most consistent performance with min FPS values of 143 at 1080p, 92 at 1440p, and 50 at 4K. The average FPS for these resolutions are 168, 109, and 59 respectively.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to other tested combinations?

A: The combo ranks 1991 out of 2930 tested combos, placing it in the 68th percentile. This indicates that while it is a capable pairing, there are many other configurations that achieve higher overall performance in Doom.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 plays a supporting role in this combo, providing sufficient processing power to avoid being the limiting factor in Doom. The CPU features 10 cores and 10 threads, with a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. This is a high-frequency design that excels in single-threaded workloads, as evidenced by its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3655.

The CPU’s architecture, Arrow Lake-S, is built on a 3 nm process, which contributes to its efficiency. The 20 MB of shared L3 cache provides fast access to frequently used data, which is beneficial for game logic and physics calculations. The CPU’s passmark single-thread score of 4412 and multithread score of 30459 indicate strong all-around performance.

In Doom, which is a well-optimized game, the CPU’s role is to ensure that the GPU is fed with draw calls and game state updates. The 1080p Low preset’s average of 193 FPS suggests that the CPU can handle high frame rates without bottlenecking. The passmark physics score of 2342 shows that the CPU can manage the game’s physics simulation, and the data compression score of 302811 indicates fast storage access for level loading.

The CPU’s percentileVsAllCpus of 85 places it in the top 15% of all tested CPUs, confirming that it is a high-performance part. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F, has an average score of 36945, which is essentially identical to the Ultra 5 225’s 36938 (a 0% delta). This suggests that the CPU is well-matched to its peers in synthetic benchmarks.

The data implies that the CPU is not the constraint in this combo. The GPU’s lower performance tier is what caps the overall framerates. Users upgrading the GPU in the future would see significant gains without needing to change the CPU, as the Ultra 5 225 has enough headroom to support more powerful graphics cards. The combo’s rank of 1991 is primarily due to the GPU’s mid-range positioning, not the CPU.