Doom

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for Doom across three resolutions reveals a classic GPU-bound scaling pattern, with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 as the primary constraint. At 1920x1080 with High settings, the combo produces 68 FPS average. Moving to 2560x1440 drops that to 44 FPS, a 35% reduction. At 3840x2160, the average falls further to 24 FPS, representing a 65% drop from the 1080p baseline. This steep decline is characteristic of a GPU operating near its memory and shading limits.

The scaling pattern intensifies as settings increase. With Ultra settings, the frame rate collapses from 55 FPS at 1080p to 36 FPS at 1440p (a 35% loss) and then to 19 FPS at 4K—a 65% total reduction from the 1080p Ultra figure. The Low preset tells a similar story: 92 FPS at 1080p, 59 FPS at 1440p, and 32 FPS at 4K. The relative consistency of these percentage drops—roughly one-third lost moving to 1440p and another third lost moving to 4K—indicates that resolution scaling is uniform across settings, which points squarely at the GPU's pixel throughput and memory bandwidth as the limiting factors.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235, with its 14 cores and 14 threads running at a base clock of 3.40 GHz and boost up to 5.00 GHz, is not the bottleneck here. The CPU's PassMark multithread score of 37816 and single-thread score of 4516 place it in the 89th percentile among all CPUs. At 1080p Low, the combo hits 92 FPS, which is respectable for this GPU, but the CPU's headroom is evident in the fact that lowering resolution from 1440p to 1080p yields a 56% FPS increase at High settings (44 to 68 FPS). If the CPU were limiting, that improvement would be far smaller. The data indicates that even at 1080p, the GTX 1650's 896 shading units and 2.984 TFLOPS FP32 throughput are the determining factor.

The 4K results are particularly telling. At 3840x2160, even the Low preset only manages 32 FPS, and Ultra drops to 19 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is 13 FPS, whereas at 1080p that same gap is 37 FPS (92 vs. 55). This narrowing spread at higher resolutions is a signature of pixel-bound performance—the GPU's 32 ROPs and 128.1 GB/s memory bandwidth simply cannot feed the frame buffer fast enough at 4K, regardless of the quality preset. The 4 GB GDDR5 frame buffer also likely contributes to the steep falloff, as texture and geometry data for 4K scenes may exceed the available memory.

FAQ

Q: What is the average frame rate at 1920x1080 with Medium settings?

A: The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 Medium is 80, with a minimum of 68 and a maximum of 92 FPS.

Q: Does the combo achieve a playable frame rate at 3840x2160?

A: At 4K, the highest average is 32 FPS on Low settings. Medium produces 28 FPS, High produces 24, and Ultra drops to 19. None of these reach the 60 FPS threshold typically considered smooth.

Q: How much faster is the GPU at 1080p compared to 4K on High settings?

A: The 1080p High average is 68 FPS, while the 4K High average is 24 FPS. This represents a 183% increase in frame rate when dropping from 4K to 1080p.

Q: What is the CPU's percentile ranking among all processors?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 ranks in the 89th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 46062.

Q: Which GPU rival is closest in average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 8850M is 0.3% behind the GTX 1650's average score of 7472, while the Intel Arc A310 is 1% faster.

Q: What is the best-case frame rate recorded at 2560x1440?

A: The maximum FPS at 1440p Medium is 60, with an average of 52. Low settings average 59 FPS, but the maximum was not recorded for that preset.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the clear performance anchor in this pairing. Its statistics paint a picture of a modest, end-of-life GPU (production status is listed as End-of-life) that was released in April 2019 with a launch MSRP of 149 USD. The chip, codenamed TU117, is built on TSMC's 12 nm process and contains 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. With 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, the GPU delivers 2.984 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and a texture rate of 93.24 GTexel/s.

Memory is a significant constraint. The 4 GB GDDR5 frame buffer runs at 2001 MHz (8 Gbps effective) across a 128-bit bus, yielding 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth. For a 2016 FPS title like Doom, this configuration is sufficient for 1080p but struggles as pixel count rises. The 4K results—19 to 32 FPS depending on preset—strongly suggest that the 4 GB capacity and 128-bit bus are overwhelmed by the geometry and texture loads at that resolution. The pixel rate of 53.28 GPixel/s, derived from the 1665 MHz boost clock, further caps the fill-rate potential.

The GPU's benchmark profile reinforces its position. Its PassMark G3D score is 7880, with a DirectX 12 score of 35 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 33042. These place it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 7472. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (0.3% slower), Intel UHD Graphics 750 (0.4% slower), and Intel Arc A310 (1% faster). The GTX 1650's DirectX 9 score of 124 is notably higher than its DirectX 11 score of 58, which may reflect driver maturity for older APIs.

In Doom specifically, the GPU's role is dominant. The measured FPS at 1080p High (68) versus 1080p Low (92) shows a 35% improvement from lowering settings, which is a GPU-side gain. The CPU's contribution is minimal by comparison—the Core Ultra 5 235's PassMark single-thread score of 4516 and multi-thread score of 37816 are far above what this game requires, even at high refresh rates. The GPU's 75 W TDP and lack of power connectors (drawing solely from the PCIe slot) further indicate a low-power chip that is fundamentally limited by its thermal and power envelope.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 ranks 2833 out of 2930 tested combos in Doom. This places it in the bottom 3.3% of all configurations, which is a stark reflection of the GPU's modest capabilities. The ranking is driven almost entirely by the GTX 1650's 40th-percentile standing among all GPUs; the CPU is in the 89th percentile, so the pairing represents a significant imbalance where the graphics card is the bottleneck.

This low rank should be interpreted in context. The combo's raw FPS numbers—68 at 1080p High, 55 at 1080p Ultra—are playable for a single-player FPS, but they fall far behind what contemporary GPUs achieve. The 2833rd position out of 2930 means that 97% of tested combinations deliver higher frame rates in this title. The data set includes combos with far more powerful GPUs, so this ranking is not a reflection of the CPU's capability but rather of the GPU's position in the performance hierarchy.

Within the GPU's own peer group, the ranking makes more sense. The GTX 1650's nearest rivals in average benchmark score are all within 1% of its 7472 average, and its 40th-percentile standing means it outperforms about 40% of all GPUs. In Doom, the measured FPS at 1080p Medium (80) and Low (92) demonstrate that the card can handle this older title at acceptable frame rates, provided the resolution and settings are managed appropriately. The 4K results, however, confirm that this combo is not suited for high-resolution gaming.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 is a desktop processor from the Core Ultra Series 2, built on Arrow Lake architecture at TSMC's 3 nm process. It features 14 cores and 14 threads—a configuration without hyper-threading—running at a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The 65 W TDP and Intel Socket 1851 (LGA) interface position it as a mainstream desktop chip. Its cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3.

The CPU's benchmark results are strong. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score is 14769, with a single-core score of 2085. PassMark scores are similarly robust: multithread at 37816, single-thread at 4516, floating-point math at 117951, and integer math at 87948. These numbers place it in the 89th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 46062. Its nearest rivals in average score are the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (0.1% faster), Intel Core i9-13900HX (0.1% slower), and AMD EPYC 4364P (0.2% faster). The deltaPct values are all within 0.2%, indicating that the Core Ultra 5 235 sits at a performance plateau shared by several high-end chips.

In Doom, the CPU's role is supportive rather than limiting. The game, released in May 2016, does not heavily tax modern multi-core processors. The Core Ultra 5 235's 14 cores and 24 MB of L3 cache provide ample headroom for the game's engine, which is unlikely to utilize all threads effectively. The measured FPS at 1080p Low (92) and the fact that the CPU can maintain frame rates that exceed the GPU's 4K capabilities (where the GPU drops to 19-32 FPS) confirm that the processor is not the bottleneck. The CPU's DDR5 memory support and dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth also ensure that memory bandwidth is not a constraint in this title.

The 3 nm process node and TSMC foundry give this CPU a power efficiency advantage, but that is irrelevant to gaming performance in this context. What matters is that the Core Ultra 5 235 is a high-end processor that, when paired with a GTX 1650, leaves significant performance on the table. The GPU's 40th-percentile ranking is the dominant factor in the combo's 2833rd overall rank. If this CPU were paired with a more capable GPU, the ranking would be dramatically different.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its best results. Low settings produce an average of 92 FPS. Medium averages 80 FPS, with a minimum of 68 and a maximum of 92. High averages 68 FPS, and Ultra drops to 55 FPS. The range from Low to Ultra spans 37 FPS, indicating that settings have a substantial impact at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the averages fall significantly. Low achieves 59 FPS, Medium averages 52 FPS (minimum 44, maximum 60), High drops to 44 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 36 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra narrows to 23 FPS, showing that resolution pressure begins to dominate over settings.

At 3840x2160, the combo struggles across the board. Low averages 32 FPS, Medium averages 28 FPS (minimum 24, maximum 32), High averages 24 FPS, and Ultra averages 19 FPS. The total spread is just 13 FPS, confirming that the GPU is saturated at 4K regardless of quality settings. The minimum and maximum values for Medium at 4K (24 and 32) exactly match the Low and High averages, respectively, which suggests a consistent scaling pattern.

The data reveals that the 1080p Medium preset (80 FPS) offers the best combination of visual quality and performance for this combo. It maintains a 60+ FPS average with a minimum of 68, which is above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. The 1080p High preset (68 FPS) is also acceptable, but the 1080p Ultra preset (55 FPS) dips below 60. At 1440p, only Low (59 FPS) comes close to the 60 FPS target, and 4K is not viable for smooth play.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal configuration for this combo is 1920x1080 with Medium settings. This preset delivers an average of 80 FPS with a minimum of 68 and a maximum of 92, ensuring consistent frame times above the 60 FPS threshold. The Medium preset at 1080p provides a 15% improvement over High (80 vs. 68 FPS) and a 45% improvement over Ultra (80 vs. 55 FPS), while maintaining a smooth experience.

For players who prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate, 1920x1080 High (68 FPS average) is the next best option. It stays above 60 FPS on average and is only 18% slower than Medium. The Ultra preset at 1080p (55 FPS) is not recommended, as it drops below the 60 FPS threshold and offers diminishing returns over High.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset (59 FPS average) is the only viable choice for near-60 FPS gameplay, but it hovers just below the target. The Medium preset at 1440p (52 FPS) may be acceptable for slower-paced play, but the minimum of 44 FPS introduces noticeable stutter. High (44 FPS) and Ultra (36 FPS) are not recommended at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves a playable frame rate. The best option, Low (32 FPS), is below the 30 FPS minimum for smooth motion in fast-paced FPS titles. Medium (28 FPS), High (24 FPS), and Ultra (19 FPS) are all unsuitable. For 4K, the data indicates that this combo should be avoided entirely, or the resolution should be lowered to 1440p.

The recommendation hierarchy is clear: 1080p Medium as the primary choice, 1080p High as an alternative for better visuals, and 1440p Low as a fallback for users with 1440p monitors who are willing to sacrifice quality. The 4K resolution should be reserved for static scenes or screenshots, not gameplay.