Doom

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 combines 20 cores and 20 threads with a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, built on the Arrow Lake architecture using a 3 nm process. In Doom, the 2016 FPS release, this CPU configuration appears more than sufficient to feed the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX, as benchmark results show frame rates scaling predominantly with GPU load across resolutions. The CPU’s 30 MB of shared L3 cache and per-core L2 cache of 3 MB contribute to its strong single-thread performance, which is critical for a game engine that relies heavily on a primary simulation thread. The processor’s Cinebench R23 single-core score of 5960 and multi-core score of 42216 place it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, indicating headroom that prevents it from becoming a bottleneck in this title.

The CPU’s 20 threads, while not hyperthreaded, provide ample parallelism for background tasks and the game’s auxiliary threads. The measured data suggests that at 1080p with Low settings, the average FPS reaches 366, which is likely near the engine’s frame rate ceiling given the GPU’s capabilities. The fact that FPS drops to 220 at Ultra settings at the same resolution indicates that the game becomes increasingly GPU-bound as visual complexity rises. The CPU’s memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s over dual-channel DDR5 ensures that data transfer to the GPU is not a limiting factor, even at high frame rates. The processor’s Passmark single-thread score of 4689 reinforces its ability to handle the game’s per-frame logic without creating stalls, allowing the GPU to operate at its full potential. The performance delta of 0.3% compared to the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F suggests that the two are functionally identical for gaming, with the non-F variant’s integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 32EU remaining inactive in this discrete GPU configuration.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX is the primary driver of Doom’s visual output, featuring 24 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus with 960.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU’s boost clock of 2498 MHz and game clock of 2365 MHz enable it to process the game’s id Tech 6 engine efficiently, as evidenced by the measured frame rates. At 4K Ultra settings, the average FPS drops to 77, which demonstrates the heavy load placed on the GPU’s 6144 shading units and 192 ROPs when rendering at maximum detail. The RDNA 3.0 architecture, built on a 5 nm process, provides a compute throughput of 61.39 TFLOPS FP32, which is more than adequate for this title. The GPU’s 96 RT cores are not directly relevant to Doom’s standard rendering path, but the rasterization performance from its 384 TMUs and 192 ROPs is what drives the high frame rates observed.

The GPU’s 24 GB VRAM is far in excess of what Doom requires, even at 4K Ultra, meaning memory capacity is never a constraint. The memory clock of 2500 MHz, yielding 20 Gbps effective, provides the bandwidth needed to feed the high pixel rates, with a pixel rate of 479.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 959.2 GTexel/s. The benchmark results show that the GPU scales well with resolution, producing 366 FPS at 1080p Low and 128 FPS at 4K Low, which is a 65% reduction in frame rate. This scaling pattern indicates that the GPU is the limiting component at all tested settings, as the CPU maintains consistent performance across resolutions. The GPU’s average benchmark score of 19410 places it in the 64th percentile of all GPUs, with its nearest rival being the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB showing a 0.4% delta, which confirms the RX 7900 XTX’s high performance relative to the broader database. The 355 W TDP and dual-slot design are consistent with a high-end card, though the thermal solution is not a factor in the measured FPS data.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS rows provide a clear picture of how settings impact performance across resolutions. At 1920x1080, the Low preset yields an average of 366 FPS, which is the highest measured value in the dataset. Medium reduces this to 319 FPS, High to 269 FPS, and Ultra to 220 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 146 FPS, or 40% less performance, but even at Ultra the frame rate is far above what any display can refresh. For competitive play at 1080p, the Low preset offers the maximum frame rate advantage, but the High preset at 269 FPS still provides a smooth experience with better visual fidelity. The Medium preset, with its min FPS of 271 and max of 367, shows tight frame pacing that could be preferable for consistency.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset delivers 237 FPS, which is still high enough for any gaming scenario. Medium drops to 206 FPS, High to 174 FPS, and Ultra to 143 FPS. The data indicates that the High preset at 1440p is the sweet spot, providing a 174 FPS average that is smooth on high-refresh monitors while maintaining visual quality. The Ultra preset at 143 FPS is also playable, but the 31 FPS drop from High to Ultra suggests diminishing returns. At 3840x2160, the Low preset produces 128 FPS, which is sufficient for most displays. Medium reduces to 112 FPS with a min of 95 and max of 129, while High drops to 94 FPS and Ultra to 77 FPS. For 4K gaming, the Medium preset is recommended as it balances the 112 FPS average with the min FPS of 95, ensuring the frame rate stays above typical VRR ranges. The Ultra preset at 77 FPS is the only configuration that approaches the lower end of acceptable frame rates, and the 35 FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 4K highlights the heavy GPU load at this resolution.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX achieves a rank of 362 out of 2930 tested combos for Doom, placing it in the top 12.4% of all configurations. This ranking reflects the GPU’s strong performance, as the CPU’s 93rd percentile standing ensures it does not impede the GPU’s output. The combo outperforms the vast majority of systems in the database, though it is not at the absolute top tier, which likely includes more recent or higher-end GPUs. The rank of 362 indicates that while this pairing is excellent for Doom, there are 361 combos that achieve higher frame rates, likely featuring flagship GPUs with higher average benchmark scores.

The GPU’s percentile of 64 versus the CPU’s percentile of 93 suggests that the GPU is the more limiting factor in this pairing. The CPU’s nearest rivals, such as the AMD EPYC 4464P with a delta of -0.3%, show that the 265 is competitive with server-class chips in synthetic tests, but those chips are not optimized for gaming. The GPU’s nearest rivals, including the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB with a delta of 0.4%, are far below the RX 7900 XTX in real-world gaming performance, which is reflected in the combo’s strong ranking. The data shows that this combo is well-balanced for Doom, with the GPU providing the bulk of the frame rate while the CPU maintains consistent frame pacing.

FAQ

Q: What is the maximum average FPS achievable with this combo in Doom?

A: The highest measured average FPS is 366, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with the Low settings preset.

Q: How does the CPU’s performance compare to its nearest rival in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 has an average benchmark score of 64640, which is 0.3% lower than the AMD EPYC 4464P and 0.3% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F.

Q: Does the GPU’s 24 GB VRAM ever become a limitation in Doom?

A: No, the measured frame rates show no evidence of VRAM limitations, as the GPU maintains high FPS even at 4K Ultra, indicating that memory capacity is sufficient for all tested settings.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between 1080p and 4K at High settings?

A: At High settings, the average FPS drops from 269 at 1920x1080 to 174 at 2560x1440 and 94 at 3840x2160, representing a 65% reduction from 1080p to 4K.

Q: How does the combo rank among all tested configurations for Doom?

A: The combo ranks 362 out of 2930 tested combos, placing it in the top 12.4% of all systems tested for this game.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor at 4K Ultra settings?

A: At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 77, and since the CPU’s performance is consistent across resolutions while the GPU’s frame rate drops significantly, the GPU is the limiting component.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 366 FPS, which is the highest recorded in the dataset. The Medium preset averages 319 FPS with a minimum of 271 and maximum of 367, showing a narrow range that indicates stable performance. High settings produce 269 FPS on average, while Ultra drops to 220 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a consistent 15-18% reduction in FPS with each step up in quality. At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 237 FPS, which is still remarkably high. Medium averages 206 FPS with a min of 176 and max of 237, providing a 61 FPS range that suggests some scene-dependent variability. High settings average 174 FPS, and Ultra falls to 143 FPS. The resolution increase from 1080p to 1440p reduces FPS by roughly 35% across all settings, which is consistent with the increased pixel count of 78%.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 128 FPS, which is the only setting above 100 FPS at this resolution. Medium averages 112 FPS with a min of 95 and max of 129, and the 17 FPS range between min and max is the tightest of any 4K configuration. High settings average 94 FPS, and Ultra drops to 77 FPS. The 4K results show a more pronounced drop from Low to Ultra, with a 40% reduction in FPS, compared to the 33% reduction at 1440p and 40% at 1080p. The min FPS data is only available for the Medium preset at each resolution, with values of 271 at 1080p, 176 at 1440p, and 95 at 4K, indicating that the Medium preset maintains frame rates above 95 FPS even at the highest resolution.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals the GPU-bound nature of this combo. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 366 at 1920x1080 to 237 at 2560x1440, a 35% reduction, and then to 128 at 3840x2160, a 46% reduction from 1440p. The total drop from 1080p to 4K at Low settings is 65%, which aligns closely with the pixel count increase of 4.5 times, suggesting the GPU is the primary bottleneck. At Medium settings, the FPS drops from 319 to 206 to 112, representing a 65% total reduction. High settings show a similar pattern with 269 to 174 to 94, a 65% drop. Ultra settings produce 220 to 143 to 77, a 65% reduction as well.

The consistency of the 65% reduction across all settings indicates that the scaling is purely resolution-driven and not affected by settings complexity. This uniformity is a hallmark of a GPU-limited scenario, where the CPU has ample headroom to maintain its performance regardless of resolution. The fact that the CPU’s workload does not increase with resolution confirms that it is not a limiting factor. However, the slight variation in FPS between Low and Ultra at the same resolution, such as the 366 versus 220 at 1080p, shows that the settings do affect the GPU load, but the resolution scaling remains consistent. The data suggests that this combo is well-suited for high-refresh-rate gaming at 1080p and 1440p, while 4K gaming is viable at Medium settings with an average of 112 FPS, but Ultra settings at 4K push the GPU to its limits with an average of 77 FPS.