Doom

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER delivers a commanding performance profile in Doom, with frame rates that remain exceptionally high even at 4K. This combination sits at rank 448 out of 2,930 tested combos for this title, placing it comfortably in the top 15% of all system configurations. The data across four resolutions and four quality presets reveals a system that is rarely stressed by this 2016 shooter, though the scaling patterns expose where the GPU begins to assert its influence.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and predictable decline as resolution increases, but the magnitude of that decline is telling. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo produces 349 FPS average. Moving to 1440p Low drops that to 226 FPS, a 35% reduction. At 4K Low, the average falls to 123 FPS, which is 65% below the 1080p figure. This steep drop-off across resolution steps indicates that the rendering load scales heavily with pixel count, which is expected for a GPU-bound scenario.

The pattern holds across all four settings presets. At High settings, the progression goes from 257 FPS at 1080p to 166 FPS at 1440p to 90 FPS at 4K. That represents a 35% loss from 1080p to 1440p and another 46% loss from 1440p to 4K. Medium settings follow a similar trajectory: 304 FPS at 1080p, 197 FPS at 1440p, and 107 FPS at 4K. Ultra settings yield 210 FPS at 1080p, 136 FPS at 1440p, and 74 FPS at 4K.

The consistency of these percentage drops across all presets is revealing. Whether the game runs at Low or Ultra, the resolution scaling penalty remains remarkably uniform. This suggests that Doom's rendering pipeline is well-balanced and that the RTX 4070 SUPER's compute resources are being utilized efficiently at every quality level. The 4K Ultra result of 74 FPS average is the only instance where the system dips below the 90 FPS threshold, indicating that the absolute ceiling for this combo is just below 4K Ultra for smooth 90Hz operation.

What the scaling data does not show is any sign of CPU limitation. At 1080p Low, where CPU overhead would typically become the bottleneck in older titles, the system still produces 349 FPS. This is a strong indicator that the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 with its 20 cores and 20 threads is providing ample headroom. The CPU's single-thread performance, evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 5,960, is more than sufficient to feed the GPU at high frame rates. The data shows no point where frame rates plateau despite increasing resolution, which would be the signature of a CPU-bound scenario.

The min and max FPS data available for Medium settings further illuminates the scaling behavior. At 1080p Medium, the range spans 259 to 350 FPS, a spread of 91 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the range tightens to 167–227 FPS. At 4K Medium, it narrows further to 91–123 FPS. This compression of the frame time variance as resolution increases is typical of GPU-bound workloads, where the consistent rendering workload smooths out the frame pacing. The 4K Medium result of 107 FPS average with a 91 FPS minimum demonstrates that even the worst-case frames remain playable.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER is the dominant component in this pairing for Doom, and its specifications align closely with the observed results. The GPU features 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth. This memory configuration is more than adequate for Doom at any of the tested settings, as the game's textures and geometry do not appear to exceed the 12 GB capacity even at 4K Ultra. The fact that 4K Ultra still produces 74 FPS average, rather than collapsing due to memory swapping, confirms that VRAM capacity is not a limiting factor here.

The GPU's clock behavior is also relevant. With a base clock of 1,980 MHz and a boost clock of 2,475 MHz, the RTX 4070 SUPER maintains high operating frequencies under load. The Ada Lovelace architecture's 5 nm process node from TSMC allows these clocks to be sustained without excessive thermal throttling, which contributes to the consistent frame rates observed across repeated measurements. The 220 W TDP and dual-slot cooler design provide sufficient thermal headroom for sustained gaming sessions.

The RTX 4070 SUPER's compute capabilities are substantial. With 7,168 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 80 raster operation processors, the GPU delivers 35.48 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput. This raw compute power is what drives the high frame rates in Doom, particularly at lower resolutions where the game's id Tech 6 engine can leverage the GPU's parallel processing capabilities. The 56 ray tracing cores and 224 tensor cores are present in the architecture, though Doom's traditional rasterization pipeline does not heavily utilize these specialized units.

Comparing the GPU to its nearest rivals in the benchmark database provides context for its performance tier. The RTX 4070 SUPER's average benchmark score of 43,223 places it within 0.1% of the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB, which scores 43,262. It is also 0.1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile at 43,268 and 0.2% ahead of the Quadro M6000 at 43,301. The RTX 4090 Mobile scores 43,667, which is 1% higher than the 4070 SUPER. These small deltas indicate that the 4070 SUPER sits in a tightly contested performance band, though its 83rd percentile ranking among all GPUs shows it outperforms the vast majority of graphics cards.

The GPU's memory clock of 1,313 MHz, translating to 21 Gbps effective, combined with the 192-bit bus, yields that 504.2 GB/s bandwidth figure. For Doom, this bandwidth is sufficient to feed the GPU's shading units without stalling, as evidenced by the smooth scaling from 1080p through 4K. The 12 GB VRAM capacity is also future-proof for this title, as even the most demanding texture packs would struggle to exhaust it.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 448 out of 2,930 tested combinations places this system in the 84.7th percentile among all CPU-GPU pairings tested in Doom. This is a strong showing, though not an elite one. The rank reflects the balance between the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and the RTX 4070 SUPER, with neither component being the weak link in the chain.

The CPU itself performs at the 93rd percentile among all processors in the database, with an average benchmark score of 64,640. Its nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 4464P at 64,823 (0.3% higher), the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F at 64,438 (0.3% lower), the AMD EPYC 7343 at 64,202 (0.7% lower), and the AMD EPYC 9124 at 65,104 (0.7% higher). This clustering around the 64,500–65,100 score range indicates that the Ultra 7 265 is well-positioned among workstation-class processors, though it does not dominate its immediate competitors.

The GPU's 83rd percentile ranking is slightly lower than the CPU's 93rd percentile, suggesting that the graphics card is the more common bottleneck in this pairing. However, the delta in Doom's results does not reflect this imbalance because the game is not particularly demanding on either component. The combo's 448th rank out of 2,930 is better than the GPU's percentile would suggest, indicating that the CPU's strength compensates for any GPU limitations in this specific title.

When compared to other combos that include the RTX 4070 SUPER, the rank suggests that the Ultra 7 265 is a favorable pairing. The 20-core, 20-thread configuration with a 5.30 GHz boost clock provides ample single-thread performance for Doom's engine, which historically favors high clock speeds over core counts. The 30 MB of shared L3 cache and 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth through dual-channel DDR5 also contribute to the system's overall responsiveness.

The data shows that this combo outperforms the vast majority of tested configurations, but it does not reach the top tier. Combos ranked above 448 likely include higher-end GPUs such as the RTX 4090 or RTX 4080-class cards, which would push frame rates even higher at 4K Ultra. However, for the vast majority of gaming scenarios, the 448th rank represents a system that can handle Doom with exceptional fluidity.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution and refresh rate. At 1080p, every preset delivers playable frame rates, but the differences are significant. Low settings produce 349 FPS, Medium produces 304 FPS, High produces 257 FPS, and Ultra produces 210 FPS. For a 144Hz monitor, Ultra at 210 FPS is the best choice as it provides the highest visual quality while still exceeding the refresh rate by a wide margin. For a 240Hz display, High at 257 FPS is the sweet spot, as the visual improvement over Medium is worthwhile and the frame rate still clears the 240 FPS threshold.

At 1440p, the recommendations shift. Low produces 226 FPS, Medium produces 197 FPS, High produces 166 FPS, and Ultra produces 136 FPS. For a 144Hz monitor, Medium at 197 FPS offers the best balance, providing a 37% frame rate improvement over High while maintaining the minimum FPS of 167, which stays above the refresh rate. For a 165Hz display, High at 166 FPS is the appropriate choice, as it just clears the refresh rate with a 1 FPS margin. Ultra at 136 FPS would be suitable for a 120Hz monitor, delivering a 16 FPS buffer above the refresh rate.

At 4K, the options narrow considerably. Low produces 123 FPS, Medium produces 107 FPS, High produces 90 FPS, and Ultra produces 74 FPS. For a 60Hz display, Ultra at 74 FPS is the clear choice, providing 14 FPS of headroom above the refresh rate while delivering the highest visual fidelity. For a 120Hz display, Medium at 107 FPS is the best option, as it provides the highest settings that still approach the refresh rate. High at 90 FPS would suit a 90Hz monitor, though such displays are rare. Low at 123 FPS is the only preset that would support a 120Hz display with full frame rate, but the visual quality reduction is substantial.

The Medium preset deserves special attention because it is the only setting with complete min/max FPS data. At 4K, the 91 FPS minimum ensures that even the most demanding scenes remain above 90 FPS. At 1440p, the 167 FPS minimum keeps frame rates above 144Hz. At 1080p, the 259 FPS minimum exceeds all common refresh rates. This consistency makes Medium the most predictable preset for competitive play, where frame time consistency matters more than peak averages.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its highest frame rates across all presets. Low settings produce an average of 349 FPS. Medium settings produce 304 FPS average, with a minimum of 259 FPS and a maximum of 350 FPS. High settings produce 257 FPS average. Ultra settings produce 210 FPS average. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 40% reduction in frame rate, from 349 FPS to 210 FPS, which is a modest penalty for the visual quality gains.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates remain high but begin to show the GPU's workload. Low settings produce 226 FPS average. Medium settings produce 197 FPS average, with a minimum of 167 FPS and a maximum of 227 FPS. High settings produce 166 FPS average. Ultra settings produce 136 FPS average. The drop from Low to Ultra is again 40%, from 226 FPS to 136 FPS, mirroring the 1080p scaling.

At 3840x2160, the system's limits become apparent. Low settings produce 123 FPS average. Medium settings produce 107 FPS average, with a minimum of 91 FPS and a maximum of 123 FPS. High settings produce 90 FPS average. Ultra settings produce 74 FPS average. The Low to Ultra reduction is 40% once more, from 123 FPS to 74 FPS, showing that the settings preset scaling is consistent regardless of resolution.

The Medium preset's min/max data is the most revealing. At 1080p, the gap between minimum and average is 45 FPS, while the gap between average and maximum is 46 FPS, indicating a symmetric distribution around the mean. At 1440p, the minimum is 30 FPS below the average and the maximum is 30 FPS above, again symmetric. At 4K, the minimum is 16 FPS below average and the maximum is 16 FPS above. This symmetry suggests stable frame pacing with no directional bias toward either framerate spikes or dips.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows that 1440p High settings produce 166 FPS average, which exceeds 144Hz refresh rates. At 4K, the best playable option is Medium at 107 FPS average with a 91 FPS minimum, suitable for 60–90Hz displays. For maximum frame rates, 1080p Low delivers 349 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this system for Doom?

A: The GPU is the primary limiter. Evidence comes from the consistent 40% frame rate reduction when moving from Low to Ultra settings at every resolution, which is a GPU-bound characteristic. The CPU's 93rd percentile ranking and 5,960 single-core Cinebench R23 score provide ample headroom, as shown by the 349 FPS result at 1080p Low.

Q: Can this combo handle 4K gaming in Doom?

A: Yes, but with caveats. At 4K Ultra, the system produces 74 FPS average, which is playable on a 60Hz monitor. At 4K High, it achieves 90 FPS average. For smoother performance, 4K Medium delivers 107 FPS average with a 91 FPS minimum. The 12 GB VRAM capacity is sufficient for all 4K presets.

Q: How does the RTX 4070 SUPER compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RTX 4070 SUPER's average benchmark score of 43,223 is 0.1% lower than the Quadro M6000 24 GB at 43,262, 0.1% lower than the RTX 5050 Mobile at 43,268, 0.2% higher than the Quadro M6000 at 43,301, and 1% lower than the RTX 4090 Mobile at 43,667. It ranks in the 83rd percentile among all GPUs.

Q: What settings should I use for a 144Hz monitor at 1440p?

A: Medium settings produce 197 FPS average with a 167 FPS minimum, providing a 53 FPS buffer above 144Hz. High settings produce 166 FPS average, which also exceeds 144Hz but with only a 22 FPS buffer. Medium offers better frame time consistency as shown by its min/max data.

Q: Does the Ultra preset provide a meaningful improvement over High?

A: At every resolution, Ultra reduces frame rates by approximately 18–19% compared to High. At 1080p, Ultra produces 210 FPS versus High's 257 FPS. At 1440p, Ultra produces 136 FPS versus High's 166 FPS. At 4K, Ultra produces 74 FPS versus High's 90 FPS. The visual improvement is present but comes at a consistent cost.