Doom

Doom (2016) is an older title, but it remains a demanding and popular benchmark for modern hardware. This analysis examines the performance of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti across various resolutions and settings. The data indicates a system that is overwhelmingly GPU-bound at higher resolutions, but which can become CPU-bound at 1080p, where frame rates are exceptionally high. The measured results show excellent playability across the board, with the combination proving capable of exceeding the refresh rates of most high-end monitors at 1440p and offering a smooth 4K experience.

Resolution Scaling

The performance scaling from 1080p to 4K clearly illustrates the shifting balance between CPU and GPU load. At 1080p with High settings, the system produces an average of 271 FPS. Moving to 1440p, the average drops to 175 FPS, a significant reduction of 96 FPS. At 4K, the average further declines to 95 FPS. This pattern is consistent with the game becoming increasingly reliant on the GPU as the pixel count rises.

The drop from 1080p to 1440p is substantial, but the jump to 4K is where the GPU is truly stressed. The data suggests that at 1080p, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is capable of feeding frames faster than the RTX 4070 Ti can render them, making the GPU the primary bottleneck. At 4K, the GPU's workload increases dramatically, and the frame rate is almost entirely dictated by its raw rendering power.

The scaling from Low to Ultra settings at each resolution further reinforces this. At 1080p Low, the system achieves a massive 368 FPS average. This high frame rate points to the CPU's ceiling being a limiting factor, as the GPU is not being tasked heavily. In contrast, at 4K Ultra, the average FPS drops to 78, showing the GPU is working at its absolute limit. The performance delta between 1080p Low and 4K Ultra is 290 FPS, a stark illustration of the resolution's impact on the limiting component.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti is the central component for this game's performance at higher resolutions. Its 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus provides a memory bandwidth of 504.2 GB/s, which is sufficient for the demands of Doom at 4K. The GPU's 7680 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 80 ROPs are the core resources that handle the game's rendering tasks. With a base clock of 2310 MHz and a boost clock of 2610 MHz, the card is well-positioned to deliver high frame rates.

The GPU's performance, as measured by its average benchmark score of 44795, places it in the 84th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile, has an average score that is 0.8% lower, while the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT is 1.3% higher. This suggests the RTX 4070 Ti is a strong performer, though its position in the hierarchy is tight among its immediate competitors.

In Doom specifically, the GPU's role is most evident in the 4K benchmarks. At 4K High, the system averages 95 FPS, but at 4K Ultra, it falls to 78 FPS. This 17 FPS drop demonstrates the cost of the higher visual fidelity settings. The GPU's capabilities are the deciding factor here, as the CPU's influence diminishes at this resolution. The 40.09 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is the raw compute power that drives these results.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 provides the foundation for this system's performance. With 20 cores and 20 threads, it offers substantial multi-threaded capability. Its base clock of 2.40 GHz and boost clock of 5.30 GHz allow it to handle the game's single-threaded tasks with ease. The 30 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB per-core L2 cache ensure that data is readily available for the processor.

The CPU's average benchmark score of 64640 places it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. Its closest rival, the AMD EPYC 4464P, has a score that is 0.3% lower, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F is 0.3% higher. This indicates that the Core Ultra 7 265 is a top-tier processor, though its performance is very similar to several other high-end models.

The CPU's role becomes most apparent at 1080p resolution. At 1080p Low, the system achieves an average of 368 FPS, which is an extremely high frame rate. This suggests that the CPU is able to process the game's logic and prepare frames faster than the GPU can render them, effectively capping the performance. At 1080p Ultra, the frame rate drops to 221 FPS, but this is still likely a CPU-limited scenario. The data shows that while the GPU is the bottleneck at 4K, the CPU is the limiting factor at 1080p, ensuring that the system is well-balanced for a wide range of display configurations.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Doom at 4K smoothly?

A: Yes. The measured data shows an average of 95 FPS at 4K High settings, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. Even at 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 78, which remains playable.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the main bottleneck at 1440p?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the primary bottleneck at 1440p. The average FPS at 1440p High is 175, which is significantly lower than the 271 FPS at 1080p High. This indicates the GPU is working harder to render the additional pixels, but the CPU is still keeping up.

Q: How much of a performance difference is there between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: The difference is substantial. At 1080p Low, the system averages 368 FPS, while at 1080p Ultra, it averages 221 FPS. This is a 147 FPS difference, showing the significant impact of graphical settings on performance.

Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The highest average FPS is 368, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This indicates the system's performance ceiling is very high at lower resolutions.

Q: How does the RTX 4070 Ti compare to its nearest rival in overall benchmarks?

A: The RTX 4070 Ti's average benchmark score is 44795. Its closest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile, has an average score that is 0.8% lower, showing they are very closely matched in overall performance.

Q: Is a high-refresh-rate monitor worth it for this setup?

A: Yes, particularly at 1440p. The system averages 175 FPS at 1440p High, which exceeds the 144Hz refresh rate of many gaming monitors. At 4K, a 120Hz monitor would be suitable, as the system averages 95 FPS at High settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table details the exact measured average frame rates for this CPU and GPU combination across all tested resolutions and settings.

| Resolution | Settings | Avg FPS | Min FPS | Max FPS |

| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |

| 3840x2160 (4K) | High | 95 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 (4K) | Low | 129 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 (4K) | Medium | 112 | 96 | 129 |

| 3840x2160 (4K) | Ultra | 78 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 (1440p) | High | 175 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 (1440p) | Low | 238 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 (1440p) | Medium | 208 | 176 | 239 |

| 2560x1440 (1440p) | Ultra | 143 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 (1080p) | High | 271 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 (1080p) | Low | 368 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 (1080p) | Medium | 321 | 273 | 369 |

| 1920x1080 (1080p) | Ultra | 221 | - | - |

The 4K results show a clear progression. Low settings yield an average of 129 FPS, which is quite high. Medium settings reduce the average to 112 FPS, with a minimum of 96 FPS. High settings drop the average to 95 FPS, and Ultra brings it down to 78 FPS. This shows that even at 4K, the system has headroom to play with higher settings while maintaining a good frame rate.

The 1440p results are even more impressive. The system averages 238 FPS on Low, 208 FPS on Medium, 175 FPS on High, and 143 FPS on Ultra. The minimum FPS at Medium is 176, indicating that the system is able to maintain a consistently high frame rate. These numbers make 1440p the sweet spot for high-refresh-rate gaming.

The 1080p results are primarily limited by the CPU. The average FPS ranges from 368 on Low to 221 on Ultra. The maximum FPS recorded at Medium settings is 369, which is a strong indicator of the CPU's capability. At this resolution, the system is capable of frame rates that exceed the refresh rates of most monitors on the market.

Settings Recommendations

For players targeting a 4K experience, the data shows that the High preset is the optimal choice. It delivers an average of 95 FPS, which is a smooth and responsive experience for a fast-paced FPS. The Ultra preset, while offering the highest visual fidelity, brings the average down to 78 FPS. This is still playable, but the 17 FPS drop from High may not be worth the visual upgrade for some. The Medium preset at 4K, with an average of 112 FPS, is also a viable option for those who prefer a higher frame rate over maximum visual quality.

At 1440p, the High preset is the clear winner. It provides an average of 175 FPS, which is more than enough for a 144Hz or even a 165Hz monitor. The Ultra preset is also a strong choice, with an average of 143 FPS, which still allows for high-refresh-rate gaming. For those with a 240Hz monitor, the Low preset at 238 FPS would be the best way to take advantage of the display's full potential.

For 1080p gaming, the CPU is the limiting factor, but the frame rates are so high that the choice of settings depends on the monitor's refresh rate. The Ultra preset, with an average of 221 FPS, is excellent for a 240Hz monitor. The High preset at 271 FPS is also a great option and provides a better balance of visual quality and performance. The data shows that the system is capable of exceeding 300 FPS on Medium settings, making it ideal for competitive play. Given the extreme frame rates, the recommendation is to prioritize visual quality, as even the Ultra preset at 1080p offers a high level of performance.