Doom

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER combination delivers a formidable performance profile in Doom, with measured frames per second (FPS) that scale predictably across resolutions and settings. The data reveals a system where the GPU is the primary driver of performance, while the CPU provides ample headroom to avoid bottlenecks. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS, contextualizes the hardware’s standing among rivals, and provides actionable settings recommendations based solely on the provided data.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS from 1080p to 4K shows a clear and consistent decline, which is characteristic of a GPU-bound workload. At 1080p High settings, the combo achieves 294 FPS. Moving to 1440p High reduces this to 190 FPS, a drop of 104 FPS, and at 4K High, the average falls to 103 FPS. This scaling pattern indicates that as pixel count increases, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER’s rendering workload becomes the limiting factor, with the CPU’s performance remaining sufficient to feed the GPU.

The transition from 1440p to 4K is particularly steep, with High settings seeing a 45.8% reduction (from 190 to 103 FPS). This suggests that the 4K resolution is pushing the GPU to its limits, especially with higher visual fidelity settings. In contrast, the drop from 1080p to 1440p is less severe (35.4% decrease), implying that the GPU still has significant headroom at the lower resolution. The data for Low settings reinforces this: 1080p Low hits 399 FPS, but 4K Low drops to 140 FPS, a 64.9% decrease, showing that even at the lowest settings, 4K demands substantial GPU resources.

The pattern across all settings shows that the RTX 4080 SUPER is the dominant component in this pairing. For example, at 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra settings is 159 FPS (399 vs 240), while at 4K, the same settings spread is only 56 FPS (140 vs 84). This compression of FPS at higher resolutions is a classic sign of GPU saturation. The CPU, with its 20 cores and 20 threads, is not the bottleneck here; the data implies that a less powerful CPU could likely achieve similar frame rates, particularly at 4K where the GPU is so heavily taxed.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER is the star of this benchmark, and its specifications directly explain the measured FPS. The GPU features 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 736.3 GB/s. This substantial memory capacity and bandwidth are crucial for Doom at high resolutions, ensuring that texture streaming and asset loading do not create stutters or frame drops. The 10240 shading units and 320 TMUs provide immense raw compute power, which is reflected in the high frame rates observed.

The GPU’s clock speeds are notable: a base clock of 2295 MHz and a boost clock of 2550 MHz. These high frequencies allow the GPU to process the game’s geometry and effects efficiently. The RTX 4080 SUPER’s architecture, Ada Lovelace, supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which Doom can leverage for advanced rendering features. The measured performance shows that the GPU is more than capable of handling the game’s demands, even at 4K Ultra, where it still manages an average of 84 FPS, which is respectable for a demanding setting.

Comparing the GPU to its nearest rivals from the data, the RTX 4080 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 54209. Its closest competitor, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080, scores 54247, a delta of -0.1%, indicating near-identical performance. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X and AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB are slightly ahead in average score (54828 and 55698 respectively), but the differences are minimal (1.1% and 2.7%). This suggests that within this performance tier, the RTX 4080 SUPER is competitive, and its real-world gaming performance in Doom is likely to be very similar to these rivals. The GPU’s 86th percentile ranking among all GPUs confirms its high-end status.

How This Combo Ranks

In the specific context of Doom, this combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER holds a rank of 182 out of a total of 2930 tested combos. This places it in the top 6.2% of all system configurations tested, which is a strong showing. The data indicates that this pairing is in the upper echelon of performance for this game, providing a high-refresh-rate experience at 1440p and a solid 4K experience.

The high rank is unsurprising given the individual strengths of both components. The CPU’s percentile rank is 93rd among all CPUs, and the GPU’s is 86th among all GPUs. When combined, their synergy is effective, as the CPU does not bottleneck the GPU’s output. The rank of 182 suggests that there are only 181 other combinations that perform better in Doom, likely involving even more powerful GPUs like the RTX 4090 or possibly higher-clocked CPUs. However, for the vast majority of the 2930 combos, this system is significantly faster. This ranking reflects the balanced nature of the build, where neither component is severely underpowered relative to the other.

FAQ

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

A: The highest average FPS is 399, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: How does the RTX 4080 SUPER compare to the RTX 4080 in terms of average benchmark score?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 54209, while the RTX 4080 scores 54247, making the RTX 4080 slightly faster by 0.1%.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more likely to be the bottleneck at 4K resolution?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the bottleneck at 4K. The FPS drop from 1440p to 4K is significant (e.g., 190 to 103 FPS on High), indicating the GPU is becoming saturated, while the CPU has ample headroom.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for the 1440p Medium settings?

A: The minimum FPS recorded for 2560x1440 with Medium settings is 191 FPS.

*Q: What is the combo's rank among all tested combinations in Doom?*

A: The combo ranks 182nd out of 2930 tested combinations.

Q: How much faster is the CPU than its nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 4464P?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 has an average benchmark score of 64640, while the AMD EPYC 4464P scores 64823, meaning the EPYC is actually 0.3% faster, not slower.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 plays a supporting role in this gaming benchmark, but its capabilities are essential for maintaining high frame rates. With 20 cores and 20 threads, the CPU has immense parallel processing power, which is reflected in its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42216. However, for gaming, single-core performance is often more critical, and the CPU’s Cinebench R23 single-core score of 5960 is also strong. The boost clock of 5.30 GHz ensures that the CPU can quickly handle the game’s main simulation thread.

In Doom, the CPU’s role is to handle game logic, physics, and draw calls, while the GPU renders the frames. The measured FPS data shows that the CPU is not a limiting factor in this configuration. For instance, at 1080p Low, the system achieves 399 FPS. If the CPU were a bottleneck, we would expect to see frame rates plateau regardless of resolution or settings. However, the FPS scales down as resolution increases, confirming that the GPU is the primary constraint. The CPU’s high percentile ranking (93rd) and its average benchmark score of 64640, which is competitive with servers like the AMD EPYC 9124 (score 65104, delta -0.7%), show that it is a high-performance part.

The CPU’s architecture, Arrow Lake, and its 3 nm process node contribute to its efficiency and speed. The 30 MB of shared L3 cache helps keep frequently accessed data close to the cores, reducing latency. While the CPU’s performance is not the bottleneck, it provides a stable platform that allows the RTX 4080 SUPER to unlock its full potential. In less GPU-intensive games or at lower resolutions, this CPU would be an asset, but in this specific test, it is the supporting cast to the GPU’s lead role.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and refresh rate. For a 1080p display, the High settings at 294 FPS is an excellent choice, providing a smooth experience on any high-refresh-rate monitor. The Ultra settings at 240 FPS is also viable if visual fidelity is preferred, as the difference in FPS is still above the typical 144 Hz threshold. Low settings at 399 FPS is only useful for competitive play where maximum frame rates are paramount, but the visual compromise is significant.

At 1440p, the High settings at 190 FPS is the best balance of visual quality and performance, easily driving a 144 Hz or 165 Hz monitor. The Ultra settings at 155 FPS is also a strong option, maintaining a high frame rate while enhancing graphics. The Medium settings at 225 FPS offers a good middle ground, but the visual upgrade from High to Ultra is often worth the FPS drop. For 4K, the situation is more nuanced. The High settings at 103 FPS is playable and looks great, but for a smoother experience, the Medium settings at 122 FPS is recommended. The Ultra settings at 84 FPS is demanding but may be acceptable for gamers who prioritize graphics over frame rate. The Low settings at 140 FPS is not recommended, as the visual downgrade is severe, and the FPS gain over High is not worth it.

The data indicates that the Medium settings provide the most consistent frame times, as it is the only setting with recorded min and max FPS values. For example, at 1440p Medium, the FPS ranges from 191 to 259, showing minimal fluctuation. This stability is crucial for a smooth gaming experience, making Medium a reliable choice for all resolutions if frame pacing is a concern. Ultimately, for the best experience, the High preset at 1440p offers the sweet spot, while 4K users should consider Medium or High based on their preference for smoothness versus fidelity.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table details the exact measured average FPS for each resolution and setting combination.

| Resolution | Settings | Average FPS |

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

| 3840x2160 | High | 103 |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 140 |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 122 |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 84 |

| 2560x1440 | High | 190 |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 259 |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 225 |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 155 |

| 1920x1080 | High | 294 |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 399 |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 348 |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 240 |

The only setting rows with min and max FPS data are the Medium settings. At 1920x1080 Medium, the FPS ranges from 296 to 400. At 2560x1440 Medium, the FPS ranges from 191 to 259. At 3840x2160 Medium, the FPS ranges from 104 to 140. This data suggests that the Medium preset offers the most predictable performance, with frame times that are less erratic than other settings. The Ultra settings show a significant drop in average FPS compared to High, particularly at 4K (84 vs 103 FPS), indicating a heavy GPU load. The Low settings consistently provide the highest frame rates, but the visual quality is substantially reduced. These exact figures allow for precise tuning based on user preference for performance or quality.