Doom

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 delivers a playable, though not exceptional, experience in Doom (2016). The benchmark data shows a system that is clearly GPU-bound at higher resolutions, while the CPU’s strong single-threaded performance ensures high frame rates at 1080p. The measured results place this combo in the lower-middle tier of all tested configurations, with specific trade-offs between visual fidelity and frame rate that are detailed below.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a predictable and steep performance curve as resolution increases, indicating the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 is the primary limiting factor at higher settings. At 1080p with High settings, the system produces an average of 123 FPS. Moving to 1440p at the same High preset drops the average to 80 FPS, a 35% reduction in frame rate. Scaling further to 4K at High settings yields only 43 FPS average, which is a 65% reduction from the 1080p figure. This pattern of significant frame rate drops with each resolution step is a classic indicator that the GPU is saturated and cannot keep pace with the increasing pixel count.

However, the scaling behavior changes when the graphics load is reduced. At Low settings, the average FPS goes from 167 at 1080p to 108 at 1440p (a 35% drop), and then to 59 at 4K (a 45% drop from 1440p). The percentage drop between 1440p and 4K at Low settings is smaller than the drop between 1080p and 1440p, suggesting that at the lowest settings, the CPU's performance becomes relatively more important, though the GPU still carries the bulk of the load. The most dramatic scaling is seen when moving from 1440p to 4K at Ultra settings, where the average FPS falls from 65 to 35, a drop of 46%. This shows that the combination of the highest resolution and the Ultra preset is far too demanding for this GPU, pushing it to its limits.

The data also highlights the performance cost of each settings tier. At 1440p, the difference between Low (108 FPS) and High (80 FPS) is 28 FPS, while the difference between High (80 FPS) and Ultra (65 FPS) is 15 FPS. This suggests that the High preset offers a relatively efficient balance between image quality and performance at this resolution, while the Ultra preset provides a diminishing return for the performance hit taken. At 4K, the entire settings range is below the 60 FPS threshold, with even Low settings only achieving 59 FPS average, underscoring that 4K gaming is not a viable option for a smooth experience with this hardware in Doom.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average frame rate this combo can achieve in Doom?

A: The highest measured average frame rate is 167 FPS, which occurs at 1920x1080 resolution with the Low settings preset.

Q: Can this system maintain a 60 FPS average at 2560x1440?

A: Yes, the system exceeds 60 FPS at 1440p for all tested settings. The lowest average at this resolution is 65 FPS with the Ultra preset, while Low, Medium, and High all achieve averages above 80 FPS.

Q: Is 4K gaming viable with this hardware in Doom?

A: No, not for a consistently smooth experience. At 3840x2160, the highest average frame rate is 59 FPS with Low settings, and it drops to 35 FPS at Ultra settings. All 4K results are below the 60 FPS target.

Q: How does the CPU's performance compare to its direct rivals?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has an average benchmark score of 40518. Its closest rival, the Intel Core 7 253PE, scores 40557, which is a deltaPct of -0.1%, meaning the 368H is essentially tied. The AMD Ryzen 9 7940H is 0.2% behind, while the Intel Xeon 6507P is also 0.2% behind, placing the 368H at the top of this small comparison group.

Q: What is the GPU's standing relative to other graphics cards?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 has an average benchmark score of 21035 and sits in the 66th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL, scores 21153, which is 0.6% higher. The RTX 5050 is 1.6% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT.

Q: What are the minimum and maximum FPS recorded for the Medium preset at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080 with Medium settings, the minimum recorded frame rate is 124 FPS and the maximum is 168 FPS, with an average of 146 FPS.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 is the bottleneck for performance at higher resolutions and settings. The GPU features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 320.0 GB/s. This memory configuration is adequate for 1080p and 1440p gaming but appears strained at 4K, where the frame rates drop precipitously. The GPU's chip, designated GB207, is built on a 5 nm process and contains 16,900 million transistors. Its boost clock is listed at 2572 MHz, with a base clock of 2317 MHz.

The GPU's benchmark results are modest, with a Passmark G3D score of 17326 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2502. These scores align with its 66th percentile ranking among all GPUs, indicating it is a mid-range part. The performance scaling in Doom directly reflects this positioning. At 1080p, the GPU can deliver high frame rates, but the load becomes increasingly demanding as resolution scales. The difference between the Low and Ultra presets at 1080p is 66 FPS (167 vs 101), showing the GPU's capacity to handle the game's workload is heavily dependent on the graphics settings. At 4K, even the Low preset (59 FPS) fails to hit 60 FPS, confirming that the GPU's raw compute power, rated at 13.17 TFLOPS FP32, is insufficient for this resolution in this title.

The GPU's 80 texture mapping units (TMUs) and 32 render output units (ROPs) contribute to a texture fillrate of 205.8 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 82.30 GPixel/s. These figures are reasonable for a card of this class but are not sufficient to maintain high frame rates when the pixel output demand quadruples from 1080p to 4K. The data suggests that the RTX 5050 is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, with 4K requiring a significant sacrifice in visual quality to remain playable.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 ranks 2320 out of 2930 tested combos for Doom. This places the system in the bottom 21% of all tested configurations, which is a low position for a modern setup. The rank is likely dragged down by the GPU, as the CPU is a high-performing part. The CPU's average benchmark score of 40518 places it in the 87th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU's average score of 21035 places it in the 66th percentile of all GPUs. This discrepancy suggests that the CPU has significant headroom, but the GPU is the limiting factor in determining the overall rank for this game.

The combo's rank is more a reflection of the GPU's mid-range performance than the CPU's capabilities. In the context of all tested systems, many of which will have more powerful graphics cards, the RTX 5050's performance is a clear bottleneck. The measured FPS data shows that at 1080p, the system can achieve high frame rates, which would be competitive with other systems. However, at higher resolutions, the frame rates fall behind what more powerful GPU pairings would achieve. The rank of 2320 indicates that while this combo is capable of running the game, it does not deliver top-tier performance compared to the broader field of tested hardware. The data points to a system that is well-balanced for mainstream gaming at 1080p but is outclassed at higher resolutions.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is a 16-core, 16-thread processor based on the Panther Lake architecture. It has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, which provides strong single-threaded performance. Its benchmark results support this, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3984 and a Passmark single-thread score of 4005. This high single-core performance is critical for Doom, as the game's engine benefits from strong single-threaded CPU performance to feed the GPU with draw calls and game logic.

The CPU's multi-threaded performance is also substantial, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 28221. The L3 cache is 18 MB shared, and it supports LPDDR5X memory with a bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s. In the context of this game, the CPU is not the bottleneck at any tested resolution. This is evident from the FPS data: at 1080p Low, the system achieves 167 FPS, which is a high frame rate that suggests the CPU can handle the game's engine demands without issue. The CPU's performance relative to its rivals is also strong, as it leads its nearest competitor, the Intel Core 7 253PE, by a negligible -0.1% in average benchmark score.

The CPU's role in this combo is to provide a solid foundation that does not limit the GPU. The data shows that as resolution increases and the GPU becomes more stressed, the frame rate drops, indicating that the CPU is keeping up with the GPU's output. The processor's 16 cores and high boost clock ensure that even in intense scenes, there is ample processing headroom. The fact that the CPU ranks in the 87th percentile while the GPU is in the 66th percentile further confirms that the CPU is the more capable component in this pairing, and its performance is sufficient to enable the GPU to reach its full potential in this game.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of performance across different settings and resolutions. At 1920x1080, the system performs admirably across all presets. With Low settings, the average FPS is 167. The Medium preset yields an average of 146 FPS, with a minimum of 124 and a maximum of 168. High settings produce an average of 123 FPS, while Ultra settings still manage a solid 101 FPS average. This shows that at 1080p, the user has a wide range of options, all of which provide a smooth gaming experience above 100 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the performance remains strong but begins to show the GPU's limitations. Low settings average 108 FPS, while Medium settings average 94 FPS (min 80, max 108). High settings drop to an 80 FPS average, and Ultra settings fall to 65 FPS. These numbers indicate that 1440p is a good target for this system, as all presets remain above the 60 FPS threshold. The step from High to Ultra at this resolution is a 15 FPS drop, which is a noticeable cost for the extra visual effects.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles to maintain playable frame rates. The Low preset achieves an average of 59 FPS, which is just below the 60 FPS target. Medium settings average 51 FPS (min 43, max 59), High settings drop to 43 FPS, and Ultra settings fall to 35 FPS. The data shows a clear pattern: 4K is only borderline playable at the lowest settings, and a smoother experience is not achievable at this resolution with this hardware. The performance drop from 1440p to 4K is substantial for every preset, reinforcing the GPU bottleneck.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the optimal settings for this system depend on the user's target resolution and preference for visual quality. For a 1080p display, the High preset is the recommended choice, as it delivers an average of 123 FPS, which is well above the 144 Hz refresh rate of many monitors, while providing a significant visual upgrade over the Medium preset. The Ultra preset, while offering the best image quality, still achieves 101 FPS, which is more than sufficient for a smooth experience, but the 22 FPS difference between High and Ultra may not justify the visual gain for all users.

For 1440p gaming, the High preset is the best balance between visual fidelity and performance, offering an average of 80 FPS. The Medium preset provides a higher frame rate of 94 FPS, but the drop in visual quality is noticeable. The Ultra preset, at 65 FPS, is playable but sits close to the 60 FPS minimum for a comfortable experience, and frame drops could be an issue in intense scenes. Therefore, High is the safest choice to maintain a stable frame rate with good visuals.

At 4K, the data suggests that this system is not suited for a high-quality experience. The only preset that approaches playability is Low, with an average of 59 FPS, but this is below the ideal 60 FPS target and involves a significant reduction in visual detail. The Medium, High, and Ultra presets all fall below 60 FPS, making them less desirable for a smooth experience. For users with a 4K display, the recommendation is to either lower the resolution to 1440p or accept the Low preset with its associated visual compromises. The performance gap between 1440p High and 4K Low is stark (80 vs 59 FPS), making the resolution reduction a much better option for maintaining both frame rate and visual quality.