Doom

# Doom Performance Analysis: Intel Core Ultra X9 388H + AMD Radeon RX 7900M

The combination of Intel's Core Ultra X9 388H and AMD's Radeon RX 7900M delivers a compelling mobile gaming experience in Doom, with measured frame rates ranging from 54 FPS at 4K Ultra to 258 FPS at 1080p Low. This pairing sits at rank 1226 out of 2930 tested combos, placing it in the upper-middle tier of all configurations evaluated for this title. The data reveals a system that excels at high-refresh 1440p gaming while remaining playable at 4K, though the performance scaling across resolutions tells a nuanced story about where the bottleneck lies in this particular hardware marriage.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and predictable degradation as resolution increases, but the rate of that degradation reveals important information about system balance. At 1080p High, the combo produces 190 FPS average. Moving to 1440p High drops that to 123 FPS — a 35% reduction. Stepping up to 4K High yields 67 FPS, which is another 45% drop from 1440p. This progressive decline is steeper than what a purely GPU-bound scenario would suggest, indicating that the CPU's role diminishes as pixel count rises, but the GPU still has headroom challenges at lower resolutions.

Examining the Low settings across resolutions provides sharper insight into the limiting component. At 1080p Low, the system hits 258 FPS average. At 1440p Low, it falls to 167 FPS — a 35% reduction, nearly identical to the High preset's scaling. At 4K Low, the average is 90 FPS, a 46% drop from 1440p. The consistency of these percentage drops between presets suggests that the scaling pattern is resolution-driven rather than settings-driven. The GPU is the primary scaling factor, but the fact that 1080p Low reaches 258 FPS while 1080p High sits at 190 FPS implies the CPU can push much higher frame rates than the GPU delivers at lower settings.

The Ultra preset tells a different story. At 4K Ultra, the average plummets to 54 FPS — the lowest measured result across all configurations. The gap between 4K Ultra (54 FPS) and 4K High (67 FPS) is 19%, while the gap between 1440p Ultra (100 FPS) and 1440p High (123 FPS) is also 19%. This consistent percentage gap across resolutions indicates that the Ultra preset's additional GPU workload scales uniformly, reinforcing that the RX 7900M is the dominant constraint at higher settings. However, the 1080p Ultra result of 155 FPS versus 1080p High at 190 FPS shows an 18% gap, nearly identical to the other resolutions — suggesting the CPU is not introducing a bottleneck even at 1080p Ultra.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H brings 16 cores and 16 threads to this pairing, with a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. This Panther Lake architecture chip, built on Intel's 3 nm process, carries an 18 MB shared L3 cache and 3 MB L2 per core. Its benchmark results show a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 18911 and a single-core score of 2200.5, positioning it at the 88th percentile of all CPUs tested. The nearest rival, AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D, scores 44573 on average — just 0.2% higher — while Intel's own Core i9-13950HX sits 0.3% lower at 44342.

In Doom, the CPU's role appears most critical at lower resolutions where frame rates exceed 200 FPS. The jump from 1080p High (190 FPS) to 1080p Low (258 FPS) — a 36% increase — demonstrates that the CPU can feed the GPU substantially more frames when graphical load is reduced. The fact that 1080p Low achieves 258 FPS while 1440p Low only reaches 167 FPS suggests that even at 1440p, the GPU is the limiting factor, as the CPU could theoretically sustain higher frame rates given its 1080p Low performance.

The 16-thread configuration, with no hyper-threading, is notable for a modern CPU. Doom's Vulkan-based engine typically scales well with multiple cores, but the data shows that this CPU's single-thread performance — a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2200.5 — may be more relevant for this game's frame pacing. The 88th percentile ranking among all CPUs indicates strong overall performance, but the 0.2% delta to the Ryzen 5 7500X3D suggests that rival chips with different cache architectures might handle Doom's engine slightly differently, even if average synthetic scores are nearly identical.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo maintain 60 FPS at 4K Ultra settings?

A: No. The measured average at 4K Ultra is 54 FPS, which falls below the 60 FPS threshold. The 4K High preset averages 67 FPS, providing a comfortable margin above 60 FPS.

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 1440p with High settings?

A: The measured average is 123 FPS at 2560x1440 with High settings. The Medium preset averages 145 FPS, and Low reaches 167 FPS, making 1440p the sweet spot for high-refresh displays.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck at 1080p?

A: At 1080p Low, the system reaches 258 FPS, which suggests the CPU can push very high frame rates. The 1080p Ultra result of 155 FPS versus 1080p Low at 258 FPS indicates the GPU becomes the limiting factor as settings increase, even at 1080p.

Q: How does this combo compare to the nearest GPU rival in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The RX 7900M's average benchmark score is 97487, which is 0.4% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro VII (97131) and 4.3% lower than the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 (101872). The Radeon Instinct MI60 trails by 5.4%, and the RTX A4500 is 6.3% behind.

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo achieves in Doom?

A: The highest measured average is 258 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The Medium preset at 1080p averages 225 FPS, and High averages 190 FPS.

Q: Does the Ultra preset provide a smooth experience at any resolution?

A: At 1080p Ultra, the average is 155 FPS with no min FPS recorded, indicating a playable experience. At 1440p Ultra, the average is 100 FPS. At 4K Ultra, the 54 FPS average falls below the 60 FPS target for smooth gameplay.

How This Combo Ranks

This configuration ranks 1226th out of 2930 tested combos for Doom, placing it in the 58th percentile of all tested systems. That ranking is notably lower than the individual component percentiles — the CPU sits at the 88th percentile and the GPU at the 94th percentile. This discrepancy suggests that Doom's engine may not fully utilize the strengths of either component, or that the mobile platform constraints (such as thermal limits or power delivery) prevent the hardware from reaching its full potential in this specific title.

The rank of 1226 out of 2930 means that 1704 other combinations performed better in Doom, while 1225 performed worse. Given the CPU's 88th percentile and GPU's 94th percentile, one might expect a higher combined rank. The delta between component percentiles and combo rank indicates that Doom may favor different hardware characteristics — perhaps lower-latency memory or different cache hierarchies — that this particular pairing doesn't optimally provide. The CPU's nearest rival, the Ryzen 5 7500X3D with its 3D V-Cache, scores nearly identically in synthetic benchmarks (44573 vs 44466 for the Ultra X9 388H), but the 0.2% difference could translate to meaningful frame rate variations in a game like Doom that responds to cache-sensitive workloads.

The GPU's ranking situation is similar: the RX 7900M's 94th percentile and its closest rival, the Radeon Pro VII (0.4% higher average score), suggest that synthetic benchmarks don't fully capture Doom-specific performance. The 4.3% gap to the Quadro RTX 6000 in average benchmark score doesn't necessarily predict how each GPU handles Doom's id Tech 6 engine, which has specific optimization paths for different architectures.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7900M is a mobile implementation of the Navi 31 chip, built on TSMC's 5 nm process with 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die. It features 4608 shading units, 288 TMUs, and 192 ROPs, with 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus delivering 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. The boost clock of 2090 MHz and base clock of 1825 MHz drive a peak FP32 throughput of 38.52 TFLOPS. Its synthetic benchmarks show a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 4201, a Geekbench OpenCL score of 129499, and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 158760, placing it at the 94th percentile of all GPUs.

In Doom, the GPU's role is most evident in the settings scaling at each resolution. At 4K, the difference between Low (90 FPS) and Ultra (54 FPS) is 36 FPS — a 40% reduction. At 1440p, the same settings span from 167 FPS to 100 FPS, a 40% reduction as well. At 1080p, Low hits 258 FPS and Ultra drops to 155 FPS, a 40% reduction. This consistent 40% penalty from Low to Ultra across all resolutions strongly indicates that the GPU is the primary determinant of performance at every resolution, with the CPU providing sufficient headroom to avoid becoming the bottleneck.

The 16 GB VRAM capacity is more than sufficient for Doom, even at 4K Ultra, as the game's texture requirements are well within this budget. The 256-bit memory bus and 576.0 GB/s bandwidth provide ample data throughput for the game's streaming needs. The 72 ray tracing cores are present but Doom (2016) does not utilize ray tracing, so their impact on this title's performance is negligible. The pixel rate of 401.3 GPixel/s and texture rate of 601.9 GTexel/s are well-matched to the observed frame rates — at 4K Ultra (54 FPS), the GPU is processing roughly 398 million pixels per second, which aligns with its pixel throughput capabilities.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the measured averages are: 90 FPS at Low, 79 FPS at Medium (with min 67 and max 91), 67 FPS at High, and 54 FPS at Ultra. The Medium preset at 4K is the only configuration with recorded min/max values, showing a range from 67 to 91 FPS, indicating some frame pacing variability at this resolution. The gap between Low and Medium at 4K is 11 FPS (12%), while the gap from Medium to High is 12 FPS (15%), and from High to Ultra is 13 FPS (19%). This progressively larger percentage drop as settings increase suggests that the Ultra preset imposes disproportionately heavy GPU workloads — likely related to shadow quality or post-processing effects that scale superlinearly.

At 2560x1440, the averages are: 167 FPS at Low, 145 FPS at Medium (min 124, max 167), 123 FPS at High, and 100 FPS at Ultra. The Medium preset's min of 124 FPS and max of 167 FPS show a 43 FPS range, which is tighter in percentage terms (26% spread) than the 4K Medium's 24 FPS range (30% spread). The 1440p results show a steady decline from Low to Ultra, with each settings tier costing roughly 20-25 FPS. The 1440p High result of 123 FPS is particularly notable as it exceeds the 120 Hz refresh rate commonly found on gaming monitors, making this the highest resolution at which the combo can fully saturate a 120 Hz display on High settings.

At 1920x1080, the averages are: 258 FPS at Low, 225 FPS at Medium (min 191, max 258), 190 FPS at High, and 155 FPS at Ultra. The 1080p Medium preset shows a min of 191 FPS and max of 258 FPS, demonstrating that even at lower resolutions, frame times can vary significantly — the 67 FPS spread represents a 35% variance. The 1080p results show that the combo can comfortably drive 240 Hz displays at Low or Medium settings, and 155+ FPS even at Ultra. The consistency of the settings penalty (roughly 30-35 FPS per tier from Low to Medium to High, then 35 FPS from High to Ultra) suggests that each preset level adds a similar GPU workload increment at this resolution.

Settings Recommendations

For 4K gaming, the High preset at 67 FPS average provides the best balance of visual quality and performance, as it stays above the 60 FPS threshold while delivering substantially better visuals than Medium (79 FPS) or Low (90 FPS). The Ultra preset at 54 FPS falls below 60 FPS and introduces the risk of noticeable stutter on standard 60 Hz displays, despite the visual improvements. Players prioritizing smoothness over fidelity at 4K should consider Medium, which at 79 FPS provides a 18% performance buffer over High while maintaining reasonable visual quality.

At 1440p, the High preset at 123 FPS is the recommended choice for most users, as it exceeds 120 Hz refresh rates and provides a significant visual upgrade over Medium (145 FPS). The Ultra preset at 100 FPS remains playable and is viable for users with 100 Hz or lower refresh displays who prioritize maximum visual fidelity. The Medium preset at 145 FPS is ideal for users with 144 Hz displays who want to maintain a consistent frame rate at or near their display's refresh cap, as the 145 FPS average provides a small buffer above 144 Hz.

At 1080p, the Ultra preset at 155 FPS is the clear recommendation, as it maintains a high frame rate while delivering the best visual quality. The 155 FPS average exceeds 144 Hz displays comfortably and even approaches 165 Hz territory. For users with 240 Hz displays, the Medium preset at 225 FPS provides the best combination of high frame rates and acceptable visuals, while the Low preset at 258 FPS is the only setting that approaches the 240 Hz ceiling but sacrifices significant visual quality. The High preset at 190 FPS is a middle-ground option that works well for 165 Hz or 180 Hz displays, but for most 1080p users, the Ultra preset's 155 FPS offers the best overall experience given the minimal frame rate penalty compared to High (35 FPS difference) and the substantial visual upgrade it provides.