Doom: The Darkish Ages is the most recent first-person shooter developed by id Software program, marking the eighth principal entry within the franchise and the third installment of the trendy sequence, following 2020’s Doom Eternal. As you may think about, we can’t be reviewing the sport right here however somewhat, we’ll be benchmarking the “hell” out of it, and little doubt a number of configurations will likely be doomed.
The Darkish Ages is powered by the idTech8 sport engine, which options full dynamic lighting with ray-traced world illumination and ray-traced reflections. Consequently, a GPU with {hardware} RT help is required to play the sport. Path tracing can be anticipated, however it’ll arrive in a post-launch replace. Which means no FPS-crushing choice simply but for all you RTX 5090 house owners.
For testing, Nvidia offered driver model 576.31, and AMD offered driver model 25.5.1. Each are game-ready drivers optimized for Doom: The Darkish Ages. After a number of hours of gameplay, we chosen a bit referred to as “Siege Half 1, Chapter 6, Aspiring Slayer” for benchmarking. The take a look at begins at a checkpoint simply earlier than a big battle sequence, and many of the benchmark takes place throughout that struggle, so this must be a fairly demanding take a look at.
In case you had been to watch body charge efficiency in a much less intense part of the sport, resembling strolling by means of near-empty corridors, you may count on increased body charges than what we’re displaying right here.
The sport affords half a dozen preset choices, and whereas we usually take a look at three or 4 presets at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K, for this take a look at we’re specializing in simply two. It’s because there was virtually no efficiency distinction between the utmost preset (Extremely Nightmare), Nightmare, Extremely, and Excessive.
The truth is, trying on the RTX 5080 and 9070 XT, we see that the GeForce GPU skilled only a 2% efficiency improve when going from Extremely Nightmare to Excessive, whereas the 9070 XT noticed a modest 5% uplift.
Oddly, the 9070 XT outperformed the RTX 5080 utilizing the offered drivers. This was sudden, given Nvidia granted us early entry to the sport and requested that we spotlight the RTX options of their GeForce 50 sequence. We agreed to take action, as a result of you already know we’re benchmarking RTX graphics playing cards, and people options are related.
However anyway, even with the Medium preset, the Radeon GPU noticed solely a further 8% enhance, whereas the GeForce GPU improved by simply 2%. Dropping to Low yielded an extra 14% improve for the 9070 XT and a 13% acquire for the RTX 5080. Which means that, in comparison with the very best high quality preset, the Low preset affords simply an 18% efficiency enchancment for the RTX 5080 and 29% for the 9070 XT.
It is a bit shocking to see such restricted efficiency scaling throughout the presets. There’s just about no distinction among the many prime 4 settings, a small acquire with Medium, and one other modest enhance with Low. This will likely be disappointing information for these with lower-end {hardware} hoping the Low and Medium presets would supply extra substantial efficiency enhancements.
Now, the rationale for this minimal scaling turns into clear when inspecting the visible variations between presets. So let’s take a fast have a look at these now…
Picture High quality Comparability
On this first instance, there’s virtually no noticeable distinction between all six presets (and that is not due to picture compression), there merely is not a lot distinction. Even when viewing the native presentation in-game, we could not spot a distinction between the highest 4 presets, all of them regarded precisely the identical to us.
Even when evaluating Medium to Extremely Nightmare, any variations are minimal. Maybe the distant shadow high quality is barely higher, however it’s very arduous to inform.
Subsequent, we’ve the Low preset, and as soon as once more, the general presentation is extraordinarily much like Extremely Nightmare. The textures on the weapon seem barely softer, and the distant tower exhibits a discount in lighting high quality, however in any other case, the 2 look fairly alike.
This second instance highlights close-up particulars, and once more, there’s virtually no seen distinction between Low and Extremely Nightmare. We restarted the sport between adjustments to make sure every setting was correctly utilized, however it made no distinction.
Probably the most noticeable variation we discovered was on this instance that includes a muddy floor. That mentioned, the Extremely Nightmare, Nightmare, Extremely, Excessive, and even Medium presets all regarded equivalent to us. With the Low preset, some element is misplaced and reflections are lowered, however general, the distinction between the very best and lowest high quality settings is extraordinarily minimal.
Earlier than transferring on, here is a comparability of a scene with intense fireplace results and close-up rubble. Once more, it’s extremely tough to establish any actual variations.
The identical applies to this scene – we would not blame you for considering we unintentionally confirmed the identical preset six instances. However relaxation assured, that is not the case.
For a clearer view, here is a side-by-side comparability of the Extremely Nightmare and Low presets. In case you look intently, it’s possible you’ll spot some very minor variations, however they’re refined. As soon as once more, the mud stands out as the realm with essentially the most seen variation, although even the Low setting appears respectable.
Given these outcomes, we have determined to focus our benchmarks on the Extremely Nightmare and Medium presets. Efficiency is just about the identical throughout Extremely Nightmare, Nightmare, Extremely, and Excessive settings. For the take a look at system, we’re utilizing the Ryzen 7 9800X3D paired with 32 GB of DDR5-6000 reminiscence and the most recent show drivers.
Check System Specs
Earlier than publishing this evaluate, we obtained Nvidia’s newest driver (model 576.40), which didn’t enhance efficiency past what we’re displaying right here. At most, we noticed a ~2-3% uplift. We requested Nvidia what sort of efficiency positive factors customers ought to count on with the brand new driver, however they had been unable to supply a solution.
| CPU | AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D |
| Motherboard | MSI MPG X870E Carbon WiFi (BIOS 7E49v1A23 – ReBAR enabled) |
| Reminiscence | G.Talent Trident Z5 RGB DDR5-6000 [CL30-38-38-96] |
| Graphics Playing cards: GeForce RTX 3060 GeForce RTX 3060 Ti GeForce RTX 3070 GeForce RTX 3080 GeForce RTX 3090 GeForce RTX 4060 GeForce RTX 4060 Ti GeForce RTX 4070 GeForce RTX 4070 Tremendous GeForce RTX 4070 Ti GeForce RTX 4070 Ti Tremendous GeForce RTX 4080 GeForce RTX 4080 Tremendous GeForce RTX 4090 GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8GB GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16GB GeForce RTX 5070 GeForce RTX 5080 GeForce RTX 5090 Radeon RX 6600 Radeon RX 6650 XT Radeon RX 6750 XT Radeon RX 6800 Radeon RX 6800 XT Radeon RX 6950 XT Radeon RX 7600 Radeon RX 7600 XT Radeon RX 7700 XT Radeon RX 7800 XT Radeon RX 7900 GRE Radeon RX 7900 XT Radeon RX 7900 XTX Radeon RX 9070 Radeon RX 9070 XT Intel Arc A770 Intel Arc B580 |
|
| ATX Case | MSI MEG Maestro 700L PZ |
| Energy Provide | Kolink Regulator Gold ATX 3.0 1200W |
| Storage | TeamGroup T-Pressure Cardea Z44Q 4TB |
| Working System | Home windows 11 24H2 |
| Show Driver | Nvidia GeForce Recreation Prepared 576.31 AMD Radeon Adrenalin 25.5.1 |
Benchmarks
Extremely Nightmare @ 1080p
Beginning with the Extremely Nightmare high quality settings and utilizing native TAA (we’ll have a look at upscaling knowledge shortly), the RTX 5090 delivered simply 151 fps, making it a mere 3% sooner than the RTX 4090. It is unclear what is going on on with the GeForce 50 sequence GPUs, however for essentially the most half, they provide little to no efficiency acquire over their predecessors. The truth is, the RTX 5080 was 8% slower than the 4080, which is puzzling.
We carried out clear installs of the GeForce driver – a number of instances, in reality – however had been unable to enhance the efficiency of Nvidia’s 50 sequence GPUs. This implies both a driver difficulty, a sport patch is required, or the 50 sequence merely does not present significant efficiency enhancements over the 40 sequence – and in some instances, it is slower.
Apparently, each AMD’s RDNA3 and RDNA4 GPUs carried out exceptionally properly. The 7900 XTX and 9070 XT matched the RTX 4080 Super, coming in simply 16% behind the RTX 5090.
The RX 9070 additionally matched the RTX 5080 and outperformed the 4070 Ti Super, whereas the 7900 XT was on par with the 5070 Ti and beat the 4070 Tremendous.
The older 6800 XT barely edged out the brand new 5060 Ti, whereas the 7700 XT delivered related efficiency with 68 fps. Under 60 fps, we discover the 3060 Ti, 4060, 6750 XT, and Arc B580. Past that time, body charges dip into the mid-40s, resulting in a subpar expertise.
Extremely Nightmare @ 1440p
Leaping to 1440p with Extremely Nightmare settings, the RTX 5090 dropped to a median of 125 fps – a 6% enchancment over the 4090, and 30% sooner than the 7900 XTX and 9070 XT. In the meantime, AMD’s flagship GPUs as soon as once more barely edged out the RTX 4080 Tremendous and RTX 5080.
For a median of round 60 fps, the 7800 XT, 6950 XT, RTX 4070, and 5070 carried out properly. Even the RTX 3080 delivered 65 fps on common. The 7700 XT landed between the 8 GB and 16 GB variations of the 5060 Ti. It is price noting that 8 GB of VRAM is ample for these high quality settings – although, as we’ll present quickly, sure configurations should run into points, even with upscaling at 1440p.
Extremely Nightmare @ 4K
At native 4K, most customers will doubtless wish to allow upscaling, however for an apples-to-apples comparability, we’re native efficiency. The RTX 5090 managed 82 fps on common – stable efficiency – however it means simply 74 fps for the 4090 and 56 fps for the 9070 XT. So except you are utilizing a 4090 or 5090, count on sub-60 fps efficiency with out upscaling.
Medium @ 1080p
Switching to the Medium preset at 1080p, most GPUs delivered over 60 fps, together with the Arc B580 and the older Radeon RX 6750 XT. Nonetheless, AMD’s RX 7600 sequence underperformed, with simply 52 fps on common, whereas the RTX 4060 managed 64 fps.
Medium @ 1440p
At 1440p, the RTX 5090 reached a median of 135 fps utilizing the Medium preset, with the RTX 4090 shut behind at 130 fps. Once more, the 40 and 50 sequence GPUs are performing a lot nearer than anticipated. For instance, the RTX 5080 was 8% slower than the 4080, permitting the RX 9070 to match it.
The older 9700 XT additionally matched the 5070 Ti, whereas the RTX 3090 was 7% sooner than the 6950 XT. The 6800 XT and RTX 3080 had been almost equivalent. Under this stage, efficiency begins to fall underneath 60 fps.
Medium @ 4K
Lastly, at 4K utilizing Medium settings, the RTX 5090 achieved 89 fps – solely a 9% enchancment over its Extremely Nightmare consequence. Decrease-end playing cards just like the RTX 5070 noticed an 11% uplift, however that is nonetheless disappointing. Usually, a drop from most to medium high quality would yield at the very least a 40% efficiency acquire. As an alternative, the 5070 solely managed 41 fps, that means even with upscaling, the expertise will not be nice.
FSR and DLSS Upscaling Efficiency
This is a fast have a look at how FSR and DLSS upscaling evaluate utilizing the 9070 XT and RTX 5080. As soon as once more, the Radeon GPU is quicker, delivering 11% extra efficiency when rendering at native decision. With the High quality upscaling choice, that margin extends to 16%, because the Radeon GPU turns into 40% sooner and the GeForce GPU sees a 34% enhance.
The efficiency hole narrows barely to fifteen% with the Balanced setting, 14% with Efficiency, and returns to 11% with Extremely Efficiency. At 1440p, we advocate the High quality preset for each GPUs, because it supplies one of the best stability between visuals and efficiency.
VRAM Debate: 8GB vs. 16GB
Now let’s discuss 8 GB GPUs in Doom: The Darkish Ages, particularly the brand new 8 GB model of the RTX 5060 Ti. For essentially the most half, 8 GB GPUs carry out fairly properly on this sport, and it is clear the developer has put effort into optimizing for that configuration. This is smart, as the vast majority of PC players are nonetheless caught on 8 GB GPUs, largely as a consequence of AMD and Nvidia persevering with to ship low-VRAM fashions, and look like actively attempting to kill PC gaming, however I digress.
As was the case with Space Marine 2, this sport might drastically profit from a correct 4K texture pack. Whereas some textures look glorious, many seem low-resolution and lack element when considered at increased resolutions. We made related feedback about House Marine 2, which some pushed again on – till the 4K texture pack was launched. At that time, the sport regarded dramatically higher however turned unplayable on 8 GB playing cards.
As an instance the distinction, here is a have a look at how the 8 GB and 16 GB variations of the RTX 5060 Ti carry out at 4K utilizing DLSS Balanced upscaling throughout a big horde battle. Whereas the 16 GB mannequin’s body charge is not nice, the sport is at the very least playable. In distinction, the 8 GB model is totally damaged on this state of affairs – although that is an excessive case, meant to check VRAM limits.
Now, if we enabled DLSS high quality upscaling at 1440p, the 8 GB 5060 Ti sees little or no enchancment over native efficiency, whereas the 16 GB mannequin is roughly 40% sooner. To additional take a look at VRAM saturation, we moved past the 30-second benchmark cross and performed for a number of minutes.
Initially, the 16 GB card was about 42% sooner. However a couple of minutes in, VRAM utilization overwhelmed the 8 GB mannequin, tanking its efficiency. This resulted within the 16 GB mannequin delivering an 82% increased common body charge – and over 200% higher 1% lows.
We noticed related variations with the Nightmare and Extremely presets. Even the Excessive preset confirmed some discrepancy, although Medium offered almost equivalent efficiency and visuals, making it a extra viable choice for 8 GB GPUs.
2GB vs 1.5GB Texture Pool Dimension
Nonetheless, this appeared to grow to be a non-issue as soon as we found that reducing the feel pool dimension from the default 2 GB to 1.5 GB drastically improved efficiency on the 8 GB 5060 Ti at 1440p with upscaling. It matched the 16 GB mannequin’s efficiency with no noticeable visible degradation. We additionally noticed no elevated texture or element pop-in, elevating questions on the true advantages of the upper texture pool setting. Whereas the sport means that allocating extra VRAM improves efficiency, we discovered no supporting proof in our testing.
This texture pool setting is very vital for customers with 8 GB GPUs – significantly when utilizing options like body technology. With the default 2 GB pool dimension, DLSS multi-frame technology usually didn’t activate, generally requiring a number of restarts. Even then, efficiency was inconsistent.
For instance, in an early take a look at of multi-frame technology, it labored as anticipated on the 16 GB mannequin however lowered efficiency on the 8 GB model. By transferring to a much less demanding space, trying down on the floor, and enabling multi-frame technology from the menu, we might generally get it to work. It appeared we needed to decrease VRAM utilization first, an issue that by no means occurred with the 16 GB mannequin.
Nonetheless, dropping to the Medium preset and decreasing the feel pool to 1.5 GB allowed multi-frame technology to work flawlessly on the 8 GB 5060 Ti. The truth is, in that particular state of affairs, the 8 GB mannequin barely outperformed the 16 GB model, although that is doubtless all the way down to run to run variance.
Primarily based on our testing, multi-frame technology is buggy on the 8 GB mannequin and flawless on the 16 GB mannequin. Decreasing the feel pool dimension to 1.5 GB on an 8 GB GPU is important. For these questioning, the feel pool dimension may be elevated to 4 GB on a 16 GB GPU with none efficiency hit, although we could not establish any visible or efficiency enhancements consequently.
What We Realized
Doom: The Darkish Ages is a well-optimized sport that performs easily at 1440p with upscaling enabled. High quality upscaling can enhance efficiency by round 30% to 40%, permitting GPUs such because the Radeon 7700 XT and GeForce RTX 5060 Ti to common over 60 fps, which must be thought-about the naked minimal for contemporary PC gaming.
The primary optimization difficulty lies within the lack of efficiency scaling. At most, we noticed a 30% enchancment in body charge when dropping from the utmost to the minimal high quality settings. That is why the Radeon RX 6600 managed simply 41 fps at native 1080p utilizing the Medium preset. The sport nonetheless appears nice, however there’s not a lot extra efficiency gained by reducing settings.
We might wish to see an choice tailor-made for older or lower-end GPUs that sacrifices visible constancy extra aggressively, permitting GPUs just like the RX 6600 to push past 60 fps at 1080p.
Visually, the sport appears superb general, with many spectacular results, explosions are significantly satisfying, nonetheless as famous earlier, texture high quality is not persistently excessive. It is paying homage to what we noticed with Space Marine 2, a sport that vastly benefited from a 4K texture pack.
At this stage, it appears mainstream GPUs could also be holding PC gaming again. Builders are confronted with a troublesome determination: both optimize video games to suit inside 8 GB of VRAM, compromising visible high quality, or prioritize higher-fidelity visuals and go away behind gamers restricted to eight GB GPUs.
Doom: The Darkish Ages is not the primary sport that works properly on 8 GB playing cards however suffers in different methods due to it. We noticed related trade-offs with Black Myth: Wukong, for instance. We imagine video games like this might look considerably higher, with out demanding extra compute energy, if 16 GB was the bottom VRAM configuration for PC gaming.
Hopefully, as with House Marine 2, we’ll see a high-resolution texture pack launched for Doom, because the outcomes may very well be transformative.
As for common stability, we skilled some crashes when utilizing GeForce GPUs, particularly the RTX 50 Blackwell fashions. Whereas stability wasn’t horrible, the sport did hard-lock a number of instances, and we encountered a number of crashes when utilizing body technology on 8 GB GeForce GPUs.
Decreasing the feel pool dimension to 1.5 GB appeared to assist in these instances. In distinction, we did not encounter a single crash or difficulty whereas testing with Radeon GPUs. We had been impressed by how properly the 9070 sequence ran the sport, in addition to the efficiency of the RDNA 3 sequence.
Will probably be fascinating to see whether or not the sport receives performance-related patches post-launch. We already know that path tracing is coming quickly, so that can undoubtedly be price exploring. Till then, in the event you loved our work on this text, share it, subscribe to our newsletter for content material updates, and take a look at our TechSpot Elite subscription choice to take away adverts and obtain extra perks.
Purchasing Shortcuts:
Source link
