DOOM Eternal PC Graphics Benchmark

QuantumPhysics

TS Evangelist
Id games like Quake Champions (idtech6) and Doom Eternal (7) will basically run well on any new machine.

All you really need lately is a RTX 2060 Super or better to enjoy new games but the 1060/1070/1080 can still get you through the door.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ZedRM

amstech

IT Overlord
The o'l GTX 1080 doing work, staying on par or near the RTX 2070 as usual.
Game is well optimized, hats off to the programming teams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lew Zealand

Jo3yization

TS Member
Check my RX 5700 1080p results outperforming their XT results. Seems like the 'early XT benchmarks' might be accurate afterall as something seems to be wrong with the 5700 series performance here. I tested with the exact same settings & Resolution scaling off.
 
Lol Steve probably didn't DDU AMD driver enough times for the 5700XT performance to be where it's at maybe, or it could be a different part of the game were benchmarked.
 

herpaderp

TS Booster
I dont trust these results here after watching this video
Try reading again, but this time, slower:

The current GeForce 442.74 driver offers big performance gains for GeForce owners. Some early benchmarks showed the 5700 XT beating even the RTX 2080 Super, but as it turns out that information is no longer accurate.
Guess when the video you linked was made.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scavengerspc

Vulcanproject

TS Evangelist
Very curious RTX2060 performance. Starts off ok 1080p. Slips back quickly as the resolution rises. Ends up practically no faster than a GTX1070 at 1440p, slower at 4K.

Surely blame lies on the smaller memory buffer presumably.
 

Ludak021

TS Booster
Looks great even on lower settings and runs great on most hardware. Rare sight to see these days.
It looks aged even on highest settings. Sorry. It was made with consoles in mind and looks the part.

Very curious RTX2060 performance. Starts off ok 1080p. Slips back quickly as the resolution rises. Ends up practically no faster than a GTX1070 at 1440p, slower at 4K.

Surely blame lies on the smaller memory buffer presumably.
That's TechSpot testing for you. It works as it should on other website reviews. I don't want to name them, but look anywhere else for proper benchmarks. Sorry TS, but you have some problems with your test rig(s) or methods, idk. But Everyone is not wrong and you are the only one that is right. It doesn't work that way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jo3yization

m3tavision

TS Evangelist
Lol Steve probably didn't DDU AMD driver enough times for the 5700XT performance to be where it's at maybe, or it could be a different part of the game were benchmarked.
Something isn't right, cuz he is seeing 200+ fps on his rdna1 card.
 

Steve

TechSpot Editor
Staff member
It looks aged even on highest settings. Sorry. It was made with consoles in mind and looks the part.

That's TechSpot testing for you. It works as it should on other website reviews. I don't want to name them, but look anywhere else for proper benchmarks. Sorry TS, but you have some problems with your test rig(s) or methods, idk. But Everyone is not wrong and you are the only one that is right. It doesn't work that way.
"That's TechSpot testing for you", it's our fault the RTX 2060 has a 6GB VRAM buffer and the GTX 1070 an 8GB buffer which serves it better at higher resolutions?

I've double checked all the numbers, the only errors I found impacted the RX 5700 result at 1080p, it was about 10% lower than it should have been. Also we must have encountered a bug with the 5500 XT as the 8GB model is now on par with the 580. But the rest of the results are accurate, despite being different to what others are reporting using the Ultra Nightmare setting. I will re-test soon using the max preset to see if it favors AMD more when compared to Ultra, but given the preset testing we've done so far, it shouldn't.
 

EtaLasquera

TS Rookie
That's a great example of optimized game! Now Bethesda need to lesson Rockstar Games how to deploy a game for PC.

My old GPU is not listed on test... Here we go! R5 1600 (2017) on cheapest A320 with GTX1060 3GB... 1080p with mixed of high and medium presets.


 
  • Like
Reactions: CharmsD

SoloCamo

TS Member
"That's TechSpot testing for you", it's our fault the RTX 2060 has a 6GB VRAM buffer and the GTX 1070 an 8GB buffer which serves it better at higher resolutions?

I've double checked all the numbers, the only errors I found impacted the RX 5700 result at 1080p, it was about 10% lower than it should have been. Also we must have encountered a bug with the 5500 XT as the 8GB model is now on par with the 580. But the rest of the results are accurate, despite being different to what others are reporting using the Ultra Nightmare setting. I will re-test soon using the max preset to see if it favors AMD more when compared to Ultra, but given the preset testing we've done so far, it shouldn't.
Thanks for your time getting benchmarks out on this, ignore the jabs.

However, yes if you could please rerun at least a few of the higher end cards at Ultra Nightmare it would be appreciated.

Honestly interested as the same area you benchmarked in the video, my Radeon VII was pulling far, far, higher FPS at 4k Ultra Nightmare no less. And though the cpu doesn't matter much here, I'm still only on a 4790k w/ 16gb DDR2400 so I certainly have no advantage over the test system.
 

Steve

TechSpot Editor
Staff member
Thanks for your time getting benchmarks out on this, ignore the jabs.

However, yes if you could please rerun at least a few of the higher end cards at Ultra Nightmare it would be appreciated.

Honestly interested as the same area you benchmarked in the video, my Radeon VII was pulling far, far, higher FPS at 4k Ultra Nightmare no less. And though the cpu doesn't matter much here, I'm still only on a 4790k w/ 16gb DDR2400 so I certainly have no advantage over the test system.
The problem with spot checking the fps counter is, you always get the impression you're maintaining much higher frame rates than you really are. I can also run the Radeon VII though our pass but focus more on areas where the fps skyrockets and it gives much higher averages. The point here was to focus on the more demanding sections and test each GPU in the exact same way.

In the less demanding sections the RX 5700 and RTX 2060 Super are very evenly matched with the Ultra preset at 1080p, as an example:



However in the more demanding sections (for AMD GPUs) there is quite a large difference:

 
Last edited:

veLa

TS Evangelist
Id games like Quake Champions (idtech6) and Doom Eternal (7) will basically run well on any new machine.

All you really need lately is a RTX 2060 Super or better to enjoy new games but the 1060/1070/1080 can still get you through the door.
Totally dude. You could even use older hardware with lower settings as well and the game will run great with its admirable optimization. The graphs say an RX 580 handles just fine at 1080p which is great since I just upgraded my secondary / back-up rig with one.

Game runs amazingly well on my system, my trusty ol 980ti sings with this one, really wish more devs put out games so well optimized as eternal
That old beast still has a lot staying power and doesn't back down from a challenge. She might be an older card, but that doesn't mean she's a bad card. Frankly, it's hard to justify an upgrade when the performance is still there.

Wonder how my r9 390 will handle it
I had an ASUS Radeon R9 390 Strix that died, and well, I loved that card. I wouldn't have upgraded if it hadn't bit the dust. You probably already know that the R9 390 holds it own against the RX 480/580/590 polaris cards, with a slight disadvantage solely due to clockspeeds despite having more ROPs and stream processors. I would say just look at the RX 580/590's performance in these graphs and know that your performance wouldn't be more than 4-8% behind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Charles Olson

Jo3yization

TS Member
"That's TechSpot testing for you", it's our fault the RTX 2060 has a 6GB VRAM buffer and the GTX 1070 an 8GB buffer which serves it better at higher resolutions?

I've double checked all the numbers, the only errors I found impacted the RX 5700 result at 1080p, it was about 10% lower than it should have been. Also we must have encountered a bug with the 5500 XT as the 8GB model is now on par with the 580. But the rest of the results are accurate, despite being different to what others are reporting using the Ultra Nightmare setting. I will re-test soon using the max preset to see if it favors AMD more when compared to Ultra, but given the preset testing we've done so far, it shouldn't.
Are you sure? I tried testing at ultra & my results seem to line up more with other sites;

At the very least they shouldnt be exceeding a 5700 XTs result.

Take the 1440p test for example,, 88fps average on the RX 5700, 106fps average on the XT.
How? I played through that entire section & there's only a few moments the 5700 dropped into the 88fps range but for the majority of it, & more importantly during the combat FPS was holding higher than the 106 avg you're getting with the XT.

I get the importance of checking the most demanding points, but if you're only using the lowest points for your average & not the combat itself something seems off. That average is closer to the minimums I'm getting & actual gameplay average while fighting is over 110fps. This is a non-XT card at 1750mhz core outperforming an XT.
 
Last edited:

Steve

TechSpot Editor
Staff member
Are you sure? I tried testing at ultra & my results seem to line up more with other sites;

At the very least they shouldnt be exceeding a 5700 XTs result.

Take the 1440p test for example,, 88fps average on the RX 5700, 106fps average on the XT.
How? I played through that entire section & there's only a few moments the 5700 dropped into the 88fps range but for the majority of it, & more importantly during the combat FPS was holding higher than the 106 avg you're getting with the XT.

I get the importance of 'spot checks' but if you're only using the lowest points for your average & not the combat itself something seems off. That average is closer to the minimums I'm getting & actual gameplay average while fighting is over 110fps. This is a non-XT card at 1750mhz core outperforming an XT.
Why don't you actually measure performance during that pass? Would be more useful than just guessing.
 

Jo3yization

TS Member
Why don't you actually measure performance during that pass? Would be more useful than just guessing.
I literally just did that, 20+ runs even dropping my base frequency to 1600mhz, I could *not* get an average result as low as your 5700 & I was only able to get it to match your XT result by literally staring at a section that dropped the fps to 112 for a good 5-10s of the 1min run.

I even tried shortening the run to avoid staring at high fps scenery for too long because apart from one section(after the broken wall staring at the ship before dropping down), the rest of the scene runs at ~150-160fps+.

So here are my results, & for a good portion of it I was purposely trying to stare at low fps sections to drop the average down on purpose along with dropping my RX 5700 frequency from boost of around 1700mhz down to 1600mhz base.

Ultra preset 1080p, RS-off::

24-03-2020, 14:28:09 DOOMEternalx64vk.exe benchmark completed, 10829 frames rendered in 66.281 s
Average framerate : 163.3 FPS
Minimum framerate : 115.0 FPS
Maximum framerate : 233.1 FPS
1% low framerate : 107.1 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 60.7 FPS
24-03-2020, 14:31:16 DOOMEternalx64vk.exe benchmark completed, 10897 frames rendered in 62.656 s
Average framerate : 173.9 FPS
Minimum framerate : 126.6 FPS
Maximum framerate : 212.9 FPS
1% low framerate : 126.0 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 108.6 FPS
24-03-2020, 14:32:31 DOOMEternalx64vk.exe benchmark completed, 10129 frames rendered in 62.594 s
Average framerate : 161.8 FPS
Minimum framerate : 116.3 FPS
Maximum framerate : 230.5 FPS
1% low framerate : 110.5 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 98.0 FPS
24-03-2020, 14:33:50 DOOMEternalx64vk.exe benchmark completed, 10752 frames rendered in 62.578 s
Average framerate : 171.8 FPS
Minimum framerate : 116.1 FPS
Maximum framerate : 245.6 FPS
1% low framerate : 112.3 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 98.0 FPS
24-03-2020, 14:35:26 DOOMEternalx64vk.exe benchmark completed, 10511 frames rendered in 62.218 s
Average framerate : 168.9 FPS
Minimum framerate : 131.4 FPS
Maximum framerate : 224.2 FPS
1% low framerate : 127.9 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 102.0 FPS
24-03-2020, 14:36:42 DOOMEternalx64vk.exe benchmark completed, 9011 frames rendered in 56.094 s
Average framerate : 160.6 FPS
Minimum framerate : 117.3 FPS
Maximum framerate : 215.3 FPS
1% low framerate : 109.5 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 92.7 FPS

24-03-2020, 14:38:31 DOOMEternalx64vk.exe benchmark completed, 8625 frames rendered in 55.094 s
Average framerate : 156.5 FPS
Minimum framerate : 111.0 FPS
Maximum framerate : 233.1 FPS
1% low framerate : 108.8 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 99.1 FPS

24-03-2020, 14:42:08 DOOMEternalx64vk.exe benchmark completed, 7953 frames rendered in 52.984 s
Average framerate : 150.1 FPS
Minimum framerate : 111.6 FPS
Maximum framerate : 193.3 FPS
1% low framerate : 105.7 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 87.2 FPS
24-03-2020, 14:43:17 DOOMEternalx64vk.exe benchmark completed, 8852 frames rendered in 57.735 s
Average framerate : 153.3 FPS
Minimum framerate : 111.1 FPS
Maximum framerate : 222.3 FPS
1% low framerate : 104.2 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 69.9 FPS
24-03-2020, 14:45:33 DOOMEternalx64vk.exe benchmark completed, 9049 frames rendered in 58.375 s
Average framerate : 155.0 FPS
Minimum framerate : 108.5 FPS
Maximum framerate : 192.9 FPS
1% low framerate : 105.1 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 95.0 FPS
24-03-2020, 14:50:09 DOOMEternalx64vk.exe benchmark completed, 6758 frames rendered in 42.078 s
Average framerate : 160.6 FPS
Minimum framerate : 114.0 FPS
Maximum framerate : 193.2 FPS
1% low framerate : 109.5 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 97.1 FPS
24-03-2020, 14:52:15 DOOMEternalx64vk.exe benchmark completed, 6323 frames rendered in 40.657 s
Average framerate : 155.5 FPS
Minimum framerate : 112.7 FPS
Maximum framerate : 196.5 FPS
1% low framerate : 105.5 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 100.1 FPS
24-03-2020, 14:53:40 DOOMEternalx64vk.exe benchmark completed, 8693 frames rendered in 54.969 s
Average framerate : 158.1 FPS
Minimum framerate : 117.2 FPS
Maximum framerate : 214.7 FPS
1% low framerate : 110.7 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 101.0 FPS
24-03-2020, 14:56:36 DOOMEternalx64vk.exe benchmark completed, 6425 frames rendered in 42.688 s
Average framerate : 150.5 FPS
Minimum framerate : 109.8 FPS
Maximum framerate : 197.9 FPS
1% low framerate : 104.8 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 95.8 FPS
24-03-2020, 14:57:23 DOOMEternalx64vk.exe benchmark completed, 5890 frames rendered in 40.390 s
Average framerate : 145.8 FPS
Minimum framerate : 105.8 FPS
Maximum framerate : 183.4 FPS
1% low framerate : 102.2 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 93.7 FPS
24-03-2020, 14:58:20 DOOMEternalx64vk.exe benchmark completed, 6104 frames rendered in 41.563 s
Average framerate : 146.8 FPS
Minimum framerate : 108.8 FPS
Maximum framerate : 174.1 FPS
1% low framerate : 102.6 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 96.1 FPS
24-03-2020, 15:01:03 DOOMEternalx64vk.exe benchmark completed, 8776 frames rendered in 56.328 s
Average framerate : 155.8 FPS
Minimum framerate : 111.7 FPS
Maximum framerate : 218.3 FPS
1% low framerate : 105.5 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 96.4 FPS
24-03-2020, 15:02:31 DOOMEternalx64vk.exe benchmark completed, 8778 frames rendered in 59.203 s
Average framerate : 148.2 FPS
Minimum framerate : 110.6 FPS
Maximum framerate : 203.9 FPS
1% low framerate : 106.5 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 99.2 FPS
24-03-2020, 15:04:05 DOOMEternalx64vk.exe benchmark completed, 10796 frames rendered in 69.281 s
Average framerate : 155.8 FPS
Minimum framerate : 110.6 FPS
Maximum framerate : 222.5 FPS
1% low framerate : 106.2 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 97.9 FPS
24-03-2020, 15:06:35 DOOMEternalx64vk.exe benchmark completed, 8343 frames rendered in 53.187 s
Average framerate : 156.8 FPS
Minimum framerate : 117.2 FPS
Maximum framerate : 200.9 FPS
1% low framerate : 109.2 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 83.4 FPS
24-03-2020, 15:08:32 DOOMEternalx64vk.exe benchmark completed, 9227 frames rendered in 55.438 s
Average framerate : 166.4 FPS
Minimum framerate : 115.9 FPS
Maximum framerate : 227.6 FPS
1% low framerate : 112.0 FPS
0.1% low framerate : 97.7 FPS
-----------------------------
At least the 1% lows seem to be lining up but I'm also running a weaker test bench so it's a bit of a given imo,, I hope these results at least give you guys a second to pause & look into it. I'm uploading a video showing how I tried to replicate your benchmark run & was unable to get the avg to drop under 145.

When a big review site posts benchmarks for a game that normally favors AMD showing weak performance that makes Nvidia look good, it's kind a big deal that those results are 110% accurate.

Anyway, please look into it, as usual great content & appreciate all the hard work that went into it but a discrepancy can't be ignored.

I also went to the same 'scenes' you posted screenshots of & had higher framerates at all of them.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ludak021