Doom OpenGL VS Vulkan Graphics Performance Analysis

Doom – 1080p, 1440p and 4K OpenGL Benchmarks

When paired with a 1920×1080, Doom doesn’t really pose a problem for modern graphics cards even on lower-tiered products like the GTX 960 2GB. Surprisingly, the low frame-buffer doesn’t become an issue and every card I tested could achieve a stable 60 frames-per-second average. Clearly, there’s a huge bump in performance when moving to the R9 390 which is what I expected. Interestingly, the R9 390X experiences a good boost compared to the R9 390 although it is way off the GTX 980.

Rather surprisingly, the Sapphire Nitro+ RX 480 OC sporting the latest Polaris 10 architecture just edged the R9 Nano. If you own a high-refresh monitor, it’s recommended to select the GTX 1070, Titan X, GTX 980Ti or NVIDIA’s current flagship the GTX 1080. I didn’t expect the GTX 980Ti to have such a noticeable lead over the GTX 1070 given the similar performance in previously tested games. All of these premium graphics cards output ridiculously high numbers and it’s clear that NVIDIA cards fare much better than the competition when using OpenGL.

Once the resolution is increased to 2560×1440, the more budget-friendly offerings struggle and it appears the GTX 960’s frame-buffer inhibits the performance. The Sapphire Nitro R9 380X does pretty well for the price point and you should be able to achieve 60 frames-per-second with a few concessions in the options menu. Additionally, the R9 390 falls just short of 60 frames-per-second while the R9 390X manages to hit this target.

There’s very little to choose between a number of AMD graphics solutions apart from the Fury X which has a commanding lead and outperformed a highly-rated GTX 1060 model. On another note, the GTX 980’s advantage reduces substantially compared to AMD products although it’s still a good margin ahead of the R9 390. The majority of GPUs were able to maintain 60 frames-per-second and the minimum rates remained very consistent. In a similar vein to the 1080p results, high-end NVIDIA graphics cards dominate the top positions but whether it’s worth the extra money is up for discussion since most users will settle for 60 frames-per-second.

During 4K benchmarking, the strenuous preset really takes it toll and only the elite-grade GPUs can even think of getting near 60 frames-per-second. As shown by the data below, the GTX 960 barely completed the benchmark and the R9 380X couldn’t uphold a 30 frames-per-second experience. A large quantity of graphics cards including the Sapphire Nitro+ RX 480 OC, GTX 970 and Sapphire R9 390 hovered around the 30 frames-per-second mark.

Furthermore, the R9 390X, R9 Nano and ASUS STRIX GAMING GTX 1060 couldn’t pull away and offered similar performance numbers. On a more positive note, the Fury X almost defeated the Titan X and the frame-rate is relatively playable. The GTX 1070 and GTX 980Ti output similar numbers and provide a major performance enhancement compared to the competition. Saying that. only the GTX 1080 can hit 60 frames-per-second while opting for a 4K monitor.