Control

The AMD Ryzen 5 5500 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 is a stark combination: a mid-range 2022 CPU with a 2022 flagship GPU, tested against the 2019 action-adventure title Control. The benchmark data, measured across three resolutions and four quality presets, shows a system that is overwhelmingly GPU-bound at higher settings but reveals the CPU’s limits at lower resolutions. This analysis walks through the measured FPS, the component roles, and how this specific pairing ranks.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the benchmark database, this specific CPU-GPU combination achieves a rank of 191 out of 3720 tested combos for Control. This places it in the top 5.1% of all tested pairings, indicating that despite the CPU’s relatively modest standing in general benchmarks, the sheer graphics horsepower of the RTX 4090 carries the system to an elite tier for this specific title. The combo’s percentile rank for the GPU is 88, meaning it outperforms 88% of all tested graphics cards, while the CPU’s percentile is 73, outperforming 73% of all tested processors. The data shows a system where the GPU is the dominant factor in overall ranking, but the CPU’s lower percentile suggests it may be the limiting factor in certain scenarios.

The measured FPS data reinforces this high ranking. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo produces an average of 203.2 FPS, which is more than three times the playable threshold of 60 FPS. Even at the most demanding preset tested, 3840x2160 Ultra, the average FPS of 79.5 remains well above the playable threshold. The rank of 191 out of 3720 is a strong indicator that this combination can handle Control without issue, but the scaling between resolutions and presets provides a more detailed picture of where the performance ceiling lies.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Examining the nearest rivals for each component provides context for what other hardware might behave similarly. For the AMD Ryzen 5 5500, the closest benchmarks come from a set of CPUs with average scores within a narrow band. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 430 has an average score of 19617, which is 0.1% lower than the Ryzen 5 5500’s 19593. The Intel Core i5-12500 scores 19668, a 0.4% difference, while the Intel Core i7-10700F scores 19499, a 0.5% difference in the opposite direction. The Intel Core i5-11600KF completes the group with a score of 19723, 0.7% higher. These deltas are all within a single percentage point, meaning a user with any of these CPUs would likely see nearly identical performance in CPU-bound scenarios within Control.

On the GPU side, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 has an average benchmark score of 60347. The nearest rival is the Intel Arc Pro A60 with a score of 60326, a negligible 0% difference. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 scores 60140, which is 0.3% lower. The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M scores 61896, which is 2.5% higher, and the AMD Radeon PRO V710 scores 58657, which is 2.9% lower. These rivals are professional or workstation-class cards, not consumer gaming GPUs, but the data indicates that their raw compute performance is comparable to the RTX 4090 in synthetic benchmarks. For gaming performance in Control specifically, the measured FPS data for this combo is the primary reference.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Control at 4K resolution?

A: Yes. At 3840x2160, all four tested presets (Low, Medium, High, and Ultra) produce average FPS above the 60 FPS playable threshold. The lowest average is 79.5 FPS at Ultra settings.

Q: What is the highest quality setting that maintains 60 FPS at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset maintains an average of 112.6 FPS. This is the most demanding preset tested and it clears the 60 FPS threshold by a significant margin.

Q: How does the performance scale from 1080p to 4K at Ultra settings?

A: The average FPS drops from 149.6 at 1920x1080 to 112.6 at 2560x1440, and then to 79.5 at 3840x2160. This represents a 24.7% decrease from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 29.4% decrease from 1440p to 4K.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more likely to be the bottleneck at 1080p?

A: The data suggests the CPU becomes more relevant at lower resolutions. At 1920x1080, the average FPS ranges from 149.6 at Ultra to 203.2 at Low. This wide spread indicates that the GPU has headroom, and the CPU’s performance, which has a 73rd percentile rank, is likely limiting the maximum frame rate.

Q: What is the performance difference between Low and Ultra settings at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 140.5 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 79.5 FPS. This is a difference of 61 FPS, or a 43.4% reduction in average frame rate when moving from the lowest to the highest quality preset.

Q: Does the combo rank in the top 10% of all tested systems for this game?

A: Yes. The combo ranks 191 out of 3720 tested combinations, which places it in the top 5.1% of all tested systems for Control.

The Verdict

The benchmark results are unambiguous: this PC can run Control with exceptional performance at all tested resolutions and settings. The verdict by resolution confirms that at 3840x2160, all four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) are playable, with the best settings being Ultra at an average of 79.5 FPS. At 2560x1440, the same holds true; all presets are playable, and Ultra runs at an average of 112.6 FPS. At 1920x1080, the system achieves an average of 149.6 FPS at Ultra settings, which is the best setting available.

The playable threshold is defined as 60 FPS, and every single data point in the measured FPS table exceeds this threshold. The lowest average FPS recorded is 79.5 at 4K Ultra, which is still 19.5 FPS above the threshold. This indicates that the system has substantial headroom for future driver updates or more demanding scenes within the game. For a player with a 60Hz monitor, this system will never drop below the refresh rate at any setting. For players with high-refresh-rate displays, the system offers the potential for 140+ FPS at 1440p and 200+ FPS at 1080p on Low settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of performance across all combinations of resolution and settings. At 1920x1080, the average frame rates are 203.2 FPS on Low, 180.5 FPS on Medium, 174.7 FPS on High, and 149.6 FPS on Ultra. The progression is linear, with each step up in quality costing roughly 10-30 FPS. At 2560x1440, the averages are 187.9 FPS on Low, 144.7 FPS on Medium, 133.2 FPS on High, and 112.6 FPS on Ultra. The drop from Low to Medium is more pronounced at this resolution, a 43.2 FPS decrease, suggesting a shift toward more GPU-bound rendering.

At 3840x2160, the averages are 140.5 FPS on Low, 102.2 FPS on Medium, 86.4 FPS on High, and 79.5 FPS on Ultra. The scaling is steeper here; the difference between Low and Ultra is 61 FPS. The data shows that the gap between Medium and High (15.8 FPS) is smaller than the gap between Low and Medium (38.3 FPS), indicating that the jump from Low to Medium introduces significant graphical effects that stress the GPU more heavily. No minimum or maximum FPS values were recorded, so the analysis relies solely on average frame rates.

Best Settings per Resolution

For each resolution, the most demanding preset that maintains an average of at least 60 FPS is the best setting. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset is the best, with an average of 149.6 FPS. This is 89.6 FPS above the playable threshold, leaving considerable margin. At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset again is the best, achieving an average of 112.6 FPS. This is 52.6 FPS above the threshold. At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset is also the best, with an average of 79.5 FPS, which is 19.5 FPS above the threshold.

The consistency across resolutions is notable. Since all presets at all resolutions clear the 60 FPS threshold, the “best” setting is always the highest quality option. There is no scenario where a player must compromise on visual quality to achieve playable frame rates. The data indicates that this combination is so powerful that the game’s maximum settings are the recommended settings, regardless of the display resolution.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals a clear division of labor between the CPU and GPU as resolution changes. At 1920x1080, the average FPS varies from 203.2 on Low to 149.6 on Ultra. The large spread (53.6 FPS) suggests that the GPU is not fully saturated at lower settings, and the CPU’s performance becomes a limiting factor. The Ryzen 5 5500’s single-thread benchmark score of 836 in 3dmark and 2319 in Cinebench R23 indicate a capable but not top-tier processor. At 1080p, the CPU is likely the bottleneck, preventing the system from reaching even higher frame rates.

As resolution increases to 2560x1440, the average FPS drops to 187.9 on Low and 112.6 on Ultra. The spread narrows to 75.3 FPS, but the overall performance is still high. The shift to 3840x2160 shows a further reduction, with averages of 140.5 on Low and 79.5 on Ultra. The spread here is 61 FPS, but the absolute numbers are lower. This pattern indicates that the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck at 4K, as the increased pixel count demands more from the graphics card. The RTX 4090, with its 82.58 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 16384 shading units, is clearly the dominant component at higher resolutions.

The scaling between presets also highlights the GPU’s role. At 4K, moving from Low to Ultra results in a 43.4% reduction in FPS, while at 1080p, the same preset change results in a 26.4% reduction. This shows that the GPU’s workload scales more steeply with quality settings at higher resolutions. The CPU’s role is more pronounced at 1080p, where the frame rate ceiling appears to be around 203 FPS, regardless of the GPU’s capability. For players seeking maximum frame rates at 1080p, a stronger CPU would be beneficial, but for 1440p and 4K gaming, the RTX 4090 is the definitive factor in determining performance.