Control

The AMD Ryzen 5 7500F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 570 is a combination that the database places at rank 3543 out of 3720 tested combos for Control. That is a low position, suggesting this pairing struggles significantly with this specific title. The recorded data shows no resolution or preset combination reaching the 60 FPS playable threshold, which defines the overall verdict. The CPU is a modern 6-core, 12-thread Zen 4 part with a 5.00 GHz boost clock, while the GPU is an older Polaris 20 chip with 4 GB of GDDR5 memory and a 256-bit memory bus. The mismatch between the relatively strong processor and the dated graphics card is the central theme of the measured results.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the CPU benchmarks, the Ryzen 5 7500F sits at the 77th percentile among all tested processors. Its nearest rivals in the database are the Intel Core i7-11850H, which scores 24935 on average, a 0.1% delta from the Ryzen's 24964 average. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F is essentially tied, with an average score of 25005 and a delta of -0.2%. The Intel Core i7-13620H trails by 0.2% with a score of 24911, and the Intel Core 5 210H is 0.4% behind at 24872. For this game, any of these CPUs would deliver nearly identical frame pacing, as the processor is not the limiting factor in most scenarios. The differences between these parts are within a fraction of a percent, so swapping between them would not change the playability outcome.

On the GPU side, the Radeon RX 570 sits at the 74th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 28766. Its closest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 6800M, which scores 28874, a -0.4% delta. The AMD Radeon R9 M295X is 0.7% behind with a score of 28580. The AMD Radeon RX 470 is nearly identical, scoring 28996 with a -0.8% delta, and the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 is 1.2% ahead at 28421. For Control, any of these GPUs would produce very similar frame rates at the same settings, given the sub-1% performance differences. The RX 570's 4 GB VRAM and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth are the characteristics that define its behavior in this game, and its rivals share this general performance class.

CPU and GPU Roles

The measured data for this combination reveals a clear pattern: the GPU is the dominant constraint at every resolution. At 3840x2160 with Low settings, the average FPS is 28.8. Dropping to Medium reduces that to 21.4, and High yields 17.8. Ultra is barely playable in a technical sense at 16.8 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 4K shows a 41.7% performance drop, which is a classic sign of a GPU-bound scenario where the graphics hardware is overwhelmed by pixel count and shading complexity.

At 2560x1440, the same trend holds. Low settings average 43 FPS, Medium drops to 34, High falls to 27.2, and Ultra reaches only 21.3. The delta between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 50.5%, again indicating that the RX 570's compute resources are the bottleneck. The Ryzen 5 7500F, with its strong Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 22799 and single-core score of 3218, has ample headroom for this game's physics and logic, but the GPU cannot translate that CPU capability into higher frame rates.

At 1920x1080, the pattern continues but with slightly higher absolute numbers. Low settings average 54.5 FPS, which is the closest this combo comes to the 60 FPS threshold. Medium drops to 38.3, High to 37, and Ultra to 33.7. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 1080p is 38.2%, smaller than at higher resolutions but still substantial. This suggests that even at 1080p, the RX 570 is the limiting factor. If the CPU were the constraint, we would expect to see smaller performance gaps between settings, as the processor would struggle to feed the GPU at all quality levels. Instead, the data shows that every increase in graphical load proportionally reduces FPS, confirming the GPU's dominant role.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Control at 1920x1080 with any settings?

A: The database records no playable settings at 1920x1080. The highest average FPS recorded is 54.5 at Low settings, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall further behind at 38.3, 37, and 33.7 FPS respectively.

Q: How does the Ryzen 5 7500F compare to its nearest CPU rival in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Ryzen 5 7500F scores 24964 on average in the database. Its closest rival, the Intel Core i7-11850H, scores 24935, which is a delta of 0.1%. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F is 0.2% faster with a score of 25005. These differences are within measurement noise for gaming purposes.

Q: What is the best FPS this combination achieves in Control?

A: The highest average FPS recorded across all resolutions and settings is 54.5, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. No other configuration reaches above 43 FPS, which occurs at 2560x1440 with Low settings.

Q: Is the GPU or the CPU more responsible for the low frame rates?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the primary bottleneck. At every resolution, lowering graphical settings from Ultra to Low produces a substantial FPS increase (for example, from 16.8 to 28.8 at 4K). This scaling behavior is characteristic of a GPU-limited system, as the CPU has sufficient single-thread and multi-thread performance to handle the game's logic.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested combinations for Control?

A: This pairing is ranked 3543 out of 3720 tested combos for Control. That places it in the bottom 5% of all configurations in the database, which is consistent with the fact that no resolution reaches the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for the RX 570, and how does it relate to its rivals?

A: The RX 570 has an average benchmark score of 28766. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6800M, scores 28874, which is 0.4% higher. The AMD Radeon RX 470 is 0.8% lower at 28996, and the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 is 1.2% higher at 28421. These close scores mean the RX 570's gaming performance should be similar to these parts.

The Verdict

The verdict is unambiguous: this PC cannot run Control at a playable frame rate. The database's playableThresholdFps is 60, and every measured configuration falls below that mark. At 3840x2160, no settings are playable, with the best case being Low at 28.8 FPS. At 2560x1440, the situation is identical, with Low settings reaching only 43 FPS. Even at 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the best average is 54.5 FPS at Low settings, which still misses the 60 FPS target. The verdictByResolution field confirms this: all three resolutions have empty playableSettings lists and no best settings. This is a clear case where the GPU's age and limited memory bandwidth prevent the system from achieving smooth gameplay, regardless of the CPU's modern capabilities.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the recorded average FPS values are as follows: Low settings average 28.8 FPS, Medium averages 21.4, High averages 17.8, and Ultra averages 16.8. The spread between Low and Ultra is 12 FPS, which is a 41.7% reduction. No minimum or maximum FPS values are recorded for any 4K configuration.

At 2560x1440, Low settings average 43 FPS, Medium averages 34, High averages 27.2, and Ultra averages 21.3. The difference between Low and Ultra is 21.7 FPS, a 50.5% drop. Again, min and max FPS are not available in the data.

At 1920x1080, Low settings average 54.5 FPS, Medium averages 38.3, High averages 37, and Ultra averages 33.7. The gap between Low and Ultra is 20.8 FPS, representing a 38.2% reduction. Across all resolutions, the pattern is consistent: higher settings and resolutions yield progressively lower average FPS, with no configuration reaching the 60 FPS threshold.

Best Settings per Resolution

For 3840x2160, there are no settings that achieve or exceed 60 FPS. The best recorded performance is at Low settings with an average of 28.8 FPS, but this is far below the playable threshold. No best settings are identified in the database for this resolution.

For 2560x1440, the result is the same. No settings reach 60 FPS. The highest average is 43 FPS at Low settings, which is insufficient. The database lists no playable settings and no best settings for this resolution.

For 1920x1080, the situation is slightly better but still not playable. Low settings produce an average of 54.5 FPS, which is the closest this combo comes to the 60 FPS target. However, since 54.5 is below the threshold, the database records no playable settings and no best settings for this resolution either. The most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS does not exist for any resolution.

How This Combo Ranks

In the context of all tested combinations for Control, this pairing ranks 3543 out of 3720. That places it in the lowest percentile of configurations, specifically below 95% of all tested combos. The rank reflects the measured reality: the system cannot achieve playable frame rates at any resolution or preset. The CPU, despite being a strong modern part with a 77th percentile ranking among all CPUs, cannot compensate for the GPU's limitations. The GPU, while at the 74th percentile among all GPUs, is clearly not suited for this game's demands at the tested settings. The combination of a high-performing CPU and a mid-range older GPU results in a system that is fundamentally GPU-bound in Control, and the data shows that this binding prevents any playable outcome. The rank of 3543 is consistent with the verdict: this is a bottom-tier configuration for this specific game, and users seeking playable performance would need to consider a different GPU or significantly lower resolution and settings than those recorded.