Control

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 5 7500F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER lands at rank 2261 out of 3720 tested combinations in Control. That places this system in the 39th percentile of all recorded combos, meaning roughly 6 out of 10 tested configurations deliver higher frame rates in this title. The ranking reflects a mid-tier pairing: the CPU sits at the 77th percentile against all processors, while the GPU reaches only the 65th percentile against all graphics cards. The GPU is the limiting factor, and the data supports that conclusion throughout the resolution scaling.

The CPU itself posts an average benchmark score of 24964, with nearest rivals being the Intel Core i7-11850H at 24935 (0.1% slower), the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F at 25005 (0.2% faster), the Intel Core i7-13620H at 24911 (0.2% slower), and the Intel Core 5 210H at 24872 (0.4% slower). These are effectively identical scores, so the processor is not what separates this combo from the pack. The GPU's average benchmark score of 20282 puts it in the same neighborhood as the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M at 20480 (1% faster), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile at 20534 (1.2% faster), the Intel Arc B570 at 20556 (1.3% faster), and the Intel Arc A750 at 20582 (1.5% faster). The spread between these cards is small, within 1.5%, so swapping among them would produce nearly indistinguishable results in this game.

The ranking context matters because Control is demanding at higher presets. The combo's position at 2261 of 3720 suggests it can handle the game at moderate settings, but it will not dominate at maximum quality. The measured frame rates confirm this: the system clears 60 FPS at 1080p on every preset, but at 4K only the Low preset stays above the threshold. The data shows a system that is well-balanced for 1080p and 1440p gaming, with 4K reserved for lighter settings.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that maintains at least 60 FPS is Ultra, which averages 73.8 FPS. The full 1080p stack clears the threshold: Low averages 132.8 FPS, Medium averages 93.7 FPS, and High averages 83.4 FPS. Users with a 1080p display can run the game at maximum settings without concern.

At 2560x1440, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Medium, averaging 67.8 FPS. High drops to 59.5 FPS, just below the playable threshold, while Ultra falls further to 53 FPS. Low remains well above at 95.7 FPS. The 1440p experience is best at Medium, where the frame rate holds comfortably above 60 while visual quality remains reasonable.

At 3840x2160, the only preset that clears 60 FPS is Low, averaging 66.8 FPS. Medium averages 46.6 FPS, High averages 42.4 FPS, and Ultra averages 33.5 FPS. The 4K data indicates that this combo is not suited for high-quality 4K play in Control; users must drop to Low to maintain smooth motion.

The pattern is clear: each resolution step down allows roughly one additional preset tier to become playable. At 1080p, all tiers work. At 1440p, the top two tiers fall short. At 4K, only the bottom tier works.

CPU and GPU Roles

The recorded data shows a system that becomes increasingly GPU-bound as resolution rises. At 1080p, the differences between presets are large: Low delivers 132.8 FPS, while Ultra delivers 73.8 FPS, a gap of 59 FPS. This wide spread indicates the GPU has headroom at lower settings and the CPU can feed it adequately. The CPU's strong multi-threaded score of 22799 in Cinebench R23 and 26825 in PassMark multithread suggests it is not a bottleneck at this resolution.

Moving to 1440p, the preset spread narrows. Low averages 95.7 FPS, Medium 67.8 FPS, High 59.5 FPS, and Ultra 53 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 42.7 FPS, smaller than at 1080p. This compression indicates the GPU is starting to limit performance, as raising settings increases pixel workload and the frame rate responds less to CPU capability.

At 4K, the preset spread narrows further. Low averages 66.8 FPS, Medium 46.6 FPS, High 42.4 FPS, and Ultra 33.5 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 33.3 FPS, the smallest of all resolutions. At this point, the GPU is the dominant constraint. The RTX 2070 SUPER's 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth are fixed resources, and 4K resolution taxes them heavily regardless of settings.

The scaling between resolutions at the same preset reinforces the GPU-bound conclusion. At Low settings, frame rates drop from 132.8 FPS at 1080p to 95.7 FPS at 1440p to 66.8 FPS at 4K. That is a steady decline but not a collapse, suggesting the CPU still contributes at low settings. At Ultra settings, the drop goes from 73.8 FPS at 1080p to 53 FPS at 1440p to 33.5 FPS at 4K, a much steeper decline. Higher settings magnify the GPU's workload, and the 2070 SUPER simply cannot sustain high frame rates at 4K with maximum quality.

The CPU's role is most visible at 1080p Low, where the system reaches 132.8 FPS. That figure approaches the practical ceiling for many games and indicates the Ryzen 5 7500F, with its 5.00 GHz boost clock and Zen 4 architecture, can drive the GPU to high output. At 4K, the same CPU could be paired with a stronger GPU and likely yield far higher frame rates, but with the 2070 SUPER the results are capped by the graphics card.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the nearest rivals in average benchmark score are all within 0.4% of the Ryzen 5 7500F. The Intel Core i7-11850H, AMD Ryzen 5 8400F, Intel Core i7-13620H, and Intel Core 5 210H would all produce nearly identical frame rates in Control. The 8400F is marginally faster at 25005 versus 24964, while the Core i7-13620H is marginally slower at 24911. None of these differences would be perceptible in gameplay. Users with any of these processors should expect the same performance profile as the 7500F in this title.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals are the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile, Intel Arc B570, and Intel Arc A750. The Quadro M4000M scores 20480, which is 1% above the 2070 SUPER's 20282. The RTX 3070 Mobile scores 20534, 1.2% above. The Arc B570 scores 20556, 1.3% above, and the Arc A750 scores 20582, 1.5% above. The performance deltas are small enough that all four cards would deliver essentially the same frame rates in Control at all tested resolutions and settings.

It is importantly the RTX 2070 SUPER sits at the lower end of this group. Users upgrading from the 2070 SUPER to any of these alternatives would see less than a 2% change in average benchmark score, which translates to roughly 1 FPS in the measured Control results. For example, at 1080p Ultra where the 2070 SUPER averages 73.8 FPS, the fastest rival (Arc A750 at 1.5% higher score) would average approximately 74.9 FPS. That difference is within normal run-to-run variance.

The practical takeaway is that this combo's performance class is well-defined. The CPU has multiple interchangeable alternatives, and the GPU has several near-identical options. The system's ranking in Control is therefore representative of a broad family of hardware, not a unique configuration.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Control at 60 FPS on a 1080p monitor?

A: Yes. All four presets at 1920x1080 exceed 60 FPS. Low averages 132.8 FPS, Medium 93.7 FPS, High 83.4 FPS, and Ultra 73.8 FPS. The most demanding preset, Ultra, stays 13.8 FPS above the playable threshold.

Q: What is the best preset for 1440p gaming?

A: Medium is the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS, averaging 67.8 FPS. High falls to 59.5 FPS, just below the threshold, and Ultra drops to 53 FPS.

Q: Is 4K playable with this hardware?

A: Only at Low settings, which average 66.8 FPS. Medium averages 46.6 FPS, High 42.4 FPS, and Ultra 33.5 FPS, all below the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: Which component limits performance in Control?

A: The GPU is the primary limiter, especially at higher resolutions and settings. At 4K, the preset spread narrows to 33.3 FPS between Low and Ultra, indicating the RTX 2070 SUPER cannot keep up with increasing pixel loads. The CPU has ample headroom, as shown by its 77th percentile ranking against all processors.

Q: How does the RTX 2070 SUPER compare to its nearest rivals in this game?

A: The closest competitors are the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M (1% faster), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile (1.2% faster), Intel Arc B570 (1.3% faster), and Intel Arc A750 (1.5% faster). These differences are negligible in actual gameplay, producing less than 2 FPS of variation at any tested setting.

Q: Does the Ryzen 5 7500F bottleneck the RTX 2070 SUPER?

A: No. The data shows no meaningful CPU bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 132.8 FPS, which demonstrates the CPU can feed the GPU effectively. The CPU's nearest rivals are within 0.4% in benchmark score, and the performance ceiling at higher resolutions is set by the GPU, not the processor.

The Verdict

This system can run Control, but the quality ceiling depends heavily on the display resolution. At 1920x1080, the verdict is unambiguous: the combo clears 60 FPS on every preset, including Ultra at 73.8 FPS. Users with 1080p monitors can enable maximum settings and enjoy smooth gameplay without compromise.

At 2560x1440, the system remains playable but requires setting expectations. Medium is the best preset, averaging 67.8 FPS. High falls just short at 59.5 FPS, and Ultra at 53 FPS is not recommended for a 60 FPS target. The 1440p experience is good, but users must accept Medium as the ceiling.

At 3840x2160, the verdict is cautionary. Only Low clears the 60 FPS threshold, averaging 66.8 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall well below playable frame rates. This is not a 4K gaming system for Control unless the user is willing to run at reduced visual quality.

The overall assessment: a capable 1080p machine, a solid 1440p machine at Medium settings, and a marginal 4K machine at Low settings. The system's rank of 2261 out of 3720 combos reflects this mixed profile, positioning it as a mid-tier option that excels at lower resolutions but struggles at the highest demands.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full preset ladder was recorded. Low produced the highest average at 132.8 FPS. Medium followed at 93.7 FPS, High at 83.4 FPS, and Ultra at 73.8 FPS. Every preset remained above the 60 FPS playable threshold, with Ultra retaining a 13.8 FPS margin.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates stepped down. Low averaged 95.7 FPS, Medium 67.8 FPS, High 59.5 FPS, and Ultra 53 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 27.9 FPS, a significant step, while the drop from High to Ultra is only 6.5 FPS. The transition between Medium and High is the critical boundary, crossing the 60 FPS line.

At 3840x2160, the results were more constrained. Low averaged 66.8 FPS, the only preset above the threshold. Medium averaged 46.6 FPS, High 42.4 FPS, and Ultra 33.5 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 20.2 FPS, the largest single-step drop in the 4K data, indicating that even a modest increase in settings at this resolution heavily impacts performance.

The recorded data includes only average frame rates; minimum and maximum values were not captured for any resolution or preset. The average figures, however, provide a clear picture of the system's capabilities. The 1080p results show ample headroom, the 1440p results show a playable mid-range, and the 4K results show a system operating at the edge of its capabilities.