Control

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 5 7600 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 570 ranks 3549 out of 3720 tested combinations for Control. That places this pairing in the bottom 5% of all recorded configurations, a result driven almost entirely by the graphics card rather than the processor. The recorded data shows a combination that struggles to reach playable frame rates in this title, with no resolution or preset combination clearing the 60 FPS threshold defined in the database.

The CPU itself sits in the 78th percentile among all processors tested, with an average benchmark score of 26324. The GPU, by contrast, lands in the 74th percentile among all graphics cards, with an average score of 28766. Those percentile values might suggest a balanced pairing, but the measured Control results tell a different story. The game's demands, particularly at higher resolutions, expose the RX 570's age. The Ryzen 5 7600 has ample headroom; the RX 570 does not.

CPU and GPU Roles

For Control, the GPU is the dominant bottleneck at every resolution and preset tested. The evidence is straightforward: moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 at Low settings drops the average from 57 FPS to 43 FPS, a 25% reduction. Moving from 2560x1440 to 3840x2160 at Low drops the average further to 29 FPS, another 33% reduction. These scaling patterns are consistent with a GPU-bound scenario, where doubling the pixel count roughly halves the frame rate.

The CPU's role becomes more visible at lower resolutions and settings, where the GPU has less work to do. At 1920x1080 Low, the combination reaches 57 FPS on average, approaching the 60 FPS playable threshold. The Ryzen 5 7600, with 6 cores and 12 threads, delivers single-thread performance that ranks near the top of its class. Its 3dmark single-thread score of 999 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1852 indicate strong per-core capability. Yet even with this CPU headroom, the RX 570 cannot push past the 60 FPS mark at any resolution in this game.

Preset scaling reinforces the GPU bottleneck. At 1920x1080, moving from Low to Medium reduces the average from 57 to 40 FPS, a 30% penalty. Moving from Medium to High reduces it further to 36 FPS, and from High to Ultra down to 31 FPS. The GPU's 4 GB of GDDR5 memory and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth become limiting factors as texture quality and effects increase. The 2048 shading units and 128 texture mapping units, while respectable for 2017, simply cannot sustain higher workloads in a 2019 title like Control.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the results are uniformly poor. Low settings produce an average of 29 FPS. Medium settings drop to 21 FPS on average, with the recorded minimum at 17 FPS and maximum at 24 FPS. High settings manage only 18 FPS on average. Ultra settings fall to 16 FPS on average. None of these figures approach playable territory; even the best case at Low settings sits 31 FPS below the 60 FPS threshold.

At 2560x1440, the situation improves but remains far from playable. Low settings deliver an average of 43 FPS. Medium settings average 30 FPS, with a minimum of 26 FPS and maximum of 35 FPS. High settings average 27 FPS. Ultra settings average 24 FPS. The gap to 60 FPS ranges from 17 FPS at Low to 36 FPS at Ultra. No setting at this resolution clears the playable threshold.

At 1920x1080, the closest approach to playability appears. Low settings average 57 FPS, just 3 FPS short of the 60 FPS mark. Medium settings average 40 FPS, with a minimum of 34 FPS and maximum of 46 FPS. High settings average 36 FPS. Ultra settings average 31 FPS. The frame time consistency at Medium settings, with a spread of 12 FPS between minimum and maximum, suggests noticeable stutter during intense scenes. The Low preset's 57 FPS average lacks recorded minimum or maximum values, but the average itself remains below the playable threshold.

The Verdict

This computer cannot run Control at a playable level, defined as 60 FPS or above, at any resolution or preset combination recorded in the database. The verdict for 3840x2160 lists no playable settings, with no best setting identified. The same applies to 2560x1440: no playable settings exist. At 1920x1080, the verdict again lists no playable settings.

The closest result is 1920x1080 Low, which reaches 57 FPS on average. That 3 FPS shortfall represents the entire gap between this hardware and a playable experience. At Medium settings, the average drops to 40 FPS, and at High it falls to 36 FPS. The pattern is clear: even at the lowest settings and lowest resolution, the RX 570 lacks the raw throughput to sustain 60 FPS in Control.

The CPU is not the limiting factor. The Ryzen 5 7600's benchmark scores, including a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12735 and a PassMark multi-thread score of 27058, place it well above what Control requires. The data indicates that replacing the GPU while keeping the CPU would yield significant improvements, whereas replacing the CPU while keeping the GPU would not change the outcome.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The Ryzen 5 7600's nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, which scores 26274 on average, a 0.2% difference. The AMD Ryzen 7 7435HS scores 26402, a 0.3% difference. The Intel Core i9-11900KF scores 26212, a 0.4% difference. The AMD Ryzen 5 8540U scores 26187, a 0.5% difference. Any of these processors would behave nearly identically to the Ryzen 5 7600 in Control, given the same GPU. The performance delta between them is negligible, all within half a percentage point.

The Radeon RX 570's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 6800M, which scores 28874 on average, a 0.4% difference. The AMD Radeon R9 M295X scores 28580, a 0.7% difference. The AMD Radeon RX 470 scores 28996, a 0.8% difference. The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 scores 28421, a 1.2% difference. A system using any of these GPUs with the Ryzen 5 7600 would produce Control frame rates within a few FPS of the RX 570 results. The RX 470, being the closest architectural sibling, would deliver nearly identical performance. The R9 M295X, despite being older, also falls within the same performance band.

These rival comparisons matter for system builders. If the goal is to run Control at 60 FPS, swapping to a nearby GPU from the database would not solve the problem. The entire cluster of similar-performance graphics cards sits below the required threshold. A meaningful upgrade would require moving to a substantially faster GPU, well outside the nearest rival range.

Best Settings per Resolution

The database records no playable settings at any resolution. For 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS does not exist. The same applies to 2560x1440 and 1920x1080. The verdictByResolution data shows empty playable settings lists and null best settings for all three resolutions.

Given the measured averages, the closest approximation to a recommendation would be 1920x1080 Low, which produces 57 FPS on average. That setting does not meet the 60 FPS playable threshold, but it represents the highest average frame rate achievable with this hardware. At Medium settings, the average drops to 40 FPS, a 30% reduction for a modest visual improvement. At 2560x1440 Low, the average falls to 43 FPS, and at 3840x2160 Low, it drops to 29 FPS.

The practical conclusion is that this combination requires a graphics card upgrade to reach playable performance in Control. The Ryzen 5 7600 provides a solid foundation, but the Radeon RX 570, with its 4 GB memory capacity and GCN 4.0 architecture, cannot deliver the sustained frame rates this game demands. Users seeking 60 FPS should look beyond this pairing, as the recorded data shows no path to playability through settings adjustments alone.