Control

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 ranks 1595th out of 1636 tested combos in Control, placing it in the bottom 2.5% of all configurations. This is a decisive positioning: the combo sits far behind the pack, reflecting a hardware pairing that struggles to deliver playable frame rates even at moderate settings. The rank is not a judgment of any single component, but rather a measure of their combined throughput in a title that stresses both CPU and GPU heavily. For context, the CPU itself holds a 77th percentile ranking among all processors, while the GPU sits at a 43rd percentile among all graphics cards—yet their synergy in this specific game produces results well below what those individual percentiles might suggest.

How This Combo Ranks

The data is unambiguous: this configuration lands at rank 1595 out of 1636, which puts it in the lowest tier of tested systems for Control. To grasp the severity, consider that only 41 other combos perform worse, meaning this pairing is slower than roughly 97.5% of all tested hardware configurations. The measured FPS numbers reinforce this—at 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo averages 55.5 FPS, which is the only preset where it approaches smooth gameplay. At higher resolutions or quality presets, the frame rates collapse into the 20s and teens, confirming that the combo lacks the headroom required for this game’s demanding rendering pipeline. The ranking is consistent across the board: whether you look at 1080p, 1440p, or 4K, the system remains in the lower percentile of results, with no resolution or settings combination rescuing it from the bottom quartile.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 brings 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz. This is a Zen-based architecture on a 12 nm process, and its benchmark scores indicate a capable mid-range processor: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 11186 and a single-core score of 1579. In Control, the CPU’s role is to feed the GPU with geometry and physics data, and the data suggests that at lower resolutions, the processor is not the primary bottleneck—the 55.5 FPS at 1080p Low is the best result in the entire dataset. However, as resolution increases, the frame rate drops disproportionately, which implies that the GPU becomes the limiting factor rather than the CPU. The processor’s 16 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support at 46.9 GB/s are adequate for this game, but the 12 nm Zen architecture does not deliver the per-core performance needed to push higher frame rates when the GPU is not the constraint. Compared to its nearest rivals, the Ryzen 5 2600’s average benchmark score of 19616 is nearly identical to the Intel Core i5-1345U (19691, -0.4% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 5 7530U (19508, +0.6% delta), showing that it is not a weak CPU in isolation—but in Control, the combination’s overall rank suggests that the CPU’s strengths are not fully utilized at the settings where the GPU can keep up.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the clear performance limiter in this pairing. It features 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s, and operates at a base clock of 1485 MHz with a boost of 1665 MHz. The GPU’s 896 shading units and 32 ROPs deliver a pixel rate of 53.28 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 93.24 GTexel/s, but its FP32 performance of 2.984 TFLOPS is modest by modern standards. In Control, the GPU’s 4 GB VRAM is likely a critical constraint at higher resolutions and settings, as the game’s texture and effect workloads can exceed that capacity. The measured FPS data shows a steep cliff: at 1920x1080, dropping from Low (55.5 FPS) to High (33.7 FPS) costs 21.8 FPS, and moving to Ultra (29.6 FPS) further reduces it. At 2560x1440, the gap between Low (43.1 FPS) and Medium (27.9 FPS) is 15.2 FPS, indicating that the GPU cannot maintain playable rates once settings exceed Low. The GPU’s benchmark scores corroborate this: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 305 and a Passmark G3D score of 7880 place it just below the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile (8746, -0.4% delta) and slightly above the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 (8761, -0.5% delta). These are tightly clustered rivals, but the GTX 1650’s 43rd percentile ranking among all GPUs makes it clear that it is a entry-level part, and Control is a game that demands more than this GPU can deliver.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a detailed look at how this combo performs across resolutions and settings. At 3840x2160, the results are uniformly poor: Low settings yield an average of 31.6 FPS, Medium drops to 21.0 FPS, High falls to 16.5 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 18.1 FPS. None of these are playable for a smooth experience, and even the Low preset at 4K is below the 30 FPS threshold that many consider the minimum for action games. Moving to 2560x1440, the situation improves but remains difficult: Low settings average 43.1 FPS, which is the only 1440p preset above 40 FPS; Medium (27.9 FPS) and High (26.8 FPS) are nearly identical, while Ultra (22.5 FPS) is the worst. The data shows that at 1440p, the GPU’s VRAM and bandwidth limitations become apparent—there is no meaningful scaling from Medium to High, suggesting a memory bottleneck. At 1920x1080, the results are more varied: Low settings reach 55.5 FPS, which is the best result in the entire dataset and approaches playable territory; Medium (38.9 FPS) and High (33.7 FPS) offer moderate performance, while Ultra (29.6 FPS) falls below 30 FPS. The pattern across all resolutions is clear: the combo only approaches acceptable frame rates at 1080p Low, and every other configuration compromises either visual quality or smoothness. The lack of min/max FPS data means we cannot assess frame time consistency, but the average FPS values alone indicate that this system is not suited for Control at anything above the lowest settings.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for this combo in Control?*

A: The best measured result is 55.5 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only preset that exceeds 50 FPS; all other configurations fall below 44 FPS, with most in the 20s and 30s.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested systems?

A: It ranks 1595th out of 1636 tested combos, placing it in the bottom 2.5% of all configurations tested for Control.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor?

A: The GPU is the primary bottleneck. The CPU’s benchmark scores (e.g., Cinebench R23 multi-core 11186) are respectable, but the GPU’s 4 GB VRAM and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth cause severe frame rate drops at higher resolutions and settings, as seen in the 2560x1440 Medium to High gap.

*Q: Can this combo handle 4K gaming in Control?*

A: No. At 3840x2160, even Low settings only achieve 31.6 FPS, and High/Ultra drop to 16.5 and 18.1 FPS respectively. These are not playable frame rates.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GTX 1650’s average benchmark score is 8713, which is within 0.5% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile (8746), AMD Radeon 550X (8749), and AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 (8761). This shows it is competitive with these parts, but none of them are high-end.

*Q: Is this combo suitable for 1080p gaming in Control?*

A: Only at Low settings, where it achieves 55.5 FPS. Medium (38.9 FPS) and High (33.7 FPS) are below the 60 FPS target, and Ultra (29.6 FPS) is not smooth. The data suggests it is playable but not optimal for 1080p.