Control

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured frame rates across resolutions reveal a classic GPU-bound scaling pattern for this pairing of AMD Ryzen 5 2600 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti in Control. At 1080p High settings, the combo produces 74.1 FPS. Moving to 1440p High drops performance to 53.8 FPS, a reduction of about 27%. Pushing further to 2160p High yields 39.2 FPS, which is another 27% decline from 1440p. The consistent proportional drops suggest the rendering workload scales predictably with pixel count, a hallmark of a system where the graphics card is the primary constraint.

However, the picture changes when examining Low settings. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 115.3 FPS. At 1440p Low, it reaches 91.4 FPS, and at 2160p Low, it still manages 60.8 FPS. The percentage drops here are smaller between 1080p and 1440p (about 21%), but the 1440p to 2160p transition (a 33% drop) is steeper. This nonlinear behavior hints that even at Low settings, the GPU begins to hit memory bandwidth or fill-rate walls at 4K, rather than purely computational limits.

The Ultra preset tells a similar story with lower absolute numbers: 63.8 FPS at 1080p, 50.7 FPS at 1440p, and 32.3 FPS at 2160p. The 1080p-to-1440p drop is 21%, but the 1440p-to-2160p drop is 36%. This pattern — where the gap widens at higher resolutions — strongly indicates that the RTX 3060 Ti's 8 GB GDDR6 memory and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth become the limiting factor as pixel count grows, especially with the demanding Ultra preset.

The data also shows that the CPU is not the bottleneck at any resolution. The Ryzen 5 2600's six cores and twelve threads, running at a base clock of 3.40 GHz and boost of 3.90 GHz, are sufficient to feed the GPU even at 1080p Low where frame rates exceed 115 FPS. If the CPU were the constraint, we would expect the 1080p and 1440p results to be much closer together, since the CPU workload per frame does not scale with resolution. Instead, every resolution step produces a measurable FPS decline, confirming the GPU as the limiting component across all settings tested.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 is a six-core, twelve-thread processor built on the Zen architecture, specifically the Zen+ (Pinnacle Ridge) generation. It operates at a 65 W TDP with a 12 nm process node from GlobalFoundries. Its cache hierarchy includes 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3, which is ample for feeding a modern GPU in an action-adventure title like Control.

In synthetic benchmarks, this CPU scores 11186 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 1579 in single-core, placing it in the 77th percentile among all CPUs. Its average benchmark score of 19616 sits between the Intel Core i5-1345U (19691, -0.4% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 5 7530U (19508, +0.6% delta), with the Intel Core i7-10700F at 19485 (+0.7% delta) and Intel Core i5-11600KF at 19740 (-0.6% delta) as nearest rivals. These delta values are all within 1% of each other, meaning the 2600's compute performance is competitive with those chips despite being from an older generation.

For Control specifically, the measured FPS data shows that the CPU's capabilities are more than adequate. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 115.3 FPS, which is a frame rate that would expose CPU limitations in many titles. The fact that the GPU still scales down as resolution increases — from 115.3 FPS at 1080p to 91.4 FPS at 1440p to 60.8 FPS at 2160p — demonstrates that the Ryzen 5 2600 is not holding back performance. The 2000 series processor's single-thread performance, while not class-leading, is sufficient to keep pace with the RTX 3060 Ti's output in this game.

The CPU's memory support for DDR4 in dual-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s, does not appear to create a bottleneck either. The game's physics and AI systems, which often rely on CPU throughput, run smoothly enough that the GPU remains the limiting factor at every resolution and settings combination measured.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti is built on the Ampere architecture with the GA104 chip, fabricated on Samsung's 8 nm process with 17,400 million transistors on a 392 mm² die. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1410 MHz and boosts to 1665 MHz, with memory running at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective).

Its compute capabilities are substantial: 4864 shading units, 152 texture mapping units, and 80 raster operations pipelines. The card also includes 38 ray tracing cores and 152 tensor cores, which are relevant for Control's use of ray-traced reflections and DLSS features, though the measured FPS data does not specify whether those features were enabled. The GPU's pixel rate is 133.2 GPixel/s and texture rate is 253.1 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance rated at 16.20 TFLOPS.

In the benchmark database, the RTX 3060 Ti scores 20349 in Passmark G3D and 10006 in GPU Compute, placing it in the 69th percentile among all GPUs. Its average benchmark score of 25120 is nearly identical to the AMD Radeon RX 6700M (25180, -0.2% delta), AMD Radeon RX 6600 (25235, -0.5% delta), AMD Radeon 890M (25246, -0.5% delta), and AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP (25287, -0.7% delta). The extremely tight delta values (all within 0.7%) indicate that the 3060 Ti's raw compute performance is essentially equivalent to those rivals in synthetic tests.

The measured FPS in Control shows the GPU's behavior under load. At 2160p Ultra, the system delivers just 32.3 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold many players target. This suggests that the 8 GB VRAM capacity and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for Ultra settings at 4K in this game, where high-resolution textures and effects overwhelm the memory subsystem. At 1080p Ultra, the same settings yield 63.8 FPS, indicating the GPU has enough headroom at lower pixel counts.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The measured FPS data provides a complete matrix of performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the system produces 115.3 FPS on Low, 82.7 FPS on Medium, 74.1 FPS on High, and 63.8 FPS on Ultra. The spread from Low to Ultra is 51.5 FPS, showing that settings have a significant impact at 1080p.

Moving to 2560x1440, the numbers are 91.4 FPS on Low, 64.9 FPS on Medium, 53.8 FPS on High, and 50.7 FPS on Ultra. The Low-to-Ultra spread narrows to 40.7 FPS, indicating that resolution pressure begins to compress the differences between settings presets. The Medium-to-High gap is 11.1 FPS, while the High-to-Ultra gap is just 3.1 FPS, suggesting diminishing returns from High to Ultra at 1440p.

At 3840x2160, the performance drops to 60.8 FPS on Low, 42.8 FPS on Medium, 39.2 FPS on High, and 32.3 FPS on Ultra. The Low-to-Ultra spread is 28.5 FPS, the smallest of any resolution. Notably, the Medium-to-High gap at 4K is only 3.6 FPS, and the High-to-Ultra gap is 6.9 FPS. This compression indicates that at 4K, the GPU is so heavily taxed that even reducing settings from High to Medium provides minimal benefit, while the jump from High to Ultra is relatively larger in percentage terms.

Across all resolutions, the Low preset consistently delivers the highest frame rates, with 1080p Low achieving over 115 FPS. The Ultra preset at 2160p is the only configuration that falls below 35 FPS, making it the most demanding combination tested. The Medium preset offers a balanced middle ground, with 82.7 FPS at 1080p, 64.9 FPS at 1440p, and 42.8 FPS at 4K.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific combination of AMD Ryzen 5 2600 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti ranks 1212 out of 1636 tested combos in Control. This places it in the 74th percentile of all combinations tested, meaning roughly a quarter of the tested systems perform worse, while about 74% perform better. For a pairing that includes a 2018-era mid-range CPU and a 2020-era upper-mid-range GPU, this ranking reflects the age of the processor relative to more modern combinations.

The ranking suggests that while the RTX 3060 Ti is capable, the Ryzen 5 2600's older Zen+ architecture may be limiting the combo's overall standing in the database. The CPU's single-thread performance, evidenced by its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1579, is below what newer processors achieve, which could impact frame pacing in a game like Control that has demanding physics and AI systems. However, the measured FPS data shows the GPU is the primary bottleneck, so the rank may be more indicative of how other combos with newer CPUs and similar GPUs perform rather than a fundamental flaw in this pairing.

The combo's rank of 1212 out of 1636 is notable because the GPU alone sits in the 69th percentile of all GPUs, while the CPU sits in the 77th percentile of all CPUs. If both components performed at their individual percentile levels, one might expect the combo to rank higher. The discrepancy suggests that the interaction between this specific CPU and GPU in Control produces results that are slightly worse than the sum of their parts, possibly due to driver overhead or the game's specific engine characteristics.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to maintain 60+ FPS?

A: At 1080p, all settings presets deliver above 60 FPS, with Low at 115.3 FPS, Medium at 82.7 FPS, High at 74.1 FPS, and Ultra at 63.8 FPS. At 1440p, only Low (91.4 FPS) exceeds 60 FPS, while Medium (64.9 FPS) is close but above the threshold. At 2160p, only Low (60.8 FPS) barely crosses 60 FPS.

Q: How much performance is lost when going from 1080p High to 1440p High?

A: The system drops from 74.1 FPS at 1920x1080 High to 53.8 FPS at 2560x1440 High, a reduction of 20.3 FPS, which is approximately a 27% decrease.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the limiting component. Frame rates scale consistently with resolution at every settings preset, and the CPU's six cores and twelve threads are sufficient to maintain over 115 FPS at 1080p Low, which would expose CPU bottlenecks if they existed.

Q: What is the difference between Medium and High settings at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, Medium produces 42.8 FPS while High produces 39.2 FPS, a difference of 3.6 FPS. This small gap suggests that the visual improvements from Medium to High come at a relatively minor performance cost at 4K.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to other tested systems?

A: The combination ranks 1212 out of 1636 total tested combos in Control, placing it in the lower-mid range of all systems tested. This ranking is despite the GPU being in the 69th percentile and the CPU in the 77th percentile individually.

Q: Can this system handle Ultra settings at any resolution?

A: Yes, at 1080p Ultra it delivers 63.8 FPS, which is above 60 FPS. At 1440p Ultra it drops to 50.7 FPS, and at 2160p Ultra it falls to 32.3 FPS, making 1080p the only resolution where Ultra settings are playable at standard refresh rates.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and frame rate preference. For 1080p displays, the High preset at 74.1 FPS offers a strong balance of visual quality and performance, with Ultra at 63.8 FPS providing additional fidelity for those willing to accept a 10.3 FPS penalty. The Medium preset at 82.7 FPS is a solid choice for players who prioritize higher frame rates over maximum detail.

At 1440p, the Medium preset at 64.9 FPS is the best overall recommendation, as it delivers smooth gameplay while maintaining reasonable visual quality. The High preset at 53.8 FPS is playable but may feel less fluid, and the Ultra preset at 50.7 FPS offers marginal visual gains over High for a 3.1 FPS loss. The Low preset at 91.4 FPS is only recommended for competitive play where maximum frame rates are paramount.

For 4K displays, the Low preset at 60.8 FPS is the only configuration that reaches the 60 FPS threshold, making it the default recommendation for 2160p gaming. The Medium preset at 42.8 FPS is a viable alternative for those who prioritize visual quality over smoothness, but the High and Ultra presets at 39.2 FPS and 32.3 FPS respectively are difficult to recommend due to their sub-40 FPS performance. Players targeting 4K should consider lowering resolution or accepting the visual compromises of the Low preset to maintain playable frame rates.