Control

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 presents an extreme generational and performance-class mismatch in Control. The data shows a system where the GPU is operating far beyond the CPU's ability to feed it, yet the sheer graphical horsepower of the RTX 5090 ensures playable frame rates at every tested configuration. This analysis interprets the measured FPS data, component benchmarks, and ranking information to provide a practical guide for this specific pairing.

Settings Recommendations

For this combination, the Medium preset at 1920x1080 is the most balanced choice, delivering an average of 132 FPS with a minimum of 112 FPS. This is a 10 FPS average increase over the High preset (126 FPS) and a 12 FPS increase over Ultra (120 FPS). The Minimum FPS of 112 ensures a smooth experience even in demanding scenes, and the 151 FPS maximum shows there is headroom. While Low does push the average to 149 FPS, the visual quality sacrifice is significant, and the Medium preset provides a far better visual experience for only a 17 FPS average cost.

At 2560x1440, the High preset is the recommended starting point. It delivers an average of 115 FPS, which is only 5 FPS behind Medium (120 FPS) but provides notably better visual fidelity. The Ultra preset at this resolution is also viable at 110 FPS average, making High the sweet spot for a high-refresh-rate 1440p experience. The Low preset at 136 FPS is only 21 FPS faster than High, which is not a compelling trade for the visual downgrade.

At 3840x2160, the High preset is the optimal choice, averaging 90 FPS. This is a playable frame rate for a single-player action game and represents the best balance of image quality and performance at 4K. The Medium preset is 11 FPS faster (101 FPS), but the drop in visual detail is more noticeable at 4K resolution. The Ultra preset drops to 78 FPS average, which is still technically playable but begins to feel less fluid for a game with fast-paced action. Low at 4K (119 FPS) is a stark outlier, showing that the game scales dramatically when visual load is removed, but the graphical quality at 4K Low is not recommended. The data indicates that the RTX 5090 is the dominant factor in performance, so prioritizing higher settings is the correct approach.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 is the undisputed performance driver in this pairing. Its benchmark data places it in the 92nd percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 79,842. Its nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB, which it edges out by 0.3%, and the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT, which it leads by 1.1%. This top-tier positioning is reflected in the measured FPS, where the GPU's immense processing power allows for high frame rates even at 4K.

The RTX 5090's core architecture is built on the Blackwell 2.0 design with a 5 nm process node from TSMC. It contains a massive 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die. The GPU is equipped with 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 1.79 TB/s. This enormous memory capacity and bandwidth are far beyond what a game like Control requires, making it a non-factor in performance. The GPU's clock speeds are listed with a base of 2017 MHz and a boost of 2407 MHz. The sheer number of shading units (21,760), TMUs (680), and ROPs (176) is what drives the high frame rates, allowing for massive parallel processing.

The data shows the GPU is not the limiting factor at any resolution or setting. The difference in FPS between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p is only 29 FPS (149 vs 120), which is a relatively small spread for such a large change in graphical load. This suggests that the CPU is creating a bottleneck, preventing the GPU from fully flexing its muscles at lower resolutions. The GPU's passmark G3D score of 39,650 and its Passmark DirectX 12 score of 185 highlight its raw compute and graphical capabilities, which are only partially utilized in this configuration. The GPU is the star of the show, but it is being held back by its older CPU partner.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 is the clear bottleneck in this system. Its benchmark data shows it sits in the 75th percentile of all CPUs, with an average score of 21,484. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V, which it trails by 0.2%, and the AMD EPYC 9454, which it leads by 1.2%. These rival comparisons show that while the 2600 is not a weak processor, it is in a completely different performance league than the RTX 5090.

This CPU is a 6-core, 12-thread processor from the 2000 series, based on the Zen architecture (Pinnacle Ridge). It has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz. Its multi-threaded performance is measured by a Cinebench R15 multi-core score of 1,248 and a Geekbench multi-core score of 5,648. The single-thread performance is more modest, with a Cinebench R15 single-core score of 157.3 and a Geekbench single-core score of 1,154. This older architecture and lower clock speeds are the primary constraint.

The FPS data confirms this bottleneck. At 1080p, the difference between Low (149 FPS) and High (126 FPS) is just 23 FPS. Had the CPU been more powerful, the GPU could have pushed the Low preset much higher, as it would be less constrained by the CPU's processing of game logic and draw calls. The single-thread performance is particularly critical for gaming, and the Ryzen 5 2600's score of 157.3 in Cinebench R15 single-core is a limiting factor. The data suggests that while the CPU can maintain a playable experience, it is preventing the system from reaching the 200+ FPS territory that the RTX 5090 is capable of in less demanding titles. The 65W TDP and 16 MB of shared L3 cache are other specs that highlight its position as a mid-range processor from a previous generation.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 ranks 676th out of 3,720 tested combos in Control. This places it in the top 18% of all system pairings, which is a solid result given the age of the CPU. However, the ranking is not as high as the GPU's individual 92nd percentile would suggest. This discrepancy is a direct result of the CPU bottleneck. The data indicates that the system is performing at a level that is lower than its most powerful component's potential.

This rank of 676 means that there are 675 other system combinations that achieve higher frame rates in this game. These likely include systems with newer, faster CPUs that can better complement the RTX 5090. The ranking reflects the raw power of the GPU, as it is able to carry this older platform to a respectable position. However, the bottleneck is visible in the data. The combo is ranked 676th, but the GPU alone is in the 92nd percentile. This shows that the system's performance is being dragged down by the CPU, preventing it from achieving a top-tier ranking that would be expected from a 5090 build.

The performance is generally good, but the system is not efficient. A more balanced pairing would likely see this combo rank significantly higher. The data suggests that this configuration is a temporary or transitional setup, where a powerful new GPU has been paired with an older, existing CPU. The frame rates are playable, but the full potential of the RTX 5090 is not being realized.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K clearly illustrates the nature of the bottleneck. At Medium settings, the average FPS falls from 132 at 1080p to 120 at 1440p, and then to 101 at 4K. This is a total drop of 31 FPS (23.5%) from 1080p to 4K. The High preset shows a similar trend: 126 FPS at 1080p, 115 at 1440p, and 90 at 4K, a drop of 36 FPS (28.6%).

These scaling patterns are crucial for analysis. A system that is purely GPU-limited would show a dramatic drop in FPS as resolution increases, because the GPU has to render more pixels. In this case, the drop is present but not as severe as one might expect from a 4K resolution increase. For example, the difference between 1080p and 1440p is often small (e.g., 126 to 115 FPS on High). This indicates that at lower resolutions, the CPU is holding the system back, preventing the GPU from delivering the massive frame rates it is capable of.

As the resolution increases to 4K, the GPU becomes more heavily loaded, and the CPU bottleneck is lessened. This is why the FPS drop from 1440p to 4K is proportionally larger (e.g., 115 to 90 FPS on High) than the drop from 1080p to 1440p. The data suggests that the system becomes more balanced at higher resolutions. At 4K, the GPU is finally being utilized to a greater extent, but even then, the CPU is still a limiting factor. The fact that 4K Low (119 FPS) is much higher than 4K Ultra (78 FPS) shows that the GPU has headroom to spare, and the CPU is the primary constraint on achieving higher frame rates at any resolution.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table provides the exact measured average FPS for each resolution and settings combination. Note that minimum and maximum FPS are only provided for Medium settings.

1920x1080:

• Low: Average 149 FPS
• Medium: Average 132 FPS (Min 112, Max 151)
• High: Average 126 FPS
• Ultra: Average 120 FPS

2560x1440:

• Low: Average 136 FPS
• Medium: Average 120 FPS (Min 102, Max 138)
• High: Average 115 FPS
• Ultra: Average 110 FPS

3840x2160:

• Low: Average 119 FPS
• Medium: Average 101 FPS (Min 86, Max 116)
• High: Average 90 FPS
• Ultra: Average 78 FPS

The data shows a consistent pattern. At every resolution, the Low preset provides the highest average FPS, followed by Medium, High, and then Ultra. The Medium preset's min and max FPS values (e.g., 112-151 at 1080p) show that even at its lowest point, the frame rate remains smooth and playable. The gap between High and Ultra is often small, such as the 6 FPS difference at 1080p (126 vs 120) and the 5 FPS difference at 1440p (115 vs 110). This suggests that the Ultra preset is more demanding but offers diminishing returns in performance cost. At 4K, the gap between High and Ultra widens to 12 FPS (90 vs 78), making High the more sensible choice for maintaining a 90 FPS average. The data confirms that the system is capable of a smooth experience at all tested settings, but the optimal balance of visual quality and performance is found at the Medium and High presets, depending on the resolution.