Control

The AMD Ryzen 5 4600G paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT delivers a solid, if not spectacular, performance profile in Control. The data indicates a system that is clearly capable of smooth gameplay at 1080p and 1440p, but which begins to struggle at 4K with higher settings. The following analysis breaks down the measured performance, component roles, and overall standing of this combination.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear and predictable scaling pattern as resolution increases. At 1080p with High settings, the combo produces an average of 74 FPS. Moving to 1440p at the same settings, the average drops to 56 FPS, a reduction of 18 FPS. The jump to 4K is more severe, with the average falling to 38 FPS, which is a further 18 FPS drop from the 1440p figure. This linear decline suggests that the rendering load is scaling consistently with the pixel count, which is typical for a GPU-bound scenario.

The behavior at Low settings is particularly telling for identifying the limiting component. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 118 FPS. At 1440p Low, it drops to 89 FPS, and at 4K Low, it hits 60 FPS. The fact that the frame rate at 4K Low (60 FPS) is exactly double the 4K High frame rate (38 FPS) and significantly higher than the 4K Medium (43 FPS) indicates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck. The RX 6600 XT is working progressively harder as resolution increases, and its performance ceiling is being reached at 4K, regardless of the CPU's capability.

This pattern is consistent across all settings presets. The gap between 1080p and 4K grows from 44 FPS at Low settings (118 vs 60) to 41 FPS at High settings (74 vs 38) and 32 FPS at Ultra settings (65 vs 33). The frame rate penalty for moving from 1080p to 4K remains substantial in all cases, confirming that the GPU is the dominant performance limiter at higher resolutions. The CPU, while not idle, is not the primary constraint in this game for this particular combo.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 4600G is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 2 architecture. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.20 GHz. Its performance in synthetic benchmarks shows a balanced profile for a mid-range part. For instance, it scores 13,593 points in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 1,919 in single-core. The multi-threaded performance is respectable, placing it in the 71st percentile against all CPUs.

In the context of Control, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and handle game logic. The data suggests that even at 1080p, where the CPU load is typically highest relative to the GPU, the Ryzen 5 4600G is able to keep up. This is evidenced by the 118 FPS average at Low settings, which is a high frame rate that requires a capable CPU to maintain. If the CPU were a severe bottleneck, the frame rate would plateau at a lower number regardless of resolution.

The CPU's benchmark scores, such as 5,709 in Cinebench R20 multi-core and 1,370 in Cinebench R15 multi-core, are indicative of its strong multi-threading capabilities. These scores are relevant because Control is a game that can utilize multiple threads for physics and AI. The 4600G's 12 threads ensure that it is not a limiting factor in most scenes. Its nearest rivals in the CPU benchmark database, such as the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE and Intel Core 7 150U, have very similar average scores (17,482 and 17,395 respectively), with deltas of only 0.1% and 0.6%, confirming that the 4600G is positioned in a tightly contested performance tier.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT is the clear workhorse for this combination in Control. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with a boost clock of 2589 MHz and a game clock of 2359 MHz. Its compute power is rated at 10.60 TFLOPS for FP32 operations. This specification set positions the card as a strong 1080p and capable 1440p performer.

The benchmark results show that the RX 6600 XT's performance is the deciding factor for the experience. The GPU's 70th percentile ranking against all GPUs is a strong indicator of its overall capability. In Control, the GPU's memory bandwidth and compute units are what determine the frame rate at higher resolutions. The 4K results, which drop below 60 FPS on all settings, clearly show the GPU hitting its limits. Even at 4K Low, the card can only manage an average of 60 FPS, suggesting that the pixel fill rate is the bottleneck.

The GPU's performance tier, when compared to its nearest rivals, is interesting. The data shows it is within 1.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER's average benchmark score, and 0.7% ahead of the GeForce GTX 1630. This places the RX 6600 XT in a performance bracket where it can handle demanding titles, but with the caveat that 4K gaming will require compromises in settings. The 8 GB of VRAM is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K with high-resolution textures, it could become a secondary limiting factor.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations for Control, this specific pairing of the Ryzen 5 4600G and RX 6600 XT ranks 2650 out of 3720 combos. This places it in the lower third of all tested systems. This ranking is a composite measure that reflects the overall performance of the CPU and GPU working together in this specific title. Given that the GPU is the primary bottleneck, the combo's rank is largely determined by the RX 6600 XT's performance.

The rank of 2650 out of 3720 is a useful data point, but it must be interpreted with context. This is not a low-end system; it is a mid-range configuration that is being compared against everything from entry-level to enthusiast-grade hardware. A rank in the 29th percentile (calculated as 2650/3720) indicates that there are many more powerful combinations, but also a significant number that are less capable. The fact that the system can achieve 118 FPS at 1080p Low and 74 FPS at 1080p High shows that it is not a weak performer in absolute terms.

The ranking highlights that while this combo is excellent for 1080p gaming, it is outclassed at 4K by systems with more powerful GPUs. The data suggests that the bottleneck is the GPU, so any user looking to improve the4K performance of this combo would need to upgrade the graphics card, not the processor. The CPU's contribution to the overall rank is secondary, as its performance is sufficient to avoid being a significant drag on the system's results.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table details the exact measured average FPS for each resolution and settings preset.

| Resolution | Settings | Avg FPS |

| :--------- | :------- | :------ |

| 3840x2160 | High | 38 |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 60 |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 43 |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 33 |

| 2560x1440 | High | 56 |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 89 |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 63 |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 49 |

| 1920x1080 | High | 74 |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 118 |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 84 |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 65 |

The data shows a consistent performance hierarchy. At every resolution, Low settings yield the highest average FPS, followed by High, then Medium, with Ultra being the most demanding. The spread between Low and Ultra settings is substantial. At 1080p, the difference is 53 FPS (118 vs 65). At 1440p, the difference is 40 FPS (89 vs 49). At 4K, the difference narrows to 27 FPS (60 vs 33), which further confirms the GPU's saturation at that resolution.

The Medium settings data is the only set that includes minimum and maximum FPS values. At 1080p Medium, the frame rate varies between 71 and 96 FPS, with an average of 84. At 1440p Medium, the range is 54 to 73 FPS, averaging 63. At 4K Medium, the range is 36 to 49 FPS, averaging 43. These figures indicate a degree of frame time variance, but the minimums are still playable at 1080p and 1440p.

FAQ

*Q: Can this system run Control at 4K 60 FPS?*

A: No. The measured data shows that at 4K, the highest average FPS achieved is 60, but only on Low settings. On High settings, the average drops to 38 FPS, and on Ultra, it falls to 33 FPS.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo?

A: The data indicates that 1080p is the ideal resolution for this system. It achieves a minimum average of 65 FPS across all settings presets, with a maximum of 118 FPS on Low settings. 1440p is also viable, with all presets averaging above 49 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the primary bottleneck in this pairing?

A: The GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions. The evidence is that at 4K, lowering the settings from High to Low only increases the average FPS from 38 to 60, indicating the GPU is struggling with the pixel load. The CPU has sufficient headroom to support these frame rates.

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

A: It ranks 2650 out of 3720 tested combinations for Control. This places it in the lower third of all tested systems, reflecting its mid-range performance profile.

Q: What is the performance difference between High and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 1440p, the average FPS on High settings is 56. On Ultra settings, the average FPS drops to 49. This is a 7 FPS difference, which is a relatively small cost for the visual upgrade.

Q: Does the 8 GB of VRAM on the GPU limit performance?

A: The data does not directly measure VRAM usage. However, the significant drop in performance at 4K suggests the GPU is compute or bandwidth limited. The 256.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth and 8 GB capacity are adequate for 1080p and 1440p, but may be a contributing factor to the 4K performance limitations.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the user's display and performance priorities. For a 1080p display, the High settings preset is the recommended choice. It provides an average of 74 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay, while offering a significant visual improvement over the Medium preset. While Ultra is playable at 65 FPS, the 9 FPS difference between High and Ultra may not be worth the additional graphical load on the GPU.

For a 1440p display, the High settings preset is again the best balance. The average of 56 FPS is acceptable for a single-player action-adventure title, and it provides a much better visual experience than the Medium preset, which averages 63 FPS but with lower texture and effect quality. The Ultra preset at 49 FPS is also playable, but the frame rate dips below the 50 FPS mark, which some users may find less smooth.

At 4K, the data suggests that this combo is not well-suited for a high-quality experience. The only preset that achieves a 60 FPS average is Low, which is a significant visual compromise. The Medium preset averages 43 FPS, which is playable but not ideal. Given the substantial visual downgrade required to reach 60 FPS, users with a 4K display would be better served by lowering the resolution to 1440p and using High or Ultra settings, which provides a superior visual quality and frame rate trade-off.