Control

The AMD Ryzen 5 4600G paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti produces a distinctly tiered performance profile in Control. Across the twelve measured configurations, the combo's standing shifts dramatically based on resolution and preset, making preset selection the single most important user decision. The data shows a system that can deliver smooth gameplay at 1080p with adjustments, but one that struggles to maintain playable framerates at 4K.

Settings Recommendations

The measured results indicate that the "Low" preset is the only reliable path to high refresh rate experiences, while "Medium" serves as the practical ceiling for standard 60 FPS targets. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves 91.6 FPS average, which is 27.4 frames higher than the next best option (Medium at 64.2 FPS). This substantial gap suggests that Low is the preferred choice for competitive or fast-paced play where frame rate consistency matters more than visual fidelity.

For users prioritizing visual quality while maintaining playability, Medium at 1080p delivers 64.2 FPS, clearing the 60 FPS threshold with a modest 4.2 FPS margin. The High preset at 1080p drops to 59.4 FPS, just below the 60 FPS target, making it a borderline choice. Ultra at 1080p falls further to 48.9 FPS, which introduces noticeable frame pacing issues in action sequences.

At 2560x1440, the situation tightens considerably. Low provides 71.6 FPS, which remains smooth, but Medium drops to 51.6 FPS and High to 42.5 FPS. The recommendation shifts to Low for 1440p gaming, as no other preset exceeds the 60 FPS threshold. Ultra at 1440p produces 39 FPS, which is below the minimum recommended for comfortable third-person action gameplay.

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves a playable average. Low reaches 49.4 FPS, Medium 32.6 FPS, High 27.6 FPS, and Ultra 23.6 FPS. The data clearly shows that 4K is not viable for this combination in Control, regardless of settings. Users with 4K displays should render at a lower resolution.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti brings 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, yielding 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU's clock behavior shows a base of 1500 MHz boosting to 1770 MHz. The 6 GB frame buffer appears sufficient for the settings tested, as the framerate scaling from Low to Ultra follows a consistent pattern without anomalous drops that would indicate memory capacity limits being hit.

The GPU's position in the broader market is modest. It sits at the 55th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 13925. Its nearest rivals in synthetic testing are the AMD Radeon RX 570X (0.4% higher score), NVIDIA Tesla K10 (0.7% lower), NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile (0.8% higher), and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 (0.8% higher). These deltas are within noise, suggesting the GTX 1660 Ti performs at parity with a cluster of mid-range cards.

The framerate data reveals the GPU's scaling efficiency. Moving from Ultra to Low at 1080p improves performance by 42.7 FPS (from 48.9 to 91.6), representing an 87% increase. At 1440p the same settings change yields a 32.6 FPS gain (71.6 from 39), and at 4K a 25.8 FPS gain (49.4 from 23.6). This scaling pattern indicates the GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher settings, with the gap between presets narrowing as resolution increases.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Control?

A: The data shows 1920x1080 as the only resolution where multiple presets exceed 60 FPS. Low achieves 91.6 FPS and Medium reaches 64.2 FPS, while 1440p only hits 60+ on Low (71.6 FPS) and 4K never exceeds 49.4 FPS.

Q: How much performance is gained by dropping from Ultra to Low?

A: At 1080p the gain is 42.7 FPS (48.9 to 91.6), at 1440p it is 32.6 FPS (39 to 71.6), and at 4K it is 25.8 FPS (23.6 to 49.4). The relative improvement grows at lower resolutions, from 109% at 4K to 87% at 1080p.

Q: Can this system run Control at 60 FPS?

A: Yes, but only under specific configurations. At 1080p, Low (91.6 FPS) and Medium (64.2 FPS) clear the threshold, while High (59.4 FPS) narrowly misses it. At 1440p, only Low (71.6 FPS) succeeds. No 4K setting reaches 60 FPS.

Q: How does the GTX 1660 Ti compare to its nearest rivals?

A: In synthetic benchmarks, the GTX 1660 Ti scores 13925 average, with the AMD Radeon RX 570X just 0.4% higher and the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile 0.8% higher. The NVIDIA Tesla K10 and GeForce GTX 680 score 0.7% and 0.8% lower respectively.

Q: Is the 6 GB VRAM sufficient for Control?

A: The measured framerates show consistent scaling across presets without sudden dips, indicating the 6 GB GDDR6 memory does not create a capacity bottleneck at the tested settings. The 288.0 GB/s bandwidth supports the observed performance levels.

Q: What is the combo's overall ranking?

A: This CPU-GPU combination ranks 1442 out of 1636 tested combos in Control, placing it in the bottom 12% of all configurations in the database.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of AMD Ryzen 5 4600G and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti holds a rank of 1442 out of 1636 tested combos in Control. This places the pairing in the lower quarter of the database, with only 194 combinations performing worse. The ranking reflects the GPU's position at the 55th percentile of all GPUs, which drags down the overall result despite the CPU's stronger standing at the 75th percentile of all CPUs.

The disparity between component percentiles is instructive. The CPU performs in the upper-middle range of all processors, while the GPU sits just above the median. In a game like Control, which shows significant scaling with graphics settings, the GPU becomes the limiting factor. The measured FPS data confirms this: at 1080p Low the system reaches 91.6 FPS, but at 1080p Ultra it drops to 48.9 FPS, a 46.6% reduction that aligns with GPU-bound workload increases.

Compared to the full set of 1636 combos, this rank suggests the pairing is better suited for less demanding titles or lower resolution gaming. The 4K results, with a maximum of 49.4 FPS, fall well below what higher-ranked combos would achieve. Users seeking to improve this ranking would need to prioritize GPU upgrades over CPU changes, based on the bottleneck analysis.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 4600G provides 6 cores and 12 threads based on the Zen 2 architecture, with a base clock of 3.70 GHz boosting to 4.20 GHz. It features 8 MB of shared L3 cache and 512 KB L2 per core. The CPU's synthetic benchmark scores show solid multi-threaded performance, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 13593 and a single-core score of 1919.

The CPU's percentile ranking of 75 places it well above the GPU's 55, indicating the processor is not the primary constraint in this pairing. Its nearest rivals in average benchmark score include the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE (0% delta), Intel Core i5-12450H (0.1% higher), Intel Core i3-14100T (0.8% lower), and Intel Core i3-13100F (1% lower). These tight deltas show the 4600G performs at parity with a range of modern budget and mobile processors.

In Control specifically, the CPU's role appears secondary. The framerate scaling across settings follows GPU-driven patterns, with the largest deltas occurring between Low and Ultra presets rather than across resolutions at the same preset. The CPU's 12 threads provide ample headroom for the game's physics and AI workloads, as evidenced by the consistent performance at 1080p Low (91.6 FPS) where CPU overhead would be most apparent. The 7 nm TSMC process and 65 W TDP contribute to efficient operation, though the integrated Radeon Vega 7 graphics are irrelevant for this discrete GPU configuration.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured data covers three resolutions and four settings presets, producing twelve data points. At 1920x1080, the framerate ranges from 48.9 FPS at Ultra to 91.6 FPS at Low. The intermediate presets land at 59.4 FPS for High and 64.2 FPS for Medium. The gap between Low and Medium is 27.4 FPS, while Medium to High drops 4.8 FPS, and High to Ultra drops 10.5 FPS.

At 2560x1440, performance scales down predictably. Low achieves 71.6 FPS, Medium 51.6 FPS, High 42.5 FPS, and Ultra 39 FPS. The delta between Low and Ultra here is 32.6 FPS, a smaller absolute difference than at 1080p but a larger percentage drop (45.5%). The step from High to Ultra is the smallest at 3.5 FPS, suggesting diminishing returns at the highest preset.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles. Low produces 49.4 FPS, Medium 32.6 FPS, High 27.6 FPS, and Ultra 23.6 FPS. The Low to Medium gap is 16.8 FPS, while High to Ultra is just 4 FPS. No configuration reaches 50 FPS, and the Ultra preset falls below 24 FPS, which would result in visible stuttering during combat sequences.

The resolution scaling from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings shows a 20 FPS drop (91.6 to 71.6), and from 1440p to 4K a further 22.2 FPS drop (71.6 to 49.4). At Ultra settings, the same resolution steps produce drops of 9.9 FPS (48.9 to 39) and 15.4 FPS (39 to 23.6). This pattern indicates the GPU's memory bandwidth and shading capacity become increasingly strained as pixel count rises, with the 288.0 GB/s bandwidth proving insufficient for 4K Ultra demands.