Control

# How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 5 4600G paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER achieves a combo rank of 610 out of 3,720 tested combinations in Control. This places the pairing in the top 16.4% of all combos tested for this title, a strong showing that reflects the GPU's high-end positioning within the benchmark database. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER sits at the 76th percentile among all GPUs, while the Ryzen 5 4600G lands at the 71st percentile among all CPUs, so this system is built around two components that individually rank in the upper third of their respective categories.

The combination's rank suggests it is well-balanced for Control, a game that benefits from both substantial rasterization throughput and competent multi-threaded CPU performance. The GPU's average benchmark score of 31,087 places it within 0.4% of the NVIDIA Quadro M5000 and 1.9% of the NVIDIA TITAN RTX, indicating that the 4070 Ti SUPER is competitive with previous-generation flagship cards. The CPU's average score of 17,507 is nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE (0.1% difference) and within 0.8% of the Intel Core i3-14100T, showing that the 4600G holds its own against newer low-power parts.

What stands out is that this combo achieves a higher rank than either component's percentile alone might suggest. A rank of 610 out of 3,720 combos means it outperforms 83.6% of tested systems, which is a better relative standing than the CPU's 71st percentile alone would predict. This indicates that for Control specifically, the GPU is the dominant factor in overall performance, and the CPU's six cores and twelve threads are sufficient to avoid becoming a significant bottleneck at most settings.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is the undisputed performance driver in this pairing. Built on the AD103 chip using TSMC's 5 nm process, this GPU packs 8,448 shading units, 264 texture mapping units, and 96 raster output units. It also includes 66 ray tracing cores and 264 tensor cores, making it well-equipped for Control, which famously features extensive real-time ray tracing effects. The GPU's base clock is 2,340 MHz with a boost clock of 2,610 MHz, and its 16 GB of GDDR6X memory runs at 1,313 MHz (21 Gbps effective) across a 256-bit bus, yielding a memory bandwidth of 672.3 GB/s.

This memory configuration is particularly relevant for Control at high resolutions. The 16 GB frame buffer is more than sufficient for 4K Ultra settings, and the 672.3 GB/s bandwidth ensures that texture streaming and high-resolution assets don't become a limiting factor. The GPU's pixel rate of 250.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 689.0 GTexel/s provide the raw throughput needed to sustain high frame rates in this action-adventure title's physics-heavy environments.

In synthetic benchmarks, the 4070 Ti SUPER scores 31,811 in Passmark G3D and 199,267 in Geekbench OpenCL. Its Passmark DirectX 11 score of 278 and DirectX 12 score of 119 indicate strong API-level performance. The GPU's 44.10 TFLOPS of FP32 compute power is substantial for a game that uses compute shaders for its destruction physics and environmental interactions. The nearest rivals in the database — the Quadro M5000 (0.4% slower), GRID M60-1Q (0.4% slower), RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell (1.4% slower), and TITAN RTX (1.9% slower) — all sit within a tight 2% band, confirming that the 4070 Ti SUPER delivers consistent, predictable performance relative to its peers.

The measured FPS data confirms the GPU's dominance. At 1080p, the card pushes between 125 FPS (Ultra) and 177 FPS (Low), with the Medium preset hitting 156 FPS. At 1440p, it maintains 94–161 FPS across presets. Even at 4K, it never dips below 64 FPS on Ultra and reaches 116 FPS on Low. These numbers suggest that the GPU has enough headroom to handle Control's most demanding ray tracing features, though the measured data does not specifically isolate ray tracing performance.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 4600G serves as the supporting player in this combo, and its role becomes more pronounced at lower resolutions where the GPU is less stressed. This is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 2 architecture (codename Renoir), manufactured on TSMC's 7 nm process. It runs at a base clock of 3.70 GHz and boosts up to 4.20 GHz, with 8 MB of shared L3 cache and 512 KB of L2 cache per core. The CPU's 65 W TDP is modest, and it supports DDR4 memory in dual-channel configuration with 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth.

In multi-threaded workloads, the 4600G delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 13,593 and a single-core score of 1,919. Its Geekbench multi-core score is 6,637 with a single-core score of 1,460. These numbers place it in the 71st percentile of all CPUs, which is respectable for a processor released in 2020. The 3DMark scores tell a similar story: 4,863 with 16 threads, 4,889 with max threads, and 726 for single-thread. The Passmark multi-thread score of 15,992 and single-thread score of 2,653 round out the picture.

For Control, the CPU's 12 threads are adequate to handle the game's AI, physics, and streaming systems. The game is not particularly CPU-intensive compared to modern titles, so the 4600G's performance is more than sufficient at 4K, where the GPU is almost certainly the bottleneck. However, at 1080p with Low settings, the CPU's single-thread performance (726 in 3DMark single-thread) could become more relevant, as the frame rate climbs toward 177 FPS and the CPU must feed the GPU at a higher rate.

The nearest CPU rivals in the database — the Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE (0.1% faster), Ryzen 3 8300GE (0.6% faster), Core 7 150U (0.6% slower), and Core i3-14100T (0.8% faster) — all have similar average scores, suggesting that the 4600G's performance is neither exceptionally strong nor weak for its class. Its 71st percentile ranking means it outperforms a majority of CPUs, but it is not a top-tier part. In this combo, the CPU's job is to stay out of the way of the GPU, and the data suggests it does so effectively at all but the most CPU-bound settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data for this combo spans three resolutions (1080p, 1440p, 4K) and four settings presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra), providing a comprehensive view of performance scaling.

At 1080p, the combo delivers its highest frame rates. The Low preset averages 177 FPS, Medium averages 156 FPS (with a min of 133 and max of 179), High averages 144 FPS, and Ultra averages 125 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 52 FPS, or roughly 29.4% — a significant spread that shows how much headroom the GPU has at this resolution. Even at Ultra, the 125 FPS average is well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay, and it exceeds the refresh rate of most standard monitors.

Moving to 1440p, the frame rates remain high but begin to show the GPU's workload increasing. Low averages 161 FPS, Medium 122 FPS (min 104, max 141), High 109 FPS, and Ultra 94 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p at Ultra is from 125 FPS to 94 FPS, a 24.8% reduction. At Low, the drop is from 177 FPS to 161 FPS, only 9% — indicating that at lower settings, the CPU or other system components may be limiting performance, as the GPU has more headroom.

At 4K, the frame rates become more moderate. Low averages 116 FPS, Medium 83 FPS (min 70, max 95), High 73 FPS, and Ultra 64 FPS. The Ultra preset at 4K is the only configuration that dips near the 60 FPS threshold, and the Medium preset's minimum of 70 FPS suggests that there can be occasional frame drops, but they remain playable. The High preset at 4K, at 73 FPS average, offers a good balance of visual quality and performance.

The data reveals that this combo is capable of 4K gaming, but users targeting 4K Ultra will want to enable upscaling technologies (not measured here) or accept frame rates in the low-to-mid 60s. At 1440p, the combo is excellent across all settings, and at 1080p it is overkill for most displays, with even Ultra exceeding 120 FPS.

Resolution Scaling

The resolution scaling behavior of this combo tells a clear story about which component is the limiting factor at each resolution. Going from 1080p to 1440p, the Ultra preset drops from 125 FPS to 94 FPS, a 24.8% reduction. Going from 1440p to 4K, Ultra drops from 94 FPS to 64 FPS, a 31.9% reduction. The scaling is roughly consistent with the increase in pixel count: 1440p has 1.78 times the pixels of 1080p, and 4K has 2.25 times the pixels of 1440p. The frame rate drops are slightly less than the pixel count increases, which is typical for GPU-bound scenarios.

At lower settings, the scaling pattern changes. For the Low preset, the drop from 1080p to 1440p is only 9% (177 to 161 FPS), and from 1440p to 4K it is 28% (161 to 116 FPS). The relatively small drop from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings suggests that the CPU is becoming a limiting factor at 1080p Low, where the GPU has so much headroom that it is waiting on the CPU to deliver frames. Once the resolution increases and the GPU becomes more loaded, the scaling becomes more pronounced.

This pattern indicates that at 1080p with lower settings, the Ryzen 5 4600G's single-thread performance is the bottleneck. The CPU's 3DMark single-thread score of 726 and Passmark single-thread of 2,653 are modest, and when the GPU is capable of delivering 177 FPS, the CPU's ability to process game logic and draw calls becomes the constraint. At 4K, however, the GPU is almost certainly the limiting factor, as evidenced by the steep frame rate drops across all settings.

The Medium preset shows the most consistent scaling across resolutions, with frame rates of 156, 122, and 83 FPS at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K respectively. The min/max values (133/179 at 1080p, 104/141 at 1440p, 70/95 at 4K) show that the frame time distribution remains stable even as the average drops, suggesting that neither component is causing stuttering or frame pacing issues.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend heavily on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For 4K gaming, the Ultra preset delivers an average of 64 FPS, which is playable but leaves little headroom for demanding scenes. The High preset at 4K, averaging 73 FPS, provides a better safety margin while presumably offering similar visual quality with minor reductions in some effects. The Medium preset at 4K, at 83 FPS average with a minimum of 70 FPS, is the safest choice for 4K if frame pacing consistency is a priority, as the minimum frame rate stays well above 60 FPS.

For 1440p, the Ultra preset at 94 FPS is the clear recommendation for users with high-refresh-rate displays. It provides a 94 FPS average, which is smooth on 1440p/144Hz monitors, and the visual quality is maximized. The High preset at 109 FPS offers even more headroom for 144Hz displays, and the Medium preset at 122 FPS is suitable for users who prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity. At 1440p Low (161 FPS), the frame rate is high enough that the CPU bottleneck becomes apparent, but this setting is only recommended for competitive play where every frame counts.

At 1080p, the Ultra preset at 125 FPS is the best overall choice, as it provides excellent visual quality while maintaining a frame rate that exceeds most 1080p monitors' refresh rates. The High preset at 144 FPS is ideal for 144Hz displays, and the Medium preset at 156 FPS offers a good balance for users who want high frame rates without sacrificing too much visual quality. The Low preset at 177 FPS is the only setting that approaches the CPU limit, making it suitable for esports-style play, but the visual degradation is significant for a game like Control that relies heavily on atmosphere and lighting.

In summary, the data indicates that the sweet spot for this combo is 1440p Ultra, where the 94 FPS average balances visual quality and performance. For 4K, the High preset at 73 FPS is the recommended compromise, and for 1080p, Ultra at 125 FPS is the best experience. The Medium preset provides the most consistent frame times across all resolutions, making it a safe fallback if users encounter any performance issues in demanding scenes.