Control

The AMD Ryzen 5 5500 and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT combination delivers a highly playable experience in Control, with the data showing a clear shift in system bottleneck behavior as resolution and settings change. The measured frame rates across all twelve tested configurations place this pairing at rank 889 out of 1636 total combos, indicating a solidly above-average position for this action-adventure title. Analysis of the core and memory architecture, combined with the GPU's rendering capabilities, reveals a system that scales predictably with workload, though the limiting component varies significantly depending on the performance target.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 5500 is built on the Zen 3 architecture, codenamed Cezanne, and manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It provides 6 physical cores with 12 threads, a base clock of 3.60 GHz, and a boost clock of 4.20 GHz. The L3 cache is 16 MB, with 512 KB of L2 cache per core. The CPU’s benchmark profile shows a single-thread score of 836 in 3dmark, rising to 5411 with all threads active. In Cinebench R23, it scores 2319 points single-core and 16429 points multi-core. The processor sits at the 79th percentile against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 20875.

In the context of Control, the CPU’s performance is most relevant at lower resolutions and settings, where the GPU can render frames fast enough for the processor to become a factor. The gap between the 3dmark 2-thread score of 1645 and the max-thread score of 5411 indicates that the processor has meaningful scaling with additional threads, which is beneficial for the game’s background simulation and physics. The nearest rival, the Intel Core i5-12500, has an average score of 20897, putting the Ryzen 5 5500 essentially at parity with a delta of -0.1%. Similarly, the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4655GE matches at 20900, also with a -0.1% delta. This suggests that in purely CPU-bound scenarios, the Ryzen 5 5500 will not be a differentiator compared to those alternatives.

The 16 MB L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth are adequate for feeding the six cores. The processor’s 65 W TDP and PCIe Gen 3 interface are not likely to be constraining factors in this game, given that the GPU has its own dedicated memory. The data indicates that the CPU is a capable partner, but its influence on the final frame rate diminishes as the resolution increases, which is a typical pattern for a six-core part in a modern title.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT is the dominant component in this pairing. It features the Navi 22 chip on RDNA 2.0 architecture, also on a 7 nm process. The GPU has 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, with 40 ray accelerators. Its clock profile is notably high: a base clock of 2321 MHz, a game clock of 2424 MHz, and a boost clock of 2581 MHz. The memory subsystem consists of 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, providing 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU’s compute capabilities are rated at 13.21 TFLOPS for FP32, with a pixel rate of 165.2 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 413.0 GTexel/s.

The benchmark data shows the GPU’s raw performance is substantial. In 3dmark Steel Nomad (DX12), it scores 2435, and in Geekbench Vulkan it achieves 108032. The passmark G3D score is 19786, placing the card at the 77th percentile among all GPUs. Its average benchmark score is 33721. The nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6800, has a score of 33493, which is a delta of 0.7% in favor of the RX 6700 XT. This is a tight margin, indicating that the two cards are effectively interchangeable in raw compute terms. The RX 6700 XT is ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A5000 by 1.3% (33294 score), but behind the AMD Radeon HD 7950 by -1% (34050 score), though the latter is an older architecture and not a direct competitor in modern titles.

For Control, the GPU’s 12 GB VRAM is more than sufficient for the game’s textures at all tested settings, and the memory bandwidth of 384.0 GB/s ensures that high-resolution assets do not cause stuttering. The high boost clock of 2581 MHz is directly correlated with the strong frame rates observed, as the GPU has significant headroom to push pixel throughput. The card’s 64 ROPs are crucial for the final rasterization stage, and the 413.0 GTexel/s texture rate handles the game’s detailed environments without becoming a limiting factor at the tested settings.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and consistent drop as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160, which is expected given the GPU’s rendering load. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 144.9 FPS at 1080p to 104.8 FPS at 1440p, and then down to 73.7 FPS at 4K. This represents a 27.7% reduction from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 29.7% reduction from 1440p to 4K. The scaling is not perfectly linear, but it shows that the GPU is the primary limiter at these settings, as the CPU has enough headroom to feed the graphics card.

At Ultra settings, the drop is more severe in absolute terms: from 79.5 FPS at 1080p to 57.1 FPS at 1440p, and then to 39.7 FPS at 4K. The percentage drop from 1080p to 1440p is 28.2%, which is similar to the Low setting drop, but the drop from 1440p to 4K is 30.5%, indicating that the GPU is increasingly saturated at higher resolutions. This pattern suggests that the system is primarily GPU-limited across all tested configurations, with the CPU providing a stable foundation that does not introduce additional bottlenecks.

The difference between Low and Ultra settings at the same resolution is also informative. At 1080p, moving from Low to Ultra reduces the frame rate by 65.4 FPS (from 144.9 to 79.5), which is a 45.1% penalty for the increased visual fidelity. At 4K, the same settings change reduces the frame rate by 34.0 FPS (from 73.7 to 39.7), a 46.1% penalty. The relatively consistent percentage penalty across resolutions indicates that the GPU’s shading and memory resources are being proportionally taxed by the higher settings, without a sudden cliff or memory spillover. The data confirms that the RX 6700 XT is the determining factor for performance, and the CPU’s role is secondary.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers high frame rates across all settings. With Low settings, the average FPS is 144.9, which is suitable for high-refresh-rate displays. Medium settings reduce this to 98.9 FPS, and High settings yield 88.7 FPS. Ultra settings produce 79.5 FPS, which is still smooth for most monitors. The gap between Low and Medium is 46.0 FPS, while the gap between Medium and High is 10.2 FPS, and the gap between High and Ultra is 9.2 FPS. This shows diminishing returns as settings increase, with the largest performance hit coming from the initial step up from Low.

At 2560x1440, the average FPS remains playable. Low settings achieve 104.8 FPS, which is excellent for 1440p gaming. Medium settings drop to 77.0 FPS, High settings to 68.6 FPS, and Ultra to 57.1 FPS. The scaling from Low to Medium is a 27.8 FPS reduction, while the steps from Medium to High and High to Ultra are 8.4 FPS and 11.5 FPS, respectively. The Ultra setting at 1440p is the first configuration that dips below 60 FPS on average, suggesting that users targeting 60 FPS should consider High settings or lower.

At 3840x2160, the performance is demanding but not unplayable. Low settings average 73.7 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold. Medium settings average 52.2 FPS, High settings 47.6 FPS, and Ultra settings 39.7 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 21.5 FPS, which is the largest single-step reduction in the entire dataset. The subsequent steps are smaller: 4.6 FPS from Medium to High, and 7.9 FPS from High to Ultra. At 4K, only the Low setting provides a consistently smooth experience, while Medium and High are borderline for 60 FPS targets. The Ultra setting is best suited for users who prioritize visual quality over frame rate.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average frame rate achieved by this combo?

A: The highest measured average frame rate is 144.9 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: Can this system maintain 60 FPS at 2560x1440 Ultra settings?

A: No. The measured average frame rate at 2560x1440 with Ultra settings is 57.1 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold. High settings at that resolution yield 68.6 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its closest rival in benchmark scores?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 5500 has an average benchmark score of 20875, which is -0.1% compared to the Intel Core i5-12500's score of 20897. The two processors are effectively tied.

Q: What is the frame rate penalty for enabling Ultra settings over Low at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, the average frame rate drops from 73.7 FPS at Low settings to 39.7 FPS at Ultra settings, a reduction of 34.0 FPS.

Q: Is the GPU or the CPU the limiting factor at 1080p Low settings?

A: The data shows the GPU is still the primary limiter. The CPU has a max-thread score of 5411 in 3dmark, and the frame rate of 144.9 FPS is high, but the GPU's benchmark percentile of 77 and its strong compute scores indicate it is handling the rendering load.

Q: How does the GPU's performance compare to the AMD Radeon RX 6800?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT has an average benchmark score of 33721, which is 0.7% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 6800's score of 33493. The two are very closely matched.