Control

The AMD Ryzen 5 5500 and AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT pairing delivers a robust Control experience, with the data placing this combo in the 556th position out of 1,636 tested configurations. The benchmark results show a clear performance hierarchy across resolutions, with the CPU and GPU balancing act shifting as pixel counts rise. This analysis breaks down the measured frames per second, the combo's standing, and how the GPU's specifications influence the game's output.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a predictable yet pronounced drop as resolution increases, underscoring the GPU's growing dominance as the primary performance limiter. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves 178.6 FPS, but this figure falls to 136 FPS at 1440p and further to 91.8 FPS at 4K. This represents a 23.9% decline from 1080p to 1440p and a 32.5% decline from 1440p to 4K, indicating that the RX 6800 XT is still delivering headroom at lower resolutions but becomes increasingly taxed as pixel count quadruples.

The scaling pattern holds across all settings presets. At High settings, the transition from 1080p (113.3 FPS) to 1440p (86.3 FPS) yields a 23.8% reduction, while moving from 1440p to 4K (56.5 FPS) costs another 34.5%. The Ultra preset shows similar behavior: 99.9 FPS at 1080p falls to 72.9 FPS at 1440p (27% drop) and then to 50.5 FPS at 4K (30.7% drop). These consistent percentage losses across presets suggest that the frame rate decline is driven primarily by the GPU's raw fill rate and memory bandwidth, not by CPU contention or settings-specific overhead.

Notably, the gap between Low and Ultra presets widens at higher resolutions. At 1080p, the difference between Low (178.6 FPS) and Ultra (99.9 FPS) is 78.7 FPS, while at 4K, the same comparison shows a 41.3 FPS gap (91.8 FPS vs 50.5 FPS). This narrowing delta indicates that at 4K, the GPU is so heavily loaded that even reducing graphical fidelity cannot fully compensate for the resolution's demands. The data suggests that 1440p represents the sweet spot where the CPU (AMD Ryzen 5 5500 with 6 cores and 12 threads) can still feed the GPU adequately, while 4K places the workload squarely on the RX 6800 XT's shoulders.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 556 out of 1,636 tested combinations places it in the upper third of all configurations, but it is not a top-tier performer for Control specifically. This positioning reflects a balanced pairing where neither component is a clear bottleneck, yet the overall system does not achieve elite status. The CPU's percentile rank of 79 against all processors indicates solid mid-range performance, while the GPU's percentile of 87 against all graphics cards shows stronger relative strength.

Looking at the CPU's nearest rivals, the Ryzen 5 5500 sits within a tight performance band. It trails the Intel Core i5-12500 by a negligible 0.1% and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4655GE by the same margin, while edging out the AMD EPYC 7J13 by 0.1% and the Intel Core i5-12600T by 0.2%. This clustering suggests that the CPU is not the differentiator in this combo's ranking; instead, the GPU's capabilities likely drive the positioning. The RX 6800 XT's nearest rivals show more variance: it is 0.5% behind the Intel Arc A550M, 1.7% behind the NVIDIA RTX A1000, and 1.9% and 2.6% ahead of the NVIDIA CMP 50HX and GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER, respectively.

Given that the GPU outperforms most of its direct competitors in average benchmark scores, the combo's 556th rank suggests that Control's specific engine demands may not fully leverage the RX 6800 XT's strengths. The game's 2019 release date means it may not utilize the RDNA 2.0 architecture's full feature set, potentially explaining why this powerful GPU pairing does not crack the top 500 combinations.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT is the clear performance anchor in this pairing, and its specifications directly correlate with the measured frame rates. The GPU's 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is ample for Control's textures and effects at all tested resolutions. The memory clock runs at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective), while the base clock of 1825 MHz boosts up to 2250 MHz, with a game clock rated at 2015 MHz. These clocks allow the GPU to sustain high throughput, though the 300 W TDP and dual-slot cooler design indicate the power draw required to maintain these frequencies.

The GPU's architectural features—72 RT cores and 128 ROPs—are relevant to Control, a game known for its ray tracing and particle effects. However, the measured FPS data does not show a disproportionate penalty at 4K Ultra (50.5 FPS), which might be expected if ray tracing were heavily utilized. Instead, the smooth scaling across presets suggests that the ROP throughput (288.0 GPixel/s) and texture rate (648.0 GTexel/s) are being exercised more than the RT cores, as the game's visual style relies heavily on rasterized geometry and post-processing effects.

The RX 6800 XT's 20.74 TFLOPS of FP32 compute is substantial, but the benchmark results indicate that memory bandwidth becomes a limiting factor at 4K. The 512.0 GB/s figure is sufficient for 1440p, where the combo maintains playable frame rates even at Ultra (72.9 FPS), but the 4K Ultra result of 50.5 FPS suggests the GPU is approaching its bandwidth ceiling. The 7 nm process node from TSMC, shared with the CPU, contributes to the GPU's efficiency, allowing these high clocks without exceeding the 300 W TDP limit.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of performance across all resolution and settings combinations. At 1920x1080, the combo delivers excellent frame rates regardless of settings: Low hits 178.6 FPS, Medium achieves 124.3 FPS, High reaches 113.3 FPS, and Ultra maintains 99.9 FPS. These figures indicate that at 1080p, the Ryzen 5 5500 is capable of feeding the RX 6800 XT adequately, as even the lowest preset does not show a CPU-bound plateau that would cap frame rates.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance remains strong but shows the GPU beginning to assert its influence. Low settings produce 136 FPS, Medium yields 96.7 FPS, High delivers 86.3 FPS, and Ultra drops to 72.9 FPS. The transition from Low to Medium at 1440p costs 39.3 FPS, a larger relative drop than the 54.3 FPS difference at 1080p, indicating that the GPU is working harder to fill the additional pixels. At 4K (3840x2160), the frame rates become more demanding: Low achieves 91.8 FPS, Medium falls to 67.8 FPS, High manages 56.5 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 50.5 FPS.

The most striking observation is the performance delta between Low and Ultra settings at each resolution. At 1080p, this gap is 78.7 FPS, representing a 44% performance cost for maximum visual fidelity. At 1440p, the gap narrows to 63.1 FPS (a 46.4% cost), and at 4K, it shrinks further to 41.3 FPS (a 45% cost). This consistency in percentage terms confirms that the settings presets scale uniformly, but the absolute FPS values at 4K Ultra (50.5 FPS) may dip below the 60 FPS threshold that many players prefer for a smooth action-adventure experience.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured rows, the optimal settings balance depends on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For 4K gaming, the data shows that Low settings (91.8 FPS) provide the smoothest experience, while Medium (67.8 FPS) remains playable and offers improved visual quality. High (56.5 FPS) and Ultra (50.5 FPS) fall below 60 FPS, which may introduce noticeable stutter in fast-paced combat sequences typical of Control's action-adventure genre. Players prioritizing visual fidelity at 4K should accept the 50.5 FPS Ultra result, but those seeking a fluid experience will find Medium settings the best compromise, delivering 67.8 FPS with a 17.3 FPS improvement over High.

At 1440p, the combo has more headroom, making High settings (86.3 FPS) the recommended choice for most players. This preset offers a strong balance between visual quality and performance, with the 96.7 FPS Medium option available for those who prefer higher frame rates. Ultra at 72.9 FPS is also viable for players who want maximum detail, as it remains above the 60 FPS threshold. The data indicates that 1440p High provides the most efficient use of the hardware, avoiding the diminishing returns seen when dropping to Medium (only 10.4 FPS gain) or the visual sacrifice of Low (49.7 FPS gain but significant graphical downgrade).

For 1080p, the choice is more flexible given the high frame rates across all presets. Ultra (99.9 FPS) is the clear recommendation, as it maintains near-100 FPS performance while delivering the game's full visual effects. Players with high-refresh-rate monitors could drop to Low (178.6 FPS) for competitive responsiveness, but the 78.7 FPS difference between Low and Ultra does not justify the visual loss for a single-player experience like Control. The 113.3 FPS High result offers a middle ground, but Ultra's 99.9 FPS is close enough that the graphical improvements are essentially free. Across all resolutions, the data supports a settings hierarchy where Medium serves as the baseline for playability, High as the balanced choice, and Ultra as the premium option for those with performance headroom.