Control

The AMD Ryzen 5 5500 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB delivers a robust 1080p and 1440p gaming experience in Control, though the 8 GB frame buffer becomes a limiting factor at 4K Ultra settings. This combination ranks 656th out of 1636 tested configurations in the game, placing it in the upper 60th percentile of all tested combos. The CPU, a 6-core, 12-thread Zen 3 part with a boost clock of 4.20 GHz, scores 16,429 in Cinebench R23 multicore, while the GPU, based on the Ada Lovelace architecture with 4352 shading units, achieves a 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 2913. Benchmark results indicate that the system is well-balanced for high-refresh-rate 1080p gaming, but the GPU’s 128-bit memory bus and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth show strain at higher resolutions.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 1080p Ultra settings?

A: The system achieves an average of 91.3 FPS at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings, which is playable but the lowest of the 1080p presets tested.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rival?

A: The Ryzen 5 5500 scores 20,875 on the average benchmark, which is 0.1% lower than the Intel Core i5-12500’s 20,897 and 0.1% higher than the AMD EPYC 7J13’s 20,845. The performance difference is negligible.

Q: Does the GPU bottleneck at 4K resolution?

A: Yes. The average FPS drops from 102.9 at 1080p High to 50.9 at 4K High, indicating the GPU becomes the primary limiting factor at higher pixel counts.

Q: What is the GPU’s memory configuration?

A: The RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB uses 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s and a boost clock of 2535 MHz.

Q: How does the combo rank among all tested configurations?

A: The combo ranks 656th out of 1636 tested combos in Control, placing it in the upper portion of the database.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the average FPS ranges from 120.6 on Low settings to 70.2 on Ultra, a difference of 50.4 FPS.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB is the dominant component in this pairing for Control, and its memory subsystem dictates the scaling pattern across resolutions. The GPU’s 8 GB GDDR6 frame buffer, paired with a 128-bit bus, provides 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p gaming but becomes a constraint at 4K. The core clock runs at a base of 2310 MHz and boosts to 2535 MHz, and with 4352 shading units, the raw compute throughput is 22.06 TFLOPS FP32. In practice, this translates to a 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 2913, which is identical to the GeForce GT 555M’s score and just 0.2% above the RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB’s 2907.

The GPU’s role is most evident when comparing settings at the same resolution. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 74.3 FPS (165.6 vs. 91.3), a 44.9% reduction in performance when enabling maximum visual fidelity. This indicates that while the GPU is capable at lower settings, the higher preset demands more from the memory system and shader units. At 1440p, the spread narrows to 50.4 FPS (120.6 vs. 70.2), and at 4K, it narrows further to 33.7 FPS (82.2 vs. 48.5). The shrinking delta suggests that at 4K, the GPU is already saturated even at Low settings, and the incremental cost of Ultra settings is relatively smaller as a percentage of the total frame time.

The 34 RT cores and 136 tensor cores are present in the hardware, but their impact on Control’s measured FPS is indirect; the game’s settings presets do not explicitly toggle ray tracing in this data, so the results reflect rasterization performance. The GPU’s 48 ROPs and 136 TMUs process the scene, and the pixel rate of 121.7 GPixel/s combined with the texture rate of 344.8 GTexel/s provides a balanced workload. The data shows that the GPU is well-matched to the CPU at 1080p, but the CPU’s 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth and PCIe Gen 3 interface do not throttle the GPU, as evidenced by the high frame rates at lower resolutions.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS data reveals a clear trend: as resolution increases, the average frame rate drops, but the rate of decline is not linear. Moving from 1080p High (102.9 FPS) to 1440p High (76.1 FPS) results in a 26.8 FPS loss, a 26% reduction. Moving from 1440p High to 4K High (50.9 FPS) results in a 25.2 FPS loss, a 33% reduction. This indicates that the GPU is the limiting component at 4K, as the scaling factor exceeds the pixel count increase ratio.

At Low settings, the scaling is more dramatic. The system produces 165.6 FPS at 1080p, 120.6 FPS at 1440p, and 82.2 FPS at 4K. The percentage drop from 1080p to 4K is 50.4%, which is close to the theoretical pixel count difference (4x), suggesting that the GPU is fully utilized even at Low settings. In contrast, at Ultra settings, the FPS ranges from 91.3 at 1080p to 70.2 at 1440p and 48.5 at 4K, a total drop of 46.9%. The smaller relative drop at Ultra indicates that the CPU or other system components begin to exert influence at lower resolutions, but the GPU remains the primary bottleneck at 4K.

The data suggests that the CPU, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, is not the limiting factor at any resolution tested. The Ryzen 5 5500’s single-thread score of 836 in 3DMark and 2319 in Cinebench R23 is sufficient to feed the GPU at 1080p, as the FPS remains above 165 at Low settings. The crossover point where the GPU becomes the sole bottleneck is somewhere between 1440p and 4K, as the frame rate at 4K Ultra (48.5) is nearly half of the 1080p Ultra (91.3), matching the pixel density increase. This behavior is consistent with a GPU-bound scenario at higher resolutions, where the 8 GB memory capacity and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient to maintain higher frame rates without reducing settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers an average of 165.6 FPS on Low settings, which is the highest result across all configurations. Medium settings reduce this to 118.0 FPS, a 28.8% drop, while High settings yield 102.9 FPS. Ultra settings produce 91.3 FPS, which is 44.9% lower than Low. The data indicates that the GPU has ample headroom at 1080p, as even the most demanding preset remains well above 60 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the average FPS ranges from 120.6 on Low to 70.2 on Ultra. The Medium preset achieves 88.6 FPS, and High settings produce 76.1 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra is a 41.8% reduction, slightly smaller than at 1080p. This suggests that the GPU is starting to become the limiting factor, but the system still provides a smooth experience across all presets. The 1440p results are particularly notable because the gap between Medium (88.6) and High (76.1) is 12.5 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra (70.2) is only 5.9 FPS, indicating diminishing returns on the highest settings.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles to maintain high frame rates. Low settings average 82.2 FPS, which is still playable, but Medium drops to 59.8 FPS, High to 50.9 FPS, and Ultra to 48.5 FPS. The 4K Ultra result is the lowest in the entire dataset, and it represents a 70.7% reduction from the 1080p Low score. The data shows that 4K gaming is only feasible at Low settings, and even then, the frame rate is barely above the 60 FPS threshold. The 4K Medium (59.8) and High (50.9) results indicate that the GPU’s memory bandwidth is the primary constraint, as increasing settings from Low to Medium incurs a 22.4 FPS penalty.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 5500 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB ranks 656th out of 1636 tested combos in Control, placing it in the 60th percentile of all configurations. This rank reflects a balanced system that excels at 1080p and handles 1440p well, but falls behind at 4K due to the GPU’s memory limitations. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 20,875 places it nearly identical to the Intel Core i5-12500 (20,897, delta -0.1%), meaning the processor is not a differentiator in this ranking. The GPU’s 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 2913 is also matched by the GeForce GT 555M, which suggests that the raw compute performance is not exceptional, but the modern architecture provides better efficiency.

The rank of 656 out of 1636 means that 980 combos tested slower, while 655 are faster. This places the system in the upper-middle tier of the database, which is consistent with its measured FPS. At 1080p Ultra, the 91.3 FPS result would be competitive with many higher-end GPUs, but the 4K Ultra score of 48.5 FPS highlights the 8 GB memory constraint. The data suggests that this combo is best suited for 1080p high-refresh-rate monitors, as the 165.6 FPS at Low settings and 102.9 FPS at High settings provide a responsive experience. At 1440p, the system is still capable, but the 70.2 FPS at Ultra indicates that users may need to dial back settings for consistent 60 FPS performance. The ranking reflects a GPU that is end-of-life but still relevant for the resolution it was designed for, while the CPU provides ample headroom for future upgrades.