Control

The AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER combination delivers a solid, if not spectacular, experience in Control. This pairing of a 6-core Zen 3 processor with a Turing-generation GPU produces a clear bottleneck profile, with performance scaling that shifts decisively as resolution increases. The data indicates that this combo is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, where it can leverage its CPU strength, rather than 4K, where the GPU's limitations become the primary constraint.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a classic pattern of GPU-bound scaling as resolution climbs. At 1080p with High settings, the combo achieves an average of 82 FPS. Moving to 1440p drops this to 62 FPS, a reduction of 24.4%. The jump to 4K is even more punishing, bringing the average down to 42 FPS, which is a further 32.3% drop from the 1440p figure. This steep decline from 1440p to 4K strongly indicates that the RTX 2070 SUPER's 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and its 448.0 GB/s bandwidth are being saturated, making the GPU the definitive limiting factor at higher resolutions.

The gap between Low and Ultra settings also widens with resolution, revealing where the CPU headroom ends. At 1080p, the spread between Low (130 FPS) and Ultra (71 FPS) is 59 FPS. This large delta suggests that at 1080p, the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU enough frames to expose the performance cost of each graphics preset. However, at 4K, the spread between Low (66 FPS) and Ultra (36 FPS) is only 30 FPS. The absolute numbers are lower, but the relative cost of Ultra is similar. The key insight is that the 5500X3D, with its 96 MB of shared L3 cache, provides ample headroom at 1080p, but the GPU simply cannot maintain that pace when pixel count quadruples.

The data suggests that the Ryzen 5 5500X3D is not the bottleneck in this configuration. Even at 1080p Low, where the CPU is most likely to be stressed, the combo produces 130 FPS. This is a strong indicator that the processor's single-thread performance, evidenced by its Passmark single-thread score of 2941, is more than adequate for this title. The limiting component is unambiguously the RTX 2070 SUPER, as the performance cliff from 1440p to 4K is far steeper than the cliff from 1080p to 1440p, which is typical of a GPU that is running out of memory bandwidth and raw shading power.

How This Combo Ranks

In the grand scheme of tested configurations, this combo ranks 1632 out of 2888 combinations for Control. This places it in the 56.5th percentile of all tested pairings, meaning it outperforms a slight majority of systems but is far from the top tier. This mid-pack ranking is consistent with its component selection: a modern, efficient CPU paired with a GPU that is now several generations old. The CPU is a strong performer in its own right, with an average benchmark score of 37018 and a percentile rank of 85 against all CPUs. The GPU, however, has a percentile rank of only 65 against all GPUs, which drags the overall combo ranking down.

The CPU's nearest rivals highlight its competitive positioning. It sits within 0.3% of the Intel Core i9-12900T and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450, and it edges out the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F and Intel Core Ultra 5 225 by 0.2%. This indicates that the 5500X3D is a very capable processor that trades blows with far more expensive or power-hungry parts. The GPU's rivals, however, tell a different story. The RTX 2070 SUPER's average benchmark score of 20282 is just barely below the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M, the RTX 3070 Mobile, and the Intel Arc B570, all of which are within 1.5% of its score. This shows that while the GPU is not a slouch, it is firmly in the performance class of mid-range mobile and entry-level desktop parts from newer generations.

The rank of 1632 out of 2888 is a direct consequence of this CPU/GPU imbalance. The processor is doing its job admirably, but the graphics card is holding the system back from achieving a higher standing. In practical terms, this combo is a 1080p/1440p machine that will struggle to maintain high refresh rates at 4K. The data suggests that if you were to pair this CPU with a significantly faster GPU, the combo rank would improve dramatically, as the CPU has the headroom to support it.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings for this combo depend entirely on the target resolution. For 4K gaming, the data is clear: stick to Low settings. The jump from Low (66 FPS) to Medium (47 FPS) is a massive 28.8% performance hit, and the visual fidelity gain is unlikely to justify dropping below the 60 FPS threshold. High (42 FPS) and Ultra (36 FPS) are effectively unplayable for smooth action, making Low the only sensible choice for a playable 4K experience.

At 1440p, the High preset is the sweet spot. It delivers an average of 62 FPS, which is perfectly playable for a single-player action-adventure title. The Medium preset offers 70 FPS, but the 8 FPS gain over High is marginal. The Ultra preset drops to 54 FPS, which is a noticeable step down in smoothness. The data suggests that High at 1440p provides the best balance of visual quality and performance, as it remains comfortably above 60 FPS without the significant cost of Ultra.

For 1080p, the choice is more flexible. The High preset (82 FPS) is a solid choice that will look great and play smoothly. However, the Low preset (130 FPS) is available for players who prioritize maximum frame rates, perhaps for competitive play or to take advantage of a high-refresh-rate monitor. The Medium preset (92 FPS) is a good middle ground, but the 10 FPS difference between Medium and High is so small that High is the better value. Ultra (71 FPS) remains above 60 FPS but is the least efficient choice, offering diminishing returns over High for a 13.4% performance penalty.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The full dataset provides a clear picture of the combo's performance across all tested configurations.

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: Average FPS 130. This is the maximum performance the combo can muster, indicating strong CPU headroom.
• Medium: Average FPS 92, with a minimum of 78 and a maximum of 106. This shows a 29.2% drop from Low.
• High: Average FPS 82. A further 10.9% reduction from Medium, showing the cost of higher-quality textures and effects.
• Ultra: Average FPS 71. The most demanding setting, representing a 45.4% reduction from Low.

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: Average FPS 98. The GPU begins to feel the load, with a 24.6% drop from the 1080p Low score.
• Medium: Average FPS 70, with a minimum of 59 and a maximum of 80. The minimum of 59 FPS shows that even Medium can dip below 60 FPS in intense scenes.
• High: Average FPS 62. The recommended setting for this resolution, offering a stable experience above 60 FPS.
• Ultra: Average FPS 54. The first preset to fall below the 60 FPS target, making it less desirable.

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: Average FPS 66. The only 4K setting that achieves a playable frame rate.
• Medium: Average FPS 47, with a minimum of 40 and a maximum of 54. The minimum of 40 FPS indicates significant stuttering potential.
• High: Average FPS 42. A 36.4% drop from Low, showing the extreme cost of high settings at 4K.
• Ultra: Average FPS 36. The lowest score in the entire dataset, confirming the GPU is overwhelmed.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER is the defining component in this pairing, and its specifications explain the performance ceiling. Built on the 12 nm Turing architecture with the TU104 chip, it features 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. Its boost clock of 1770 MHz and FP32 performance of 9.062 TFLOPS are respectable for its generation, but the 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus is its Achilles' heel. The 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth is simply not enough to feed the GPU's processing units at 4K resolutions, leading to the significant frame rate drops observed.

The GPU's compute and graphics benchmarks reflect its mid-tier standing. Its Passmark G3D score of 18169 and Geekbench OpenCL score of 83358 place it in the 65th percentile of all GPUs. This is a good score, but it is notably lower than the CPU's 85th percentile. The GPU's closest rivals, the Intel Arc A750 and Arc B570, are within 1.5% of its average benchmark score, showing that the RTX 2070 SUPER is competitive with modern entry-level offerings. However, it lacks the raw power of higher-tier cards that could fully utilize the Ryzen 5 5500X3D's capabilities.

The GPU's 40 RT cores and 320 Tensor cores are present, but their impact on Control is not directly measured in the FPS data. The game is known for its use of ray tracing, but the measured rows do not specify if RT is enabled. Given the significant performance drops observed at 4K, it is likely that enabling ray tracing would push frame rates even lower. The data suggests that for this combo, the standard rasterization performance is the primary concern, and the GPU's VRAM capacity and bandwidth are the limiting factors, not its compute capabilities.

FAQ

*Q: Can this combo run Control at 4K smoothly?*

A: Not at high settings. The measured data shows that at 4K, only the Low preset achieves a playable average of 66 FPS. High and Ultra settings drop to 42 FPS and 36 FPS respectively, which are not smooth experiences.

Q: What is the best resolution for this CPU and GPU pairing?

A: The data indicates 1440p is the sweet spot. At High settings, it produces an average of 62 FPS, which balances visual quality and performance. 1080p also works well, with High settings reaching 82 FPS, but 1440p offers a better visual experience without sacrificing playability.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the main bottleneck in this system?

A: The GPU is the primary bottleneck. This is evident from the resolution scaling, where the FPS drops significantly from 1440p to 4K. The CPU's high benchmark scores and the strong 1080p Low performance (130 FPS) show it has ample headroom.

Q: How does the Ryzen 5 5500X3D compare to its closest rivals?

A: The data shows it is extremely competitive. Its average benchmark score of 37018 is within 0.3% of the Intel Core i9-12900T and AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450. It also outperforms the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F and Intel Core Ultra 5 225 by 0.2%.

Q: What is the performance difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: The difference is substantial. Low settings yield an average of 130 FPS, while Ultra drops to 71 FPS. This is a 45.4% reduction in performance, highlighting the significant cost of the highest quality presets.

*Q: Is 8 GB of VRAM sufficient for Control?*

A: It is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p, but it appears to be a limiting factor at 4K. The steep performance cliff between 1440p and 4K suggests that the 8 GB VRAM buffer and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient to handle the texture data required at 4K resolution.