Control

Control is an action-adventure title from 2019 that stresses both GPU throughput and CPU overhead, and the combination of an AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D with an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti produces a compelling but nuanced result. The data shows a combo that ranks 700th out of 2,888 tested combinations in this game, placing it comfortably in the upper quartile of all pairings. That rank is not a fluke; it reflects a system where the RTX 3080 Ti’s raw rasterization power is largely realized, though the Ryzen 5 5500X3D’s six Zen 3 cores occasionally set the ceiling at lower resolutions. For builders, this pairing is about balancing settings and resolution to keep the GPU fed without pushing the CPU into a bottleneck. The measured frames per second across three resolutions and four quality presets provide a clear map of where this combo excels and where it leaves performance on the table.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 700 out of 2,888 tested combinations places it in the top 24.2% of all pairings in Control. That is a strong showing, but it is not elite; the data suggests that while the RTX 3080 Ti is a formidable GPU—sitting at the 83rd percentile among all GPUs—the Ryzen 5 5500X3D’s 85th percentile among all CPUs does not fully complement it in this specific title. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 37,018 is nearly identical to its nearest rivals: the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F scores 36,945 (0.2% higher), the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 scores 37,093 (0.2% lower), the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 scores 36,938 (0.2% higher), and the Intel Core i9-12900T scores 37,112 (0.3% lower). This clustering means the 5500X3D is not a performance outlier; it is a mid-pack CPU that trades blows with modern mid-range and older high-end parts. The GPU, meanwhile, has an average benchmark score of 41,187, and its nearest rivals show a wider spread: the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 scores 40,870 (0.8% higher), the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB scores 41,707 (1.2% lower), the NVIDIA Tesla M40 scores 41,897 (1.7% lower), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 scores 40,377 (2.0% higher). The RTX 3080 Ti is clearly the dominant component here, and the rank reflects that the GPU is doing most of the heavy lifting.

In practical terms, the rank means this combo will handle Control at high settings without major compromises, but it will not top leaderboards. The gap between the CPU and GPU percentiles—85 for the CPU versus 83 for the GPU—is narrow, yet the game’s engine appears to reward single-thread performance and memory bandwidth more than raw core counts. The Ryzen 5 5500X3D’s 96 MB of shared L3 cache helps in many titles, but Control’s benchmark results indicate that the GPU is the limiting factor at 4K, while the CPU becomes more relevant at 1080p. For a builder targeting 1440p or 4K, this rank is reassuring; for someone chasing maximum frame rates at 1080p, the CPU will hold back the GPU in low and medium presets.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides a clear hierarchy of settings at each resolution, and the sweet spot is not always the highest preset. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 192 FPS, which is 56 FPS higher than High (121 FPS) and 87 FPS higher than Ultra (105 FPS). Medium sits at 136 FPS, which is a 31 FPS drop from Low but still 15 FPS above High. The jump from Low to Medium is significant, but the jump from Medium to High is a steep 15 FPS decline, suggesting that High introduces costly effects that do not proportionally improve visual quality. For 1080p, Medium is the best balance: it maintains an average above 136 FPS, which is well beyond the refresh rate of most monitors, while avoiding the performance cliff of High. Ultra is not worth the 31 FPS penalty over Medium unless visual fidelity is the sole priority.

At 2560x1440, the pattern shifts. Low averages 145 FPS, Medium averages 103 FPS, High averages 92 FPS, and Ultra averages 80 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 42 FPS, which is larger than at 1080p, indicating that the GPU is starting to feel the resolution increase. Medium remains the recommended preset here because it stays above 100 FPS, which is smooth for most displays, and it offers a 23 FPS advantage over High. High is only 12 FPS faster than Ultra, which is a smaller margin than at 1080p, so if you want higher quality, skipping straight to Ultra is less punishing—but it still costs 23 FPS versus Medium. For 1440p, the data favors sticking with Medium or High depending on whether you prefer frame rate headroom or visual polish; Ultra should be reserved for slower-paced scenes.

At 3840x2160, the situation changes dramatically. Low averages 98 FPS, Medium averages 70 FPS, High averages 62 FPS, and Ultra averages 54 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 28 FPS, and from Medium to High is another 8 FPS, with Ultra just 8 FPS behind High. At 4K, Low is the only preset that keeps the average above 60 FPS, while Medium dips just below at 70 FPS but with a minimum of 59 FPS, which can cause stutters on 60 Hz displays. High and Ultra both fall below 62 FPS average, which is marginal for 4K gaming. The recommendation here is to use Low for competitive or high-refresh-rate play, or Medium if you have a VRR display that can handle the 59 FPS minimum. High and Ultra are only viable if you cap the frame rate or accept occasional dips. Overall, the measured rows show that Medium is the best all-rounder at 1080p and 1440p, while 4K demands Low for consistent performance.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS data from 1080p to 4K reveals how this combo scales with resolution and where the bottleneck lies. At Low settings, the average FPS goes from 192 at 1080p to 145 at 1440p to 98 at 4K. That is a 24.5% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a 32.4% drop from 1440p to 4K. The scaling is not linear, which indicates that the GPU is being increasingly stressed as pixel count rises, but the CPU is still contributing at 1080p. At Medium settings, the averages are 136 FPS at 1080p, 103 FPS at 1440p, and 70 FPS at 4K—a 24.3% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 32.0% drop from 1440p to 4K. This consistent scaling across Low and Medium suggests that the RTX 3080 Ti is the primary limiter at these settings, as the CPU has enough headroom to feed the GPU at lower resolutions.

At High settings, the averages are 121 FPS at 1080p, 92 FPS at 1440p, and 62 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 24.0%, and from 1440p to 4K is 32.6%. Ultra follows a slightly steeper curve: 105 FPS at 1080p, 80 FPS at 1440p, and 54 FPS at 4K, with drops of 23.8% and 32.5% respectively. The similarity in percentage drops across all four presets—roughly 24% for the first resolution step and 32% for the second—indicates that the game’s rendering load scales predictably with pixel count, and the GPU is the dominant factor. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the 1080p-to-1440p drop would be smaller because the CPU would already be limiting at 1080p, leaving less room for the GPU to scale down. The fact that 1080p Low hits 192 FPS while 4K Low hits 98 FPS shows that the RTX 3080 Ti can push high frame rates but is capped by its 12 GB of GDDR6X memory and 912.4 GB/s bandwidth at higher resolutions.

The limiting component is clearly the GPU at 4K, but at 1080p Low, the 192 FPS average suggests the CPU is nearing its limit. The Ryzen 5 5500X3D’s boost clock of 4.00 GHz and 6 cores/12 threads are adequate for Control, but the benchmark results indicate that dropping from Low to Medium at 1080p costs 56 FPS, which is a larger penalty than the 42 FPS drop at 1440p or the 28 FPS drop at 4K. This suggests that at 1080p, the CPU is doing more work to maintain high frame rates, and the GPU has excess capacity. For builders, this means the combo is best exploited at 1440p, where the GPU is fully utilized without the CPU becoming a bottleneck. At 1080p, lowering settings to Low will yield frame rates that exceed most monitors’ refresh rates, but the CPU will prevent the GPU from reaching its full potential in less demanding scenes.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured results show a wide spread across presets. Low delivers an average of 192 FPS, which is the highest of all tested configurations. Medium drops to 136 FPS, with a minimum of 116 FPS and a maximum of 157 FPS, indicating stable frame times with occasional dips. High averages 121 FPS, while Ultra averages 105 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 56 FPS, which is substantial, and the gap between High and Ultra is 16 FPS. For 1080p gamers, the data suggests that Low is for esports-style play where frame rate is king, but Medium offers a better balance for most users—it stays above 116 FPS minimum, which is smooth on 120 Hz panels. Ultra at 105 FPS is still playable, but it is 31 FPS slower than Medium, and the visual difference may not justify the cost.

At 2560x1440, the averages are 145 FPS for Low, 103 FPS for Medium, 92 FPS for High, and 80 FPS for Ultra. The Medium preset again shows a minimum of 88 FPS and a maximum of 118 FPS, which means it can dip below 90 FPS in heavy scenes but remains above 60 FPS consistently. High at 92 FPS is 11 FPS slower than Medium, and Ultra at 80 FPS is 12 FPS slower than High. The scaling from Low to Medium is 42 FPS, which is steeper than at 1080p, reflecting the GPU’s increased workload. For 1440p, Medium is the best choice for high-refresh displays, while High is acceptable for 60-75 Hz monitors. Ultra is only suitable if you prioritize visuals over frame rate and have VRR to mask the 80 FPS average.

At 3840x2160, the results are more constrained. Low averages 98 FPS, Medium averages 70 FPS with a minimum of 59 FPS and a maximum of 80 FPS, High averages 62 FPS, and Ultra averages 54 FPS. The 4K Medium minimum of 59 FPS is close to the 60 FPS target, which means it will stutter on fixed 60 Hz displays. Low is the only preset that comfortably exceeds 60 FPS, while High and Ultra fall below 62 FPS average, making them marginal for 4K gaming. The difference between High and Ultra is only 8 FPS, so if you are on 4K, you might as well use Ultra if you can tolerate the frame rate, since the visual gain is minimal. The data shows that this combo is not a 4K powerhouse; it can handle 4K Low or Medium, but for consistent 60+ FPS, you need to drop to 1440p or lower.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti is the star of this pairing, and its specifications explain the measured results. With 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 384-bit bus, it offers 912.4 GB/s of bandwidth, which is critical for Control’s high-resolution textures and effects. The base clock is 1365 MHz, boosting to 1665 MHz, and the GPU has 10,240 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 112 ROPs. Its FP32 performance is 34.10 TFLOPS, and it supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which Control uses for ray tracing and other modern features. The GPU’s 83rd percentile ranking and average benchmark score of 41,187 place it slightly above the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 (40,870, 0.8% slower) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 (40,377, 2.0% slower), but below the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB (41,707, 1.2% faster) and the Tesla M40 (41,897, 1.7% faster). This means the RTX 3080 Ti is a high-end card that sits just below the current-generation mid-range in raw compute, but its 12 GB VRAM is a limiting factor at 4K.

The data shows that the GPU’s role becomes more pronounced at higher resolutions. At 1080p, the CPU manages to keep the GPU fed, as evidenced by the 192 FPS Low result, but at 4K, the GPU is clearly the bottleneck. The 70 FPS average at 4K Medium, with a 59 FPS minimum, indicates that the GPU is running out of headroom, and the 54 FPS Ultra result confirms that 12 GB of VRAM is sufficient but not excessive for Control’s 4K textures. The memory clock of 1188 MHz, effective 19 Gbps, provides ample bandwidth, but the GPU’s 350 W TDP and 750 W suggested PSU requirement reflect its power-hungry nature. The RTX 3080 Ti’s predecessor, the GeForce 20 series, and successor, the GeForce 40 series, bracket its performance, but in this game, it delivers solid frame rates up to 1440p High without issues.

The GPU’s benchmark scores in DirectX 12 (110 in PassMark) and DirectX 11 (223) are lower than its DirectX 9 (274) and DirectX 10 (184) scores, which is unusual but reflects the test suite’s methodology. In Control, the actual game performance aligns more with the GPU’s overall 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 5,077 and PassMark G3D score of 26,896, which are strong indicators of real-world capability. The RTX 3080 Ti’s 80 RT cores and 320 Tensor cores are not directly tested in the FPS data, but they contribute to the game’s visual effects when enabled. For builders, the GPU is not the weak link; it is the CPU that occasionally limits at 1080p, and the GPU that defines the ceiling at 4K.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Control?

A: The data shows that 2560x1440 is the sweet spot. At Medium settings, the average FPS is 103, with a minimum of 88 and a maximum of 118. This is smooth on high-refresh displays, and the GPU is fully utilized without the CPU bottleneck seen at 1080p. At 4K, the average drops to 70 FPS on Medium, which is playable but close to the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Should I use Low or Medium settings at 1080p?

A: Low delivers 192 FPS average, while Medium delivers 136 FPS with a minimum of 116. If you have a 144 Hz or 165 Hz monitor, Medium is safer because it stays above 116 FPS, avoiding frame drops below the refresh rate. Low is only necessary for 240 Hz displays or competitive play where every frame matters.

Q: Can this combo handle 4K Ultra in Control?

A: The measured average at 4K Ultra is 54 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target. This is not ideal for a fixed 60 Hz display, but it is playable on a VRR monitor that supports 48-60 Hz range. For consistent 60+ FPS, you need to drop to Medium (70 FPS average) or Low (98 FPS average).

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck at 1440p?

A: The scaling data indicates the GPU is the primary limiter at 1440p. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is about 24% across all presets, which is consistent with a GPU-bound scenario. The CPU’s 96 MB L3 cache and 4.00 GHz boost are sufficient to feed the GPU at this resolution.

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

A: The CPU’s average benchmark score of 37,018 is essentially tied with its nearest rivals: the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F (36,945, 0.2% higher), the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 (37,093, 0.2% lower), the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 (36,938, 0.2% higher), and the Intel Core i9-12900T (37,112, 0.3% lower). This means there is no meaningful difference in raw CPU performance among these parts for Control.

Q: What is the minimum FPS at 4K Medium, and is it a problem?

A: The minimum FPS at 4K Medium is 59, with an average of 70 and a maximum of 80. The 59 FPS minimum means the frame rate can dip just below 60 in intense scenes, which could cause stuttering on a fixed 60 Hz display. A VRR monitor eliminates this issue, but for strict 60 FPS consistency, 4K Low (98 FPS average) is the safer choice.