Control

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600 + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti combination ranks 1202nd out of 1636 tested combos in Control. That places this pairing in the lower-middle tier of the database, which is a meaningful context for interpreting the raw frame rates. While the individual components hold respectable positions in their own right — the CPU sits in the 79th percentile against all processors, and the GPU in the 69th percentile against all graphics cards — their combined performance in this specific title does not boost them into the upper echelon of tested systems.

The gap between the component-level standing and the combo rank suggests that Control's engine presents a particular challenge that neither part fully overcomes. The CPU's average benchmark score of 21765 puts it within a razor-thin margin of its nearest rivals: it is 0.6% ahead of the Intel Xeon D-1746TER, 0.6% behind the AMD EPYC 9554P, and 0.9% behind the Intel Core i7-11700F. The GPU's average score of 25120 similarly sits in a tight cluster, trailing the AMD Radeon RX 6700M by 0.2%, the AMD Radeon RX 6600 by 0.5%, and the AMD Radeon 890M by 0.5%. These near-ties mean the combo's ranking is driven less by raw component strength and more by how the two parts interact under Control's specific workload.

What the data makes clear is that this is a configuration capable of solid 1080p and 1440p play, but one that runs out of headroom at 4K. The measured FPS rows show a system that is consistently playable at lower resolutions, yet the 4K Ultra result of 35.5 FPS confirms a hard ceiling. The ranking reflects this: many better-positioned combos in the database achieve higher frame rates at 4K, which is where the biggest differentiators in this benchmark pool tend to appear.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data points to a clear hierarchy of playable settings. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves 118.5 FPS, Medium delivers 83.7 FPS, High reaches 72.4 FPS, and Ultra drops to 65.1 FPS. All four are above the 60 FPS threshold, meaning 1080p users have full freedom of choice. However, the optimal balance between visual quality and frame rate sits at the High preset: it delivers 72.4 FPS with substantial visual uplift over Low, while retaining a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS baseline.

At 2560x1440, the situation tightens. Low produces 87.7 FPS, Medium 65.8 FPS, and High 55.2 FPS. The Medium preset is the recommended choice here, offering a playable 65.8 FPS while preserving more graphical fidelity than Low. High and Ultra fall below the 60 FPS mark, making them less ideal for smooth gameplay. For users prioritizing frame rate over visuals, Low at 87.7 FPS remains viable, but Medium strikes the best compromise.

At 3840x2160, the picture changes dramatically. Low is the only preset that clears the 60 FPS bar, hitting 62.5 FPS. Medium manages 41.4 FPS, High 38.5 FPS, and Ultra 35.5 FPS. The data strongly recommends Low for 4K play; anything above that sacrifices smoothness for visual gains that are hard to appreciate when the frame rate dips below 40 FPS. Users with 4K displays should either accept Low settings or consider lowering the resolution to 1440p, where Medium provides a superior experience at 65.8 FPS.

FAQ

Q: Is this combo capable of 60 FPS at 1080p with maximum settings?

A: Yes, the Ultra preset at 1920x1080 delivers 65.1 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS threshold. However, the High preset provides a more comfortable margin at 72.4 FPS, suggesting that Ultra is playable but leaves less headroom for demanding scenes.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 1440p gaming?

A: The Medium preset at 2560x1440 produces 65.8 FPS, making it the only preset above 60 FPS outside of Low. Low reaches 87.7 FPS but sacrifices significant visual quality. High and Ultra fall below 60 FPS at 55.2 FPS and 47.5 FPS respectively.

Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming?

A: At 3840x2160, only the Low preset reaches a playable frame rate of 62.5 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra produce 41.4 FPS, 38.5 FPS, and 35.5 FPS respectively, which are below the 60 FPS target for smooth gameplay.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 4K?

A: At the High preset, the drop from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 is from 72.4 FPS to 38.5 FPS, a reduction of roughly 47%. At the Low preset, the drop is from 118.5 FPS to 62.5 FPS, a reduction of approximately 47% as well.

Q: Which component is more likely to bottleneck this combo in Control?

A: The data suggests the GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher resolutions. The frame rate scales consistently with resolution changes (1080p to 1440p to 4K), and the sharp decline at 4K — where the GPU's 8 GB VRAM and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth are stressed — indicates the graphics card is the primary constraint in this title.

Q: How does this combo compare to systems with similar components?

A: The CPU performs within 0.9% of its nearest rivals (Intel Core i7-11700F, AMD EPYC 9534), and the GPU within 0.7% of its nearest rivals (AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP). The combo's rank of 1202 out of 1636 reflects that these near-ties in component benchmarks do not translate to a standout position in Control specifically.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the full range of scores is: Low 118.5 FPS, Medium 83.7 FPS, High 72.4 FPS, and Ultra 65.1 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 53.4 FPS, indicating that Control scales significantly with settings at this resolution. The step from Low to Medium costs 34.8 FPS, while the step from Medium to High costs 11.3 FPS, and from High to Ultra costs 7.3 FPS. This pattern shows diminishing returns: the largest visual quality jump (Low to Medium) carries the heaviest performance penalty.

At 2560x1440, the scores are: Low 87.7 FPS, Medium 65.8 FPS, High 55.2 FPS, and Ultra 47.5 FPS. The total spread is 40.2 FPS, narrower than at 1080p. The Low-to-Medium drop is 21.9 FPS, Medium-to-High is 10.6 FPS, and High-to-Ultra is 7.7 FPS. The proportional pattern remains similar, but the absolute frame rates are lower across the board.

At 3840x2160, the scores are: Low 62.5 FPS, Medium 41.4 FPS, High 38.5 FPS, and Ultra 35.5 FPS. The total spread is 27.0 FPS. The Low-to-Medium drop is 21.1 FPS, which is the largest single-step penalty in the entire dataset. Medium-to-High only costs 2.9 FPS, and High-to-Ultra 3.0 FPS. This compression at the top end suggests that at 4K, the GPU is so heavily loaded that settings changes beyond Medium have minimal additional impact.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti brings 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU's base clock is 1410 MHz with a boost clock of 1665 MHz. These specifications directly influence the measured results: the 4K data shows a hard ceiling, with the Ultra preset producing only 35.5 FPS. The 8 GB VRAM capacity appears sufficient for 1080p and 1440p, where the frame rates stay respectable, but at 4K the combination of memory pressure and compute load pushes the GPU to its limits.

The GPU's benchmark scores place it at the 69th percentile overall, with an average score of 25120. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6700M, scores 25180 (a 0.2% difference), while the AMD Radeon RX 6600 scores 25235 (0.5% ahead). The tight clustering means the 3060 Ti is not a standout performer in synthetic tests, and the Control results reflect this: the GPU maintains playable frame rates up to 1440p Medium but cannot sustain 60 FPS at 4K on anything above Low settings.

The gap between the Low and Medium presets at 4K (62.5 FPS vs 41.4 FPS) — a 21.1 FPS drop — indicates that the GPU's shading units, TMUs, and ROPs (4864, 152, and 80 respectively) are the limiting factor. The 16.20 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is enough for lower settings, but Control's higher presets demand more than this GPU can deliver at 4K resolution.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600 provides 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. It features 32 MB of shared L3 cache and supports DDR4 memory with a dual-channel bus delivering 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. Its benchmark scores are strong for a mid-range desktop part: the Cinebench R23 multicore score is 18309, single-core is 2584, and the Passmark multithread score is 21541.

The CPU's percentile standing of 79th against all processors is notably higher than the GPU's 69th percentile. This suggests the CPU is less likely to be the bottleneck in most scenarios. However, the measured FPS data reveals that at lower resolutions, the CPU still plays a role. At 1080p Low, the combo hits 118.5 FPS, which is close to what the CPU can feed the GPU; the fact that this is the highest score in the dataset indicates the CPU can keep up with the GPU's output at this resolution.

The near-tie in CPU benchmarks with rivals — 0.6% ahead of the Intel Xeon D-1746TER and 0.6% behind the AMD EPYC 9554P — means that swapping this CPU for a comparable part would not meaningfully change Control's performance. The CPU's 12 threads are sufficient for Control's engine, which does not appear to be heavily multithreaded based on the frame rate patterns. The bottleneck in this combo is clearly the GPU, particularly at higher resolutions and settings.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is consistent and predictable, which points to a GPU-bound workload. At the Low preset, the progression is 118.5 FPS (1080p) to 87.7 FPS (1440p) to 62.5 FPS (4K). The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 30.8 FPS (a 26% reduction), and from 1440p to 4K is 25.2 FPS (a 29% reduction). This scaling is roughly proportional to the pixel count increase, confirming that the GPU is the limiting component.

At the High preset, the progression is 72.4 FPS (1080p) to 55.2 FPS (1440p) to 38.5 FPS (4K). The 1080p-to-1440p drop is 17.2 FPS (24%), and the 1440p-to-4K drop is 16.7 FPS (30%). The slightly steeper drop at 4K under High settings suggests that the GPU's memory bandwidth (448.0 GB/s) becomes a more significant constraint as resolution increases, since higher settings demand more texture data and shader work.

The data indicates that this combo is most balanced at 1080p and 1440p, where the CPU can adequately feed the GPU. At 4K, the GPU's limitations dominate: even at Low settings, the frame rate drops to 62.5 FPS, which is barely above the 60 FPS line. The scaling pattern — with the largest proportional drops occurring at 4K — confirms that users targeting 4K should look to a more powerful GPU, while those at 1080p or 1440p can enjoy this combo with appropriate settings.