Control

Control, the 2019 action-adventure title, presents a unique performance profile for the AMD Ryzen 5 5600G and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 pairing. The measured data reveals a system that scales unusually well into high resolutions, suggesting a balance of components that defies typical expectations for this hardware class. This analysis examines the measured FPS across a matrix of resolutions and settings, interpreting the results within the context of the CPU's and GPU's respective benchmarks and overall market positioning.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for this combination shows an exceptionally smooth performance curve as resolution increases, with the system demonstrating remarkable resilience at 4K. At Ultra settings, the average frame rate drops from 164 FPS at 1920x1080 to 113 FPS at 2560x1440, and further to 67 FPS at 3840x2160. This represents a 31% performance hit when moving from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 41% reduction when stepping up to 4K. The pattern indicates that while 4K Ultra is demanding, the system does not experience a catastrophic collapse, suggesting the GPU is not being entirely overwhelmed by pixel count.

The scaling from Medium to High settings across resolutions provides additional insight. At 1080p, the difference between Medium (222 FPS) and High (192 FPS) is a 14% reduction, while at 1440p the gap narrows to 14% as well (153 to 132 FPS). However, at 4K the relative difference expands: High settings produce 78 FPS compared to Medium's 90 FPS, a 13% reduction, but the absolute margins become more critical for playability. Low settings, by contrast, show the system's headroom: 261 FPS at 1080p, 179 FPS at 1440p, and 106 FPS at 4K, indicating that even at the highest resolution, the hardware can deliver a fluid experience when visual fidelity is sacrificed.

This scaling behavior points to a system where neither the CPU nor GPU becomes a hard bottleneck at any tested resolution. The consistent frame rate progression suggests a well-balanced configuration, though the 4K Ultra result of 67 FPS does indicate the GPU is nearing its practical limit. The data implies that at 1080p, the system is likely CPU-bound in lighter scenes, given the 5600G's strong single-thread performance, while at 4K the GTX 1650's 4 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory bus become the limiting factors, particularly with higher texture loads.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600G serves as the processing foundation for this configuration, bringing six cores and twelve threads based on the Zen 3 architecture. Its base clock of 3.90 GHz and boost clock of 4.40 GHz provide the computational throughput necessary for modern game logic and physics. In synthetic benchmarks, the processor achieves a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 10551 and a single-core score of 1409, placing it in the 74th percentile among all CPUs. This single-thread performance is particularly relevant for Control, which relies heavily on consistent frame pacing.

The CPU's nearest rivals in the benchmark database include the Intel Core i3-1220P and the AMD Ryzen 5 7530U, with the 5600G's average benchmark score of 21088 sitting nearly identical to these competitors (0.1% and -0.2% deltas respectively). This positions the processor as a mid-range contender that punches above its class in gaming workloads. The 16 MB of L3 cache and 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth ensure that the CPU can feed the GPU without introducing stutter, a critical factor given the game's physics-heavy environments and destructible objects.

In the measured game results, the CPU's role appears to be supporting rather than limiting. At 1080p Low settings, the system reaches 261 FPS, a figure that likely approaches the engine's internal limits or the CPU's ability to issue draw calls. However, the fact that 4K Low still produces 106 FPS suggests that even at lower resolutions, the CPU is not the primary constraint; rather, the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth become the deciding factors. The 5600G's 3DMark 16-thread score of 5451 and 8-thread score of 4694 indicate strong multi-threaded capability that aligns well with the game's use of multiple worker threads for rendering and physics.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the visual workhorse here, built on the Turing architecture with 896 shading units and 32 ROPs. Its base clock of 1485 MHz and boost clock of 1665 MHz, combined with 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, yields a memory bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s. This configuration places the GPU in the 40th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 7472. The nearest rivals include the Intel Arc A310 (1% faster) and the AMD Radeon R7 350 (0.6% slower), indicating the GTX 1650 sits at a competitive but modest performance tier.

In Control, the GPU's limitations become apparent at higher settings. The 4K Ultra result of 67 FPS, while playable, shows the card struggling to maintain the frame rates seen at lower resolutions. The 4 GB VRAM capacity is a likely constraint when loading high-resolution textures, and the 2001 MHz memory clock (8 Gbps effective) may not provide sufficient bandwidth for the game's detailed environments at 4K. However, the GTX 1650 demonstrates surprising capability at 1440p, where it delivers 132 FPS on High settings and 113 FPS on Ultra, suggesting that the card's compute throughput (2.984 TFLOPS FP32) is sufficient for the game's visual complexity at this resolution.

The GPU's DirectX 12 support (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4 compatibility are relevant for Control, which uses modern rendering APIs. The measured FPS at 1080p Medium (222 FPS) and High (192 FPS) show the card operating well within its comfort zone, with the 189 FPS minimum on Medium indicating stable frame delivery. The pixel rate of 53.28 GPixel/s and texture rate of 93.24 GTexel/s provide the raw throughput needed for the game's particle effects and lighting, though the 4K Ultra frame rate suggests the ROPs and memory subsystem are the constraining factors at that extreme.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the benchmark database, this specific combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 5600G and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 achieves a combo rank of 145 out of 3720 tested combinations for Control. This places the pairing in the top 4% of all configurations tested for this game, a remarkable result given the individual components' mid-range positioning. The ranking suggests that the synergy between the CPU's strong single-thread performance and the GPU's efficient architecture yields a disproportionately good gaming experience in this title.

The rank implies that for Control specifically, this combination outperforms many systems with ostensibly more powerful components. This can be attributed to the game's optimization and the balanced nature of the pairing. The CPU's 74th percentile standing and the GPU's 40th percentile standing combine to produce a result that exceeds what either component's individual ranking might suggest. The data shows that Control responds well to the CPU's 12 threads and high boost clock, while the GPU's Turing architecture efficiently handles the game's rendering workload without being bottlenecked by the processor.

Compared to other combos in the database, this pairing's rank of 145 indicates it surpasses a significant majority of tested systems. The nearest CPU rivals (Intel Core i3-1220P, Intel Core Ultra 7 256V) and GPU rivals (Intel Arc A310, AMD Radeon HD 8850M) would likely produce different in-game results, but the measured data for this specific combo demonstrates that the 5600G and GTX 1650 form a cohesive unit for Control. The 67 FPS at 4K Ultra is particularly noteworthy, as many higher-tier GPUs would struggle with this setting, indicating the game's engine scales efficiently with this hardware.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combination depend on the user's resolution and performance targets. At 1920x1080, all settings levels provide excellent playability, with even Ultra averaging 164 FPS. For users prioritizing maximum visual fidelity at 1080p, Ultra is the recommended choice, as the 164 FPS average and the absence of a reported minimum frame rate suggest consistent performance. Those seeking higher refresh rates may prefer High (192 FPS) or Medium (222 FPS), with the Medium setting offering a 189 FPS minimum that ensures smooth gameplay.

At 2560x1440, the recommendation shifts toward High settings, which produce 132 FPS on average. This provides a solid balance between visual quality and frame rate, though Ultra (113 FPS) remains viable for those who prioritize image quality over raw speed. The Low setting at 179 FPS is excessive for most displays and sacrifices too much visual fidelity. The Medium setting (153 FPS) offers a middle ground with a 130 FPS minimum, making it a safe choice for users with 144Hz monitors who want to ensure frame rates stay above the refresh rate.

For 3840x2160, the data suggests that Medium settings (90 FPS) offer the best experience, as they provide a comfortable margin above 60 FPS while maintaining reasonable visual quality. High settings (78 FPS) are also playable, but the 67 FPS average at Ultra dips close to the 60 FPS threshold, risking noticeable frame drops in demanding scenes. Low settings (106 FPS) are recommended only for users who prioritize frame rate above all else, as the visual degradation at 4K is more pronounced than at lower resolutions. The Medium setting's minimum of 77 FPS and maximum of 104 FPS indicate stable performance, making it the most balanced choice for 4K gaming on this hardware.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following breakdown details the exact measured average frame rates for each resolution and settings combination, along with minimum and maximum values where recorded.

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 261 FPS average
• Medium: 222 FPS average, 189 FPS minimum, 255 FPS maximum
• High: 192 FPS average
• Ultra: 164 FPS average

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 179 FPS average
• Medium: 153 FPS average, 130 FPS minimum, 176 FPS maximum
• High: 132 FPS average
• Ultra: 113 FPS average

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 106 FPS average
• Medium: 90 FPS average, 77 FPS minimum, 104 FPS maximum
• High: 78 FPS average
• Ultra: 67 FPS average

The data reveals a consistent pattern across all resolutions: Medium settings provide the most complete dataset with both minimum and maximum frame rates, indicating the most thoroughly tested configuration. The minimum FPS values for Medium settings (189 at 1080p, 130 at 1440p, 77 at 4K) show that frame pacing remains stable even in demanding scenes, with no catastrophic drops. The spread between minimum and maximum FPS narrows as resolution increases, suggesting that at 4K the system operates closer to its consistent performance envelope, whereas at 1080p there is more variability due to CPU or engine limitations.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Control at 4K with playable frame rates?

A: Yes, the measured data shows 67 FPS on Ultra, 78 FPS on High, and 90 FPS on Medium at 3840x2160, all of which are above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay.

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

A: High settings at 2560x1440 produce 132 FPS on average, offering the best balance of visual quality and performance. Ultra is also viable at 113 FPS, while Medium provides 153 FPS with a 130 FPS minimum.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to other tested systems?

A: This pairing ranks 145th out of 3720 tested combinations for Control, placing it in the top 4% of all configurations in the database for this specific game.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080 Low settings, the system reaches 261 FPS, suggesting the CPU may be the limiting factor at very high frame rates. However, the GPU becomes the primary constraint at higher resolutions and settings, as evidenced by the 4K Ultra result of 67 FPS.

Q: Does the system maintain stable frame rates, or are there significant drops?

A: The measured minimum FPS values for Medium settings are 189 at 1080p, 130 at 1440p, and 77 at 4K, indicating stable frame delivery with no severe drops below the average.

Q: What is the CPU's performance percentile relative to other processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 5600G ranks in the 74th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 21088, placing it just above the Intel Core i3-1220P and slightly below the AMD Ryzen 5 7530U in overall performance.