Control

Control on this AMD Ryzen 5 5600G + NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER pairing shows a classic mid-range pattern: the game is playable at 1080p, demanding at 1440p, and largely a slideshow at 4K. The data indicates a system where the GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions, while the CPU provides ample headroom. The combination ranks 1458 out of 1636 tested configurations for this title, placing it in the lower half of the performance spectrum, yet the measured frames per second (FPS) reveal a usable experience at the right settings.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is severe, highlighting the GTX 1660 SUPER's limitations. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 88.7 FPS at 1920x1080 to 48.5 FPS at 3840x2160. That is a reduction of approximately 45% when moving to four times the pixel count. This steep decline points directly at the GPU as the limiting component; the rendering workload at 4K simply overwhelms the 6 GB frame buffer and the TU116 chip's compute capabilities.

The trend continues across all presets. At High settings, the average drops from 58.9 FPS at 1080p to 45.9 FPS at 1440p, and then plummets to 29.9 FPS at 4K. The gap between 1440p and 4K is consistently larger than the gap between 1080p and 1440p, suggesting that the card hits a memory bandwidth or pixel throughput wall as resolution climbs. The pixel rate of 85.68 GPixel/s and texture rate of 157.1 GTexel/s are simply insufficient for 4K Ultra detail in this game.

The scaling pattern also indicates that the Ryzen 5 5600G is not the limiting factor here. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see smaller FPS differences between resolutions, as the workload would remain CPU-bound. Instead, the consistent and significant drops with each resolution increase confirm that the GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER is the component determining performance limits, especially above 1080p.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600G provides a solid foundation for this game. With 6 cores and 12 threads based on the Zen 3 architecture, it offers plenty of processing power for Control's physics and AI systems. The CPU's benchmark scores reinforce this: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 16758 and a single-core score of 2365 indicate strong performance that should not hold back the GPU in most scenarios. Even at 1080p Low, where CPU load is proportionally highest, the system still delivers 88.7 FPS, showing the processor is keeping up.

The CPU's percentile ranking of 78 versus all CPUs places it in the upper tier of processors. Its nearest rivals in average benchmark score include the Intel Core i7-11600H and the Intel Core i7-11800H, with delta percentages of 0.2% and -0.2% respectively. This means the 5600G trades blows with those mobile chips, offering comparable throughput. The Ryzen 5 5600G's boost clock of 4.40 GHz and base clock of 3.90 GHz are respectable for gaming, ensuring that single-threaded tasks like game logic and draw call submission run efficiently.

In this specific pairing, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU. The data shows that at 1440p Ultra, the average FPS is 35.6, while at 1080p Ultra it is 48.3. The difference of roughly 12 FPS is likely due to the GPU struggling with the higher resolution, not the CPU. The processor has enough headroom that even at 4K Low, where the GPU is pushing 48.5 FPS, the CPU is not the constraint. This is a balanced pairing in that the CPU will not be the reason for a performance cap.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER is the workhorse and the primary performance limiter in this configuration. Its 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus provides 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This is enough for 1080p gaming but becomes strained at higher resolutions. The GPU's average benchmark score of 14286 places it at the 55th percentile among all GPUs, showing it is a mid-range part. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT, which is only 0.7% behind in average score, and the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11, which is 0.5% behind.

The GPU's clock speeds of 1530 MHz base and 1785 MHz boost, along with its 1408 shading units, are the key to its 1080p performance. At 1920x1080 with Medium settings, the card averages 66.1 FPS, which is a smooth experience. However, the 12 nm process node and 125 W TDP mean it has a finite thermal and power envelope, which limits its ability to sustain high clocks under heavy 4K loads. The lack of ray tracing cores and tensor cores is also relevant, as Control features ray-traced effects, though the measured data does not specify whether these are enabled.

The GPU's memory bandwidth of 336.0 GB/s is a critical factor. At 4K, the demand for texture data increases dramatically, and the 6 GB frame buffer may also cause stuttering or texture swapping, although the measured average FPS does not show minimum frame data. The 4K High average of 29.9 FPS is just below the 30 FPS threshold often considered the minimum for playability, and 4K Ultra drops to 23.8 FPS, which is largely unplayable. This GPU is best suited for 1080p and entry-level 1440p gaming.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 is the only resolution where all presets average above 48 FPS, with Low hitting 88.7 FPS and Ultra hitting 48.3 FPS. At 1440p, only the Low preset stays above 60 FPS, and at 4K, the highest average is 48.5 FPS on Low.

Q: How much faster is the Ryzen 5 5600G compared to its nearest rival?

A: The Ryzen 5 5600G's average benchmark score is 19983. Its closest rival, the Intel Core i7-11600H, scores 19949, which is a 0.2% difference. The AMD EPYC 7713P scores 20024, which is 0.2% slower than the 5600G's score.

Q: Does the GTX 1660 SUPER outperform the RX 5500 XT in this test suite?

A: The GTX 1660 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 14286. The AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT has an average score of 14389, which is 0.7% higher. This means the RX 5500 XT is slightly faster in the aggregate benchmarks used here.

Q: Can this system run Control at 4K?

A: Technically yes, but the experience is poor. At 4K Low, the average is 48.5 FPS, but at 4K Medium it drops to 31.2 FPS, and at 4K High it is 29.9 FPS. Only the Low preset approaches playability, and it still may not be a consistent experience.

Q: What is the performance gap between 1080p and 1440p on High settings?

A: At 1080p High, the average frame rate is 58.9 FPS. At 1440p High, it is 45.9 FPS. This represents a 22% drop in performance when moving up one resolution tier.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck at 1080p Ultra?

A: At 1080p Ultra, the average FPS is 48.3. Given that the CPU scores well in benchmarks (e.g., 16758 in Cinebench R23 multi-core), the GPU is likely the limiting factor, as the load on the graphics card increases with the Ultra preset's higher fidelity settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of performance across three resolutions and four quality presets.

At 1920x1080, the system performs well. The Low preset yields an average of 88.7 FPS, which is excellent for competitive or high-refresh-rate play. Medium settings reduce this to 66.1 FPS, still comfortably above 60. High settings produce 58.9 FPS, which is a solid playable experience. Ultra settings drop the average to 48.3 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for fast-paced action.

Moving to 2560x1440, performance degrades noticeably. The Low preset averages 67.2 FPS, which is still smooth. Medium settings average 49.1 FPS, which is borderline but generally playable. High settings average 45.9 FPS, and Ultra settings drop to 35.6 FPS. These numbers suggest that 1440p is best suited for Low or Medium presets if you want a consistent frame rate.

At 3840x2160, the card is out of its depth. The Low preset averages 48.5 FPS, which is the only configuration above 30 FPS. Medium settings average 31.2 FPS, High settings average 29.9 FPS, and Ultra settings average 23.8 FPS. The data indicates that 4K gaming is not a realistic option for this GPU, even at the lowest quality settings.

The full table of results is as follows:

• 3840x2160, High: 29.9 FPS
• 3840x2160, Low: 48.5 FPS
• 3840x2160, Medium: 31.2 FPS
• 3840x2160, Ultra: 23.8 FPS
• 2560x1440, High: 45.9 FPS
• 2560x1440, Low: 67.2 FPS
• 2560x1440, Medium: 49.1 FPS
• 2560x1440, Ultra: 35.6 FPS
• 1920x1080, High: 58.9 FPS
• 1920x1080, Low: 88.7 FPS
• 1920x1080, Medium: 66.1 FPS
• 1920x1080, Ultra: 48.3 FPS

Settings Recommendations

For a balance of visual quality and performance, the 1080p High preset is the strongest choice. It delivers 58.9 FPS, which is near the 60 FPS target, while still providing a significant visual upgrade over Medium. If you prefer a rock-solid 60 FPS or higher, the Medium preset at 1080p achieves 66.1 FPS and is the safest option for consistent smoothness.

At 1440p, the Low preset is the only one that keeps the average above 60 FPS, at 67.2 FPS. If you can tolerate slightly lower frame rates, the Medium preset at 49.1 FPS is viable for slower-paced exploration, but for combat-heavy sections, Low is recommended to maintain responsiveness. The High and Ultra presets at 1440p are not recommended, as their averages of 45.9 and 35.6 FPS may cause noticeable stutter.

At 4K, the data suggests avoiding this resolution entirely. The Low preset's 48.5 FPS is the only playable option, but even that is below the 60 FPS target and may feel inconsistent. The Medium, High, and Ultra presets all fall below 32 FPS, which is generally considered unplayable for an action-adventure game. The best experience for this hardware is unequivocally at 1920x1080, where the GPU has enough headroom to handle the game's demands. The Ultra preset at 1080p is a viable choice for those prioritizing visuals over frame rate, as 48.3 FPS is still within the playable range.