Control

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600GT and Radeon RX 6650 XT combination delivers a solid 1080p experience in Control, with performance scaling predictably across resolutions and settings. The data reveals a system where the GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions, while the CPU provides ample headroom for the game's physics and logic at lower settings. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS, component roles, and optimal configurations based solely on the provided benchmark data.

FAQ

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

A: Based on the measured FPS, 1920x1080 is the only resolution where the combo consistently exceeds 60 FPS across all settings. The average FPS at 1080p ranges from 67 on Ultra to 122 on Low, while at 2560x1440, only the Low preset reaches above 60 FPS with an average of 93. At 3840x2160, no preset achieves a 60 FPS average, with the highest being 63 on Low.

Q: How does the combo rank among all tested systems for this game?

A: The combo ranks 2438 out of 3720 tested combinations for Control. This places it in the lower third of all systems, indicating that while it can run the game, many other configurations deliver higher frame rates. The rank of 2438 suggests this is a mid-to-low tier pairing for this specific title.

Q: Which component is the limiting factor at 4K resolution?

A: The GPU is the clear limiting factor at 3840x2160. The average FPS drops dramatically from 77 at 1080p High to 39 at 4K High, a reduction of 38 FPS. With an 8 GB VRAM capacity and a 128-bit memory bus, the RX 6650 XT struggles to maintain playable frame rates at this resolution, as even the Low preset only manages a 63 FPS average.

Q: What is the CPU's performance relative to its nearest rivals?

A: The Ryzen 5 5600GT has an average benchmark score of 20733, which is 0.3% lower than the Intel Core i5-12490F and 0.4% lower than the Intel Xeon 6325P. It performs nearly identically to these rivals, with the deltaPct values showing a negligible difference of less than 1% in all cases.

Q: Does the GPU have any performance headroom at 1080p Low settings?

A: At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the average FPS is 122. This high frame rate, combined with the fact that the CPU has a 3.60 GHz base clock and a 4.60 GHz boost clock, suggests the system is not fully GPU-bound at this preset. The GPU's 2635 MHz boost clock and 10.79 TFLOPS FP32 performance are sufficient to push well beyond 120 FPS, indicating potential for higher refresh rate displays.

Q: What is the average FPS difference between Medium and Ultra at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Medium preset delivers an average of 66 FPS, while the Ultra preset delivers an average of 51 FPS. This represents a 15 FPS drop when moving from Medium to Ultra, showing a significant performance cost for the highest visual quality settings.

Settings Recommendations

The data suggests that the optimal experience balances visual fidelity with smooth frame rates. For a 60 FPS target, the 1920x1080 resolution with High settings is the clear sweet spot, delivering an average of 77 FPS. This provides a substantial improvement over the Medium preset's 87 FPS but with better visual quality. At 2560x1440, the Medium preset is the best choice for a playable experience, as it is the only setting that maintains a 66 FPS average, staying above the 60 FPS threshold.

For users with a 1080p 144Hz monitor, the Low preset at 122 FPS is the only option that approaches that refresh rate, though it sacrifices visual fidelity. The Ultra preset at 1080p delivers 67 FPS, which is still smooth but not ideal for high-refresh-rate displays. At 3840x2160, the data indicates that this combo is not suitable for a consistent experience; the Low preset at 63 FPS is the only option above 60 FPS, but it does so with minimal visual quality. The Medium preset at 4K falls to 44 FPS average, which is playable but not ideal for fast-paced action.

The measured data shows that the Medium preset at 1440p is the highest resolution and quality combination that maintains a 60+ FPS average. This is the recommended configuration for a balanced experience. If visual quality is the priority and frame rates above 50 FPS are acceptable, the Ultra preset at 1080p (67 FPS) or the High preset at 1440p (58 FPS) are viable alternatives. However, the data implies that the High preset at 1080p offers the best compromise between the 77 FPS average and the enhanced visual details compared to Medium.

How This Combo Ranks

With a rank of 2438 out of 3720 tested combos in Control, this system falls into the lower 34% of all configurations. This ranking is a holistic measure of the combo's performance in this specific game, not just a raw average of component scores. The CPU's percentileVsAllCpus of 74 and the GPU's percentileVsAllGpus of 65 indicate that both components are above the 50th percentile individually, yet the combined result in Control is relatively low. This suggests the game may be particularly demanding on the GPU, which is the weaker of the two components in this pairing.

The low ranking is primarily driven by the GPU's performance at higher resolutions. At 4K, the average FPS across all settings is between 34 and 63, which is below the 60 FPS target for many players. Even at 1440p, only the Low preset exceeds 60 FPS. The combo's performance is more competitive at 1080p, where it achieves a 77 FPS average on High and 122 FPS on Low. This indicates that the system is better suited for 1080p gaming, and its overall rank is dragged down by its inability to handle higher resolutions smoothly.

The rank of 2438 suggests that while this is not a top-tier system for Control, it is also not a bottom-tier one. It outperforms the bottom 34% of tested combos, which likely include systems with older or less capable hardware. For a mid-range CPU paired with a mid-range GPU, the performance is acceptable for 1080p gaming, but users expecting high frame rates at 1440p or 4K will be disappointed. The data clearly indicates that this combo is best utilized at 1080p with medium-to-high settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured FPS shows a clear progression across settings. The Low preset averages 122 FPS, which is the highest recorded for this resolution. The Medium preset drops to 87 FPS, with a minimum of 74 and a maximum of 100. High settings further reduce the average to 77 FPS, while Ultra delivers 67 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 55 FPS, a substantial 45% performance penalty for the highest visual quality.

At 2560x1440, the performance scales similarly but with lower absolute values. Low settings average 93 FPS, which is the only preset above 60 FPS. Medium averages 66 FPS, with a minimum of 56 and a maximum of 76. High settings average 58 FPS, and Ultra averages 51 FPS. The drop from Low to Ultra is 42 FPS, indicating that the resolution increase has a significant impact on the GPU's ability to maintain high frame rates.

At 3840x2160, the combo struggles to maintain playable frame rates. Low settings average 63 FPS, barely above the 60 FPS threshold. Medium averages 44 FPS, with a minimum of 38 and a maximum of 51. High settings average 39 FPS, and Ultra averages 34 FPS. The step from Low to Medium is a 19 FPS drop, which is the largest single-setting penalty across all resolutions. This indicates that the GPU's 8 GB VRAM and 280.3 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for the demands of 4K rendering in Control.

The data shows that the minimum FPS values are only recorded for the Medium preset at each resolution. At 1080p, the minimum is 74 FPS, at 1440p it is 56 FPS, and at 4K it is 38 FPS. These minimums indicate that while the average frame rate may be acceptable, there are occasional dips that could cause stuttering, particularly at higher resolutions.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT is the primary driver of performance in Control, and its capabilities are directly reflected in the measured FPS. The GPU has a base clock of 2055 MHz and a boost clock of 2635 MHz, with a game clock of 2410 MHz. This clock speed, combined with 2048 shading units and 64 ROPs, provides a theoretical FP32 performance of 10.79 TFLOPS. These specifications allow the GPU to handle the game's rendering demands at 1080p effectively, as shown by the 77 FPS average on High settings.

The GPU's 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus provides a bandwidth of 280.3 GB/s. This memory configuration is a significant factor in the performance drop at higher resolutions. At 4K, the game requires more memory bandwidth to handle the increased pixel count, and the 128-bit bus becomes a bottleneck. The 44 FPS average on Medium settings at 4K, compared to 66 FPS at 1440p, illustrates this limitation. The 8 GB VRAM capacity is also a concern, as Control at Ultra settings and 4K may exceed this limit, forcing the system to use slower system memory.

The GPU's benchmark scores corroborate its performance in Control. The passmark_g3d score of 17166 and the geekbench_vulkan score of 81306 indicate that the GPU is capable of handling DirectX 12 and Vulkan workloads. The 3dmark_steel_nomad_dx12 score of 1859 is a modern benchmark that reflects the GPU's performance in demanding titles. The GPU's percentileVsAllGpus of 65 shows it is better than 65% of all GPUs, but in Control, its performance is limited by the game's specific requirements, particularly at high resolutions.

The GPU's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Tesla K40m, which has a similar average benchmark score of 19885, and the AMD FirePro D300, which scores 19637. These rivals are professional-grade cards, but their performance in Control would likely be similar to the RX 6650 XT, as the deltaPct values are within 1%. This suggests that the RX 6650 XT is a capable mid-range GPU, but it is not designed for 4K gaming in demanding titles like Control.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600GT provides the computational foundation for this system. With 6 cores and 12 threads, it offers a balanced configuration for gaming. The base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz ensure that the CPU can handle both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads effectively. The CPU's L3 cache of 16 MB is sufficient for gaming, and the 7 nm process node from TSMC contributes to its efficiency.

The CPU's benchmark scores show its capabilities. The cinebench_r23_multicore score of 17272 and the cinebench_r23_singlecore score of 2438 indicate that the CPU is strong in both multi-threaded and single-threaded tasks. The 3dmark_single_thread score of 913 and the 3dmark_max_threads score of 5554 further confirm this. In Control, the CPU is responsible for game logic, physics, and AI, which are typically not as demanding as the GPU's rendering tasks.

The data shows that the CPU is not the bottleneck in this combo, even at high frame rates. At 1080p Low settings, the average FPS is 122, which is a high frame rate that requires a capable CPU. The Ryzen 5 5600GT's boost clock of 4.60 GHz and its Zen 3 architecture provide enough single-thread performance to handle this. The CPU's percentileVsAllCpus of 74 indicates it is better than 74% of all CPUs, which is a strong showing.

The CPU's nearest rivals, such as the Intel Core i5-12490F, have nearly identical average benchmark scores within 0.3%. This means that swapping the CPU for a rival would not significantly change the FPS in Control. The CPU's role is to feed the GPU with data, and with a 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth and dual-channel DDR4 support, it does so without creating a bottleneck. The CPU's 65W TDP also ensures that it does not throttle under load, maintaining consistent performance.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear trend of decreasing performance as resolution increases. From 1920x1080 to 2560x1440, the average FPS on High settings drops from 77 to 58, a 19 FPS decrease. From 2560x1440 to 3840x2160, the average FPS on High settings drops further from 58 to 39, a 19 FPS decrease. This consistent 19 FPS drop per resolution step indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor, as the CPU's performance is largely independent of resolution.

The scaling is more pronounced at lower settings. On Low settings, the FPS drops from 122 at 1080p to 93 at 1440p, a 29 FPS decrease, and then to 63 at 4K, a 30 FPS decrease. This suggests that at lower settings, the GPU's rendering workload is reduced, but the memory bandwidth and VRAM capacity still become bottlenecks at higher resolutions. The 8 GB VRAM and 128-bit bus are particularly stressed at 4K, as the game needs to store more texture data.

The percentage drop in FPS from 1080p to 4K is substantial. At High settings, the FPS drops by 49.4%, from 77 to 39. At Medium settings, the FPS drops by 49.4%, from 87 to 44. At Low settings, the FPS drops by 48.4%, from 122 to 63. This consistent ~50% drop across all settings indicates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck, and the resolution scaling is not limited by the CPU.

The fact that the FPS drop is similar in absolute terms (19 FPS per resolution step) but varies in percentage terms suggests that the GPU's performance is not linearly scaling with pixel count. The 4K resolution has four times the pixels of 1080p, but the FPS drop is less than 75%, indicating that the GPU is not fully utilizing its resources at 4K. This could be due to memory bandwidth limitations, as the 280.3 GB/s bandwidth is insufficient for the increased data transfer requirements of 4K rendering. The data implies that the combo is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, with 4K being a stretch that requires significant setting reductions to achieve playable frame rates.