Control

Control is a demanding action-adventure title that stresses both the GPU and CPU depending on the resolution and settings you choose. Based on measured data for the AMD Ryzen 5 5600GT and AMD Radeon RX 9060 combination, this system delivers a solid 1080p experience, a capable 1440p experience with adjustments, and struggles to maintain smooth frame rates at 4K. The following analysis breaks down exactly how this hardware pairing behaves in this specific game, using only the measured frame rate data and hardware specifications provided.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and predictable trend: performance drops significantly as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 130 FPS at 1080p to 98 FPS at 1440p, and then further down to 66 FPS at 4K. This represents a 24.6% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a 49.2% drop from 1080p to 4K. The scaling pattern indicates that the GPU becomes the primary limiting factor at higher resolutions, as the pixel count increases dramatically.

Looking at High settings, the same trend appears but with lower absolute numbers. The system achieves 82 FPS at 1080p, drops to 62 FPS at 1440p (a 24.4% reduction), and reaches 42 FPS at 4K (a 48.8% reduction from 1080p). The consistency of these percentage drops across different settings strongly suggests that the Radeon RX 9060's rendering throughput is the bottleneck when moving to higher resolutions. The GPU has 1792 shading units and a 128-bit memory bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, which is adequate for 1080p but becomes strained as the render target grows.

The most telling data point comes from the Ultra preset. At 1080p, the system manages 71 FPS, which drops to 54 FPS at 1440p and then plummets to 36 FPS at 4K. The gap between 1440p and 4K at Ultra is 33.3%, which is steeper than the 24.4% drop seen at High settings. This indicates that the Ultra preset introduces additional GPU-intensive effects that scale poorly with resolution, making 4K Ultra essentially unplayable for smooth gameplay.

Interestingly, the difference between Low and Ultra at each resolution reveals the headroom available. At 1080p, the spread is 59 FPS (from 130 to 71), while at 4K the spread narrows to 30 FPS (from 66 to 36). This narrowing shows that at 4K, the GPU is so saturated that even dropping to Low settings cannot overcome the raw pixel fill rate demands. The data confirms that this system is best suited for 1080p gaming, with 1440p being viable only if you are willing to accept lower settings or frame rates below 60 FPS.

Settings Recommendations

For the best balance of visual quality and smooth gameplay, the Medium preset at 1920x1080 is the standout choice. The measured data shows 92 FPS average with a minimum of 78 FPS and a maximum of 106 FPS. This means the frame rate stays comfortably above 60 FPS even in demanding scenes, and the 14 FPS gap between minimum and average suggests good consistency. The Medium preset provides a significant visual upgrade over Low while costing only 38 FPS (from 130 to 92) in average performance.

If you prioritize maximum visual fidelity and have a 1080p display, the High preset at 82 FPS is also viable. The 10 FPS drop from Medium to High is noticeable, but the average remains above 60 FPS. However, the lack of minimum FPS data for High makes it harder to guarantee smoothness in intense combat sequences. The Ultra preset at 71 FPS is just above the 60 FPS threshold, but the average is close enough to the line that dips below 60 FPS are likely in heavy particle effect scenes.

For 1440p users, the Low preset at 98 FPS is the only option that provides a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. The Medium preset at 70 FPS is playable, but the minimum of 59 FPS indicates that frame drops below 60 are possible. The High preset at 62 FPS is borderline, and the Ultra preset at 54 FPS falls short of smooth gameplay. Given these numbers, 1440p gaming on this system requires compromising on visual settings to maintain playable frame rates.

At 3840x2160, no preset delivers a consistent 60 FPS experience. The best option is Low at 66 FPS, but this falls below 60 FPS in demanding scenes. Medium at 47 FPS and High at 42 FPS are playable but not smooth, while Ultra at 36 FPS is the only option that stays above 30 FPS. For 4K, you would need to accept significant visual compromises or consider lowering the resolution scale, though the data does not provide information on such features.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows that at 3840x2160, only the Low preset achieves an average above 60 FPS at 66 FPS. Medium averages 47 FPS, High averages 42 FPS, and Ultra drops to 36 FPS. While Low is technically playable, the lack of minimum FPS data for that setting means you might experience drops below 60 FPS.

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

A: Based on the measured FPS, 1920x1080 offers the most consistent experience. At Medium settings, the system achieves 92 FPS average with a 78 FPS minimum, which is well above the 60 FPS target. Even at Ultra, 1080p maintains a 71 FPS average.

Q: How does the GPU's memory configuration affect performance?

A: The Radeon RX 9060 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The data suggests this is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p gaming, but the steep performance drops at 4K indicate that memory bandwidth becomes a limiting factor at higher resolutions.

Q: Is the Ultra preset worth the performance cost?

A: Compared to High settings, Ultra costs 11 FPS at 1080p (from 82 to 71), 8 FPS at 1440p (from 62 to 54), and 6 FPS at 4K (from 42 to 36). The relative cost is highest at 1080p, where you lose 13.4% of your frame rate for the extra visual effects.

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 1440p with Medium settings?

A: The measured data shows an average of 70 FPS with a minimum of 59 FPS and a maximum of 80 FPS. This means you will mostly stay above 60 FPS, but there will be occasional dips below that threshold in demanding scenes.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck the GPU in this game?

A: The Ryzen 5 5600GT has 6 cores and 12 threads with a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. At 1080p Low settings, the system reaches 130 FPS, which suggests the CPU can feed the GPU adequately at lower resolutions. The consistent FPS drops at higher resolutions indicate the GPU is the primary bottleneck, not the CPU.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete set of measured frame rates for this combination is as follows:

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 130 FPS average
• Medium: 92 FPS average, 78 FPS minimum, 106 FPS maximum
• High: 82 FPS average
• Ultra: 71 FPS average

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 98 FPS average
• Medium: 70 FPS average, 59 FPS minimum, 80 FPS maximum
• High: 62 FPS average
• Ultra: 54 FPS average

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 66 FPS average
• Medium: 47 FPS average, 40 FPS minimum, 54 FPS maximum
• High: 42 FPS average
• Ultra: 36 FPS average

The Medium preset is the only one with complete minimum and maximum data across all resolutions. At 1080p, the 14 FPS spread between minimum and average indicates good frame pacing. At 1440p, the 11 FPS spread shows similar consistency, but the 59 FPS minimum confirms occasional drops below 60. At 4K, the 7 FPS spread between minimum and average is tight, but the absolute performance is too low for smooth gameplay.

The scaling from 1080p to 1440p costs roughly 25% of performance across all settings. The scaling from 1440p to 4K costs an additional 33-37% depending on the preset. This non-linear scaling pattern is typical for a GPU with a 128-bit memory bus, as the bandwidth required for 4K exceeds what the card can efficiently provide.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 is the clear performance driver in this pairing. With a boost clock of 2990 MHz and a game clock of 2400 MHz, the GPU is capable of high pixel throughput, as evidenced by the 1080p results. The 1792 shading units and 64 ROPs deliver a pixel rate of 191.4 GPixel/s, which is sufficient for 1080p gaming but becomes a limiting factor at 4K where the pixel count quadruples.

The 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth is the most likely bottleneck at higher resolutions. The data shows that even at Low settings, the 4K performance (66 FPS) is less than half of the 1080p performance (130 FPS). This 49.2% reduction is larger than what would be expected from pure pixel count scaling, indicating that memory bandwidth constraints are compounding the issue.

The GPU's RDNA 4.0 architecture and Navi 44 chip are built on a 4 nm process, which explains the high boost clock of 2990 MHz. The 21.43 TFLOPS of FP32 compute is more than enough for this 2019 title, as evidenced by the strong 1080p performance. The GPU's benchmark scores support this interpretation: the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3322 and PassMark G3D score of 17631 place it in the 59th percentile of all GPUs, with its closest rival being the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti at a 0.7% higher average score.

The 132 W TDP and 300 W suggested PSU indicate this is a mainstream card, not a high-end enthusiast model. The data confirms this positioning: it delivers excellent 1080p performance but cannot sustain high frame rates at 4K. The 64 ROPs and 112 TMUs provide balanced texturing and pixel throughput, but the memory subsystem is the weak link for higher resolutions.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600GT plays a supporting role in this game, but its specifications are sufficient to avoid bottlenecking the GPU at most settings. With 6 cores and 12 threads based on the Zen 3 architecture, this CPU provides solid multi-threaded performance. The boost clock of 4.60 GHz is high enough for gaming workloads, and the 16 MB of L3 cache helps with game data locality.

The CPU's benchmark results show strong single-thread and multi-thread performance. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 17272 and single-core score of 2438 indicate a well-balanced processor. The 3DMark max threads score of 5554 and the PassMark multithread score of 20325 place this CPU in the 74th percentile of all CPUs. Its closest rival is the Intel Core i5-12490F, which scores only 0.3% higher on average.

In Control, the CPU's role becomes more apparent at lower resolutions and settings. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 130 FPS, which suggests the CPU can keep up with the GPU's output. The 6 cores and 12 threads are sufficient for this game's threading model, and the 4.60 GHz boost clock ensures responsive frame times. The CPU's 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth is not a limiting factor, as the GPU has its own dedicated memory.

However, the CPU does have some potential constraints. The PCIe Gen 3 interface with 16 lanes is older than the GPU's PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, which could theoretically limit data transfer speeds. In practice, the measured FPS data shows that the CPU is not the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions, where the GPU's rendering capability dominates. The 65 W TDP also keeps thermals manageable, allowing the CPU to sustain its boost clock during extended gaming sessions.

The 5600GT's integrated Radeon Vega 7 graphics are not relevant for this discrete GPU setup, but the CPU's overall performance profile is well-matched to the RX 9060. The data shows that at 1440p and 4K, the FPS drops are consistent with GPU limitations rather than CPU bottlenecks. This suggests that the 5600GT provides enough processing power to feed the RX 9060 effectively, making the combination a balanced pairing for 1080p and 1440p gaming in Control.