Control

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT delivers a highly capable 1440p experience in Control, with 1080p performance that pushes well past the 144 Hz threshold. The data indicates that this combination is heavily GPU-bound at higher resolutions, while the CPU’s strength becomes apparent only at 1080p Low settings. Overall, this combo ranks in the 69th percentile of all tested configurations, offering a robust balance for high-refresh-rate gaming.

Resolution Scaling

The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and consistent, revealing a clear GPU bottleneck at higher resolutions. At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 110 FPS at 1920x1080 to 83 FPS at 2560x1440, a 24.5% reduction. Moving to 3840x2160, the average drops further to 56 FPS, which is 49.1% lower than the 1080p result. This scaling pattern is typical for a title where the Radeon RX 7800 XT’s compute throughput is the limiting factor, rather than the Ryzen 5 7400F’s processing power.

The scaling behavior becomes even more pronounced when examining the Low preset. At 1920x1080, the combo achieves 174 FPS, but this falls to 132 FPS at 2560x1440 and then to 89 FPS at 3840x2160. The 1080p-to-1440p drop of 24.1% is nearly identical to the High preset’s drop, but the 1440p-to-4K drop of 32.6% is noticeably larger. This suggests that at Low settings, the game becomes increasingly reliant on the GPU’s fill rate and memory bandwidth as resolution climbs, with the RX 7800 XT’s 624.1 GB/s bandwidth being pushed to its limits at 4K.

The Medium preset shows a similar trend, with average FPS of 124 at 1080p, 94 at 1440p, and 63 at 4K. The percentage drops are 24.2% and 33.0%, respectively, indicating a consistent scaling penalty. The Ultra preset, which is the most demanding, yields 96 FPS at 1080p, 72 FPS at 1440p, and 49 FPS at 4K. Here, the 1080p-to-1440p drop is 25.0%, while the 1440p-to-4K drop is 31.9%. Across all settings, the 4K results hover around or below the 60 FPS threshold, suggesting that 4K gaming is only viable with significant settings compromises.

The data clearly shows that the CPU is not the primary constraint at 1440p and 4K. The Ryzen 5 7400F, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, provides ample headroom, as evidenced by the fact that lowering settings from Ultra to Low at 1440p increases FPS from 72 to 132, a gain of 83.3%. This performance scaling with settings is a hallmark of a GPU-limited scenario. The 1080p Low result of 174 FPS is the only data point where the CPU’s single-thread performance (3,072 in Cinebench R23 single-core) may begin to matter, but even then, the GPU still delivers a substantial frame rate.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT is the dominant component in this pairing, and its specifications directly correlate with the measured results. The GPU’s 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 624.1 GB/s of bandwidth, which is sufficient for the texture-heavy environments of Control at 1440p. The 4K results, which dip to 49 FPS on Ultra, indicate that the memory subsystem and the 96 ROPs are strained at that resolution, but the bandwidth is not entirely saturated, as the Low preset still manages 89 FPS.

The GPU’s clock behavior also plays a role. With a base clock of 1295 MHz, a game clock of 2124 MHz, and a boost clock of 2430 MHz, the RX 7800 XT can dynamically adjust its frequency based on workload. In Control, the high boost clock is likely sustained during less demanding scenes, contributing to the strong 1080p results. The 37.32 TFLOPS of FP32 compute power is the theoretical ceiling for raw shader work, and the benchmark results show that this translates to an average of 174 FPS at 1080p Low, which is near the point where the CPU might become a limiting factor.

The VRAM capacity is another key factor. At 4K Ultra, the game likely consumes a significant portion of the 16 GB frame buffer, and the fact that the average FPS stays above 49 suggests that there is no memory thrashing. The GPU’s 60 RT cores are present but are not heavily utilized in this game’s standard rasterization benchmarks, as the measured FPS data does not include ray tracing results. The GPU’s 51st percentile ranking among all GPUs, based on an average benchmark score of 11,627, places it in the mid-range tier, yet its performance in Control is clearly above average for this title’s demands.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Ryzen 5 7400F and RX 7800 XT achieves a rank of 899 out of 2,888 tested combos in Control. This places it in the 68.9th percentile, meaning it outperforms roughly 69% of all configurations tested. This is a strong result, indicating that the pairing is well-balanced for this game, even though neither component individually is at the top of its respective benchmark charts.

Looking at the CPU’s nearest rivals, the Ryzen 5 7400F has an average benchmark score of 32,750, which is 0.1% higher than the Intel Core i5-14600T (32,707) and 0.2% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H (32,697). It is also 0.2% lower than the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H (32,812) and 0.3% higher than the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 (32,662). These delta percentages are minuscule, indicating that the CPU’s performance is essentially on par with its closest competitors. However, the 83rd percentile ranking for the CPU suggests that it is a solid mid-to-upper-tier processor, but not a top-tier one.

For the GPU, the RX 7800 XT’s average benchmark score is 11,627, which is 0.5% lower than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 (11,680) and 1.8% lower than the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT (11,842). It is 0.9% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M (11,528) and 1.3% higher than the NVIDIA Tesla K20c (11,479). These are surprisingly close margins, given that the RX 7800 XT is a modern RDNA 3.0 part, but the aggregate benchmark scores do not fully reflect its gaming prowess. The GPU’s 51st percentile ranking is modest, yet in Control, the combo’s 899th rank out of 2,888 shows that the pairing performs better than the component averages might suggest, likely due to the game’s specific optimization for AMD hardware.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The data provides a complete picture of performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the combo delivers an average of 174 FPS on Low, 124 FPS on Medium, 110 FPS on High, and 96 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset shows a minimum of 105 FPS and a maximum of 142 FPS, indicating a tight frame pacing window. The 1080p results are uniformly high, with even the most demanding Ultra preset staying above 90 FPS, making this resolution ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors.

At 2560x1440, the average FPS drops to 132 on Low, 94 on Medium, 83 on High, and 72 on Ultra. The Medium preset again provides min/max data, with a minimum of 80 FPS and a maximum of 108 FPS. This resolution is the sweet spot for the combo, as the High preset’s 83 FPS is comfortably above the 60 FPS playability threshold, and the Ultra preset’s 72 FPS remains smooth. The 1440p results show a 24.2% reduction from 1080p on Medium, which is expected, but the absolute numbers are still high enough for a satisfying experience.

At 3840x2160, the average FPS falls to 89 on Low, 63 on Medium, 56 on High, and 49 on Ultra. The Medium preset shows a minimum of 54 FPS and a maximum of 73 FPS, which means that even the minimum frame rate is close to the 60 FPS target. However, the Ultra preset’s 49 FPS average is below the 60 FPS threshold, and the High preset’s 56 FPS is marginal. The data indicates that 4K gaming is possible, but only with settings reduced to Medium or lower to maintain a consistent frame rate above 60 FPS.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows that 2560x1440 is the optimal resolution. At High settings, the average FPS is 83, which is well above the 60 FPS target, while 4K Ultra drops to 49 FPS. The 1440p results offer a strong balance between visual fidelity and performance.

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

A: At High settings, the average FPS drops from 110 at 1920x1080 to 56 at 3840x2160, a reduction of 49.1%. At Low settings, the drop is from 174 to 89 FPS, a 48.9% reduction. This indicates a significant GPU bottleneck at 4K.

Q: Is the Ultra preset playable at 1440p?

A: Yes, the Ultra preset at 2560x1440 delivers an average of 72 FPS. This is above the 60 FPS playability threshold, though it may not be suitable for competitive play on a 144 Hz monitor. The High preset at 83 FPS is a better choice for higher refresh rates.

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

A: The combo ranks 899th out of 2,888 tested combos in Control, placing it in the 68.9th percentile. This means it outperforms approximately 69% of all other tested CPU-GPU pairings in this specific game.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The only min FPS data available is for the Medium preset. The minimum is 105 FPS at 1080p, 80 FPS at 1440p, and 54 FPS at 4K. These minima indicate that the frame rate remains stable without major dips.

Q: Does the CPU limit performance at any point?

A: The data suggests that the CPU is not a limiting factor at 1440p or 4K, as lowering settings from Ultra to Low at 1440p increases FPS by 83.3%. At 1080p Low, the 174 FPS result may begin to approach the CPU’s limit, but the GPU still delivers a very high frame rate.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data supports a clear hierarchy for settings preferences. For players targeting 60 FPS or higher, the High preset is the most balanced choice across all resolutions. At 1080p, High delivers 110 FPS, which is excellent for high-refresh-rate displays. At 1440p, High provides 83 FPS, which is smooth and visually demanding, while at 4K, High yields 56 FPS, which is slightly below the 60 FPS target but still playable.

For those with 144 Hz or higher refresh rate monitors, the Medium preset is the recommended starting point. At 1080p, Medium achieves 124 FPS, which is close to the 144 Hz mark, and at 1440p, it delivers 94 FPS, which is a strong result. The Medium preset also has the benefit of having the only min/max data provided, with a minimum of 105 FPS at 1080p and 80 FPS at 1440p, ensuring frame pacing consistency. At 4K, Medium’s 63 FPS average is the only preset that comfortably exceeds the 60 FPS target.

The Low preset is only recommended for players seeking maximum frame rates at 1080p, where it hits 174 FPS. At higher resolutions, the visual compromises are substantial, and the FPS gains over Medium are marginal (from 124 to 174 at 1080p, but from 94 to 132 at 1440p). The Ultra preset should be avoided at 4K, as its 49 FPS average falls below the playability threshold, but it is viable at 1080p (96 FPS) and 1440p (72 FPS) for those who prioritize image quality over raw frame rate. Ultimately, the data indicates that the High preset at 1440p offers the best overall experience, balancing visual fidelity with a frame rate that exceeds the standard 60 FPS target.