Control

# Control with AMD Ryzen 5 7500F + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080

This combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 delivers a strong Control experience across all tested resolutions, with the data showing a combo rank of 1071 out of 3720 tested configurations. The pairing places this system in the upper 29% of all tested combos for this title, demonstrating that the six-core Zen 4 processor and Ampere-based GPU work well together in Control's action-adventure environments.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 1071 out of 3720 tested combinations places this system firmly in the upper tier of configurations for Control. This ranking reflects the balance between the Ryzen 5 7500F's processing capabilities and the RTX 3080's rendering throughput. The CPU's percentile ranking of 77 against all tested CPUs indicates it outperforms roughly three-quarters of processors in general benchmark workloads, while the GPU's percentile of 68 shows similar relative strength against all tested graphics cards.

Looking at the CPU's nearest rivals, the Ryzen 5 7500F sits within a narrow band of performance. It is 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i7-11850H and 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core i7-13620H, while trailing the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F by 0.2% and the Intel Core 5 210H by 0.4% in average benchmark scores. This clustering indicates that the 7500F is positioned at a performance plateau where minor architectural differences between generations and brands produce negligible real-world variation.

On the GPU side, the RTX 3080's nearest rivals show similar tight grouping. The NVIDIA P106-100 leads by 0.3%, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 leads by 0.3%, and the AMD Radeon RX 6600M leads by 0.4%, while the AMD Radeon R9 M290X matches within 0.4%. This proximity suggests that in Control, the RTX 3080's advantage comes less from raw compute dominance and more from its specific feature set and memory configuration.

The measured FPS data reinforces this ranking. At 1080p Ultra, the system achieves 101 FPS average, which is well above playable thresholds and demonstrates headroom for high refresh rate displays. The 4K Ultra result of 52 FPS average shows the limits of this configuration at maximum fidelity, yet the 4K High setting at 60 FPS provides a perfectly smooth experience for the game's intended pacing.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 7500F brings six cores and twelve threads to Control, operating on the Zen 4 architecture with Raphael codename. Its base clock of 3.70 GHz and boost clock of 5.00 GHz provide the single-thread performance that Control's physics and game logic demand. The 65 W TDP indicates efficient operation, while the 5 nm process node from TSMC with 6,570 million transistors on a 71 mm² die shows the density of this design.

The CPU's cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. This arrangement supports the rapid data access patterns typical of action games where world state changes frequently. Memory support for DDR5 in dual-channel configuration with 83.2 GB/s bandwidth ensures the CPU can feed the GPU without bottlenecks, particularly at lower resolutions where frame rates rise and per-frame CPU work becomes more critical.

Benchmark results show the 7500F's scaling characteristics. The 3DMark scores progress from 1902 for 2 threads to 5372 for 8 threads, then reach 6376 for 16 threads and 6379 for max threads. This pattern indicates diminishing returns beyond eight threads, meaning Control's workload likely utilizes the processor's multi-threading capabilities without fully saturating all twelve threads. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 22799 versus single-core of 3218 further illustrates this balance, with the multicore result roughly seven times the single-core figure.

In Control specifically, the 1080p Low setting achieves 185 FPS average, which is the highest measured result across all configurations. This high frame rate at low resolution indicates that the CPU can drive the GPU to its limits when rendering overhead is minimal. The progression from Low to Ultra at 1080p shows a decline from 185 to 101 FPS, a 45% reduction, which reflects the GPU becoming increasingly responsible for frame time as visual complexity rises.

FAQ

Q: Can this system maintain 60 FPS at 4K resolution in Control?

A: Yes, at 4K High settings the average FPS is exactly 60, providing a consistent 60 FPS experience. At 4K Medium, the average rises to 67 FPS with a minimum of 57 and maximum of 77, offering a small buffer above 60 FPS. However, 4K Ultra drops the average to 52 FPS, which falls below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How does the RTX 3080's 10 GB memory affect Control at high resolutions?

A: The 10 GB GDDR6X memory on the RTX 3080, with a 320-bit bus and 760.3 GB/s bandwidth, supports the texture streaming demands of Control at 4K. The measurable FPS difference between 4K High (60 FPS) and 4K Medium (67 FPS) suggests that memory capacity is not the limiting factor at these settings, as the game remains playable even at Ultra with reduced frame rates.

Q: What is the best resolution for competitive play with this combo?

A: At 1080p Low, the system achieves 185 FPS average, which is the highest measured frame rate. This setting minimizes visual effects to maximize responsiveness. For a balance of visuals and speed, 1440p Medium at 99 FPS average provides smooth gameplay while maintaining reasonable image quality.

Q: How does the Ryzen 5 7500F compare to its direct competitors in general benchmarks?

A: The 7500F's average benchmark score of 24964 places it within 0.4% of its nearest rivals. It sits 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i7-11850H, 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core i7-13620H, and 0.4% ahead of the Intel Core 5 210H, while trailing the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F by 0.2%. These differences are negligible in real-world gaming scenarios.

Q: Should users enable ray tracing on this GPU for Control?

A: The RTX 3080 includes 68 RT cores and 272 tensor cores, indicating ray tracing capability. However, the measured FPS data does not include ray tracing results. Based on the standard settings tested, enabling ray tracing would likely reduce frame rates below the already marginal 4K Ultra result of 52 FPS average, so users should prioritize resolution or ray tracing based on preference.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck at 1080p in this game?

A: The 1080p Low setting at 185 FPS average suggests the GPU is still processing frames efficiently, but the gap between Low and Ultra (185 to 101 FPS) indicates that GPU load scales significantly with settings. The CPU's 3DMark 16-thread score of 6376 and max-thread score of 6379 show consistent multi-threaded performance, so the CPU is likely not the primary limiter at 1080p.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data spans three resolutions, each tested at four quality presets, providing a comprehensive view of this combo's performance envelope.

At 3840x2160 (4K), the system produces an average of 60 FPS at High settings. The Low preset raises this to 94 FPS, while Medium delivers 67 FPS with a minimum of 57 and maximum of 77. Ultra settings reduce the average to 52 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra at 4K spans 42 FPS, from 94 down to 52, representing a 45% performance penalty for maximum quality.

At 2560x1440, the results show greater headroom. Low settings achieve 140 FPS average, High reaches 88 FPS, Medium produces 99 FPS with a range of 84 to 114, and Ultra maintains 77 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 63 FPS, or 45% of the Low value, matching the 4K scaling pattern proportionally.

At 1920x1080, the system demonstrates its highest performance. Low settings deliver 185 FPS average, which is the fastest measured result in the dataset. High settings produce 117 FPS, Medium reaches 131 FPS with a minimum of 111 and maximum of 151, and Ultra sustains 101 FPS. The Low-to-Ultra gap at 1080p is 84 FPS, representing 45% of the Low figure, consistent with the other resolutions.

The Medium preset is the only one with complete min/max data across all resolutions. At 4K, the spread from minimum to maximum is 20 FPS (57 to 77), at 1440p it is 30 FPS (84 to 114), and at 1080p it is 40 FPS (111 to 151). This increasing variance at lower resolutions suggests that CPU-side frame pacing becomes more variable as the GPU completes frames faster.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS progression from 1080p to 4K follows a clear pattern across all settings. At Low, the average drops from 185 at 1080p to 140 at 1440p, then to 94 at 4K. This represents a 24% reduction from 1080p to 1440p, and a 33% reduction from 1440p to 4K. The cumulative decline from 1080p to 4K is 49% at Low settings.

At High settings, the progression is from 117 at 1080p to 88 at 1440p, then 60 at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 25%, and from 1440p to 4K is 32%, showing similar scaling behavior to Low. The total reduction from 1080p to 4K at High is 49%.

Medium settings show 131 at 1080p, 99 at 1440p, and 67 at 4K. This represents a 24% reduction from 1080p to 1440p and a 32% reduction from 1440p to 4K, with a total 49% decline. Ultra settings follow the same pattern: 101 at 1080p, 77 at 1440p, and 52 at 4K, with a 24% drop to 1440p and 32% drop to 4K.

The consistent 49% total reduction from 1080p to 4K across all settings indicates that the limiting component scales uniformly with resolution. This pattern suggests that neither the CPU nor GPU is disproportionately burdened at any resolution; instead, the system behaves as a balanced configuration where frame rate scales with pixel count. The 4K results, particularly the 60 FPS at High settings, show that this combo can handle 4K gaming in Control, though 1440p provides more comfortable margins for higher refresh rates.

Settings Recommendations

For 4K displays, the High preset at 60 FPS average offers the best experience, as it maintains exactly 60 FPS without the frame rate drops seen at Ultra. The Medium preset at 67 FPS with a minimum of 57 provides a small performance buffer but slightly reduces visual quality. Users prioritizing smoothness should choose High, while those accepting occasional dips below 60 FPS may opt for Ultra at 52 FPS average.

At 1440p, the Medium preset delivers 99 FPS average with a minimum of 84, ensuring consistent frame delivery for most displays. The High preset at 88 FPS average provides better visual fidelity while remaining above 60 FPS. For users with 144 Hz monitors, the Low preset at 140 FPS average is the only setting that approaches refresh rate saturation, though Medium at 99 FPS still provides a smooth experience.

At 1080p, the Ultra preset at 101 FPS average is recommended for the best visual quality while maintaining triple-digit frame rates. The High preset at 117 FPS offers a compromise for those wanting higher frame rates without sacrificing much visual detail. The Medium preset at 131 FPS with a minimum of 111 provides excellent consistency for competitive play, while Low at 185 FPS is ideal for maximum responsiveness in fast-paced combat scenarios.

The measured data indicates that the Medium preset consistently provides the most stable frame delivery, as evidenced by the min/max ranges showing tighter grouping relative to the average at each resolution. For users who prioritize frame time consistency over peak performance, Medium settings across all resolutions offer the most predictable experience.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is the primary driver of Control's visual output, utilizing the GA102 chip on Samsung's 8 nm process with 28,300 million transistors across a 628 mm² die. The GPU's base clock of 1440 MHz and boost clock of 1710 MHz, combined with its 8704 shading units, 272 texture mapping units, and 96 raster output units, provide substantial raw rendering throughput. The 68 RT cores and 272 tensor cores enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing and DLSS capabilities, though the measured FPS data reflects standard rasterization performance.

The 10 GB GDDR6X memory running at an effective 19 Gbps through a 320-bit interface delivers 760.3 GB/s of bandwidth. This bandwidth proves adequate for Control's texture-heavy environments at 4K resolution, as evidenced by the 60 FPS average at 4K High settings. The pixel rate of 164.2 GPixel/s and texture rate of 465.1 GTexel/s indicate the GPU's capacity to fill high-resolution frames with detailed textures without becoming the primary bottleneck.

The GPU's FP32 performance of 29.77 TFLOPS, with matching FP16 throughput at 1:1, supports the computational demands of modern game rendering techniques. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 4407 and Passmark G3D score of 25086 place the RTX 3080 in the 68th percentile against all tested GPUs. The GPU compute score of 14397 from Passmark, alongside the Geekbench OpenCL score of 152423 and Vulkan score of 33620, demonstrate strong general-purpose compute capabilities that extend beyond gaming.

The RTX 3080's nearest rivals in average benchmark scores — the NVIDIA P106-100 at 23249, AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 at 23250, AMD Radeon RX 6600M at 23273, and AMD Radeon R9 M290X at 23276 — all sit within 0.4% of the 3080's 23172 average. This narrow margin suggests that in Control's specific workload, the RTX 3080's advantages in memory bandwidth and ray tracing hardware do not translate to a significant lead in standard benchmarks, yet the measured FPS results show strong real-world performance across all settings and resolutions.