Control

Control on this hardware pairing is a study in extremes: a modern, high-cache 6-core CPU paired with an entry-level GPU from 2019. The benchmark data shows a system where the graphics card is the overwhelming bottleneck, and the CPU’s potential is largely left untapped. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS across resolutions and settings to show exactly where this combo stands and how to get the most playable experience.

Resolution Scaling

The measured frames per second tell a clear story about where the performance ceiling lives. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo averages 56 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 at Low settings drops that average to 43 FPS, a 23% reduction. At 3840x2160 with Low settings, the average falls further to 29 FPS, which is a 48% drop from the 1080p result. This scaling pattern is typical of a GPU-bound scenario, where the rendering resolution directly dictates the workload on the graphics card.

The story becomes more pronounced when looking at the higher quality presets. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 31 FPS. At 1440p Ultra, it drops to 23 FPS. At 4K Ultra, the average is just 16 FPS. The progression from 1080p to 4K at Ultra settings represents a 48% decrease in frame rate. This steep decline indicates that the GTX 1650 is being saturated by the pixel count and shader complexity, and the CPU’s speed is not a limiting factor in these scenarios.

The data suggests that the transition from 1080p to 1440p is the most significant breaking point for this GPU. The 4K Low average of 29 FPS is nearly identical to the 1440p High average of 27 FPS, showing that you can trade resolution for quality without changing the performance class. The limiting component here is definitively the GPU, as the frame rates scale almost linearly with the number of pixels being rendered, rather than showing the plateau that would occur if the CPU were the bottleneck. The Ryzen 5 7500X3D’s high single-thread score is irrelevant when the GPU is struggling to output even 30 frames per second at 4K.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 4 Raphael architecture, built on a 5 nm process. It has a base clock of 4.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz, with 96 MB of shared L3 cache. This cache configuration is a key feature for gaming, as it helps reduce memory latency. The CPU’s benchmark results show a Passmark single-thread score of 3494 and a multithread score of 25047. In the context of this game, the CPU’s role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and physics calculations, a task it performs with ease.

The data indicates that the CPU is not the performance limiter at any resolution tested. At 1080p Low, where the CPU load is highest relative to the GPU, the system still only manages 56 FPS. This is a modest result for a CPU that scores in the 89th percentile of all CPUs, suggesting that the GTX 1650 is preventing the processor from reaching its full potential. The CPU’s nearest rivals, such as the Intel Core i9-13950HX and the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385, have similar average benchmark scores (within 0.6%), yet their performance in this title would be equally gated by the GPU.

The 7500X3D’s 12 threads are more than sufficient for Control’s threading model. The game’s performance at 4K Ultra (16 FPS) versus 4K Low (29 FPS) shows that the CPU is not struggling with the increased scene complexity; the GPU is simply overwhelmed. The high L3 cache and boost clock are wasted resources in this pairing, as the GPU’s 4 GB of VRAM and limited compute throughput create a hard ceiling. For a user looking to upgrade, the CPU is a solid foundation that will last for years, but its performance in this specific configuration is entirely dictated by the graphics card.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is a Turing-architecture card built on a 12 nm process, featuring 896 shading units and 32 ROPs. It has a base clock of 1485 MHz and a boost clock of 1665 MHz, with 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s. Its compute capability is rated at 2.984 TFLOPS for FP32 operations. The card’s average benchmark score is 7472, placing it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals include the Intel UHD Graphics 750 and the AMD Radeon R7 350, which are similarly low-powered solutions.

The measured FPS data shows that the GTX 1650 is the sole determinant of performance in Control. The 4 GB VRAM is a critical limitation, especially at higher resolutions. The jump from 1080p Medium (40 FPS) to 1440p Medium (30 FPS) and then to 4K Medium (20 FPS) shows a consistent degradation that aligns with the increased memory and bandwidth demands. The card’s memory bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s is insufficient for 4K textures, leading to the low averages seen at that resolution.

The GPU’s clock speeds and core count are simply not enough to maintain playable frame rates at 1440p or 4K with any quality preset. Even at 1080p, the card can only manage an average of 56 FPS on Low settings, which is barely acceptable for a fast-paced action game. The data shows that the GTX 1650 is an entry-level part that is best suited for 1080p gaming with reduced settings. The card’s DirectX 12 score of 35 and DirectX 11 score of 58 in Passmark reflect its limited ability to handle modern graphics APIs, which Control relies on for its visual effects. This GPU is the clear bottleneck, and its end-of-life production status suggests that it is not a future-proof investment for this title.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured rows, the best experience for this combo is at 1920x1080 with Low settings, which yields an average of 56 FPS. This is the only configuration that approaches a smooth 60 FPS target. The Medium preset at 1080p drops the average to 40 FPS, with minimums of 34 FPS, which can lead to noticeable stuttering during intense combat sequences. The High preset at 1080p averages 36 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for a game that requires precise aiming.

For 1440p, the data suggests that even Low settings (43 FPS) are barely playable, and the Medium preset (30 FPS) is borderline. Pushing to High (27 FPS) or Ultra (23 FPS) results in a slideshow-like experience. At 4K, all presets are below 30 FPS, with Low averaging 29 FPS and Ultra averaging 16 FPS. These results are not recommended for a responsive gaming experience.

The practical advice is to prioritize resolution over quality. Running at 1080p Low is the only way to get a consistent frame rate above 50 FPS. If a user insists on higher visual fidelity, they should accept that the frame rate will drop into the 30-40 FPS range, which is a significant compromise for a game like Control. The Medium preset at 1080p offers a balance between visuals and performance, with a 40 FPS average, but the minimum FPS of 34 indicates that there will be moments of frame pacing issues. In summary, the Low preset at 1080p is the only setting that provides a playable and responsive experience for this hardware combination.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 ranks 2789 out of 2888 tested combos in Control. This places it in the bottom 3.4% of all configurations, which is a direct reflection of the GTX 1650’s limited capabilities. The CPU is a top-tier part, but the GPU holds the entire system back, resulting in a ranking that is far below what the processor alone would achieve.

The data shows that this combo is outperformed by nearly every other pairing that includes a more capable GPU. The CPU’s high percentile ranking (89%) is negated by the GPU’s low percentile ranking (40%). For context, the GPU’s nearest rivals in benchmark scores are the Intel Arc A310 and the AMD Radeon R7 350, all of which are low-end parts that would likely produce similar results. The combo’s rank is not a reflection of the CPU’s quality but rather a measure of the system’s overall gaming performance, which is severely handicapped by the graphics card. If a user is looking to build a system for Control, this pairing is a mismatch, and the GPU should be upgraded to see any meaningful improvement in frame rates.

FAQ

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

A: The measured data shows that 1920x1080 with Low settings provides the highest average FPS at 56. This is the only configuration that approaches a smooth 60 FPS target, making it the recommended setup for playable performance.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this system?

A: The GPU is the definitive bottleneck. The frame rates scale heavily with resolution, dropping from 56 FPS at 1080p Low to 29 FPS at 4K Low, which indicates the GTX 1650 is the limiting component. The CPU’s performance is not the constraint, as its single-thread score is high.

Q: Can I play Control at 4K with this hardware?

A: Technically, yes, but the experience is not recommended. The highest 4K average is 29 FPS on Low settings, with Ultra settings dropping to 16 FPS. These frame rates are below the threshold for a responsive action game.

Q: How does the GTX 1650 compare to its nearest rivals in terms of performance?

A: The GTX 1650 has an average benchmark score of 7472, which is 0.3% higher than the AMD Radeon HD 8850M and 0.4% higher than the Intel UHD Graphics 750. It is 1% slower than the Intel Arc A310.

Q: What is the CPU's performance percentile?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D scores in the 89th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 44573. This indicates it is a high-performing processor, but its potential is not realized in this specific GPU pairing.

Q: Does the 4 GB VRAM on the GTX 1650 affect performance in Control?

A: Yes, the 4 GB VRAM is a significant limitation, particularly at higher resolutions. The memory bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s is insufficient for 4K textures, which contributes to the low average FPS at 3840x2160 across all settings.