Control

The AMD Ryzen 5 7600 and AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT combination delivers a robust Control experience across all tested resolutions, with the data showing a clear transition from CPU-bound behavior at 1080p to GPU-bound behavior at 4K. The CPU’s 6 cores and 12 threads, based on the Zen 4 architecture, operate at a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, while the GPU’s RDNA 3.0 architecture, built on the Navi 31 chip, provides 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 320-bit bus. Measured framerates range from 208 FPS at 1080p Low to 58 FPS at 4K Ultra, illustrating the performance envelope of this pairing.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 7600 serves as the processing foundation for this combo, featuring 6 cores and 12 threads. Its base clock of 3.80 GHz and boost clock of 5.10 GHz are the primary clock specifications that influence game performance, particularly in scenarios where the engine relies on single-threaded execution. The processor’s 32 MB of shared L3 cache and 1 MB per-core L2 cache provide the memory hierarchy needed for game logic and physics calculations. In synthetic benchmarks, this CPU achieves a single-thread score of 999 in 3dmark, a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1852, and a Geekbench single-core score of 2521. Multi-threaded performance is represented by a 3dmark max threads score of 6503, a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 12735, and a Geekbench multicore score of 13413.

The CPU’s role in Control becomes evident when examining the framerate scaling across resolutions. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo reaches 208 FPS average, which is the highest measured value in the dataset. This high framerate indicates that the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU with enough draw calls and game state updates to sustain well over 200 FPS. However, the delta between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p is substantial—208 FPS versus 114 FPS—which suggests that while the CPU can handle the game logic at high speeds, the GPU’s rendering workload at higher settings becomes a limiting factor even at this resolution. The data shows the CPU’s percentile ranking at 78 among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 26324. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX with an average score of 26274 (0.2% delta), the AMD Ryzen 7 7435HS at 26402 (-0.3% delta), the Intel Core i9-11900KF at 26212 (0.4% delta), and the AMD Ryzen 5 8540U at 26187 (0.5% delta). These small delta percentages indicate that the Ryzen 5 7600 sits in a tightly competitive performance band, neither significantly ahead nor behind its closest competitors in aggregate CPU benchmarks.

The 65 W TDP of this processor, combined with its 5 nm process node from TSMC and 6,570 million transistors on a 71 mm² die, reflects a modern efficiency profile. The CPU supports DDR5 memory with dual-channel configuration and a memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s, which contributes to data throughput in memory-intensive scenes. For a game like Control, which features physics-heavy combat and destructible environments, the 6-core/12-thread configuration provides sufficient parallel processing capability, as evidenced by the 3dmark 16-thread score of 6499. The boost clock of 5.10 GHz is particularly relevant for the game’s single-threaded rendering threads, allowing the CPU to maintain high minimum framerates even when the GPU workload increases.

FAQ

Q: What is the maximum average framerate achieved by this combo in Control?

A: The highest measured average framerate is 208 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX?

A: The Ryzen 5 7600 has an average benchmark score of 26324, which is 0.2% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX’s score of 26274, indicating a negligible performance difference in aggregate benchmarks.

Q: What is the lowest average framerate recorded in the dataset?

A: The lowest average framerate is 58 FPS, which occurs at 3840x2160 resolution with Ultra settings.

Q: Does the GPU’s 20 GB memory capacity affect performance at 4K?

A: The 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 320-bit bus with 800.0 GB/s bandwidth supports the high-resolution rendering, as evidenced by the 67 FPS average at 4K High settings, though the data does not provide a direct memory utilization metric.

Q: What is the combo’s rank among all tested combinations for Control?

A: This combo ranks 740 out of 3720 tested combinations, placing it in the top 20% of all tested hardware pairings for this game.

Q: How much performance difference exists between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Low settings produce 157 FPS average, while Ultra settings produce 86 FPS average, a difference of 71 FPS or approximately 45% lower performance at Ultra compared to Low.

Resolution Scaling

The resolution scaling behavior of this combo reveals a classic performance curve where the GPU becomes progressively more dominant as pixel count increases. At 1920x1080 with High settings, the average framerate is 131 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 at the same settings yields 99 FPS, a reduction of 32 FPS or about 24% lower performance. At 3840x2160 High settings, the average drops to 67 FPS, which is 49% lower than the 1080p High result. This scaling pattern indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting component at higher resolutions, as the CPU’s workload does not scale with resolution in the same way.

The Low settings row provides a clearer picture of the CPU’s ceiling. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 208 FPS. At 1440p Low, this drops to 157 FPS, and at 4K Low, it drops to 106 FPS. The relative decrease from 1080p to 1440p is 24.5%, while the decrease from 1440p to 4K is 32.5%. These percentages suggest that even at Low settings, where GPU load is minimized, the resolution increase still imposes a significant rendering cost. The data indicates that the GPU’s pixel rate of 459.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 804.4 GTexel/s are being exercised heavily at 4K, even with reduced shading complexity.

The Medium settings row includes minimum and maximum framerate data, which adds temporal context. At 1080p Medium, the average is 148 FPS with a minimum of 125 FPS and a maximum of 170 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the average is 112 FPS with a minimum of 95 FPS and a maximum of 128 FPS. At 4K Medium, the average is 75 FPS with a minimum of 64 FPS and a maximum of 87 FPS. The framerate range, defined as the difference between maximum and minimum, is 45 FPS at 1080p, 33 FPS at 1440p, and 23 FPS at 4K. This narrowing range at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU is operating closer to its consistent throughput limit, whereas at 1080p, there is more variance likely due to CPU-driven frame time spikes or scene complexity changes.

The data supports the conclusion that at 1080p, the CPU’s 5.10 GHz boost clock and 6-core configuration are sufficient to push framerates beyond 200 FPS at Low settings, but the GPU’s rendering pipeline becomes the bottleneck when settings increase. At 4K, the GPU’s 51.48 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 20 GB memory capacity are the dominant factors, with the CPU providing adequate support as evidenced by the 106 FPS average at Low settings—a value that still exceeds the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank for this specific pairing in Control is 740 out of 3720 tested combinations. This percentile placement, roughly the 80th percentile (calculated as 740/3720 = 19.9% from the top), indicates that this hardware configuration outperforms the majority of tested combos in this game. The dataIsMeasured field confirms that these results come from actual testing rather than estimation, lending credibility to the ranking.

To contextualize this rank, consider that the CPU’s percentileVsAllCpus is 78, and the GPU’s percentileVsAllGpus is 55. The CPU ranks higher relative to its peers than the GPU does relative to its peers, which suggests that the CPU is a stronger component in this pairing. The GPU’s average benchmark score of 13745 places it near the AMD Radeon 660M (13812, -0.5% delta), the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile (13821, -0.5% delta), and the AMD Radeon RX 570X (13871, -0.9% delta), while being 1.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT (13543). These rivals are not direct performance equivalents in gaming workloads—the RX 7900 XT’s 20 GB memory and 800.0 GB/s bandwidth far exceed those of the integrated or mobile GPUs listed—but the aggregate benchmark scores place them in a similar numerical range.

The rank of 740 out of 3720 means that approximately 2980 other combos perform worse in Control, while 739 perform better. This places the combo in a strong position for 1440p and 4K gaming, where the measured framerates remain playable. The fact that 4K High achieves 67 FPS and 4K Ultra achieves 58 FPS indicates that this combo can handle the game at maximum settings with only minor compromises, which is a meaningful achievement given that Control is known for its demanding visual effects. The rank also reflects the balance between CPU and GPU—neither component is dramatically mismatched, allowing the combo to avoid severe bottlenecking at any tested resolution.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT is the primary rendering engine in this combo, built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 31 chip. Its 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 320-bit bus provides 800.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is critical for high-resolution textures and effects in Control. The GPU’s base clock of 1387 MHz and boost clock of 2394 MHz, with a game clock of 2025 MHz, determine its sustained performance under load. The memory clock of 2500 MHz, translating to 20 Gbps effective, supports the high bandwidth figure.

In terms of raw compute, the GPU features 5376 shading units, 336 texture mapping units, and 192 raster operation units. It also includes 84 ray tracing cores, which are relevant for Control’s optional ray-traced reflections and shadows, though the measured data does not specify whether ray tracing was enabled. The FP32 performance of 51.48 TFLOPS and FP16 performance of 103.0 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) provide the computational headroom for the game’s physics and particle effects. The texture rate of 804.4 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 459.6 GPixel/s are directly exercised by the game’s rendering pipeline.

The GPU’s benchmark scores include a 3dmark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 5623, a Geekbench OpenCL score of 12756, a Geekbench Vulkan score of 71068, and a Passmark G3D score of 29009. These synthetic results indicate strong DirectX 12 and Vulkan performance, which aligns with Control’s use of DX12. The Passmark DirectX 11 score of 340 and DirectX 12 score of 110 are lower relative to the G3D composite, but these are individual API tests that do not directly translate to game performance. The GPU’s percentileVsAllGpus of 55 reflects that it sits near the median of all GPUs in the database, though this metric includes integrated and older discrete GPUs, which skews the distribution.

The 300 W TDP and suggested PSU of 700 W indicate the power requirements, but the measured framerates show that this power is translated into performance. At 4K Ultra, the GPU sustains 58 FPS average, which is within the playable range for a demanding title. At 1080p Low, the GPU is capable of 208 FPS, demonstrating that it is not the limiting factor at lower resolutions. The 20 GB memory capacity is particularly beneficial for Control’s high-resolution texture packs and the game’s tendency to use large buffer allocations, though the dataset does not provide direct VRAM usage figures.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides 12 distinct data points across four resolutions and four settings levels. At 1920x1080, the average framerates are: Low 208, Medium 148, High 131, and Ultra 114. The Medium setting also reports a minimum of 125 FPS and a maximum of 170 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 94 FPS, with Ultra delivering 54.8% of the Low performance. This indicates that the settings presets have a significant impact on rendering load, with Ultra enabling advanced effects that nearly halve the framerate.

At 2560x1440, the average framerates are: Low 157, Medium 112, High 99, and Ultra 86. The Medium setting reports a minimum of 95 FPS and a maximum of 128 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 71 FPS, with Ultra delivering 54.8% of the Low performance—the same ratio as at 1080p, suggesting that the settings presets have a consistent relative cost across resolutions. The minimum framerate of 95 FPS at Medium ensures that even the lowest frames remain above 60 FPS, providing a smooth experience.

At 3840x2160, the average framerates are: Low 106, Medium 75, High 67, and Ultra 58. The Medium setting reports a minimum of 64 FPS and a maximum of 87 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 48 FPS, with Ultra delivering 54.7% of the Low performance. The minimum framerate of 64 FPS at Medium is just above the 60 FPS threshold, while the Ultra average of 58 FPS dips below it. The High setting at 67 FPS average provides a safer margin above 60 FPS.

Comparing the same settings across resolutions, High settings show 131 FPS at 1080p, 99 FPS at 1440p, and 67 FPS at 4K. The step from 1080p to 1440p reduces performance by 24.4%, and the step from 1440p to 4K reduces it by 32.3%. This accelerating drop with resolution confirms that the GPU’s fillrate and memory bandwidth become increasingly stressed at higher pixel counts. Low settings show a similar pattern: 208 FPS at 1080p, 157 FPS at 1440p, and 106 FPS at 4K, with reductions of 24.5% and 32.5% respectively.

The Medium settings row is the only one with complete min/max data across all resolutions. The framerate range (max minus min) is 45 FPS at 1080p, 33 FPS at 1440p, and 23 FPS at 4K. The decreasing range at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU is more consistently saturated, reducing the impact of scene complexity variation. At 1080p, the larger range suggests that some scenes are CPU-limited while others are GPU-limited, leading to more variable frame times.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the optimal settings preset depends on the target resolution and desired framerate consistency. At 1920x1080, all four presets deliver average framerates above 114 FPS, making any setting playable. The Ultra preset at 114 FPS average provides the highest visual quality while still maintaining a framerate that exceeds the refresh rate of most standard monitors. For users with high-refresh-rate displays (144 Hz or higher), the High preset at 131 FPS or Medium at 148 FPS offer better headroom, but the data shows that Ultra’s 114 FPS average is still well above the 60 FPS threshold.

At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset at 86 FPS average is sufficient for 60 Hz displays but may not fully saturate 144 Hz monitors. The High preset at 99 FPS provides a better balance, with a framerate that approaches the 100 FPS mark. The Medium preset at 112 FPS with a minimum of 95 FPS ensures that even the most demanding scenes remain above 90 FPS, making it the recommended choice for competitive play or for users who prioritize consistency over maximum visual fidelity. The Low preset at 157 FPS is only necessary for extreme refresh rates or if the user prefers minimal input latency.

At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset at 58 FPS average falls below the 60 FPS target, which may result in occasional stutter on standard 60 Hz displays. The High preset at 67 FPS average provides a comfortable margin above 60 FPS, making it the recommended choice for 4K gaming with this combo. The Medium preset at 75 FPS average, with a minimum of 64 FPS, offers even more headroom and is the safest option for maintaining consistent frame pacing. The Low preset at 106 FPS average is recommended only if the user prioritizes framerate over all visual quality, as it delivers a smooth experience but sacrifices the game’s atmospheric effects.

The data suggests that the High preset at 4K is the best overall experience, as it maintains an average framerate above 60 FPS while retaining most of the visual enhancements that Control is known for. At 1440p, the High preset at 99 FPS offers the best balance of quality and performance, while at 1080p, the Ultra preset is viable given the 114 FPS average. The Medium preset’s min/max data at 4K (64-87 FPS) indicates that frame times are relatively stable, making it a strong fallback if High produces any drops below 60 FPS in specific scenes. The measured data does not include ray tracing or DLSS/FSR upscaling settings, so these recommendations are based solely on the preset levels tested.