Control

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4 GB combination delivers a highly variable experience in Control, with performance heavily dependent on resolution and preset. The data shows the combo ranks 1471 out of 1636 tested combinations, placing it in the lower tier of systems, yet capable of playable frame rates at lower settings. The measured results indicate a system that is fundamentally limited by its GPU, as the 4 GB VRAM buffer and the RTX 3050's compute capabilities dictate performance more than the CPU's strong multi-threaded scores.

FAQ

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

A: Based on the measured average FPS, 1920x1080 is the only resolution where the system consistently exceeds 48 FPS across all tested settings, with Low reaching 83.5 FPS. At 2560x1440, only the Low preset achieves a playable 64.2 FPS, while 3840x2160 results in sub-30 FPS averages for all presets except Low, which hits 45.2 FPS.

Q: How does the Ultra preset perform at 1920x1080?

A: At 1920x1080 with Ultra settings, the combo produces an average of 48 FPS. This is the only instance where the Ultra preset crosses the 30 FPS threshold at any resolution tested, but it remains below the 60 FPS target that many players prefer.

Q: Is the CPU a bottleneck in this pairing?

A: Benchmark results for the Ryzen 5 8400F show strong synthetic scores, including a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 20851 and a single-core score of 2943. Since the measured FPS scales significantly with resolution and settings, it indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor, not the CPU.

Q: What is the performance delta between Low and Ultra at 2560x1440?

A: The measured data shows a 30 FPS difference: Low averages 64.2 FPS while Ultra averages 34.2 FPS. This represents a significant drop in performance when increasing visual fidelity.

Q: Does the 4 GB VRAM capacity affect settings choices?

A: The RTX 3050 has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The measured frame rates suggest that higher presets, particularly at higher resolutions, are constrained by this memory capacity, as the performance drops sharply when moving from Low to Medium at 3840x2160.

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

A: The combo ranks 1471 out of 1636 total combinations, placing it in the bottom 10% of tested setups. This position is consistent with the low FPS measurements at higher settings and resolutions.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4 GB is the primary performance determinant in this configuration. Its specifications include a base clock of 1545 MHz and a boost clock of 1740 MHz, paired with 2048 shading units and 32 ROPs. The 4 GB VRAM capacity, running at 12 Gbps effective on a 128-bit bus, provides a memory bandwidth of 192.0 GB/s. This memory configuration is a limiting factor in Control, a game that can quickly consume VRAM at higher texture qualities and resolutions.

The GPU's FP32 performance is 7.127 TFLOPS, which is modest by current standards. The data shows a clear pattern: as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160, the average FPS drops substantially at every settings level. For instance, at High settings, the average falls from 55.7 FPS at 1920x1080 to 40.9 FPS at 2560x1440, and further to 29 FPS at 3840x2160. This scaling indicates that the GPU's compute and memory subsystems are saturated at higher resolutions.

The RTX 3050's 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores are present, but the measured data does not include ray tracing-specific benchmarks. The pixel rate of 55.68 GPixel/s and texture rate of 111.4 GTexel/s provide context for its fill-rate capabilities, which are sufficient for 1080p gaming but struggle to maintain high frame rates at 4K. The GPU's 90 W TDP and dual-slot design suggest a power-efficient card, but this does not translate to high-end performance in demanding titles like Control.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured frame rates, the optimal experience for this combo is at 1920x1080 with the Low preset, which delivers 83.5 FPS on average. This is the only configuration that approaches or exceeds the 60 FPS threshold, making it the smoothest option. For players willing to trade some fluidity for visual quality, the Medium preset at 1920x1080 offers a reasonable compromise with 57.3 FPS, which is still above the 30 FPS playability floor.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset is the only viable option, producing 64.2 FPS. The Medium preset drops to 47.3 FPS, which is playable but noticeably less smooth. The High preset at 40.9 FPS is borderline, while Ultra at 34.2 FPS is only suitable for players who prioritize visuals over responsiveness. At 3840x2160, the Low preset is the only one that exceeds 30 FPS, hitting 45.2 FPS, but this resolution is generally not recommended for this hardware.

The data suggests that the Ultra preset is not a practical choice for this combo, as it only reaches 48 FPS at 1920x1080 and falls to 22.5 FPS at 3840x2160. The performance gap between Low and Ultra at 1920x1080 is 35.5 FPS, indicating a significant cost to visual fidelity. For the best balance of image quality and performance, the Medium preset at 1920x1080 appears to be the sweet spot, though it still falls short of 60 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data for Control reveals a consistent trend across all three resolutions tested. At 1920x1080, the average FPS ranges from 83.5 on Low to 48 on Ultra. The Medium preset achieves 57.3 FPS, while High sits at 55.7 FPS. This shows a relatively narrow gap between Medium and High, with a larger drop to Ultra.

At 2560x1440, the averages are lower across the board. Low produces 64.2 FPS, Medium drops to 47.3 FPS, High to 40.9 FPS, and Ultra to 34.2 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra here is a 30 FPS difference, representing a 46.7% reduction in frame rate.

At 3840x2160, the performance is severely limited. Low averages 45.2 FPS, which is the only playable result at this resolution. High drops to 29 FPS, Medium to 27.9 FPS, and Ultra to 22.5 FPS. The difference between Low and Medium at 4K is only 17.3 FPS, suggesting that the GPU is hitting a hard memory or compute ceiling.

The data shows that increasing resolution has a more pronounced effect on performance than increasing settings. For example, moving from 1920x1080 Low to 2560x1440 Low results in a 19.3 FPS drop, while moving from 2560x1440 Low to 3840x2160 Low results in another 19 FPS drop. This linear scaling highlights the GPU's limited memory bandwidth and fill rate.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Ryzen 5 8400F and RTX 3050 4 GB ranks 1471 out of 1636 tested combos in Control. This position places it in the bottom 10% of all configurations, which aligns with the low FPS measurements at higher settings and resolutions. The rank reflects the GPU's modest performance, as the CPU's synthetic benchmarks are relatively strong.

The Ryzen 5 8400F itself has an average benchmark score of 25064, placing it at the 82nd percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 2700X with a score of 25057 (a 0% delta), the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 at 25099 (-0.1%), and the AMD EPYC 9474F at 25103 (-0.2%). This indicates that the CPU is well within the performance envelope of its peers, and its 0.3% advantage over the Ryzen 5 7500F is negligible.

The GPU, however, has no nearest rivals listed and a 50th percentile ranking among all GPUs, confirming its mid-range status. The combo's overall rank of 1471 suggests that while the CPU is capable, the RTX 3050 4 GB drags the system down in a GPU-intensive title like Control. This is consistent with the measured data showing that the GPU is the bottleneck at all resolutions except possibly 1920x1080 Low.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Phoenix. It has a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The CPU features 16 MB of shared L3 cache and 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and it supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel interface providing 83.2 GB/s of bandwidth.

In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU shows strong multi-threaded performance with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 20851 and a single-core score of 2943. The PassMark multi-thread score is 24530, and the single-thread score is 3684. These scores indicate that the CPU is not a limiting factor in Control, as the game's performance scales primarily with GPU load.

The CPU's 3DMark scores are also notable: 6165 for max threads, 6091 for 16 threads, and 951 for single thread. This demonstrates balanced multi-threading capability. In the context of the measured FPS, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and physics data. Since the FPS drops significantly as resolution increases, it confirms that the CPU is capable of keeping up with the GPU's demands at 1080p, but the GPU's performance ceiling is reached at higher resolutions.

The CPU's release date is March 2024, and it has a launch MSRP of $170. Its architecture and cache layout are suited for gaming workloads, but the data shows that pairing it with a higher-end GPU would yield better results in Control. The current combo is CPU-satisfied but GPU-limited, meaning that the Ryzen 5 8400F has headroom that the RTX 3050 4 GB cannot utilize.