Control

The pairing of AMD's Ryzen 5 9600X with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is a study in stark imbalance. The CPU is a modern, high-throughput processor, while the GPU is an end-of-life entry-level part. Benchmark data for Control shows this combo lands at rank 3588 out of 3720 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 4% of all recorded systems. The results are consistently playable only at the lowest settings, with the frame rate collapsing as resolution and detail levels rise.

Resolution Scaling

The measured frame rates show a predictable but severe drop as resolution climbs. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo averages 56 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops that to 43 FPS, a 23% reduction. At 4K Low, the average falls to 29 FPS, which is roughly half of the 1080p figure. This scaling pattern indicates the GPU is the dominant constraint; the pixel-count increase directly taxes the rasterization and memory bandwidth limits of the GTX 1650.

The situation worsens with higher detail presets. At 1080p High, the average is 36 FPS, down from 56 FPS at Low. The 1440p High average of 27 FPS and the 4K High average of 18 FPS show a consistent erosion of performance. The gap between Low and High presets at the same resolution is roughly 36-38%, which is substantial. This suggests that the game's higher-quality textures and lighting effects are placing a heavy load on the GPU's 4 GB VRAM and its 128-bit memory interface.

Looking at the 4K results specifically, the data shows a narrow band of performance. The Ultra preset averages 16 FPS, High averages 18 FPS, and Medium averages 20 FPS, with a minimum of 17 FPS and a maximum of 24 FPS. The Low preset at 29 FPS is the only 4K configuration that approaches a playable state, and even that is marginal. The frame time variance at Medium (17-24 FPS) indicates that the system is struggling to maintain a consistent frame pacing, which would be noticeable as stutter.

At 1080p, the Medium preset yields 40 FPS (min 34, max 46), while Ultra yields 31 FPS. The 9 FPS difference between Medium and Ultra suggests that the Ultra preset's additional effects are too costly for this GPU. The resolution scaling data points to a clear conclusion: this combo is a 1080p-oriented machine, and even then, only with reduced settings. Pushing beyond 1080p or into High/Ultra presets will result in a sub-30 FPS experience that is not suitable for action gameplay.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 9600X is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge), built on a 4 nm process. It has a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. Its synthetic benchmarks are strong: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 17528.5 and a single-core score of 2183.5. It also posts a Geekbench multi-core score of 14438 and a single-core score of 2923. The CPU's percentile ranking against all CPUs is 81, indicating it is in the top fifth of processors tested.

In the context of Control, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and physics data. The game is not known for being exceptionally CPU-heavy at lower resolutions, but the 9600X's high single-thread performance (evidenced by its 3DMark single-thread score of 1253) should be more than adequate. The fact that frame rates drop so steeply with resolution increases confirms that the CPU is not the bottleneck; a faster CPU would not recover the lost frames at 4K.

The 9600X's 32 MB of shared L3 cache and 89.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth are ample for a game like Control. The CPU's benchmark results, such as a PassMark multi-thread score of 30027 and a 3DMark max-threads score of 7590, show it can handle heavy workloads. However, none of that horsepower translates into higher FPS in this specific pairing because the GPU cannot keep up. The data suggests the CPU is effectively idle-waiting for the GPU to finish rendering each frame.

The contrast with the GPU's percentile is telling. The CPU sits at the 81st percentile, while the GPU sits at the 40th percentile. This 41-point gap illustrates the bottleneck. In a balanced system, these numbers would be closer. For this game, the Ryzen 5 9600X is not the limiting factor; its role is to ensure that the GTX 1650 is always the component holding the system back, which it does consistently across all measured resolutions.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is a Turing-architecture part (TU117 chip) built on a 12 nm process. It has 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. Its clocks are a base of 1485 MHz and a boost of 1665 MHz. The memory subsystem is a critical weakness: 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU's FP32 performance is 2.984 TFLOPS.

The GPU's benchmark scores are modest. Its PassMark G3D score is 7880, and its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 305. Its average benchmark score of 7472 places it near the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (delta 0.3%) and the Intel UHD Graphics 750 (delta 0.4%). It is 1% slower than the Intel Arc A310. This is a GPU designed for 1080p gaming at medium-to-low settings in modern titles, and Control is no exception.

The 4 GB VRAM is likely the primary culprit for the poor High/Ultra performance. Control uses high-resolution textures and complex lighting, which can exceed 4 GB at 1080p with high settings. When VRAM is exhausted, the system has to swap data over the PCIe bus, causing severe frame drops. The measured 1080p Medium average of 40 FPS versus the 1080p Low average of 56 FPS suggests that even Medium settings are pushing the memory capacity.

The GPU's texture rate of 93.24 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 53.28 GPixel/s are low by modern standards. The measured FPS data reflects this: at 4K Ultra, the average is just 16 FPS. The GPU is simply unable to fill the frame buffer at higher resolutions. The TDP of 75 W and the lack of power connectors confirm it is a low-power part, but the bottleneck is not power—it is raw compute and bandwidth. The GPU's percentile rank of 40 versus the CPU's 81 is the core issue.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 3588 out of 3720 tested combinations places it in the 3.5th percentile of all systems tested. This is a very low standing, driven almost entirely by the GPU. The CPU's nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks—the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755GE (delta 0.2%), AMD Ryzen 7 7840H (-0.5%), and AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT (-0.6%)—are all comparable in average score, but none of them would rescue this pairing.

The rank is consistent with the GPU's position in its own league. The GTX 1650's nearest rivals, such as the AMD Radeon HD 8850M and Intel UHD Graphics 750, are similarly low-end parts. When a top-20% CPU is paired with a bottom-half GPU, the result is a system that performs like a budget laptop. The data shows that even the Intel Arc A310, which is 1% faster than the GTX 1650, would not meaningfully change the outcome.

In practical terms, this rank means that the vast majority of other tested combinations will deliver higher frame rates in Control. The 9600X is overkill for the GTX 1650; a more modest CPU would yield nearly identical game performance. The ranking is a direct reflection of the GPU's inability to process frames fast enough to utilize the CPU's capabilities. For a game like Control, this combo is effectively a 1080p Low/Medium machine, and the rank confirms that it is unsuitable for higher-fidelity play.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows 1920x1080 is the only viable resolution. At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 56, and at Medium it is 40. Higher resolutions (1440p and 4K) all drop below 43 FPS even at Low settings, which is not smooth for this action title.

Q: Can this system handle Ultra settings?

A: No. At 1080p Ultra, the average FPS is 31. At 1440p Ultra, it drops to 23 FPS, and at 4K Ultra, it falls to 16 FPS. The GTX 1650's 4 GB VRAM and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for the Ultra preset's demands.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its rivals?

A: The Ryzen 5 9600X has an average benchmark score of 29713, which is 0.2% higher than the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755GE and 0.5% lower than the AMD Ryzen 7 7840H. Its performance is effectively tied with these parts, but that does not impact game FPS here.

Q: Is the GPU the main bottleneck?

A: Yes. The CPU sits at the 81st percentile, while the GPU sits at the 40th percentile. The frame rate drops by roughly half when moving from 1080p Low (56 FPS) to 4K Low (29 FPS), which is a classic sign of a GPU-bound workload.

Q: What is the expected frame rate at 1440p Medium?

A: The measured average is 30 FPS, with a minimum of 26 FPS and a maximum of 35 FPS. This is borderline playable but will suffer from noticeable frame drops during intense scenes.

Q: Does the CPU's 12-thread count help in this game?

A: Not measurably. The CPU's 3DMark multi-thread score of 7590 shows strong throughput, but the GPU's low FP32 performance (2.984 TFLOPS) means the system is never CPU-bound. The 6 cores and 12 threads are more than sufficient for Control.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides a clear hierarchy for settings. For a consistent 60 FPS experience, which is ideal for a fast-paced action game, the only option is 1080p Low, which averages 56 FPS. This is the best choice for competitive or smooth play, though it means sacrificing visual fidelity.

For a better visual experience without dropping to unplayable levels, 1080p Medium is the sweet spot. It averages 40 FPS with a minimum of 34 FPS and a maximum of 46 FPS. This preset will look noticeably better than Low while maintaining a frame rate that is acceptable for most players, though not perfectly smooth. The 1080p High preset at 36 FPS is a viable alternative if you prefer sharper textures, but the 4 FPS gain from Medium to High is not worth the extra load on the 4 GB VRAM.

All other settings and resolutions are not recommended. The 1440p and 4K presets all fail to reach 60 FPS, and most fall below 30 FPS. The 4K Low preset at 29 FPS is technically playable but will feel sluggish. The Ultra presets at any resolution are unusable, with 1080p Ultra at 31 FPS being the only one that approaches a playable state, but it is still below the 40 FPS of Medium.

The optimal configuration based on the data is 1920x1080 with the Medium preset. It provides the best balance of visual quality and performance, with an average FPS that is 43% higher than the High preset. If you must prioritize frame rate, drop to Low; otherwise, Medium is the highest preset that keeps the average above 40 FPS. Avoid 1440p and 4K entirely, as the GPU lacks the memory bandwidth and compute power to handle those resolutions at acceptable speeds.