Control

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Ryzen 5 9600X is a 6-core, 12-thread processor built on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge) using TSMC's 4 nm process. It runs on the AMD Socket AM5 platform with a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, backed by a 32 MB shared L3 cache and 1 MB L2 per core. The chip's single-thread performance is strong, as evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2183.5 and a 3DMark single-thread score of 1253. This matters for Control, which is an action-adventure title that relies heavily on physics simulations and asynchronous compute workloads—both of which respond well to high single-core throughput.

In multi-threaded workloads, the 9600X posts a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 17528.5 and a Geekbench multi-core score of 14438. The processor's 3DMark scores scale with thread count: 2456 at 2 threads, 4649 at 4 threads, 6726 at 8 threads, and 7585 at 16 threads (max threads). This scaling pattern suggests that the CPU delivers nearly linear gains up to 8 threads, then plateaus—a characteristic that aligns with Control's engine, which typically utilizes 4-6 cores effectively but doesn't heavily tax beyond that. The 9600X's 81st percentile ranking among all CPUs indicates it sits comfortably in the upper tier of processors, though its nearest rivals—the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755GE (0.2% ahead), AMD Ryzen 7 7840H (0.5% behind), AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT (0.6% behind), and AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS (0.8% behind)—show that the competition is tight within this performance band.

The 65W TDP and 4 nm process node mean the 9600X runs efficiently, which is beneficial for sustained gaming sessions. The chip's memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s over dual-channel DDR5 is adequate for feeding the RTX 5080. In Control, the CPU's role is largely about maintaining frame pacing and handling the game's physics-heavy environments. Benchmark results indicate that at 1080p with Low settings, the system reaches 255 FPS average—a figure that reflects both the CPU's ability to feed frames rapidly and the GPU's capacity to render them. The 9600X's single-thread performance (PassMark single-thread score of 4570) is particularly relevant here, as Control's render thread can become a bottleneck at high frame rates.

The processor's 3DMark 16-thread score of 7585 and max-thread score of 7590 are nearly identical, confirming that the 6-core/12-thread configuration is fully utilized by modern benchmarks. For Control specifically, the data shows that the CPU never becomes a limiting factor at 4K, where the GPU takes over as the primary constraint—a point we'll explore in the resolution scaling section. The 9600X's 81st percentile ranking, combined with its 0.2% to 0.8% delta from nearest rivals, places it in a sweet spot where it won't hold back a high-end GPU in most scenarios.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture (chip GB203) using TSMC's 5 nm process. It features 16 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 960.0 GB/s of bandwidth—a figure that proves critical for Control's high-resolution textures and particle effects. The GPU's base clock is 2295 MHz with a boost clock of 2617 MHz, and memory runs at 1875 MHz (30 Gbps effective). With 10752 shading units, 336 texture mapping units, and 112 raster output pipelines, the RTX 5080 is a formidable rendering engine. Its 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores provide dedicated hardware for ray tracing and DLSS, though Control's implementation of these features is relatively modest compared to newer titles.

The GPU's raw compute capabilities are substantial: 56.28 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16, a texture rate of 879.3 GTexel/s, and a pixel rate of 293.1 GPixel/s. These specs translate directly to the measured frame rates in Control. At 4K Ultra settings, the RTX 5080 averages 72 FPS, while dropping to High settings yields 82 FPS—a 13.9% improvement. The GPU's 87th percentile ranking among all GPUs places it in the upper echelon, though its nearest rivals—the AMD Radeon 8060S (0.6% ahead), AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB (0.7% ahead), AMD Radeon Pro W5700X (2.3% ahead), and AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE (2.2% behind)—show that the field is competitive. The RTX 5080's PassMark G3D score of 36565 and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 8637 underscore its DirectX 12 performance, which is the primary API used by Control.

The 16 GB VRAM capacity is a key asset for Control at 4K, where the game's environments—particularly the shifting, destructible office spaces—demand substantial texture memory. The 960.0 GB/s bandwidth ensures that texture streaming doesn't become a bottleneck, even during rapid camera movements or when the game's physics engine spawns debris. The GPU's 360W TDP and dual-slot design require a 750W suggested PSU, but for Control specifically, the power draw is moderate since the game isn't as demanding as modern AAA titles. The RTX 5080's PassMark G2D score of 1415 and GPU compute score of 21789 indicate balanced performance across 2D and compute workloads, though these are less relevant to gaming. In Control, the GPU's role becomes increasingly dominant as resolution rises—at 1080p, the CPU can feed frames fast enough to reach 255 FPS at Low settings, but at 4K, the GPU's rendering limits become the primary constraint.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data for Control reveals a clear scaling pattern across resolutions. At 1080p Low settings, the system averages 255 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops this to 193 FPS—a 24.3% reduction. At 4K Low, the average falls to 130 FPS, representing a 32.6% drop from 1440p and a 49.0% drop from 1080p. This scaling suggests that at 1080p Low, the system is CPU-limited or at least CPU-bound enough that the GPU isn't fully saturated; the 255 FPS ceiling likely reflects the 9600X's ability to feed frames rather than the RTX 5080's rendering capacity. The 9600X's single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2183.5) becomes the limiting factor at these high frame rates.

At Medium settings, the pattern becomes more GPU-bound. The 1080p Medium average is 181 FPS, dropping to 137 FPS at 1440p (24.3% decrease) and 93 FPS at 4K (32.1% decrease from 1440p). The Medium settings include the only measured min/max FPS data: at 1080p, the range is 154-209 FPS; at 1440p, it's 117-158 FPS; and at 4K, it's 79-107 FPS. These ranges indicate that frame pacing remains consistent across resolutions, with the min FPS staying about 85% of the average in each case. The High settings show a similar scaling: 161 FPS at 1080p, 122 FPS at 1440p (24.2% decrease), and 82 FPS at 4K (32.8% decrease from 1440p).

Ultra settings exhibit the steepest resolution penalty. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 140 FPS; at 1440p Ultra, it drops to 106 FPS (24.3% decrease); and at 4K Ultra, it falls to 72 FPS (32.1% decrease from 1440p). The consistency of these percentage drops across all settings presets—roughly 24% from 1080p to 1440p and 32% from 1440p to 4K—indicates that the scaling is primarily resolution-driven rather than settings-driven. This suggests that the RTX 5080's rendering pipeline is the dominant factor at higher resolutions, while at 1080p, the CPU becomes more influential. The fact that the 4K Low average (130 FPS) is still higher than the 1080p Ultra average (140 FPS) is notable—it shows that the GPU has substantial headroom at lower settings, and the CPU isn't a bottleneck even at 4K Low. The limiting component shifts from CPU at 1080p Low to GPU as resolution and settings increase, with the GPU becoming the clear constraint at 4K Ultra where the average drops to 72 FPS.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS data, the Medium preset offers the best balance of visual quality and performance across all resolutions. At 1080p, Medium delivers 181 FPS average with a minimum of 154 FPS—well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay and providing enough headroom for high-refresh-rate displays. The jump from Medium to High at 1080p costs 20 FPS (181 to 161), while the jump from Medium to Ultra costs 41 FPS (181 to 140). The visual difference between Medium and High in Control is noticeable but not transformative, making Medium the sweet spot for competitive play.

At 1440p, Medium averages 137 FPS with a minimum of 117 FPS, which remains comfortably above 60 FPS and supports 120 Hz+ displays. The High preset at 1440p averages 122 FPS, still playable, but the 15 FPS drop from Medium doesn't justify the marginal graphical improvements in most scenes. Ultra at 1440p drops to 106 FPS, which is still playable but begins to approach the threshold where frame pacing could become noticeable on high-refresh displays. The Medium preset's min FPS of 117 at 1440p ensures that even in intense combat sequences with heavy particle effects, the frame rate won't dip below 100 FPS.

At 4K, the recommendation shifts. Medium averages 93 FPS with a minimum of 79 FPS, which is excellent for 4K gaming—it allows for smooth play on 60 Hz displays with substantial headroom, and even 120 Hz displays are feasible with VRR. High at 4K averages 82 FPS, still good, but the 11 FPS drop from Medium is more significant at this resolution where pixel count taxes the GPU heavily. Ultra at 4K averages 72 FPS, which is playable but leaves little margin for demanding scenes; the min FPS isn't measured for Ultra, but based on the Medium min-to-avg ratio (79/93 = 85%), Ultra's min could dip into the low 60s. The Low preset at 4K averages 130 FPS, but the visual degradation is severe enough that it undermines the point of playing at 4K. For the best experience, Medium at 4K provides a strong balance: it maintains an average above 90 FPS while keeping visual quality respectable.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Control at 4K 60 FPS?

A: Yes. At 4K Medium settings, the system averages 93 FPS with a minimum of 79 FPS. Even at 4K Ultra, the average is 72 FPS, which stays above 60 FPS in most scenes.

Q: What is the best resolution for competitive play?

A: 1080p with Low settings delivers 255 FPS average, which is ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors. The Medium preset at 1080p still provides 181 FPS with a 154 FPS minimum.

Q: How much performance is lost from 1080p to 4K?

A: The drop varies by settings preset. At Low, the average falls from 255 FPS to 130 FPS (49% reduction). At Medium, it goes from 181 FPS to 93 FPS (49% reduction). At High, it drops from 161 FPS to 82 FPS (49% reduction). At Ultra, it decreases from 140 FPS to 72 FPS (49% reduction).

Q: Is this configuration CPU-limited or GPU-limited in Control?

A: The system is CPU-limited at 1080p Low settings, where the 255 FPS average likely exceeds the CPU's frame-feeding capacity. At 4K and higher settings, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, as evidenced by the consistent 24% and 32% drops when moving from 1080p to 1440p and 1440p to 4K.

Q: Does the Medium preset provide good frame pacing?

A: Yes. The Medium preset is the only one with measured min/max FPS data. At 1080p, the range is 154-209 FPS; at 1440p, it's 117-158 FPS; and at 4K, it's 79-107 FPS. The min FPS stays around 85% of the average in each case, indicating stable frame delivery.

Q: How does this system rank among all tested combos?

A: The CPU+GPU combination ranks 204th out of 3720 tested combos for Control, placing it in the top 5.5% of all configurations. The CPU's 81st percentile and GPU's 87th percentile rankings support this strong overall position.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The measured FPS data for Control with the AMD Ryzen 5 9600X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 covers three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the system achieves the following average FPS: Low 255, Medium 181 (min 154, max 209), High 161, and Ultra 140. The 1080p results demonstrate the system's high-refresh-rate capability, with even the Ultra preset maintaining 140 FPS. The Medium preset's minimum of 154 FPS is particularly strong, ensuring no drops below 150 FPS in the most demanding scenes.

At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low 193, Medium 137 (min 117, max 158), High 122, and Ultra 106. The 1440p results show a consistent 24.3% decrease from 1080p across all presets, indicating that the scaling is proportional. The Medium preset at 1440p maintains a minimum of 117 FPS, which comfortably supports 100 Hz+ displays. The High preset's 122 FPS average is still excellent for 1440p gaming, while Ultra's 106 FPS remains above 100 FPS, making all presets viable at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the averages are: Low 130, Medium 93 (min 79, max 107), High 82, and Ultra 72. The 4K results show a further 32.6% decrease from 1440p, reflecting the GPU's increased workload at this pixel count. Even at 4K Ultra, the system maintains 72 FPS average, which is playable on 60 Hz displays with VRR. The Medium preset at 4K provides the best balance with 93 FPS average and 79 FPS minimum. Across all resolutions, the Low preset consistently delivers the highest frame rates, while Ultra provides the most demanding rendering. The data shows that the system is capable of running Control at high frame rates across all tested configurations, with the 1080p Low result of 255 FPS representing the peak performance.