Control

# Control — AMD Ryzen 7 3700X + AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT

The pairing of AMD's Ryzen 7 3700X and Radeon RX 7600 XT delivers a workable but not exceptional experience in Control, a 2019 action-adventure title that leans heavily on GPU throughput at higher resolutions. Benchmark data across 1080p, 1440p, and 4K with four settings presets reveals a system that is clearly GPU-bound at every step, with the CPU's eight Zen 2 cores providing ample headroom. The measured frame rates show a predictable scaling pattern: from 124 FPS at 1080p Low down to 35 FPS at 4K Ultra, the entire range is governed by the Radeon's fill rate and memory bandwidth rather than the processor's compute. This analysis examines the resolution scaling, CPU and GPU contributions, measured FPS rows, and how this specific combination ranks against 3,720 other tested combos in the database.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and consistent across all settings, which is the classic signature of a GPU-limited scenario. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 124 FPS at 1920x1080 to 94 FPS at 2560x1440, then to 63 FPS at 3840x2160. That is a 24% reduction from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 33% drop from 1440p to 4K. At High settings, the progression is 78 → 59 → 40 FPS, representing a 24% and 32% decline per step, respectively. At Medium, the values are 88 → 67 → 45 FPS, and at Ultra, 68 → 51 → 35 FPS. The uniformity of these percentage drops across presets suggests that resolution scaling is entirely resolution-bound, not settings-bound — the relative cost of each pixel is constant regardless of how many effects are enabled.

What does this imply about the limiting component? The Ryzen 7 3700X, with its 8 cores and 16 threads clocked at 3.60 GHz base and 4.40 GHz boost, is not the bottleneck. If it were, the frame rates would plateau or even increase slightly at higher resolutions as the GPU takes over more of the frame time, but here the FPS falls monotonically. The RX 7600 XT, with 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, is clearly the constraining factor. Its 128-bit memory bus and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth become increasingly taxed as the pixel count rises. At 4K, the card's 176.3 GPixel/s pixel rate is simply insufficient to maintain fluid motion, especially at Ultra where the average dips to 35 FPS.

The data also shows that the gap between presets narrows at higher resolutions. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 56 FPS (124 vs 68). At 1440p, it shrinks to 43 FPS (94 vs 51). At 4K, it is just 28 FPS (63 vs 35). This is a telltale sign that at 4K, the GPU is so saturated that even turning down settings yields diminishing returns — the pixel throughput ceiling dominates over the effect workload. Conversely, at 1080p, the GPU has spare cycles, so lowering settings translates directly into higher frame rates.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 1080p Ultra settings?

A: The measured average is 68 FPS at 1920x1080 with Ultra presets. This is the lowest 1080p result, but still above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth play.

Q: Does the system achieve 60 FPS at 1440p?

A: Only at Low settings, where the average is 94 FPS. At Medium, it drops to 67 FPS, at High to 59 FPS, and at Ultra to 51 FPS. So, for a locked 60 FPS experience, Medium is the highest viable preset at 1440p.

Q: What is the best 4K result in the measured data?

A: The highest average at 3840x2160 is 63 FPS, achieved only at Low settings. Medium yields 45 FPS, High 40 FPS, and Ultra 35 FPS. No 4K preset reaches a consistent 60 FPS.

Q: How does the RX 7600 XT compare to its nearest GPU rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score is 17083, placing it in the 60th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690, scores 17037 (0.3% lower), while the RTX 3070 scores 17208 (0.7% higher). The Radeon HD 7970M is 0.4% behind, and the Tesla M4 is 0.9% behind.

Q: What are the CPU's core and clock specifications?

A: The Ryzen 7 3700X has 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. It is built on TSMC's 7 nm process with a 65 W TDP and uses the AMD Socket AM4 platform.

Q: Is the measured FPS data from real testing?

A: Yes, the `dataIsMeasured` flag is true, meaning all FPS values come from actual benchmark runs, not synthetic estimates.

CPU Role

The Ryzen 7 3700X, released in July 2019, is a Zen 2 architecture processor codenamed Matisse. It packs 8 cores and 16 threads, with a 32 MB L3 cache and 512 KB L2 per core. The 3.60 GHz base and 4.40 GHz boost clocks are modest by current standards, but for Control, a game that primarily stresses the GPU, this CPU is more than adequate. The benchmark data supports this: at 1080p Low, the system reaches 124 FPS, which is well beyond what the GPU alone can deliver at higher resolutions. The CPU's 84th percentile ranking among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 34260, suggests it sits comfortably in the upper-middle tier of processors.

In synthetic tests, the 3700X scores 2092 in Cinebench R15 multi-core and 204 in single-core, 8899 in Geekbench multi-core and 1593 in single-core, and 22458 in Passmark multithread. These numbers indicate a balanced performer that can handle both threaded workloads and single-threaded game logic. The nearest CPU rivals in the database include the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 (0.1% higher score), AMD EPYC 4244P (0.1% higher), Intel Core i5-13450HX (0.2% lower), and Intel Core Ultra 7 165H (0.5% higher). None of these are dramatically faster, which implies the 3700X is still competitive in gaming scenarios.

For Control specifically, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and physics calculations. With 16 threads, it can easily handle the game's asynchronous workloads, and the 4.40 GHz boost ensures snappy response in CPU-bound moments. There is no evidence in the FPS data of a CPU ceiling — at 1080p, the frame rates scale linearly with GPU settings, showing that the processor is not the limiting factor. Even at 4K Ultra, where the GPU is clearly struggling, the CPU has headroom to spare.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS table provides 12 data points, covering four resolutions (1080p, 1440p, 4K) and four settings presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra). At 1920x1080, the averages are: Low 124 FPS, Medium 88 FPS (min 75, max 101), High 78 FPS, and Ultra 68 FPS. The Medium row includes explicit minimum and maximum values, showing a 26 FPS spread, which indicates some frame-time variance but nothing catastrophic. At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low 94 FPS, Medium 67 FPS (min 57, max 76), High 59 FPS, and Ultra 51 FPS. The Medium spread is 19 FPS, tighter than at 1080p. At 3840x2160, the averages are: Low 63 FPS, Medium 45 FPS (min 38, max 52), High 40 FPS, and Ultra 35 FPS. Here, the Medium spread is 14 FPS, the narrowest of all.

The pattern is clear: as resolution increases, both the average FPS and the frame-time variance decrease. This is typical of a GPU-bound system where the bottleneck at higher resolutions smooths out micro-stutters because the GPU is constantly saturated. The 1080p Medium row, with a 26 FPS range, suggests that at lower resolutions the CPU or driver overhead can cause occasional hitches, but these become less pronounced as the GPU takes longer per frame.

Comparing settings at the same resolution, the drop from Low to Ultra is 45% at 1080p (124 to 68), 46% at 1440p (94 to 51), and 44% at 4K (63 to 35). The consistency of these percentage drops again confirms that settings have a uniform multiplicative effect on performance, independent of resolution. The absolute difference in FPS between Low and Ultra shrinks from 56 FPS at 1080p to 28 FPS at 4K, highlighting how pixel-bound the card becomes at higher resolutions.

GPU Role

The Radeon RX 7600 XT, released in January 2024, is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 33 chip, codenamed Hotpink Bonefish. It features 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, with 32 ray-tracing cores. The GPU's boost clock is 2755 MHz, with a game clock of 2470 MHz and a base clock of 1980 MHz. The memory subsystem consists of 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The card's FP32 performance is 22.57 TFLOPS, and its texture rate is 352.6 GTexel/s.

In synthetic benchmarks, the GPU scores 17132 in Passmark G3D, 8987 in Passmark GPU Compute, 92426 in Geekbench OpenCL, and 48366 in Geekbench Vulkan. It also achieves 2348 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. The GPU's average benchmark score is 17083, placing it in the 60th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 (0.3% higher), AMD Radeon HD 7970M (0.4% higher), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 (0.7% lower), and NVIDIA Tesla M4 (0.9% higher). Notice that the RTX 3070 is only 0.7% faster in aggregate benchmarks, which is a surprisingly small gap for a card from a different generation and tier.

For Control, the GPU's role is paramount. The game's physics-based destruction and particle effects are GPU-intensive, and the 16 GB VRAM is more than sufficient for any resolution in this test. The bottleneck is raw pixel throughput, not memory capacity. At 4K Ultra, the card's 35 FPS average suggests it is hitting its compute limits, while at 1080p Low, the 124 FPS shows it can stretch its legs when pixel count is low. The 128-bit bus is a known limitation for high-resolution gaming, and the data reflects this: the 4K results are consistently below 60 FPS, even at Low settings.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal preset depends on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For a 60 FPS baseline, the data shows that at 1080p, all four presets exceed 60 FPS, with Ultra hitting 68 FPS. At 1440p, Medium is the highest preset to stay above 60 FPS, averaging 67 FPS, while High dips to 59 FPS and Ultra to 51 FPS. At 4K, no preset reaches 60 FPS; the closest is Low at 63 FPS, which just barely clears the threshold, but Medium falls to 45 FPS.

If the goal is the best visual quality while maintaining playable frame rates, the sweet spot is 1440p Medium, which balances the 67 FPS average with the Medium preset's visual enhancements over Low. For users with a 1080p monitor, Ultra at 68 FPS is the clear choice — it delivers maximum fidelity without sacrificing smoothness. At 4K, the only viable option for a near-60 FPS experience is Low, but even then, the 63 FPS average is fragile, as the Medium row's minimum of 38 FPS suggests potential dips below 60 FPS during intense scenes.

For those prioritizing frame rate over visuals, 1080p Low at 124 FPS is excellent for high-refresh-rate displays. Conversely, if visual fidelity is paramount and 60 FPS is not a hard requirement, 1440p Ultra at 51 FPS or 4K High at 40 FPS are acceptable for slower-paced exploration. The data does not include any settings between Medium and High, so there is no evidence for a custom mix that might yield a better balance. Given the measured rows, the recommendation is clear: 1440p Medium for the best all-around experience, 1080p Ultra for maximum quality on a 1080p screen, and 1080p Low for competitive or high-refresh play.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of 3,720 tested combinations, this specific pairing of the Ryzen 7 3700X and RX 7600 XT ranks 2363rd in Control. This places it in the lower-middle tier of all combos, which is somewhat surprising given the individual component rankings. The CPU ranks in the 84th percentile, and the GPU in the 60th percentile, yet the combination's in-game rank is around the 36th percentile (2363/3720 ≈ 0.635). This discrepancy suggests that while each component is mid-pack or better, their synergy in Control is not exceptional.

The rank implies that many other CPU-GPU combinations deliver higher frame rates in this title, likely because Control favors GPUs with higher memory bandwidth or more shading units. The RX 7600 XT's 128-bit bus is a known limitation, and the 4K results confirm this. The CPU's strong single-thread performance (2656 in Passmark single-thread) is not enough to compensate for the GPU's pixel-rate ceiling. In relative terms, the combo's average FPS across all settings and resolutions — roughly (124+88+78+68+94+67+59+51+63+45+40+35)/12 ≈ 67.7 — is moderate, but the high-end 4K results drag down the overall experience.

Compared to the nearest GPU rivals, the RTX 3070 is only 0.7% faster in synthetic terms, yet in real-world gaming, the 3070 typically outperforms the 7600 XT by a larger margin. This suggests that the 7600 XT's synthetic scores overstate its gaming capability, at least in Control. The ranking of 2363 out of 3720 means that roughly 63% of tested combos perform better, which is a humbling result for a card that was released in 2024. The combination is not a poor one — it handles 1080p and 1440p admirably — but it is not a high-end performer in this specific game. Users seeking 4K gaming would need to look at higher-tier GPUs, as the data clearly shows this combo's limits.