Control

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 combination produces a highly constrained experience in Control, with the measured data indicating that the GPU is the dominant limiting factor across all tested resolutions and settings. The combo ranks 3588 out of 3720 tested configurations, placing it in the bottom 4% of all combinations in this game, which is consistent with the GTX 1650's overall percentile rank of 40 against all GPUs. The CPU, by contrast, demonstrates substantial headroom, suggesting that the system's performance ceiling is almost entirely dictated by the graphics card.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a steep performance cliff as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At High settings, the average frame rate drops from 36 FPS at 1080p to 27 FPS at 1440p, a 25% reduction, and then further to 18 FPS at 4K, which is exactly half of the 1080p figure. This pattern is consistent across all quality presets: Low settings see a drop from 56 FPS at 1080p to 43 FPS at 1440p (23% lower), and finally to 29 FPS at 4K (48% lower than 1080p). The scaling factor from 1080p to 4K is remarkably uniform across settings, ranging from a 1.9x reduction for Low and High presets to a 2.0x reduction for Medium and Ultra presets.

This near-linear scaling with pixel count is a classic indicator of a GPU-bound scenario. The number of pixels at 4K is four times that of 1080p, and the FPS drops by roughly half, which aligns perfectly with the expectation that the GPU's pixel throughput, rated at 53.28 GPixel/s, is the bottleneck. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the frame rate would be expected to remain relatively flat as resolution increases, since the CPU's workload per frame does not scale with pixel count in the same way. The data clearly shows that this is not the case, as every resolution step produces a substantial FPS penalty.

The GTX 1650's memory subsystem, with a 128-bit bus and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth for its 4 GB of GDDR5, further reinforces this conclusion. At 4K, the sheer data throughput required for textures and geometry overwhelms the available bandwidth, explaining why the Medium preset at 4K manages only 20 FPS with a minimum of 17 FPS and a maximum of 24 FPS. The tight FPS range at 4K Medium (a 7 FPS spread) suggests that the GPU is consistently saturated, leaving little variance for scene complexity. In contrast, the 1080p Medium preset shows a wider 12 FPS spread (34 to 46), indicating that the GPU has occasional moments of headroom that are not available at higher resolutions.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700 is a formidable processor on paper, featuring 8 cores and 16 threads based on the Zen 3 architecture, with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. Its benchmark scores are robust, including a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 20655 and a single-core score of 2916, placing it in the 78th percentile against all CPUs. The processor's average benchmark score of 25517 is nearly identical to its nearest rivals, such as the Intel Xeon D-2752TER (25530, -0.1%) and the AMD Ryzen 5 6600H (25550, -0.1%), indicating that it sits in a highly competitive performance tier.

Despite this computational strength, the measured FPS data in Control shows no evidence of CPU limitation. The uniform FPS scaling with resolution discussed above is the primary evidence: if the CPU were struggling, the 1080p results would likely show higher frame rates that then plateau or decrease less predictably at higher resolutions. Instead, the FPS drops are consistent with pure GPU throughput limitations.

The CPU's 16 MB of L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support with 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth are more than sufficient for this game's typical CPU demands. The 3DMark scores show healthy scaling from 2 threads (1762) to 8 threads (5585) and then to max threads (6617), indicating that the processor can effectively utilize its multi-threaded capabilities. However, Control's engine, while demanding, does not appear to require the full 16 threads to maintain playable frame rates at 1080p, as evidenced by the 56 FPS result at Low settings, which is still well below what the CPU could theoretically feed to a more powerful GPU.

The data suggests that the Ryzen 7 5700 is essentially idle in this configuration, waiting for the GTX 1650 to deliver frames. The CPU's Passmark single-thread score of 3296 and physics score of 984 are strong, but they are never stressed to their limits in this pairing. The bottleneck is unequivocally the GPU, and any frame rate improvements would require a graphics card upgrade rather than a CPU change.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the clear limiting component in this combo, and its specifications explain why. The GPU features 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, all operating at a base clock of 1485 MHz and a boost clock of 1665 MHz. Its 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus provides 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth, which is modest by modern standards. The GPU's FP32 performance is rated at 2.984 TFLOPS, and its overall benchmark average of 7472 places it in the 40th percentile against all GPUs, with the Intel Arc A310 being its closest rival at 7550 (-1%).

The measured results in Control highlight the GPU's limitations at every turn. At 1080p, the GPU manages a playable 56 FPS only on Low settings, dropping to 40 FPS on Medium, 36 FPS on High, and 31 FPS on Ultra. These numbers indicate that even the lowest resolution requires significant compromises in visual quality to achieve smooth gameplay. The 4 GB VRAM capacity is likely a contributing factor, as Control's high-resolution textures and complex shaders can easily exceed this limit, forcing the GPU to use slower system memory or reduce texture quality.

The GPU's texture rate of 93.24 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 53.28 GPixel/s are the theoretical ceilings that the FPS measurements reflect. At 4K, the GPU simply cannot fill enough pixels per second, resulting in averages of 16 FPS on Ultra and 29 FPS on Low. Even the best-case 4K result, 29 FPS on Low, is well below the 30 FPS threshold for smoothness, and the minimum FPS values (when recorded) reinforce the inconsistency of the experience at this resolution. The 4K Medium preset shows a minimum of 17 FPS, which is significantly below the average of 20 FPS, indicating severe frame pacing issues during demanding scenes.

The GPU's DirectX 12 benchmark score of 35 (Passmark) is low, and this is reflected in Control's DX12 rendering path. The GPU's Vulkan score of 33042 and OpenCL score of 29629 are average at best, but the game's specific workload appears to be heavily dependent on raw shading and memory bandwidth, which are the GTX 1650's weakest areas. The GPU's 75 W TDP and lack of power connectors suggest it is designed for low-power systems, and its performance envelope is simply not suited for a title as graphically intensive as Control.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 is the only resolution where playable frame rates are achievable. At 1080p, the average FPS ranges from 31 (Ultra) to 56 (Low), whereas 1440p drops to a range of 23 to 43, and 4K falls to 16 to 29.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck the GTX 1650 in this game?

A: No, the benchmark results indicate the opposite. The FPS drops almost exactly in proportion to pixel count when moving from 1080p to 4K, which is a clear sign of GPU limitation. The Ryzen 7 5700's strong multi-threaded and single-threaded benchmark scores suggest it has significant headroom.

Q: How does the GTX 1650 compare to its nearest rival, the Intel Arc A310?

A: The GTX 1650 has an average benchmark score of 7472, while the Intel Arc A310 scores 7550, making the GTX 1650 1% slower. This is a negligible difference, and both GPUs are in the same performance class for this game.

Q: Is 4K gaming viable with this setup?

A: No, it is not viable. The highest average FPS at 3840x2160 is 29 on Low settings, which is still below the 30 FPS target for smooth motion. All other 4K presets fall below 20 FPS, making the experience stuttery and unresponsive.

Q: What is the performance difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 56 FPS, while the Ultra preset delivers 31 FPS. This is a 45% reduction in frame rate from Low to Ultra, highlighting the significant cost of higher visual fidelity on this GPU.

Q: What is the combo's overall rank among all tested systems?

A: This specific combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 5700 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 ranks 3588 out of 3720 tested combinations in Control. This places it in the bottom 4% of all systems, indicating its performance is well below average for this game.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the experience is uniformly poor. The Low preset achieves an average of 29 FPS, which is the only 4K result above 20 FPS. The Medium preset averages 20 FPS, with a minimum of 17 FPS and a maximum of 24 FPS. The High preset averages 18 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 16 FPS. No 4K preset comes close to providing a consistently smooth experience.

At 2560x1440, the results improve but remain marginal. The Low preset delivers an average of 43 FPS, which is the only 1440p result above 30 FPS. The Medium preset averages 30 FPS, with a minimum of 26 FPS and a maximum of 35 FPS. The High preset averages 27 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 23 FPS. This resolution is only playable on Low settings, and even then, frame drops may be noticeable.

At 1920x1080, the data shows the full range of possible performance. The Low preset achieves the highest average of 56 FPS, offering a smooth experience. The Medium preset averages 40 FPS, with a minimum of 34 FPS and a maximum of 46 FPS, providing a playable but not perfectly smooth experience. The High preset averages 36 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 31 FPS. The Ultra preset's 31 FPS average is right at the edge of playability, and users would likely experience occasional stutters.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data points to a clear hierarchy for this combo. For a priority on smoothness, the Low preset at 1920x1080 is the only configuration that consistently delivers frame rates above 50 FPS, with an average of 56 FPS. This is the recommended choice for any gameplay that requires quick reactions, such as combat encounters. The 1080p Medium preset, with an average of 40 FPS, is a viable alternative for those who want better visual fidelity without sacrificing too much performance, but the minimum of 34 FPS suggests that drops below 30 FPS are possible in heavy scenes.

For users who prefer visual quality over frame rate, the 1080p High preset (36 FPS) is the highest quality setting that remains playable, though it requires accepting a 20% performance penalty over Medium. The Ultra preset at 1080p (31 FPS) is not recommended, as it pushes the GPU to its limits and is likely to produce inconsistent frame pacing. At higher resolutions, the data shows no viable options; the 1440p Low preset (43 FPS) is the only 1440p result above 30 FPS, but it looks visibly worse than 1080p High. All 4K presets should be avoided entirely, as they all fall below 30 FPS.

The best overall experience, balancing visual quality and performance, is the Medium preset at 1920x1080. It offers a 40 FPS average, which is 25% faster than High and 11% slower than Low. The 34 FPS minimum is acceptable for most players, and the 46 FPS maximum shows there is headroom in less demanding scenes. This configuration provides a stable foundation without the visual compromises of the Low preset.

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700 + NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 combo ranks 3588 out of 3720 tested combinations in Control, placing it in the 4th percentile of all systems. This is a very low ranking, confirming that this hardware pairing is far from ideal for this specific title. The CPU's performance percentile of 78 (against all CPUs) is high, but the GPU's percentile of 40 (against all GPUs) drags the overall experience down significantly.

The ranking reflects the fact that the GTX 1650 is a low-end GPU that struggles with modern titles, while the Ryzen 7 5700 is a capable mid-range processor. The combination creates a severe imbalance, where a substantial portion of the CPU's potential is wasted because the GPU cannot keep up. The GPU's nearest rivals in terms of average benchmark score (AMD Radeon HD 8850M, Intel UHD Graphics 750, and AMD Radeon R7 350) are all older or integrated solutions, indicating that the GTX 1650 is at the bottom of the discrete GPU hierarchy.

In practical terms, this rank means that almost all other tested combinations, even those with older CPUs, would likely outperform this setup in Control if they had a more powerful graphics card. The data shows that the bottleneck is so severe that upgrading the CPU would yield no measurable improvement in frame rates, while a GPU upgrade to even a mid-range card would transform the experience. The combo's performance is essentially defined by the GTX 1650's limitations, and the rank accurately reflects its position as one of the weaker configurations for this game.