Control

# Control — AMD Ryzen 7 5700G + AMD Radeon RX 580

Control, Remedy’s 2019 action-adventure title, is a demanding showcase of physics-driven combat and destructible environments. This pairing of an 8-core AMD Ryzen 7 5700G with the Polaris-based Radeon RX 580 is a classic mid-range 1080p setup from a few generations ago. The measured data here reveals a system that is playable at 1080p with compromises, struggles at 1440p, and is largely out of its depth at 4K. The benchmark numbers tell a story of a CPU that is far ahead of its GPU partner, with the RX 580 consistently becoming the bottleneck as resolution climbs.

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

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700G is a Cezanne-based processor built on the Zen 3 architecture, manufactured on a 7 nm process by TSMC. It packs 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The chip’s 16 MB of L3 cache, paired with 512 KB of L2 per core and 64 KB of L1 per core, provides a solid foundation for gaming workloads. Its 65 W TDP and unlocked multiplier make it a flexible, efficient choice for desktop builds on the AMD Socket AM4 platform.

In synthetic benchmarks, the 5700G demonstrates strong multi-threaded capability. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12830.5 points, alongside a single-core score of 1494, places it comfortably in the upper tier of desktop CPUs. The Geekbench multi-core result of 9950 and single-core result of 1894 further confirm its balance. In 3DMark, the 16-thread score of 6629 and the 8-thread score of 5648 show scaling that tapers off beyond 8 threads, but the processor still handles heavily threaded titles without issue. PassMark’s multithread score of 24419 and single-thread score of 3283 reinforce its position.

Relative to its nearest rivals in the database, the 5700G sits remarkably close to the Intel Core i9-9900K, with an average benchmark score of 27051 versus 27097, a negligible 0.2% difference. It edges out the AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 by 0.4% and trails the Intel Core i5-14400T by 0.4% and the Intel Core i7-1370P by 0.6%. The 5700G’s percentile rank of 79 among all tested CPUs means it outperforms roughly four out of five processors in general compute tasks.

For Control specifically, the CPU is rarely the limiting factor. At 1080p with Low settings, the average FPS of 63 is likely near the engine’s practical ceiling for this GPU. The game’s physics-based destruction and AI routines can be single-thread sensitive, but the 5700G’s strong single-core performance — a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1494 — ensures that even chaotic firefights with debris and enemy telekinesis won’t cause CPU-bound stutters. The data shows no evidence of CPU throttling; instead, the GPU becomes the wall at higher resolutions and settings.

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

The measured FPS rows for Control with this hardware provide a clear hierarchy. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 63 FPS, which is smooth for most players. Medium improves visual fidelity while still maintaining a respectable 45 FPS average, with a minimum of 38 and maximum of 51 FPS — indicating some frame-time variance but no catastrophic dips. High drops to 40 FPS average, and Ultra falls to 35 FPS, both of which are playable but begin to feel less fluid during intense action sequences.

The best experience per the measured data is the Medium preset at 1080p. It offers a 45 FPS average with the only recorded minimum-maximum range among the 1080p settings (38 to 51 FPS). This suggests that Medium provides a balance where the engine’s dynamic resolution or effects don’t cause severe drops, and the visual uplift over Low is substantial. The jump from Low to Medium costs 18 FPS (a 28.6% reduction), but the jump from Medium to High costs only 5 FPS (an 11.1% reduction) — indicating diminishing returns on the higher presets.

At 2560x1440, the story changes. Low settings yield 48 FPS, which is acceptable for slower-paced exploration, but Medium drops to 34 FPS, High to 30 FPS, and Ultra to 26 FPS. The minimum of 29 FPS on Medium at 1440p hints at stutter during combat. For this resolution, Low is the only truly playable preset, and even that is borderline for action-heavy scenes.

At 3840x2160, no preset is genuinely playable. Low averages 32 FPS, Medium 23 FPS (min 19, max 26), High 20 FPS, and Ultra 18 FPS. These are slideshow territory for a game that demands fast reactions. The recommendation is clear: stick to 1080p Medium for the best frame rate-to-visuals ratio, or 1080p Low if targeting 60 FPS is a priority.

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

The measured FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K is a textbook demonstration of a GPU-bound system. At the Low preset, the average FPS drops from 63 at 1080p to 48 at 1440p (a 23.8% decrease), then to 32 at 4K (a further 33.3% decrease from 1440p). The total drop from 1080p to 4K is 31 FPS, or 49.2% of the original value. This is far less than the theoretical 4x pixel-count increase would suggest if the CPU were the limit — the GPU is clearly the constraint.

At the Medium preset, the scaling is steeper: 45 FPS at 1080p, 34 FPS at 1440p (24.4% drop), and 23 FPS at 4K (32.4% drop from 1440p). The High preset shows 40 FPS at 1080p, 30 FPS at 1440p (25% drop), and 20 FPS at 4K (33.3% drop). Ultra follows the same pattern: 35 FPS at 1080p, 26 FPS at 1440p (25.7% drop), and 18 FPS at 4K (30.8% drop).

The consistent ~25% drop from 1080p to 1440p and ~30-33% drop from 1440p to 4K across all settings indicates that the RX 580’s pixel throughput — its 42.88 GPixel/s pixel rate and 193.0 GTexel/s texture rate — is being saturated. The GPU’s 6.175 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while respectable for its era, cannot keep up with the increasing pixel count. The 8 GB of GDDR5 memory with 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth is sufficient in capacity, but the bandwidth is the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

This scaling behavior confirms that the Ryzen 7 5700G is not the bottleneck. If the CPU were limiting, the FPS would remain flat across resolutions, but the data shows a steady decline, meaning the GPU is the sole constraining component. The 5700G’s 51.2 GB/s of dual-channel DDR4 memory bandwidth is ample for feeding the GPU’s demands.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

In the database of tested hardware combinations for Control, this pairing of the AMD Ryzen 7 5700G and AMD Radeon RX 580 ranks 3399 out of 3720 combos. That places it in the 91st percentile from the top — meaning only about 9% of tested configurations perform worse. This is a low ranking, but it reflects the GPU’s age more than the CPU’s capability.

To contextualize, the RX 580’s individual percentile rank among all GPUs is 53, meaning it sits near the median of tested graphics cards. The 5700G’s percentile rank of 79 among CPUs is significantly higher. The combo rank being far lower than either component’s individual percentile suggests that in Control, the GPU is the primary drag. The pairing’s rank of 3399 out of 3720 indicates that most other combos in the database feature stronger GPUs, even if their CPUs are weaker.

The measured FPS data aligns with this: at 1080p Low, the 63 FPS average is competitive with many mid-range systems, but at 4K, the 18-32 FPS range is far below what a modern GPU would achieve. The combo’s position in the rankings is a direct consequence of the RX 580’s 6.175 TFLOPS being insufficient for Control’s demanding rendering at higher resolutions. The CPU is more than capable — its 3DMark 16-thread score of 6629 places it well above the minimum needed for this game — but the system’s overall performance is held back by the GPU.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 580 is a Polaris 20 chip built on a 14 nm process by GlobalFoundries, featuring 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die. It runs at a base clock of 1257 MHz and a boost clock of 1340 MHz, with memory clocked at 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective). The 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth — a figure that is adequate for 1080p but becomes strained at higher resolutions.

The GPU’s 2304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs deliver a theoretical pixel rate of 42.88 GPixel/s and texture rate of 193.0 GTexel/s. Its FP32 performance of 6.175 TFLOPS is the same as its FP16 throughput (1:1 ratio), indicating a GCN architecture that does not benefit from half-precision acceleration. The card supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, which covers Control’s requirements.

In synthetic benchmarks, the RX 580 scores 8813 in PassMark G3D, 45235 in Geekbench Metal, 37453 in Geekbench OpenCL, and 45173 in Geekbench Vulkan. Its PassMark DirectX 12 score of 43 is notably low, reflecting the architecture’s age in modern API workloads. The GPU’s percentile rank of 53 among all GPUs places it near the median, and its average benchmark score of 12928 is nearly identical to its nearest rivals: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (12940, 0.1% faster), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER (12986, 0.4% faster), the AMD Radeon 740M (12870, 0.5% slower), and the AMD FirePro W5100 (12847, 0.6% slower).

For Control, the RX 580’s performance is directly tied to its memory bandwidth and pixel fill rate. At 1080p Medium, the 45 FPS average with a 38 FPS minimum indicates that the GPU is handling the game’s particle effects and physics-based debris without hitting a VRAM wall — 8 GB is plenty for Control at 1080p. However, at 1440p and 4K, the bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s becomes insufficient, causing the frame rate to collapse. The GPU’s 185 W TDP and dual-slot design with a single 8-pin power connector are typical for this class, but the card’s end-of-life production status in 2017 (release date April 17, 2017) means it lacks modern optimizations like mesh shaders or hardware ray tracing — features that Control can use but does not require.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Control at 60 FPS?

A: Only at 1080p with the Low preset, which averages 63 FPS. At Medium, the average drops to 45 FPS, below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Is the Ryzen 7 5700G or the RX 580 the bottleneck in Control?

A: The GPU is the bottleneck at all resolutions. The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K shows a steady decline with resolution, which is characteristic of GPU limitation. The CPU’s percentile rank of 79 versus the GPU’s 53 confirms the imbalance.

Q: How much faster is the RX 580 compared to its nearest rival, the GTX 1660 SUPER?

A: The RX 580 is 0.4% slower than the GTX 1660 SUPER in average benchmark score, a negligible difference in real-world performance.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo?

A: 1920x1080 is the only resolution where all presets remain playable. At 1440p, only Low settings achieve above 40 FPS, and at 4K, all presets fall below 32 FPS.

Q: Does the RX 580’s 8 GB VRAM cause issues in Control?

A: No. At 1080p Medium, the card maintains a 45 FPS average with a 38 FPS minimum, indicating no VRAM-related stutter. The 8 GB capacity is sufficient for Control’s textures at 1080p and even 1440p.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested configurations for Control?

A: It ranks 3399 out of 3720 combos, placing it in the bottom 9% of tested systems for this game, primarily due to the GPU’s limitations.

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

The measured FPS data for Control with the AMD Ryzen 7 5700G and AMD Radeon RX 580 is as follows:

1920x1080:

• Low: 63 FPS average
• Medium: 45 FPS average, 38 FPS minimum, 51 FPS maximum
• High: 40 FPS average
• Ultra: 35 FPS average

2560x1440:

• Low: 48 FPS average
• Medium: 34 FPS average, 29 FPS minimum, 39 FPS maximum
• High: 30 FPS average
• Ultra: 26 FPS average

3840x2160:

• Low: 32 FPS average
• Medium: 23 FPS average, 19 FPS minimum, 26 FPS maximum
• High: 20 FPS average
• Ultra: 18 FPS average

The only settings rows with recorded minimum and maximum values are the Medium presets across all three resolutions. At 1080p Medium, the 38-51 FPS range shows a 13 FPS spread, indicating moderate frame-time variance. At 1440p Medium, the 29-39 FPS range tightens to a 10 FPS spread, but the absolute values are lower. At 4K Medium, the 19-26 FPS range is a 7 FPS spread, yet the average of 23 FPS is not playable. The lack of min/max data for other presets suggests more stable frame pacing, but at lower averages.

The data also reveals that the gap between Low and Ultra presets widens with resolution. At 1080p, the difference is 28 FPS (63 vs 35). At 1440p, it is 22 FPS (48 vs 26). At 4K, it narrows to 14 FPS (32 vs 18). This compression at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU is so heavily pixel-bound that lowering settings has diminishing returns — the bottleneck shifts from shader complexity to raw fill rate and memory bandwidth.