Control

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700G paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT delivers a playable experience in Control across most settings, but the data charts a clear path for optimization. This combination of an 8-core Zen 3 processor and a RDNA 2 graphics card shows a distinct pattern where GPU load dominates at higher resolutions, while CPU headroom becomes evident at 1080p. The benchmark results, measured across three resolutions and four quality presets, provide a robust picture of where this system excels and where its limitations appear.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data for Control shows that the Medium preset is the sweet spot for this system across all tested resolutions. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset yields an average of 84 FPS with a minimum of 71 FPS and a maximum of 96 FPS, delivering a smooth and consistent frame pacing that falls well within high-refresh territory. The High preset at the same resolution still produces a solid 74 FPS average, but the drop of 10 FPS compared to Medium is a notable trade for marginal visual gains in a game like Control where particle effects and physics are both intensive.

Moving to 2560x1440, the argument for Medium strengthens considerably. The Medium preset averages 63 FPS with a minimum of 54 FPS, which is a reliable experience for a game with frequent combat and dynamic destruction. High at 1440p averages 56 FPS, which will feel playable but dips closer to discomfort in dense scenes, whereas Medium retains a 7 FPS advantage that helps maintain stability. At 3840x2160, no preset reaches the holy grail of 60 FPS except Low, which hits exactly 60 FPS average, but Medium is the definitive recommendation for users who want visual fidelity without falling into the sub-40 FPS territory of High and Ultra.

Ultra settings are statistically the worst value in every resolution tested. The Ultra preset at 1080p averages 65 FPS, which is 34 FPS lower than Low and still 19 FPS below Medium. At 1440 p, Ultra falls to 49 FPS, and at 4K it collapses to 33 FPS. The data suggests that the jump from Medium to Ultra imposes a severe frame rate penalty that outscales the visual return in this engine, given the similar geometry and lighting complexity. Therefore, the recommendation is to use Medium everywhere, accepting a target range of 63-84 FPS depending on resolution.

CPU Role

The Ryzen 7 5700G is a 8-core, 16-thread processor based on the Zen 3 architecture, with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. In Control, the game agent role is not overtly CPU-bound at lower resolutions, but the benchmark scores from the FACT PACK indicate this processor is a strong general performer. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12830.5 and single-core score of 1494 suggest the processor is capable of handling the game’s simulation and physics threads, which are often a bottleneck factor in Action Adventure titles with heavy object destruction.

The interesting dynamic here is the single-thread performance. The 3DMark single-thread score sits at 899, and this is crucial for Control because the game uses a limited number of primary threads for AI and game logic. With a percentile of 79 among all CPUs, the 5700G is competent but not a top-tier example. However, the nearest rivals offer a comparison. The Intel Core i9-9900, with a deltaPct of -0.2, indicates the 5700G is essentially on par with that older high-end chip. On the other hand, the AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 is 0.4%, behind the 5700G, same as the Intel Core i7-1370P at 0.6%. The Intel Core i5-14400T, a lower-power desktop chip, is -0.4% behind, highlighting that the 5700G’s net scores are outstanding.

In terms of gaming performance, the 8 cores and 16 threads are not excessive for Control, which typically does not use more than 8 threads, but the extra multi-head capacity (evident in the 179-passmark multithread score of 24419) helps with background tasks or DRM overhead. The processor’s memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s and dual-channel DDR4 support are also adequate to feed the GPU without starving it, which is a common cause of frame stutter in many games. The data from the measured FPS shows that at 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves 118 FPS average, which is a strong indicator that the CPU can push beyond 100 FPS when the GPU is not the limiting factor, proving that the CPU is not a primary bottleneck in this configuration at lower settings.

GPU Role

The Radeon RX 6600 XT is the primary driver of frame performance in this measured data, and its characteristics—graphics card memory of 8 GB, 128-bit bus width and a bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s—dictate how the game scales. The GPU buffering at 1968 MHz base and 2589 MHz boost, with a game clock of 2359 MHz. The 8 GB of GDDR6 frame buffers at 100% usage across the resolution span, but the performance drops that accompany rising pixel count state point to a GPU that is processing the workloads efficiently at 1080p, but the 4K data shows the memory bandwidth is becoming a limiting factor on the data.

The benchmark results for the GPU verify its position. The PassMark G3D score of 16461 and the DirectX 12 score of 61 place it in a brackets that includes legacy performers. The nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630, which is 0.7% slower, while the Intel Arc A350M is 0.8% faster, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER is 1.1% slower. This deltaPct compare is revealing: the RX 6600 XT is within a 1% club of those parts in raw benchmark averages, but the real-world game tests in Control show a different story. The GPU is capable of hollowing out the frame rates in the 4K and 1440p resolutions, where the 8 GB VRAM buffer is taxed heavily.

The texture rate of 331.4 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 165.7 GPixel/s indicate plenty of raw fill capacity, but Control is a game know for its materials and lighting, which puts pressure on the memory subsystem. The FP32 throughput of 10.60 TFLOPS is the actual compute power, mid-range; the game low-level computation for physics steps, interacting with the CPU. At 1080p, the GPU is only partially limiting. The 118 FPS on Low demonstrates that the GPU can run fast when the amount of work is low, but the average for 1080p Ultra stays at 65 FPS. The reduction from 118 to 65 FPS is a 53 FPS gap, which falls on the shaders and ROP throughput. All that being said, the 8 GB VRAM size is adequate for 1080p and 1440p, where the visible counts do not exceed that allocation.

FAQ

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 7 5700G and Radeon RX 6600 XT capable of sustaining 60 FPS at 1080p on Medium settings?

A: Yes. The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 with Medium settings is 84 FPS, which is well above 60, with a minimum of 71 FPS, ensuring 60 FPS is maintained in most scenes.

Q: At which resolution does this combination start to struggle to maintain 60 FPS on High settings?

A: At 2560x1440, the High preset averages 56 FPS. This drops from the 74 FPS average at 1080p, indicating that 60 FPS is no longer guaranteed to stay above threshold at 1440p High.

Q: What is the primary performance bottleneck when playing at 3840x2160?

A: The data shows that across Low, Medium, High, and Ultra presets, the average FPS ranges from 60 to 33. This spread indicates that the weakest component, the GPU or its 8 GB memory capacity, is the limiting factor, as the CPU has sufficient performance for 118 FPS at 1080p Low.

Q: How much faster is the Medium preset compared to Ultra at the same resolution?

A: At 1920x1080, Medium yields 84 FPS while Ultra yields 65 FPS, a difference of 19 FPS. Standard at 4K, Medium yields 43 FPS vs 33 FPS at Ultra, a 10 FPS difference.

Q: Does the CPU system’s performance align with its closest class competitors?

A: Yes. The Ryzen 7 5700G has a deltaPct of -0.2 % vs the Intel Core i9-9900K and +0.4% vs the AMD Ryzen AI 7 445, placing it directly within the performance stack of those processors.

Q: Are there any settings that push the minimum FPS below 60 at 1440p?

A: Yes. At 2560x1440 with Low settings, the average FPS reaches 89, while at Medium the minimum is 54 FPS. Therefore, only the Low preset can be considered to keep the minimum above 60 at 1440p, but even that has a min FPS 20 higher than Medium.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS across resolutions shows a clear pattern of scaling that identifies the graphics card (GPU) as the dominant component for this game. At 1920x1080, bringing the High preset from Low, shows a peak of 118 FPS on Low (which is the full performance) to 74 FPS on High, a reduction. The next step to 2560x1440 brings a proportional decrease: the Low drops from 118 to 89 FPS and High drops from 74 to 56 FPS. At the final step to 3840x2160, the increments are larger. The Low preset halves from 89 to 60 FPS, and the High from 56 to 38 FPS, resulting in a total reduction from 1080p High to 4K High of 36 FPS.

The scaling from 1080p to 1440p is about a 25% load increase in pixels, and the frame in the data for Low goes from 118 to 89, a 29 FPS drop (25% slower). However, the 1440p-to-4K jump is a full 2.25x the pixel count, and Low FPS goes from 89 to 60, which is a 33 FPS drop (another 32% decrease). This pattern shows that the RX 6600 XT has a headroom in the past 1080p that is gradually reduced further as the resolution increases; by 4K, even the Low is still fast but not high. The gap between medium and High remains almost constant across each; the 84 vs 74 FPS at 1080p, 63 vs 56 FPS at 1440p, and 43 vs 38 FPS on high (which is 5 FPS). This suggests that the GPU architecture responds predictably to the workload, but the CPU is never the sole bottleneck because the scaling is not unsteady.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the data shows a full range of performance options. The Low preset tops the charts with an average of 118 FPS, followed by Medium average at 84 FPS (with a min of 71 and max of 96), High at 74 FPS, and Ultra at 65 FPS. The gap from Low to Ultra is a substantial 53 FPS, proving that the Ultra preset is a misuse of the GPU’s time in this resolution. The best D how to 1440: The Medium and High outputs both place the balance of visual quality.

At 2560x1440, the High average of 56 FPS and Medium average 63 FPS ( with min 54 max 73 ) close together. The Low preset averages 89 FPS, an extreme spike that is 60% higher than the High preset. The Ultra average falls to 49 FPS, with a minimum left undefined but always below the average, thereby confirming that Ultra is not fit for a 60Hz display.

At 3840x2160, the averages abs are all in the low range. Low is 60 FPS, Medium 43 FPS ( min 36 max 49 ), High 38 FPS, and Ultra 33 FPS. The jumping distinction between Low and Medium (17 FPS) is the most significant. At 4K the resolution is realistic, any preset above Low will fail to maintain motion smoothness, but the Medium continues to be the least choppy.

The data also displays the anomalies of the minimum FPS. In no case does the minimum on Medium surpass the average of another, and the 4K Medium min of 36 FPS shows where the system is deepest. The varying delta between min and max is larger at lower settings, e.g., 84 average to 71 min (a 13 FPS drop), but wider at Medium 1440p (54 min to 63 avg). The system is stable at lower resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo places at rank 2650 out of a total of 3720 combinations tested, as tracked by the comboRankInGame field. That qualification puts it in the 28th percentile of all setups, and so the system mid mainstream market niches. The GPU is rated in percentile 70 for all GPUs, a good secondary component, but the CPU’s performance of 79th percentile is a stronger mount. However, game performance is the real port where the factor.

The rank coefficient is consistent with relation. The processor and card are both near the middle of the work, but the rank in this game, this specific integration leaves the system. The 5700G being a powerhouse that features an APU with 8 cores, it can actually impose its own opportunities, but it is the kit that uses the GPU rate. The low resolution being 118 FPS on Low is a vivid display of CPU choice not to hold the GPU. But we should not conclude the system is poor. The other pair is that the system can achieve fast breaks 1080p High/Medium combinations most regardless of High usage. The rank of 2650/ 3720 indicates there are over 1000 combinations available that beat this match, but it still keeps the system in a playable, not in a high-end bracket. The fact that its RX 660 XT has rivals like the GTX 1630 (0.7% slower) shows that the GPU is carefully positioned the high mid-range. Only the combo test at 4K starts to critically limit the system.

The ranking shows the combination is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, as indicated by the FPS ladder derived in the measured data; in 4K it is not very viable. The CPU of the system has a margin for future upgrades but at the time is acceptable. Its position 2650 out of 3720 means that for the average user, the medium is a compromised but workable choice; resolution to the resolution of the resolution has to be made, a compromise (exceeding). The overall percentile rank in the testable data, 79 vs 70, also confirms it is more of a CPU-bound system than the GPU which dictates the game’s actual feeling.