Control

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700G paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT delivers a robust 1080p experience in Control, with the data showing a clear path to high-refresh-rate gaming at lower presets and solid 60+ FPS at High settings. At higher resolutions, the combination remains viable but requires settings adjustments to maintain smooth gameplay. The measured data indicates that this combo ranks in the 47th percentile of tested configurations, offering a balanced platform for this Action Adventure title.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows 1920x1080 as the strongest resolution, with average FPS ranging from 81.7 at Ultra to 147.9 at Low. At 2560x1440, averages fall between 61.3 and 113.2, while 3840x2160 sees averages from 38.4 to 78.

Q: How does the CPU benchmark score compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Ryzen 7 5700G has an average benchmark score of 25626, which is 0.3% below the AMD Ryzen 7 6800U (25706) and 0.4% above the Intel Xeon D-2752TER (25532). It also sits 0.5% above the Intel Core 5 210H and 0.6% above the AMD Ryzen 5 7640U.

Q: What is the GPU's performance percentile relative to all GPUs?

A: The Radeon RX 6750 XT holds a percentile of 79 among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 35327. Its closest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 5600M, scores 35264, a 0.2% difference.

Q: Does the CPU's integrated graphics affect gaming performance?

A: The Ryzen 7 5700G includes Radeon Vega 8 integrated graphics, but the system uses the discrete RX 6750 XT. The CPU benchmarks show a multi-thread score of 24419 in Passmark, indicating strong processing capability independent of the iGPU.

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

A: This specific combination ranks 767 out of 1636 total tested combos, placing it in the upper-middle tier of configurations for Control.

Q: How much VRAM does the GPU have and what is its memory bandwidth?

A: The Radeon RX 6750 XT features 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Memory clocks run at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective speed.

GPU Role

The Radeon RX 6750 XT serves as the primary rendering engine for Control, and its specifications directly influence the measured frame rates. The GPU operates with a base clock of 2150 MHz and a boost clock of 2600 MHz, with a game clock of 2495 MHz. This clock configuration, combined with 2560 shading units and 64 ROPs, produces a pixel rate of 166.4 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 416.0 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance of 13.31 TFLOPS provides the raw compute necessary for the game's physics and particle effects.

The 12 GB VRAM capacity proves adequate across all tested settings, as evidenced by consistent performance scaling from Low to Ultra presets. At 3840x2160, the average FPS drops from 78 at Low to 38.4 at Ultra, showing the memory bandwidth and GPU compute limits at higher resolutions. The 432.0 GB/s bandwidth supports the texture streaming demands of Control's environments, though the data shows diminishing returns at 4K Ultra where the average falls below 40 FPS.

The GPU's architecture, RDNA 2.0 on a 7 nm process with 17,200 million transistors, enables DirectX 12 Ultimate support. This allows the game to utilize modern rendering features, though the measured data focuses on traditional rasterization performance. The GPU's benchmark scores, including a Passmark G3D score of 20700 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2548, correlate with the gaming results. The GPU sits at the 79th percentile overall, with its nearest rival being the AMD Radeon RX 5600M, which scores only 0.2% lower.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700G provides the processing foundation for this combo, with 8 cores and 16 threads based on the Zen 3 architecture. The CPU runs at a base clock of 3.80 GHz and boosts up to 4.60 GHz, which supports the game's AI and physics calculations. The 16 MB of L3 cache, split across the cores, helps maintain consistent frame pacing in Control's combat scenarios. The CPU's 65 W TDP indicates efficient power draw, though this is separate from the GPU's 250 W TDP.

Multi-threaded performance is robust, with Cinebench R23 multicore scoring 20755 and Passmark multithread scoring 24419. Single-thread performance, crucial for game logic, shows a Passmark single-thread score of 3283 and a Geekbench single-core score of 2016. The CPU's memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s from dual-channel DDR4 support feeds the GPU adequately, preventing bottlenecks at 1080p where frame rates reach up to 147.9 FPS at Low settings.

The CPU's overall benchmark percentile sits at 83, with an average score of 25626. Compared to its nearest rivals, the Ryzen 7 5700G performs nearly identically to the AMD Ryzen 7 6800U, which is only 0.3% faster. The Intel Xeon D-2752TER trails by 0.4%, while the Intel Core 5 210H and AMD Ryzen 5 7640U are 0.5% and 0.6% slower respectively. This places the CPU in a competitive position for gaming workloads, though the data shows that GPU limitations become more apparent at 4K resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Ryzen 7 5700G and RX 6750 XT achieves a rank of 767 out of 1636 tested combos in Control. This places the system in the upper-middle range, indicating that while it is not a top-tier configuration, it delivers solid performance for the game. The rank reflects the balance between the CPU's strong multi-threading and the GPU's mid-range to upper-mid-range capabilities.

The GPU's percentile of 79 and the CPU's percentile of 83 suggest a well-matched pairing, where neither component significantly bottlenecks the other in most scenarios. The measured data supports this, showing that at 1920x1080, the system can achieve 147.9 FPS at Low settings, which indicates the CPU can feed the GPU sufficiently at lower graphical demands. At higher settings, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, with Ultra preset at 1080p delivering 81.7 FPS.

The rank of 767 out of 1636 places this combo in the 47th percentile of all tested configurations. This means roughly 53% of tested combos perform better in Control, while 47% perform worse. The system's performance is competitive for its component class, though users seeking higher refresh rates at 1440p Ultra may need to consider more powerful GPUs.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and desired frame rate. At 1920x1080, the High preset delivers an average of 97.1 FPS, which is suitable for smooth gameplay on standard 60 Hz displays and provides headroom for 100 Hz monitors. The Medium preset offers 108.3 FPS, a 11.5% improvement over High, while Low reaches 147.9 FPS for competitive or high-refresh-rate play. Ultra at 81.7 FPS remains playable but sacrifices 16% performance compared to High.

For 2560x1440, the High preset averages 71.2 FPS, which is adequate for most gaming monitors. The Medium preset improves this to 79.3 FPS, while Low achieves 113.2 FPS for those prioritizing frame rate. Ultra drops to 61.3 FPS, which is still above 60 but leaves little margin for demanding scenes. At 3840x2160, only the Low preset provides a smooth experience at 78 FPS, while Medium and High deliver 55.6 and 48.3 FPS respectively, which may cause noticeable stuttering. Ultra at 38.4 FPS is not recommended for playable performance.

The data suggests that High settings at 1920x1080 offer the best balance of visual quality and performance, with 97.1 FPS providing a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. For 1440p users, Medium at 79.3 FPS represents the sweet spot, while 4K users should stick to Low settings to maintain playability.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system demonstrates clear scaling across presets. Low settings produce an average of 147.9 FPS, representing the maximum performance ceiling. Medium settings reduce this to 108.3 FPS, a 26.8% decrease. High settings deliver 97.1 FPS, which is 10.3% lower than Medium. Ultra settings yield 81.7 FPS, a 15.9% drop from High. The progression shows diminishing returns in performance cost as settings increase.

For 2560x1440, the measured averages are 113.2 FPS at Low, 79.3 FPS at Medium, 71.2 FPS at High, and 61.3 FPS at Ultra. The transition from Low to Medium represents a 30% performance reduction, while High to Ultra costs 13.9%. This resolution shows the GPU beginning to strain, with Ultra barely maintaining 60 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 45.8%, indicating significant scaling pressure.

At 3840x2160, performance drops substantially. Low settings average 78 FPS, which is 47.3% lower than the same settings at 1080p. Medium averages 55.6 FPS, a 28.7% reduction from Low at the same resolution. High settings achieve 48.3 FPS, while Ultra falls to 38.4 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is 50.8%, showing that higher resolutions amplify the GPU's workload. The data reveals that 4K Ultra is the only configuration that fails to reach 40 FPS, highlighting the GPU's limitations at this resolution.