Control

Control, the 2019 action-adventure title, presents an exceptionally demanding workload for the AMD Ryzen 7 5700X and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti combination. The measured frame rates place this pairing near the very bottom of the database, ranking 1604 out of 1636 tested combos. This indicates a severe performance bottleneck, primarily driven by the graphics card, which will be examined in detail across the following sections. The data shows a system that can technically run the game but struggles to maintain playable smoothness at most settings, making it a prime candidate for aggressive graphical compromises.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a stark and consistent pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases, clearly identifying the GPU as the limiting component. At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves an average of 46.9 FPS. Moving to 1440p at the same Low settings drops the average to 36.9 FPS, a decline of 10 FPS. At 4K, the average plummets to 24.1 FPS, which is less than half the 1080p figure. This scaling pattern demonstrates that the rendering workload is overwhelming the GPU’s capabilities.

The trend is even more pronounced at higher graphical presets. At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 31.5 FPS at 1080p to 23.4 FPS at 1440p, and then to a nearly unplayable 13.6 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 4K at High settings represents a 57% reduction in performance. This steep decline is typical of a GPU that is running out of pixel processing power and memory bandwidth, as the resolution increase directly multiplies the number of fragments the GPU must shade.

This behavior confirms that the CPU is not the primary constraint in this scenario. The Ryzen 7 5700X, with its 8 cores and 16 threads, has sufficient processing headroom to feed the GPU at lower resolutions. However, as resolution increases, the GPU's fill-rate limits become the dominant factor, causing frame rates to collapse. The data indicates that the GTX 1050 Ti's 44.54 GPixel/s pixel rate and 112.1 GB/s memory bandwidth are simply insufficient for the demands of Control at higher resolutions. For users of this combo, 1080p is the only viable resolution for achieving a semblance of playable performance.

FAQ

Q: What is the best average frame rate this combo can achieve in Control?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 46.9, which is achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: How does the GTX 1050 Ti's performance compare to its closest rivals?

A: The data shows it is virtually identical in performance to the NVIDIA GeForce 930A, with a deltaPct of 0. It is 0.4% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce 940M and 0.7% faster than the AMD Radeon R7 240, but 0.8% slower than the AMD Radeon R7 M445.

Q: Is the Ryzen 7 5700X a bottleneck for this game?

A: Benchmark results indicate the CPU has ample power. Its average benchmark score of 26214 places it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs, and it scores 22620 in Cinebench R23 multicore. The frame rate drops at higher resolutions point to the GPU as the limiting factor.

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

A: At 1920x1080, Low settings produce an average of 46.9 FPS, while Ultra settings produce an average of 27.4 FPS. This is a significant 19.5 FPS difference, or roughly a 42% performance penalty for the highest preset.

Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Control?

A: No. The data shows the average FPS at 3840x2160 is 24.1 at Low settings and drops to 13.6 at High settings. These frame rates are well below what is generally considered playable.

Q: What is the memory configuration of the GTX 1050 Ti?

A: The GPU is equipped with 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 112.1 GB/s.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700X is a formidable processor, and its specifications suggest it should not be the primary cause of low frame rates in Control. It features 8 cores and 16 threads based on the Zen 3 architecture, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. Its substantial 32 MB of shared L3 cache and support for DDR4 memory provide a solid foundation for gaming. In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU demonstrates its strength, scoring 22620 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 9500 in Cinebench R20 multicore, placing it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs.

The CPU's role in the measured results appears to be secondary to that of the GPU. The frame rates are consistently low across all settings, and the pattern of decline with increasing resolution is a classic sign of a GPU bottleneck. A CPU-bound scenario would typically show similar frame rates across different resolutions, as the CPU would be the limiting factor regardless of the rendering load. Here, the FPS drops dramatically from 1080p to 4K, indicating that the CPU is waiting on the GPU to complete its work.

The Ryzen 7 5700X's benchmark scores, such as 6858 in 3DMark 16 threads and 26612 in PassMark multithread, show it has significant computational headroom. Even at 1080p Low, where the CPU would have the most influence, the average FPS of 46.9 suggests the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU more data than it can process. The data suggests that this processor is far more capable than the paired GPU, and in a system with a more powerful graphics card, it would likely deliver much higher frame rates in Control.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive picture of the system's performance across a grid of resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the system achieves its best results. Low settings yield an average of 46.9 FPS, which is the only configuration that approaches a smooth 60 FPS target. Medium settings follow with 32.1 FPS, and High settings are close behind at 31.5 FPS. Ultra settings are the most demanding, resulting in an average of 27.4 FPS. This shows that at 1080p, dropping from Ultra to Low provides a 19.5 FPS performance gain.

Moving to 2560x1440, all average frame rates fall below the 40 FPS mark. Low settings produce an average of 36.9 FPS, which is still playable for some, but the higher presets suffer. Medium and High settings are nearly identical at 23.8 and 23.4 FPS respectively, suggesting a different bottleneck, likely memory bandwidth. Ultra settings drop further to an average of 18.2 FPS, which is a very poor experience for an action game. The performance gap between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 18.7 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the system is completely overwhelmed. Low settings are the only option that breaks the 20 FPS barrier, with an average of 24.1 FPS. Medium settings drop to 17.5 FPS, while High and Ultra settings are nearly unplayable at 13.6 and 14.1 FPS respectively. The data shows that the GTX 1050 Ti simply does not have the raw power or memory bandwidth to handle 4K rendering in Control. The frame rates are consistently low and the differences between settings become less significant, indicating the GPU is fully saturated.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti is the clear performance bottleneck in this configuration. Based on the Pascal architecture and built on a 14 nm process, it is an older, entry-level GPU that struggles with modern titles like Control. Its specifications include 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1291 MHz and a boost clock of 1392 MHz, with a TDP of 75 W. Its 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus provides 112.1 GB/s of bandwidth, which is a critical limitation for a game with high-resolution textures and complex visual effects.

The GPU's benchmark scores place it in the 30th percentile of all GPUs, with an average score of 5316. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce 930A, has an identical average score of 5317, showing that it performs at the level of a low-end mobile chip. The GTX 1050 Ti's PassMark G3D score of 6340 and its DirectX 12 score of 26 illustrate its limited capabilities. These figures are consistent with the low frame rates observed in Control.

The GPU's role is defined by its inability to keep up with the rendering demands of the game. The 4 GB VRAM is likely insufficient for Ultra settings even at 1080p, potentially causing texture thrashing and stuttering, though the data only provides average FPS. The measured results show a clear ceiling on performance. For instance, the jump from 1080p Low to 1080p High results in a 15.4 FPS drop, highlighting how quickly the GPU's processing power is exhausted. The data strongly suggests that the GTX 1050 Ti is the primary reason for this combo's low rank of 1604 out of 1636.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this hardware combination are clearly at 1080p with the Low preset. This configuration yields an average frame rate of 46.9 FPS, which is the highest of any tested setting and provides the most playable experience. While not a locked 60 FPS, it is the only setting that approaches a smooth frame rate for a game that requires quick reactions. The performance cost of moving to Medium is substantial, with a drop to 32.1 FPS, a 14.8 FPS decrease that is not worth the visual improvement given the already low baseline.

At 1440p, the data indicates that only the Low preset is worth considering, with an average of 36.9 FPS. However, this comes at a significant resolution downgrade from 1080p. The Medium and High presets at this resolution offer nearly identical performance, around 23.4-23.8 FPS, which is below the threshold for a comfortable gaming experience. The Ultra preset is not recommended at any resolution, as it provides the worst performance, with an average of 27.4 FPS at 1080p and 14.1 FPS at 4K.

Consequently, the recommendation is to play at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This setup prioritizes frame rate above all else, which is critical for the game's combat and exploration. The alternative of 1440p Low might be preferable for users who prioritize resolution over smoothness, but the 10 FPS loss is significant. For users who find the Low preset too visually sparse, the Medium preset at 1080p offers a middle ground, but users should be prepared for an average of around 32 FPS, which can feel inconsistent. The data is clear that this hardware is not suited for high-fidelity or high-resolution play in Control.