Control

Control, Remedy’s 2019 action-adventure, presents a demanding environment where physics-driven combat meets a shifting brutalist architecture. For the combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT and AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT, the measured data reveals a system that prioritizes high refresh rates at 1440p while remaining capable of delivering a playable 4K experience with adjustments. The benchmark results indicate a pairing that is well-balanced, though the performance scaling across resolutions suggests the GPU is the primary driver of frame rates in this title.

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT and AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT combination secures the 374th position out of 1636 tested combos for Control. This places the pairing in the top 22.8% of all configurations, a strong showing that underscores its capability for this specific title. The rank reflects a system that is not at the absolute advanced but is firmly within the upper echelon of performance, suggesting it can handle the game’s intense particle effects and physics simulations with relative ease.

This rank is a product of both components' strengths. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 29774 places it in the 86th percentile against all CPUs, demonstrating robust processing power. The GPU’s average score of 39647 places it in the 82nd percentile against all GPUs, indicating it is a high-tier performer. The combination of two components that are both above the 80th percentile in their respective fields logically results in a high overall ranking for the combo in a game like Control, which is known to stress both the processor for physics and the graphics card for rendering.

When delving into the component-level rivalries, the data shows the CPU is positioned in a tight cluster of performers. The Ryzen 7 5800XT’s average score is a mere 0.1% higher than the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755GE and 0.3% higher than the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360. Conversely, it trails the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS and AMD Ryzen 7 7840H by 0.3%. This indicates that in purely synthetic CPU benchmarks, the 5800XT is on par with a range of mobile and desktop processors, but its real-world gaming performance is likely bolstered by its high boost clock and single-threaded capabilities, which are critical for game logic.

The GPU’s rival positioning is similarly tight. The RX 9070 XT’s average score is 0.2% higher than the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile, but it is 0.1% lower than the AMD Radeon Pro 575 and 0.5% and 0.6% lower than the AMD Radeon Pro 575X and AMD Radeon RX Vega 64, respectively. This suggests that while these GPUs are close in raw compute benchmarks, the RX 9070 XT’s modern architecture and features like hardware ray tracing likely provide a significant advantage in a game like Control, which heavily utilizes DX12 and ray-traced reflections. The overall combo rank, therefore, is a more accurate representation of its gaming performance than the sum of its synthetic parts.

GPU Role

The Radeon RX 9070 XT is the undisputed workhorse in this pairing for Control. Its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus provides a 644.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, a crucial asset for the game’s high-resolution textures and streaming of complex environments. The data shows a clear correlation between GPU load and frame rates, with the graphics card acting as the primary bottleneck as resolution increases.

The GPU’s clock speeds are indicative of its performance class. The base clock of 1660 MHz and a boost clock of 2970 MHz are impressive figures, but the 2400 MHz game clock is the most relevant metric for sustained performance in a title like Control. This high sustained frequency allows the GPU to maintain its compute throughput during extended play sessions. The 4096 shading units and 128 ROPs are fully utilized in Control’s rendering pipeline, which features heavy use of post-processing effects and alpha-blended particles.

The GPU’s benchmark results, such as a Geekbench Vulkan score of 184026 and an OpenCL score of 160317, highlight its raw compute capability. In a game like Control, which leverages asynchronous compute, these scores translate into efficient handling of the game’s physics and rendering tasks simultaneously. The GPU’s memory capacity is a forward-looking feature, ensuring that even at 4K with Ultra settings, the 16 GB frame buffer will not be a limitation. The data suggests that the GPU is capable of driving high frame rates but is also the first component to show strain when graphical settings are maxed out.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a classic pattern of GPU-bound scaling as resolution increases. At 1080p, the system is incredibly fast, but the performance delta between settings is stark. At Low settings, the combo delivers 193.4 FPS, which drops to 107.4 FPS at Ultra. This 44.5% performance hit from Low to Ultra at 1080p shows the GPU is being pushed harder, but the CPU is still capable of feeding it enough data.

Moving to 1440p, the frame rates remain high but the scaling becomes more linear. The Low setting produces 148.2 FPS, while Ultra yields 79.5 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 53.6%, indicating that the GPU is starting to become the limiting factor, as the resolution increase places a larger burden on the render pipeline. The High setting at 93 FPS is a sweet spot, offering a significant improvement over Ultra while still maintaining high fluidity.

The jump to 4K is where the GPU’s dominance becomes clear. At 3840x2160, the Low setting produces 100 FPS, but Ultra drops to 55.3 FPS. This is a 44.7% reduction from Low to Ultra, but the absolute frame rates are much lower. The difference between 1440p Ultra (79.5 FPS) and 4K Ultra (55.3 FPS) is a 30.4% drop, demonstrating that the GPU is heavily taxed at 4K. The data implies that at 4K, the CPU has less impact on the frame rate, and the GPU’s raw pixel-pushing power is the sole determinant of performance. The system is clearly CPU-limited at 1080p Low, but becomes firmly GPU-limited at 4K Ultra.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured rows, the High preset provides the most balanced experience across all resolutions. At 1080p, High yields 123.1 FPS, which is an excellent result for a fast-paced action game. At 1440p, High produces 93 FPS, a very playable frame rate that takes advantage of higher resolution without sacrificing smoothness. Even at 4K, High manages 63.8 FPS, which is right at the threshold for a console-like experience and is perfectly playable on a standard 60Hz display.

The Medium preset is a viable alternative for 4K users who want a higher frame rate cushion. It offers 71.3 FPS at 4K, a 11.8% improvement over High, but the visual fidelity loss may be noticeable in Control’s detailed environments. At 1440p, Medium (104 FPS) and High (93 FPS) are both excellent, with the choice coming down to personal preference for visual quality versus a slight frame rate advantage.

The Ultra preset is only recommended for 1080p and 1440p users with high refresh rate monitors. At 1080p Ultra, the system hits 107.4 FPS, which is still very smooth. At 1440p Ultra, 79.5 FPS is acceptable for most players, but the drop from High is significant. The 4K Ultra setting at 55.3 FPS is best avoided unless the user prioritizes absolute visual fidelity over frame rate stability. The Low preset, while offering high FPS, does not represent a good experience for a game with such a strong visual identity as Control.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The dataset provides a complete matrix of performance. At 1920x1080, the frame rates are: Low 193.4 FPS, Medium 140 FPS, High 123.1 FPS, and Ultra 107.4 FPS. This shows a smooth degradation in performance as settings increase, with a 44.5% difference between the lowest and highest settings.

At 2560x1440, the results are: Low 148.2 FPS, Medium 104 FPS, High 93 FPS, and Ultra 79.5 FPS. The scaling here is more aggressive, with a 46.3% difference between Low and Ultra. The High setting is the only one to see a more significant drop from Medium (10.6%), suggesting that High introduces more demanding effects.

At 3840x2160, the system delivers: Low 100 FPS, Medium 71.3 FPS, High 63.8 FPS, and Ultra 55.3 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 44.7%. The drop from 1440p to 4K is substantial. For example, High settings drop from 93 FPS to 63.8 FPS, a 31.4% reduction. Similarly, Medium drops from 104 FPS to 71.3 FPS, a 31.4% reduction. This consistent percentage drop across settings confirms the GPU is the limiting factor at 4K, as the relative cost of each setting remains constant, but the absolute cost of the resolution increase is fixed.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Control at 4K with a stable 60 FPS?

A: Yes, but only on the High preset. The data shows an average of 63.8 FPS at 3840x2160 with High settings. The Medium preset offers a higher 71.3 FPS, but the Ultra preset drops below 60 FPS at 55.3 FPS.

Q: What is the best resolution for a 144Hz monitor?

A: 1440p is the optimal choice. The High preset at 2560x1440 delivers 93 FPS, which is close to the 144Hz target. The Medium preset at 104 FPS is even closer. At 1080p, the High preset hits 123.1 FPS, also a good match.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 4K on the High preset?

A: The frame rate drops from 123.1 FPS at 1920x1080 to 63.8 FPS at 3840x2160. This represents a 48.2% reduction in performance, highlighting the significant load increase that 4K places on the GPU.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more important for this game at high resolutions?

A: The benchmark data indicates the GPU is the limiting factor at higher resolutions. The consistent frame rate drops from 1440p to 4K across all settings (e.g., 31.4% for both High and Medium) suggest that the CPU has ample headroom, and the GPU's rendering throughput is what determines the final frame rate.

Q: Should I use the Ultra preset at 1440p?

A: The Ultra preset at 2560x1440 produces 79.5 FPS. This is playable, but the High preset at 93 FPS offers a 16.9% performance improvement with a likely minor visual difference. The data suggests High is the better choice for a smoother experience.

Q: Does the 16 GB VRAM of the GPU affect performance in Control?

A: The 16 GB memory capacity is sufficient to handle the game's highest texture settings at 4K without running out of memory, as evidenced by the playable frame rates at that resolution. The 644.6 GB/s bandwidth ensures the GPU can stream textures quickly, which is critical for the game's fast-paced environment changes.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT plays a crucial supporting role in this configuration. Its 8 cores and 16 threads are more than sufficient for Control’s multi-threaded physics engine, which calculates debris and object interactions. The CPU’s performance, as measured by a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23794, ensures that it won't bottleneck the GPU at lower resolutions. At 1080p Low, the system hits 193.4 FPS, a figure that is only possible if the CPU can process the game’s logic and issue draw calls faster than the GPU can render them.

The CPU’s architecture, Zen 3, and its high boost clock of 4.80 GHz are key to its strong single-threaded performance, which is still critical for game engines. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3359 shows that the 5800XT excels in tasks that require low latency, such as managing the game’s AI and input processing. The 32 MB of L3 cache provides a large, fast pool of memory for the CPU to access frequently used data, reducing latency and improving frame pacing.

The data shows that the CPU’s influence on the frame rate diminishes as resolution increases. At 4K, the frame rate is almost entirely dependent on the GPU. However, the 5800XT’s robust multi-threading ensures that the GPU is never waiting for data, even in the most chaotic combat scenarios. The CPU’s benchmark scores, such as a PassMark multi-thread score of 27988, indicate it has the throughput to handle the game’s worst-case scenarios without becoming a bottleneck, which is why the system maintains a high ranking among all tested combos.