Control

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 combination delivers a playable but constrained experience in Control, with the GPU acting as the definitive bottleneck across all tested resolutions. The data shows a clear pattern: frame rates collapse as resolution climbs, and even at the lowest settings, 4K remains out of reach for smooth gameplay.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a steep performance cliff when moving from 1080p to 4K. At High settings, the average frame rate drops from 37.7 FPS at 1920x1080 to 28.6 FPS at 2560x1440, a reduction of approximately 24%. Pushing further to 3840x2160 yields just 17.3 FPS, which is less than half the 1080p figure. This scaling pattern indicates that the GTX 1650’s rendering pipeline saturates quickly as pixel count increases.

The gap between Low and Ultra settings widens dramatically at higher resolutions. At 1080p, Low produces 56.6 FPS versus 33.1 FPS on Ultra—a 23.5 FPS spread. At 1440p, that spread narrows slightly to 22.3 FPS (43.5 vs 21.2), but at 4K it shrinks to 14.8 FPS (28.9 vs 14.1). This convergence at 4K suggests that raw pixel throughput, not shading complexity, becomes the limiting factor; the GPU cannot leverage lower settings to escape the resolution penalty.

The 1440p Medium result of 28.7 FPS is nearly identical to the 1440p High result of 28.6 FPS, indicating that the extra graphical features in the High preset cost almost nothing at this resolution—the GPU is already bound by fill rate rather than shader work. Similarly, 1080p Medium (39.6 FPS) and 1080p High (37.7 FPS) are within 2 FPS of each other, reinforcing that the GTX 1650’s 128-bit memory bus and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth throttle performance before the game’s visual settings can fully engage.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 brings 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, with bandwidth rated at 128.1 GB/s. Its base clock sits at 1485 MHz, boosting to 1665 MHz. The card’s TU117 chip, built on a 12 nm process, contains 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. These specifications position it firmly as an entry-level part, evidenced by its 43rd percentile ranking among all GPUs.

In Control, the VRAM capacity proves adequate for 1080p but becomes strained at higher resolutions. The measured FPS at 4K Ultra (14.1 FPS) versus 4K Low (28.9 FPS) shows that reducing texture and shadow quality can nearly double performance, suggesting that memory pressure and bandwidth, not just compute, are at play. The card’s FP32 throughput of 2.984 TFLOPS is modest, and the 4 GB frame buffer likely forces the engine to swap data to slower system memory at 1440p and above, explaining the disproportionate FPS drops compared to the resolution’s pixel count increase.

The GTX 1650’s nearest rivals in the benchmark database include the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 (avg score 8671, deltaPct 0.5) and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 (avg score 8761, deltaPct -0.5). These professional-oriented cards score similarly, but the GTX 1650’s consumer drivers and lack of RT cores mean Control’s specific effects—which rely on compute-heavy post-processing—run without hardware acceleration. The 75 W TDP and lack of power connectors indicate the card draws entirely from the PCIe slot, which caps its sustained clock speeds under load.

How This Combo Ranks

This CPU-GPU pairing ranks 1582nd out of 1636 tested combinations for Control, placing it in the bottom 3.3% of all configurations. The rank reflects the severe imbalance between the processor and graphics card. The Ryzen 7 5800XT is a high-end desktop chip—its 8 cores and 16 threads, based on Zen 3 architecture, achieve a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 23794 and a single-core score of 3359. It sits in the 86th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 29774.

The GPU, by contrast, scores 7880 in Passmark G3D and ranks in the 43rd percentile. The delta between these two components is enormous: the CPU outperforms its rivals by fractions (e.g., 0.1% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755GE, 0.3% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360), while the GPU is effectively mid-pack among entry-level cards. In Control, the CPU’s headroom goes unused; at 1080p Low, the combo hits 56.6 FPS, which is likely CPU-bound, but at every other setting the GPU dominates the bottleneck. This explains why the combo ranks so low despite having a capable processor—the GTX 1650 simply cannot drive the game at competitive frame rates.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience per the measured rows, the 1080p Low preset stands out as the only configuration that approaches smooth gameplay, delivering 56.6 FPS. This is the sole setting combination that exceeds 50 FPS in the entire dataset. If visual fidelity matters more than frame rate, 1080p Medium offers 39.6 FPS, which is playable but noticeably less fluid, while 1080p High drops to 37.7 FPS—a marginal cost for improved textures and effects.

At 1440p, no preset reaches 45 FPS. The Low setting yields 43.5 FPS, which is the best result at that resolution, but the jump to Medium costs 14.8 FPS (28.7), showing that the card cannot sustain 1440p with any meaningful graphical features enabled. At 4K, even Low produces only 28.9 FPS, and Ultra falls to 14.1 FPS—effectively a slideshow. Users targeting 4K should consider lowering resolution scaling or accepting sub-30 FPS gameplay.

The data suggests that the GTX 1650’s sweet spot is 1080p with Low or Medium settings. The difference between Medium (39.6 FPS) and High (37.7 FPS) is just 1.9 FPS, so enabling High at 1080p costs almost nothing and provides better image quality. Conversely, Ultra at 1080p (33.1 FPS) costs 6.5 FPS over High, which is a significant penalty for marginal visual gains. The optimal compromise is 1080p High, balancing the 37.7 FPS average with the game’s atmospheric lighting and reflections.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to play Control with this hardware?

A: The measured data shows 1920x1080 is the only resolution where any preset exceeds 50 FPS. At 1080p Low, the average is 56.6 FPS, while 1080p Ultra drops to 33.1 FPS. Higher resolutions like 1440p and 4K fail to reach 44 FPS even on Low settings.

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

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT has an average benchmark score of 29774, which is 0.1% higher than the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755GE (29740) and 0.3% higher than the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 (29682). It trails the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS by 0.3% (29856) and the AMD Ryzen 7 7840H by 0.3% (29868).

Q: Why does the combo rank so low in Control?

A: The combo ranks 1582nd out of 1636 tested combinations. The GPU’s 43rd percentile ranking (Passmark G3D score of 7880) severely limits performance, while the CPU’s 86th percentile ranking (Cinebench R23 multicore 23794) provides ample headroom that goes unused. The GPU is the clear bottleneck.

Q: Is the GTX 1650’s 4 GB VRAM sufficient for Control?

A: At 1080p, the 4 GB GDDR5 memory appears adequate, as shown by the 56.6 FPS result on Low. However, at 1440p and 4K, the performance drop is disproportionate to the pixel increase—4K Low (28.9 FPS) is roughly half of 1080p Low (56.6 FPS)—suggesting memory bandwidth (128.1 GB/s) and capacity constraints.

Q: What is the difference between Medium and High settings at 1080p?

A: The measured average FPS for Medium is 39.6 FPS, while High is 37.7 FPS—a difference of 1.9 FPS. This small gap indicates that the High preset’s additional visual features are not heavily taxing at this resolution, making High a reasonable choice.

Q: Can this combo run Control at 4K?

A: Technically yes, but not well. The best 4K result is 28.9 FPS on Low settings, and Ultra drops to 14.1 FPS. No 4K preset reaches 30 FPS, so the experience will be choppy regardless of settings.