Control

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700 and Radeon RX 5700 XT pairing delivers a playable but demanding experience in Control, with performance heavily dictated by resolution and preset. The data shows a clear ceiling at 4K, while 1080p and 1440p offer much more headroom for higher settings. Below is a breakdown of how this specific combination performs, based strictly on measured results.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700 is an 8-core, 16-thread processor based on the Zen 4 architecture, with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. It sits in the 91st percentile of all CPUs tested, indicating strong overall processing capability. Its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks include the AMD Ryzen 9 7940H (0.1% ahead), the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 (0.5% ahead), the Intel Core i9-13905H (0.6% behind), and the Intel Core Ultra 5 235T (1.2% ahead). These margins are tiny, meaning the 7700 is essentially performance-equivalent to that group.

In Control, the CPU’s role is to feed the GPU and handle the game’s physics and AI. The measured FPS at 1080p Low settings reaches an average of 118 FPS, which is the highest result in this dataset. This suggests that at lower resolutions and settings, the CPU is not the primary bottleneck; the GPU is. The 7700’s single-thread performance, evidenced by a 3DMark single-thread score of 1049 and a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4136, is more than sufficient for this title. The multi-threaded headroom (Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 29302) is largely unused in Control, which is typical for an action-adventure game that does not scale perfectly with 16 threads. The 32 MB of shared L3 cache and DDR5 memory support (with 83.2 GB/s bandwidth) help maintain consistent frame delivery, but the data indicates that frame rates are dictated by the graphics card in most scenarios.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

The measured data provides four presets—Low, Medium, High, and Ultra—across three resolutions. The choice of preset depends entirely on your target resolution and desired frame rate.

At 1920x1080, the best balance is the High preset. It delivers an average of 76.6 FPS, which is significantly smoother than the Ultra preset’s 61.5 FPS. The Medium preset (85.8 FPS) is also viable, but High offers a meaningful visual uplift for a modest FPS cost compared to Medium. Low (118 FPS) is only necessary if you are chasing maximum refresh rates on a 120Hz+ monitor and are willing to sacrifice visuals.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset is the recommended starting point, yielding 64.5 FPS. High drops to 58.5 FPS, which is close to the 60 FPS target but may dip in busy scenes. Ultra is not advisable here, as it averages exactly 50 FPS. Low (87.6 FPS) is an option for competitive play or if you prefer a very high frame rate over graphical fidelity.

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves a locked 60 FPS. The Low preset is the only playable option, with an average of 57.7 FPS. Medium (44.9 FPS) and High (36.1 FPS) are too slow for smooth gameplay, and Ultra (32.9 FPS) is essentially a slideshow. If you own a 4K monitor, you must use Low settings for this combo.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

*Q: Can this combo run Control at 4K with high settings?*

A: No. At 3840x2160 with High settings, the average FPS is 36.1. This is below the 60 FPS threshold and will feel stuttery. The Low preset is the only 4K option that approaches playability, with an average of 57.7 FPS.

*Q: What is the highest average FPS this pairing achieves in Control?*

A: The highest measured average is 118 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This is the only preset/resolution combination that crosses the 100 FPS mark.

Q: How does the Ultra preset compare to High at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the High preset averages 58.5 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages exactly 50 FPS. The 8.5 FPS difference is the cost of the extra visual effects in the Ultra preset.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the primary bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the CPU can push 118 FPS, but as resolution increases to 1440p and 4K, frame rates drop sharply (to 87.6 and 57.7 FPS at Low, respectively), indicating the GPU is struggling to keep up with pixel output.

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

A: The Medium preset averages 85.8 FPS, while High averages 76.6 FPS. The difference is 9.2 FPS, which is noticeable but not massive. High provides better visuals for a relatively small performance penalty.

*Q: Does the RX 5700 XT’s 8 GB VRAM cause issues in Control?*

A: The measured data does not show VRAM-related stutters or crashes, but the 4K Ultra preset (32.9 FPS) is the worst performer. Given the GPU’s overall percentile rank (68th), it is likely that memory bandwidth (448.0 GB/s) and compute power are the limiting factors at high resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 7700 and AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT ranks 1198th out of 1636 tested combos for Control. This places it in the lower-mid tier of all systems tested. In percentile terms, this means it outperforms roughly 27% of the tested combos, but it is beaten by the majority.

The ranking is not surprising given the GPU’s age and tier. The RX 5700 XT’s average benchmark score of 24731 places it in the 68th percentile of all GPUs, with nearest rivals including the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile (0.1% behind), the Intel Arc A350M (0.3% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile (0.6% ahead), and the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 (0.9% ahead). The CPU is far more capable, ranking in the 91st percentile, but the GPU drags the overall combo ranking down. For Control, this means the system is balanced toward the CPU side, leaving graphical performance as the weak link.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT is built on the RDNA 1.0 architecture and features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock is 1605 MHz, with a game clock of 1755 MHz and a boost clock of 1905 MHz. The GPU has 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, which results in a texture rate of 304.8 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 121.9 GPixel/s. The FP32 compute is rated at 9.754 TFLOPS.

In Control, this GPU shows its limitations at higher resolutions. The drop from 1080p Low (118 FPS) to 1440p Low (87.6 FPS) to 4K Low (57.7 FPS) illustrates a classic bandwidth and fill-rate bottleneck. The 8 GB VRAM is sufficient for the game’s textures at these settings, but the rendering load at 4K overwhelms the GPU’s compute units. The GPU’s percentile rank (68th) and its average benchmark score (24731) suggest it is a mid-range part by today’s standards, and the measured FPS reflects that: it can handle 1080p and 1440p well, but 4K is only playable on the lowest preset. The lack of dedicated ray tracing cores is not directly measured here, but the Ultra preset’s low FPS (32.9 at 4K, 50 at 1440p, 61.5 at 1080p) indicates that the highest settings impose a significant load on the traditional rasterization pipeline.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The following table details the exact average FPS for each measured configuration.

• 1920x1080:
• Low: 118.0 FPS
• Medium: 85.8 FPS
• High: 76.6 FPS
• Ultra: 61.5 FPS

The spread here is from 118 down to 61.5 FPS. Low is the only setting that exceeds 100 FPS. Ultra remains playable but is 15.1 FPS slower than High.

• 2560x1440:
• Low: 87.6 FPS
• Medium: 64.5 FPS
• High: 58.5 FPS
• Ultra: 50.0 FPS

At this resolution, Low is the only setting above 60 FPS. Medium is close to the 60 FPS target but not quite there. Ultra is exactly 50 FPS, which is a hard cap for smooth motion. The step from Low to Medium is a 23.1 FPS drop, which is substantial.

• 3840x2160:
• Low: 57.7 FPS
• Medium: 44.9 FPS
• High: 36.1 FPS
• Ultra: 32.9 FPS

This resolution is the most demanding. Low barely misses 60 FPS. Medium loses 12.8 FPS from Low. High loses another 8.8 FPS. Ultra is the worst, at just 32.9 FPS, which is less than a third of the 1080p Low result. The performance degradation from 1080p Low to 4K Low is a 60.3 FPS loss, confirming that the RX 5700 XT is not suited for 4K gaming beyond the lowest settings.