Control

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700 and AMD Radeon RX 9060 pairing delivers a mid-pack experience in Control, a 2019 Action Adventure title. The CPU, an 8-core, 16-thread Zen 4 Raphael part on the AMD Socket AM5 platform, operates with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. Its architecture is built on a 5 nm TSMC process, and it features a substantial cache hierarchy: 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3. This processor supports DDR5 memory via a dual-channel bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. With a 65 W TDP, it is a power-efficient option for the desktop segment, and it includes integrated Radeon Graphics. The chip also supports ECC memory and offers PCIe Gen 5 with 24 lanes from the CPU, making it a forward-looking foundation for this GPU.

In terms of raw compute, the Ryzen 7 7700 posts a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 18760 and a single-core score of 1930. Its Geekbench results are 15371 for multicore and 2525 for single-core. The processor’s 3DMark scores scale with thread count, starting at 2043 for 2 threads, rising to 3931 for 4 threads, 6933 for 8 threads, and peaking at 8484 for 16 threads, with a max-thread score of 8479. PassMark results show a multithread score of 34470 and a single-thread score of 4063. The CPU’s percentile ranking against all CPUs is 87, indicating strong general performance. Its average benchmark score is 40081, placing it within a tight pack of rivals: it is 0.1% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365, 0.2% behind the Intel Core 5 221E, 0.4% behind the AMD Ryzen 9 270, and 0.6% behind the Intel Core i9-13905H. These deltas are minimal, suggesting that in synthetic tests, the 7700 is virtually indistinguishable from these alternatives. For Control, the CPU’s strong single-thread performance is likely sufficient to feed the GPU, though the game’s engine may not fully utilize all 16 threads.

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

The Ryzen 7 7700’s configuration is more than adequate for Control, a title that typically responds well to high clock speeds. With a boost clock of 5.30 GHz and a robust single-thread Cinebench R23 score of 1930, the processor ensures that the game’s main simulation and physics threads are not a bottleneck at lower resolutions. The 8-core, 16-thread layout provides ample headroom for background tasks and any multi-threaded components of the game’s engine, as evidenced by the 3DMark max-thread score of 8479, which closely mirrors the 16-thread score of 8484, indicating efficient scaling across all cores. The 32 MB of shared L3 cache is beneficial for keeping frequently accessed game data close to the cores, reducing latency.

The data from the measured FPS suggests that the CPU is not the limiting factor in most scenarios. At 1080p, the CPU’s high boost clock allows the GPU to push frame rates, with the Low preset hitting 130 FPS. As resolution increases to 1440p and 4K, the frame rates drop, which is typical of GPU-bound workloads. The CPU’s role here is to maintain a consistent frame pacing, and given its PassMark single-thread score of 4063, it is well-suited for this task. The Cinebench R15 scores, 3047 for multicore and 308 for single-core, further reinforce that the processor has the necessary grunt for older game engines like the one powering Control. The chip’s 5 nm process node and 6,570 million transistors on a 71 mm² die contribute to its efficiency, allowing sustained boost clocks without thermal throttling, which could otherwise cause frame drops in prolonged sessions.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

In the database of tested combinations for Control, this pairing of the Ryzen 7 7700 and Radeon RX 9060 holds a combo rank of 1632 out of 2888 tested combos. This places it in the 56th percentile of all recorded systems, meaning it outperforms a slight majority of other configurations. This ranking reflects a balanced system that is neither at the bleeding edge nor struggling to run the game. The GPU’s average benchmark score of 16014 places it in the 59th percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, which is 0.7% ahead, and the AMD Radeon R9 370X and AMD Radeon RX 7700, which are 1% and 1% behind, respectively. The AMD Radeon Pro W5500 is 2.1% behind. This context suggests that the GPU is a capable mid-range performer, and the CPU’s 87th percentile ranking is higher, indicating that the processor has more headroom than the graphics card.

The combo’s rank of 1632 indicates that many systems with faster GPUs or more optimized pairings achieve higher frame rates, but this setup still delivers a playable experience across all settings. The delta between the CPU’s high percentile and the GPU’s lower percentile implies that the RX 9060 is the primary constraint on performance. This is a common scenario in gaming builds where a strong CPU is paired with a mid-range GPU to allow for future upgrades. The 2888 total combos tested include a wide range of hardware, from entry-level to enthusiast, so being in the upper half is a solid result for a 1080p and 1440p gaming focus.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data reveals a clear trend of performance scaling with resolution, which points directly to the GPU as the limiting component. At 1080p with High settings, the system achieves 82 FPS. Moving to 1440p at the same settings drops the average to 62 FPS, a reduction of 24.4%. At 4K, the frame rate falls to 42 FPS, a 48.8% drop from 1080p. This pattern is consistent with a GPU-bound scenario, where the rendering workload increases exponentially with pixel count, and the CPU’s role diminishes.

Looking at the Low preset, the scaling is even more pronounced: 130 FPS at 1080p, 98 FPS at 1440p, and 66 FPS at 4K. The percentage drops are 24.6% and 49.2% from 1080p to 1440p and 4K, respectively. The fact that the frame rate nearly halves at 4K, regardless of settings, indicates that the RX 9060’s 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 128-bit bus are saturated by the higher resolution demands. The GPU’s bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s is sufficient for 1080p but becomes a bottleneck at 4K. The CPU, with its high boost clock and 32 MB cache, does not show signs of being the constraint, as the frame rate drops are entirely proportional to the increase in resolution. If the CPU were the limit, we would expect to see a plateau in frame rates at lower resolutions, but instead, we see a consistent scaling that tracks the GPU’s pixel throughput capabilities.

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

The benchmark data provides a comprehensive view of performance across three resolutions and four quality presets. At 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the system performs admirably. The Low preset yields an average of 130 FPS, which is exceptionally smooth for fast-paced action. The Medium preset delivers 92 FPS, with a minimum of 78 FPS and a maximum of 106 FPS, indicating good frame consistency. High settings reduce the average to 82 FPS, while the Ultra preset brings it down to 71 FPS. These numbers show that at 1080p, the user can comfortably play at High or Ultra settings while maintaining frame rates above 60 FPS.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance decreases as expected. The Low preset still offers a high average of 98 FPS, making it ideal for competitive play. Medium settings provide 70 FPS, with a minimum of 59 FPS and a maximum of 80 FPS, which means some scenes may dip below 60 FPS. High settings average 62 FPS, which is playable but close to the threshold. The Ultra preset drops to 54 FPS, which may not be smooth enough for all players. At 3840x2160, the system struggles to maintain high frame rates. The Low preset averages 66 FPS, which is acceptable for a cinematic experience. Medium settings drop to 47 FPS, with a minimum of 40 FPS and a maximum of 54 FPS, showing significant variance. High settings average 42 FPS, and Ultra settings fall to 36 FPS, which is not ideal for action sequences. The data clearly shows that 4K is only viable with the Low preset for a consistent experience above 60 FPS.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 is a mid-range graphics card built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture, specifically the Navi 44 chip, codenamed Strix Point. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s. The GPU’s core clocks are set with a base of 1700 MHz, a game clock of 2400 MHz, and a boost clock of 2990 MHz. Its memory operates at 2250 MHz, or 18 Gbps effective. With 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation pipelines, the card is designed for 1080p and 1440p gaming. It also includes 28 ray tracing cores, which can enhance visual fidelity in supported titles, though Control benefits from these features.

The GPU’s benchmark scores reflect its position in the market. It achieves a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3322, and its PassMark G3D score is 17631. The Geekbench OpenCL score is 88183, while the Vulkan score is 39476. These numbers place the card in the 59th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 16014. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, is only 0.7% faster, indicating that the RX 9060 is a strong competitor in its class. The GPU’s TDP is 132 W, with a single 8-pin power connector and a suggested PSU of 300 W, making it an efficient choice. In Control, the GPU’s 8 GB VRAM is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p at all settings, but at 4K Ultra, the memory capacity may be a limiting factor, contributing to the lower frame rates. The boost clock of 2990 MHz helps maintain performance in less demanding scenes, but the card’s 128-bit bus is a constraint at higher resolutions.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the user’s resolution and preference for frame rate versus visual quality. For 1920x1080, the High preset is the best balance, offering an average of 82 FPS while maintaining good visual fidelity. The Ultra preset is also viable at 71 FPS, but the marginal visual improvement over High may not justify the 13% performance hit. For players seeking maximum smoothness, the Medium preset at 92 FPS provides a significant boost over High with only a modest reduction in quality, and its minimum of 78 FPS ensures no noticeable stutter.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset is the recommended choice, delivering an average of 70 FPS with a minimum of 59 FPS. This provides a near-60 FPS experience with decent visuals. The High preset at 62 FPS is acceptable for those who prioritize image quality, but it is closer to the 60 FPS threshold and may dip during intense scenes. The Low preset at 98 FPS is excellent for competitive play, but it sacrifices too much visual detail for most users. For 3840x2160, the Low preset is the only option that provides a consistently playable experience, averaging 66 FPS. The Medium preset at 47 FPS is too inconsistent, with a minimum of 40 FPS, which will be noticeable in fast-paced combat. The data suggests that this combo is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, where it can handle High and Medium settings, respectively, with smooth frame rates. At 4K, users should stick to Low settings to avoid a sub-60 FPS experience.