Control

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700X paired with the AMD Radeon RX 9060 delivers a solid, if unspectacular, 1080p and 1440p experience in Control, but the combination struggles to maintain playable frame rates at 4K on higher settings. The data shows a system that is consistently capable at lower resolutions, yet clearly constrained by the GPU’s 8 GB VRAM and memory bandwidth as the rendering load intensifies.

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

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700X is a Zen 5 (Granite Ridge) part built on TSMC’s 4 nm process, featuring 8 cores and 16 threads. It operates with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. This CPU sits on the AMD Socket AM5 platform and supports DDR5 memory via a dual-channel bus, offering 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. Its 32 MB of shared L3 cache is a significant asset for gaming workloads that rely on data locality.

In synthetic benchmarks, the 9700X demonstrates strong single-threaded performance, scoring 1280 in 3dMark single-thread and 2211 in Cinebench R23 single-core. Its multi-threaded capabilities are equally robust, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 20485 and a Geekbench multi-core score of 17906. These results place the CPU in the 86th percentile of all processors, with an average benchmark score of 37943. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-14901E (deltaPct 0.1), the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 (deltaPct 0.1), and the Intel Core 5 211E (deltaPct 0.3), all of which are statistically tied in overall performance.

For Control, a game that is not heavily CPU-bound at high resolutions, the 9700X provides ample headroom. The action-adventure title’s physics and AI routines can stress a few cores, but the 8-core/16-thread configuration ensures that frame pacing remains consistent. Even at 1080p Low, where the CPU is most likely to be a limiting factor, the measured 130 FPS average indicates that the processor is not bottlenecking the system. The CPU’s high boost clock of 5.50 GHz is particularly beneficial for the game’s single-threaded update loops, which directly translate to higher minimum frame rates in demanding scenes.

Benchmark results indicate that the 9700X is more than sufficient for this title. The 3dMark 8-thread score of 8184 and max-thread score of 9771 show that the CPU scales well with additional threads, but the game rarely needs that much parallelism. In practice, the data suggests that the Ryzen 7 9700X is a capable air-cooled processor that will not be the primary constraint in this pairing, allowing the GPU to dictate the overall performance ceiling.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture (Navi 44 chip) and features a base clock of 1700 MHz, a game clock of 2400 MHz, and a boost clock of 2990 MHz. It comes equipped with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU’s 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 raster output units give it a pixel rate of 191.4 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 334.9 GTexel/s. Its FP32 throughput is 21.43 TFLOPS.

In the benchmark database, the RX 9060 sits in the 59th percentile of all GPUs, with an average score of 16014. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti (deltaPct -0.7), the AMD Radeon R9 370X (deltaPct 1), and the AMD Radeon RX 7700 (deltaPct 1). This places the RX 9060 in a competitive mid-range tier, trading blows with last-generation mainstream cards.

For Control, the GPU’s role is paramount. The game’s heavy use of real-time reflections, volumetric lighting, and destructible environments puts a significant load on the rasterization pipeline and memory subsystem. The 8 GB VRAM is the most critical specification here. At 1080p, this capacity is generally sufficient, allowing for smooth performance across presets. However, at 1440p and especially 4K, the game’s texture and geometry data can exceed 8 GB, forcing the GPU to rely on slower system memory or compression, which directly impacts frame rates.

The clock speeds are healthy, but the 128-bit memory bus is a limiting factor. The 288.0 GB/s bandwidth is adequate for 1080p, but the data shows that higher resolutions suffer disproportionately, confirming that memory throughput is a bottleneck. The GPU’s 21.43 TFLOPS of compute power is not the issue; rather, the inability to feed the cores quickly enough at high resolutions is what drags performance down. The measured FPS data confirms this narrative: the GPU is strong enough for 1080p Ultra (71 FPS) but falls to 36 FPS at 4K Ultra, a drop of nearly 50%.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 9700X and the AMD Radeon RX 9060 ranks 1632 out of 2888 tested combos in Control. This places it in the bottom half of the database, which is a telling statistic. While the individual components are respectable on their own, the pairing does not boost the system to a top-tier gaming position.

This ranking suggests that the RX 9060 is the weaker link in the chain. The CPU is in the 86th percentile of all processors, while the GPU is only in the 59th percentile. The CPU’s high performance is not fully utilized because the GPU cannot keep up with the rendering demands of the game, especially at higher resolutions. The combo rank reflects this imbalance, showing that the system is held back by the graphics card.

When compared to other tested configurations, this pairing falls into a mid-range category. It is not a low-end setup, but it is far from the top 10% of combos. The data implies that users would see a significant performance uplift by pairing the 9700X with a higher-tier GPU, as the CPU has ample headroom to support a more powerful graphics card. Conversely, the RX 9060 would be better matched with a less expensive CPU to create a more balanced budget-oriented system, though that would sacrifice the CPU’s future-proofing potential.

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

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of the system’s capabilities across three resolutions and four settings presets.

1080p (1920x1080):

• Low: 130 FPS average. This is the peak performance of the system, showing that the CPU and GPU can deliver high frame rates when graphical demands are minimal.
• Medium: 92 FPS average, with a minimum of 78 FPS and a maximum of 106 FPS.
• High: 82 FPS average.
• Ultra: 71 FPS average.

At 1080p, the system is well-suited for high-refresh-rate monitors. Even at Ultra settings, the 71 FPS average is playable, though not ideal for competitive play. The jump from Low to Medium is a 38 FPS drop, indicating that the medium preset introduces significant graphical effects that impact performance.

1440p (2560x1440):

• Low: 98 FPS average.
• Medium: 70 FPS average, with a minimum of 59 FPS and a maximum of 80 FPS.
• High: 62 FPS average.
• Ultra: 54 FPS average.

At 1440p, the system remains playable but starts to show its limits. The Ultra preset’s 54 FPS average is on the edge of smooth gameplay. The drop from 1080p to 1440p at High settings is 20 FPS (from 82 to 62), a 24% reduction. This is a significant penalty that highlights the GPU’s memory bandwidth constraints.

4K (3840x2160):

• Low: 66 FPS average.
• Medium: 47 FPS average, with a minimum of 40 FPS and a maximum of 54 FPS.
• High: 42 FPS average.
• Ultra: 36 FPS average.

At 4K, the system is clearly over-matched for anything above Low settings. The Ultra preset’s 36 FPS average is not a smooth experience, and even High settings at 42 FPS will feel stuttery in fast-paced combat. The Medium preset’s minimum of 40 FPS is below the threshold for a consistent 60 FPS experience, making 4K gaming impractical for this title.

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

The resolution scaling behavior is a textbook example of a GPU-bound system. Moving from 1080p to 4K at High settings, the average FPS drops from 82 to 42, a 49% reduction. This is a massive performance hit that cannot be attributed to the CPU, which shows no signs of bottlenecking at lower resolutions.

The data points to the GPU’s memory subsystem as the primary constraint. The 8 GB VRAM and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth are simply insufficient for the data throughput required at 4K. The game’s textures and render targets at 4K likely exceed the VRAM capacity, causing the GPU to page data in and out, which tanks performance. The fact that the FPS drop from 1080p to 1440p (24% at High settings) is less severe than the drop from 1440p to 4K (32% at High settings) further confirms this.

The CPU’s role in this scaling is minimal. Benchmark results show the 9700X is a high-performance part, and its capabilities are not the limiting factor. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would see smaller FPS differences between resolutions, as the frame rate would be capped by the processor’s speed. Instead, the consistent and steep decline in FPS as resolution increases is a clear signal that the RX 9060 is the component that determines the system’s performance ceiling in Control.

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

For the best balance of visual fidelity and performance, the High preset at 1440p is the recommended configuration. The measured 62 FPS average is smooth enough for immersive gameplay, and the visual upgrade from Medium to High is noticeable in a game with as much atmospheric detail as Control. This setting provides a good compromise, avoiding the VRAM issues that plague 4K while maintaining a higher level of graphical quality than Medium.

If a player prioritizes a locked 60 FPS experience, the Medium preset at 1440p is the safest choice, with a 70 FPS average and a 59 FPS minimum that stays above the 60 FPS threshold for the most part. For those with 1080p monitors, the Ultra preset is viable, delivering a 71 FPS average that is still well above playable standards. The 1080p Low preset’s 130 FPS is only recommended for competitive play where maximum frame rates are essential, but it sacrifices too much visual quality for a single-player title like Control.

At 4K, the Low preset is the only playable option, yielding 66 FPS, but this defeats the purpose of high-resolution gaming. The Medium preset’s 47 FPS average and 40 FPS minimum are too inconsistent for a smooth experience. Therefore, the data strongly suggests that 4K is not a viable resolution for this combination in Control, and users should stick to 1440p or 1080p for the best experience. The High preset at 1440p offers the most balanced experience, leveraging the CPU’s strength while acknowledging the GPU’s limitations.