Control

# Control — AMD Ryzen 7 9700X + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti

This pairing of AMD's 8-core Ryzen 7 9700X with NVIDIA's GeForce RTX 3080 Ti delivers a broad spread of frame rates across Control's four presets and three resolutions, with the data showing a clear GPU-bound pattern that becomes more pronounced as pixel count rises. The measured results place this combo at rank 981 out of 3720 tested combinations, putting it in roughly the 74th percentile of all system pairings for this title, while the individual components sit at the 86th percentile (CPU) and 83rd percentile (GPU) relative to their respective pools.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate drop from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 and then to 3840x2160 reveals how heavily this game leans on the graphics card. At High settings, average FPS falls from 121 at 1080p to 92 at 1440p — a 24% reduction — and then to 62 at 4K, another 33% cut. The Low preset shows an even steeper proportional decline: 192 FPS at 1080p, 145 at 1440p, and 98 at 4K, representing drops of 24% and 32% respectively. Medium settings follow the same trajectory: 136 → 103 → 70, with the 4K figure landing 49% below the 1080p result. Ultra settings, the heaviest load, scale from 105 at 1080p down to 80 at 1440p and finally 54 at 4K, a cumulative 49% loss.

What stands out is the consistency of the 1080p-to-1440p penalty across all four presets: roughly 24-25% in every case. The 1440p-to-4K drop is also remarkably uniform at 32-33% for Low, High, and Medium, though Ultra tightens slightly to 32%. This regularity suggests the bottleneck is almost entirely the GPU's rasterization throughput rather than any CPU limitation, since a CPU-bound scenario would show smaller percentage losses at higher resolutions where the graphics card has more time to wait. The RTX 3080 Ti's 34.10 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 532.8 GTexel/s texture rate are being exercised fully, with the 912.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth on a 384-bit bus proving adequate to feed the GA102 chip at all tested settings.

The 4K results deserve particular attention. Even at Low settings, the combo only reaches 98 FPS average, and Ultra dips to 54 FPS — playable but far from the high-refresh territory seen at 1080p. The gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is 44 FPS, nearly the same absolute spread as at 1440p (65 FPS) and 1080p (87 FPS), meaning the preset overhead remains constant while the resolution tax multiplies it. This is classic GPU-bound scaling: the CPU's 5.50 GHz boost clock and 8 cores are more than sufficient to keep up, and the measured 3DMark scores — 9824 for 16 threads and 9771 for max threads — suggest headroom that goes unused as resolution climbs.

How This Combo Ranks

At rank 981 out of 3720 combos, this system sits in the upper quarter of all tested configurations for Control. The percentile placement is notable: the CPU alone ranks at the 86th percentile among all processors, and the GPU at the 83rd percentile among all graphics cards, yet the combined score lands slightly lower than either component's individual standing. This suggests that while each part is strong in isolation, the pairing doesn't extract maximum synergy in this specific title — possibly because Control's engine rewards raw shader throughput more than the balanced mix this combo provides.

Comparing to the CPU's nearest rivals in overall benchmark averages, the Ryzen 7 9700X trails the Intel Core i9-14901E by just 0.1% (37943 vs 37911 average score), sits even with the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 (37904), and leads the Intel Core 5 211E by 0.3% and the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 by 0.4%. These are razor-thin margins, indicating the 9700X is firmly mid-pack among high-end desktop and mobile parts, not a standout leader. The GPU's nearest rivals paint a similar picture: the RTX 3080 Ti's average benchmark score of 41187 is 0.8% above the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 (40870) and 2% above the GeForce RTX 5070 (40377), but it trails the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB by 1.2% and the Tesla M40 by 1.7% — though those Tesla parts are compute-oriented and not directly comparable for gaming.

The rank of 981 out of 3720 means roughly 2739 other combos performed worse, placing this system comfortably above the median. For a game released in 2019, Control's demands are moderate by modern standards, but the 3080 Ti's end-of-life status and the 9700X's mid-2024 release create an interesting generational mix. The data implies this combo is capable of high-refresh 1440p gaming and solid 4K at reduced settings, but it won't dominate leaderboards against newer GPU pairings.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700X brings 8 cores and 16 threads based on the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Granite Ridge, built on TSMC's 4 nm process with 8,315 million transistors on a 70.6 mm² die. Its base clock of 3.80 GHz boosts to 5.50 GHz, and the 65 W TDP is notably modest for a desktop part with this core count. The L3 cache is 32 MB shared, with 80 KB L1 per core and 1 MB L2 per core, and memory support is dual-channel DDR5 with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The CPU's 3DMark results show a strong scaling curve: 2525 for 2 threads, 4869 for 4 threads, 8184 for 8 threads, and 9824 for 16 threads — nearly linear scaling from 4 to 8 threads, but only a 19% gain from 8 to 16 threads, indicating diminishing returns beyond eight threads for typical workloads.

In Control specifically, the CPU's role is secondary. The game's engine, built around DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support, does utilize multiple threads, but the measured FPS deltas across resolutions — identical percentage drops regardless of preset — confirm the GPU is the limiting factor. At 1080p High, the 121 FPS average suggests the CPU can feed the GPU well beyond 120 frames; at 4K Ultra, the 54 FPS result shows the GPU simply can't keep up with the pixel and shader load. The Cinebench R23 scores of 20485 multi-core and 2211 single-core, plus a Geekbench single-core score of 3023, indicate the 9700X has ample single-thread performance for game logic and draw call submission.

The PassMark multithread score of 37161 and single-thread score of 4654 place this CPU in the top tier for productivity, but these strengths don't translate into Control's frame rates once the resolution climbs. The 9700X's 3DMark 2-thread score of 2525 versus the 4-thread 4869 shows that doubling threads nearly doubles performance — a sign of efficient thread scheduling — but Control's measured results don't show CPU-bound behavior at any resolution, meaning the bottleneck is elsewhere. The 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth is adequate for the 3080 Ti's demands, and the PCIe Gen 5, 24-lane interface provides ample bandwidth for the GPU's PCIe 4.0 x16 connection.

FAQ

Q: Is this combo better suited for 1080p or 1440p gaming in Control?

A: The data shows 1080p High averaging 121 FPS and 1440p High averaging 92 FPS — a 24% drop. For high-refresh monitors, 1080p is clearly superior, but 1440p remains above 90 FPS on High, making it a viable choice for 144 Hz displays. At 4K, High drops to 62 FPS, which is still playable but not competitive.

Q: How does the RTX 3080 Ti compare to its nearest rival in raw benchmarks?

A: The RTX 3080 Ti's average benchmark score of 41187 is 0.8% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 (40870) and 2% higher than the GeForce RTX 5070 (40377), but it falls 1.2% behind the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB and 1.7% behind the Tesla M40. These margins are small, indicating the 3080 Ti is slightly above average among its peers.

Q: What's the best resolution for maintaining 60+ FPS at Ultra settings?

A: At 2560x1440 Ultra, the average FPS is 80, which comfortably exceeds 60. At 3840x2160 Ultra, the average drops to 54 FPS, below the 60 FPS threshold. So 1440p Ultra is the highest quality preset that stays above 60 FPS, while 4K Ultra requires lowering to High (62 FPS) or Medium (70 FPS) to maintain that target.

Q: Does the CPU's 8-core/16-thread configuration matter for Control?

A: The benchmark data suggests it matters only minimally. The 9700X's 3DMark scores show near-linear scaling from 2 to 8 threads (2525 to 8184), but Control's FPS drops are identical across presets at each resolution, indicating the GPU is the sole bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the 192 FPS average shows the CPU can drive very high frame rates, but at 4K, the GPU's limits dominate.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested systems for Control?

A: It ranks 981st out of 3720 combinations, placing it in the 74th percentile. The CPU's individual percentile (86th) and GPU's (83rd) are both higher, suggesting the pairing is slightly less effective than each component alone would predict, likely due to Control's specific engine demands.

Q: What's the FPS difference between Low and Ultra at each resolution?

A: At 1080p, Low averages 192 FPS and Ultra 105 FPS — an 87 FPS gap. At 1440p, Low is 145 FPS and Ultra 80 FPS — a 65 FPS gap. At 4K, Low is 98 FPS and Ultra 54 FPS — a 44 FPS gap. The absolute difference shrinks as resolution rises, but the percentage gap remains similar (45-46%).

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti, based on the GA102 chip with Ampere architecture, is the primary driver of Control's frame rates. Its 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die, built on Samsung's 8 nm process, deliver 10240 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 112 ROPs. The 80 RT cores and 320 tensor cores are present but Control's standard rendering doesn't heavily leverage ray tracing in these measurements. Clock speeds are 1365 MHz base and 1665 MHz boost, with memory running at 1188 MHz (19 Gbps effective) across 12 GB of GDDR6X on a 384-bit bus, yielding 912.4 GB/s bandwidth. The GPU's 34.10 TFLOPS FP32 and 532.8 GTexel/s texture rate directly correlate with the observed scaling.

The measured FPS data shows the GPU hitting its limits at 4K: even at Low settings, the 98 FPS average is only 51% of the 1080p Low result (192 FPS), while at Ultra, 4K is 51% of 1080p (54 vs 105). This halving of performance with a quadrupling of pixel count (1080p has ~2.07 million pixels, 4K has ~8.29 million) indicates the GPU's fillrate and shading capacity are the binding constraints. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 5077 and PassMark G3D score of 26896 place the 3080 Ti in the 83rd percentile among GPUs, but for Control's specific workload, the 112 ROPs and 186.5 GPixel/s pixel rate are what determine the ceiling.

The 12 GB VRAM is sufficient for Control at all tested settings — no texture thrashing is evident from the FPS stability (Medium presets show min/max ranges like 116-157 at 1080p and 59-80 at 4K, indicating consistent frame pacing). The GPU's 350 W TDP and 750 W suggested PSU indicate a power-hungry part, but the data doesn't show thermal throttling affecting results. The 3080 Ti's end-of-life status means it's a last-generation part, yet its performance in Control remains strong, particularly at 1440p where it delivers smooth gameplay across all presets.

Settings Recommendations

For 1080p displays, the data shows Ultra averaging 105 FPS, which is ideal for high-refresh monitors. The gap to High (121 FPS) is 16 FPS, and to Medium (136 FPS) another 15 FPS, while Low hits 192 FPS. Given that Ultra at 1080p still exceeds 100 FPS, there's little reason to drop below High unless targeting 165+ Hz, where Medium (136 FPS) or Low (192 FPS) would be necessary. For 1440p, Ultra at 80 FPS is already above 60, but High (92 FPS) provides a 15% improvement with likely minimal visual difference — this is the sweet spot for 144 Hz panels. Medium (103 FPS) is also viable for competitive play.

At 4K, the choice is more constrained. Ultra (54 FPS) is just below the 60 FPS standard, making High (62 FPS) the minimum for smooth 60 Hz gameplay. Medium (70 FPS) offers a 13% boost over High with only a modest quality reduction, and Low (98 FPS) nearly doubles the Ultra frame rate — though the visual compromise is substantial. For 4K gaming on a 60 Hz display, High is recommended as the best balance; for 120 Hz 4K panels, only Low (98 FPS) comes close, and even then it falls short. The Medium preset's min FPS of 59 at 4K and 88 at 1440p ensures frame times stay within VRR ranges, making it a safer choice for stutter-sensitive users.

The measured data suggests that High settings provide the most consistent experience across all resolutions: 121 FPS at 1080p, 92 FPS at 1440p, and 62 FPS at 4K. This uniformity makes High the default recommendation, with Ultra reserved for 1080p or 1440p users who prioritize image quality over frame rate headroom.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the four presets produce the following average FPS: Low 192, Medium 136 (min 116, max 157), High 121, and Ultra 105. The Medium preset's min-max range of 41 FPS shows some frame time variance, but the averages are all well above 100 FPS. At 2560x1440, Low averages 145 FPS, Medium 103 (min 88, max 118), High 92, and Ultra 80. The Medium range narrows to 30 FPS, indicating smoother pacing at higher resolution. At 3840x2160, Low averages 98 FPS, Medium 70 (min 59, max 80), High 62, and Ultra 54. The Medium range at 4K is 21 FPS, the tightest of all, suggesting the GPU is consistently saturated.

Comparing across resolutions, the Low preset shows the largest absolute drop from 1080p to 4K: 192 → 145 → 98, a 49% total reduction. High follows: 121 → 92 → 62, a 49% drop. Medium: 136 → 103 → 70, a 49% drop. Ultra: 105 → 80 → 54, a 49% drop. The uniformity of these percentage drops across all four presets strongly indicates a single bottleneck — the GPU's pixel throughput — with no CPU or memory constraint altering the scaling pattern. The 3080 Ti's 186.5 GPixel/s pixel rate and 34.10 TFLOPS compute are the variables that determine these numbers, and the 9700X's role is limited to feeding the GPU without becoming a limiting factor. The 4K Ultra result of 54 FPS is the only sub-60 average in the entire dataset, making it the sole configuration that fails the 60 FPS baseline.