Control

The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D and AMD Radeon RX 7700 combination delivers a compelling 1080p and 1440p experience in Control, but the data reveals a distinct ceiling at 4K. The measured frame rates show a system where the GPU becomes the primary constraint at higher resolutions, while the CPU’s strong multi-threaded performance ensures headroom at lower settings. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS, component roles, and how this specific pairing ranks against other tested configurations.

FAQ

*Q: What is the highest average frame rate achieved by this combo in Control?*

A: The highest measured average is 148 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This drops to 112 FPS at 2560x1440 and 76 FPS at 3840x2160 under the same Low preset.

Q: How does the combo perform at 4K with the Ultra preset?

A: At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the average frame rate is 41 FPS. This is the lowest average recorded in the dataset, indicating that the Ultra preset at 4K is not suitable for smooth gameplay.

Q: What is the performance difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the average frame rate drops from 112 FPS on Low to 61 FPS on Ultra. This represents a significant 45.5% reduction in average FPS when moving from the lowest to the highest quality preset.

Q: Does the combo provide a 60 FPS average at 4K on any preset?

A: No. The only 4K preset that comes close is Low, which averages 76 FPS. The Medium preset averages 54 FPS, and the High preset averages 48 FPS, both falling below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How does the CPU's benchmark score compare to its closest rival?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D has an average benchmark score of 39768. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS, scores 39603, making the 9800X3D 0.4% faster in average benchmark performance.

Q: What is the GPU's percentile ranking among all tested GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7700 has a percentile rank of 58, meaning it performs better than 58% of all GPUs in the benchmark database, based on its average benchmark score of 15852.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7700 is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with a Navi 32 chip. It features 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 624.1 GB/s. The GPU’s boost clock is listed at 2459 MHz, with a game clock of 2041 MHz. These specifications are directly reflected in the measured FPS data for Control. The 16 GB frame buffer is a substantial asset, especially at 4K where memory capacity can be a limiting factor. However, the data suggests that raw compute throughput, not memory size, is the bottleneck at higher resolutions. The GPU’s FP32 performance is 25.18 TFLOPS, which is a strong indicator of its ability to handle the graphical load of Control at 1080p and 1440p.

The benchmark results for the RX 7700 show a passmark G3D score of 20974, placing it in the 58th percentile among all GPUs. Its average benchmark score of 15852 puts it in close competition with the AMD Radeon R9 370X, which scores 15862, a 0.1% difference. This context is crucial: while the RX 7700 is a modern card, its raw performance in synthetic tests places it near older or lower-tier parts. In Control, this translates to excellent performance at 1080p, with the Ultra preset hitting 81 FPS average. The situation changes markedly at 4K, where the GPU’s limits become apparent. The transition from 1440p to 4K on the High preset sees a drop from 71 FPS to 48 FPS, a 32.4% reduction, which aligns with the increased pixel count and the GPU's compute ceiling. The GPU is clearly the dominant factor in determining frame rates at higher resolutions, as the CPU's capabilities are not fully utilized.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for Control shows a clear and consistent scaling pattern as resolution increases from 1080p to 4K. At the Low preset, the average frame rate drops from 148 FPS at 1920x1080 to 112 FPS at 2560x1440, and finally to 76 FPS at 3840x2160. This represents a 24.3% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 32.1% drop from 1440p to 4K. The scaling is not linear, and the most significant performance hit occurs when moving to 4K, which suggests the GPU is nearing its limits. For the High preset, the averages are 93 FPS at 1080p, 71 FPS at 1440p, and 48 FPS at 4K. The percentage drops are 23.7% and 32.4% respectively, showing a similar pattern.

This scaling behavior indicates that the limiting component shifts with resolution. At 1080p, the CPU is likely able to feed the GPU efficiently, allowing it to achieve high frame rates. As the resolution increases, the demand on the GPU's pixel and texture processing units grows, and the frame rate becomes increasingly GPU-bound. The fact that the FPS drops are larger when going from 1440p to 4K than from 1080p to 1440p reinforces this interpretation. The GPU's pixel rate of 236.1 GPixel/s and texture rate of 393.4 GTexel/s are sufficient for 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K, the sheer number of pixels being processed overwhelms the GPU's capacity. The data implies that for a 4K experience, users would need to rely on the Medium or Low presets, which average 54 FPS and 76 FPS, respectively, to maintain playable frame rates.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The dataset provides average FPS for all four settings presets across three resolutions. For 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves an average of 148 FPS. The Medium preset averages 105 FPS, with a minimum of 89 FPS and a maximum of 121 FPS. The High preset averages 93 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 81 FPS. At this resolution, even the most demanding preset provides a very smooth experience, well above the 60 FPS threshold. The difference between Low and Ultra is 67 FPS, highlighting the performance cost of the higher quality settings.

Moving to 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 112 FPS. The Medium preset averages 80 FPS, with a minimum of 68 FPS and a maximum of 92 FPS. The High preset averages 71 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 61 FPS. The Ultra preset at 1440p is the first configuration in the dataset to dip near the 60 FPS line, suggesting that this is the upper limit for a consistently smooth experience with the highest quality settings. At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 76 FPS. The Medium preset averages 54 FPS, with a minimum of 46 FPS and a maximum of 62 FPS. The High preset averages 48 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 41 FPS. The data at 4K shows that only the Low preset can maintain a 60+ FPS average. The Medium preset’s minimum of 46 FPS indicates noticeable stutters or slowdowns during intense scenes.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend heavily on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For 1920x1080, the Ultra preset is the clear recommendation, as it provides an average of 81 FPS. This is high enough for a smooth experience, and the visual fidelity benefits are significant. Even the High preset at 93 FPS is viable, but the Ultra preset offers the best balance of quality and performance without dropping below the 60 FPS mark.

For 2560x1440, the situation is more nuanced. The Ultra preset averages 61 FPS, which is technically playable but leaves little headroom for demanding scenes. The High preset averages 71 FPS, offering a more comfortable margin above 60 FPS. The data suggests that High is the safer choice for a consistently smooth experience at 1440p, as it provides a 16.4% performance increase over Ultra while still delivering high visual quality. The Medium preset at 80 FPS is also an option for those who prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity.

At 3840x2160, the recommendations are starkly different. The Ultra preset at 41 FPS is not suitable for a responsive gaming experience. The High preset at 48 FPS is also below the ideal threshold. The Medium preset at 54 FPS is borderline, with a minimum of 46 FPS. The only preset that provides a consistently smooth experience at 4K is Low, which averages 76 FPS. This suggests that users with a 4K display should either lower their expectations to the Low preset or consider reducing the resolution to 1440p to take advantage of higher quality settings.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D is an 8-core, 16-thread processor based on the Zen 5 architecture. It has a base clock of 4.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. Its substantial 96 MB of shared L3 cache is a key feature, particularly for gaming. The CPU’s benchmark results show strong multi-threaded performance, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23230 and a Geekbench multi-core score of 18696. Single-thread performance is also solid, with a Geekbench single-core score of 2964. The CPU has a percentile rank of 87 among all tested CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 39768.

In Control, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and process game logic. The data shows that at 1080p, the CPU is not the limiting factor, as the frame rates are high across all settings. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 10081 and the 8-thread score of 8252 indicate that the processor can handle the multi-threaded workloads typical of modern games. The CPU’s nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 7 7700, has an average score of 40081, which is 0.8% higher than the 9800X3D. This close competition suggests that in CPU-bound scenarios, the performance difference between these two chips is minimal. However, the 9800X3D's large L3 cache likely provides an advantage in specific gaming scenarios, though the measured FPS data for Control cannot isolate this effect precisely. The CPU’s performance is more than sufficient for this game, as evidenced by the high frame rates at 1080p, and it is the GPU that ultimately determines the playable settings at higher resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D and AMD Radeon RX 7700 has a combo rank of 1294 out of 2888 tested combinations in Control. This places it in the 55th percentile of all tested combos, indicating that it performs better than average but is not among the top-tier configurations. The rank reflects the overall performance across all tested resolutions and settings, and it is heavily influenced by the GPU's performance, which has a percentile rank of 58. The CPU’s high rank of 87 does not fully compensate for the GPU’s mid-range standing in the final combo ranking.

The data implies that the CPU is overqualified for the GPU in this pairing for Control. The CPU’s benchmark scores are significantly higher than the GPU’s, suggesting that the system is GPU-bound in most scenarios. This is confirmed by the FPS scaling, which shows a clear GPU bottleneck at higher resolutions. While the combo performs well at 1080p and 1440p, its 4K performance is limited, which likely contributes to its overall rank of 1294. The combo’s performance is consistent with the GPU’s individual standing, and the CPU does not provide a significant uplift in the final ranking. For users seeking a higher rank in this game, the data suggests that a more powerful GPU would be a more impactful upgrade than the CPU. The current pairing offers a balanced experience at mainstream resolutions but falls short of the high-end performance required for a top-tier rank.