Control

The pairing of the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 presents a stark example of GPU-limited performance in Control. The benchmark data shows a processor with top-tier synthetic scores paired with a graphics card that ranks in the 43rd percentile among all GPUs, resulting in frame rates that consistently fall below playable thresholds across most settings. The analysis below breaks down the measured FPS, scaling behavior, and the distinct roles each component plays in this specific configuration.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases, with the GTX 1650 acting as the primary bottleneck. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo achieves 55.9 FPS, which is the only measured configuration that approaches smooth gameplay. Moving to 2560x1440 at the same Low settings drops the average to 46.1 FPS, a reduction of approximately 17.5% from the 1080p result. At 3840x2160 Low, the frame rate falls further to 26.6 FPS, representing a 52.4% decline from the 1080p Low baseline.

This scaling pattern indicates that the GPU's memory bandwidth and compute resources are saturated early. The GTX 1650 has a 128-bit memory bus and 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth, which becomes increasingly inadequate as pixel count rises. The data shows that the gap between Low and Ultra settings narrows at higher resolutions, suggesting that resolution scaling imposes a hard ceiling regardless of graphical fidelity. At 3840x2160, the spread from Low (26.6 FPS) to Ultra (17.8 FPS) is only 8.8 FPS, whereas at 1920x1080 the same settings spread is 23.7 FPS. This compression of performance variance at 4K confirms that the GPU's raw throughput, not the game's settings, dictates the upper limit.

The Ryzen 7 9800X3D, with its 8 cores and 16 threads, shows no signs of being the limiting factor in these results. Its synthetic benchmarks, including a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 34004 and a PassMark multithread score of 40009, place it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs. Yet the frame rates in Control never exceed 55.9 FPS at any resolution, which is far below what this processor could feed to a more capable graphics card. The data strongly suggests that the GTX 1650's 4 GB of GDDR5 memory and 2.984 TFLOPS of FP32 performance are the binding constraints across all tested configurations.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured rows, the only viable setting for this combo at 1920x1080 is Low, which produces 55.9 FPS. Every other setting at this resolution falls below 40 FPS: Medium yields 38.4 FPS, High yields 33.6 FPS, and Ultra yields 32.2 FPS. For a game like Control, which involves fast-paced combat and environmental destruction, the difference between 55.9 and 38.4 FPS is substantial in terms of perceived smoothness and input responsiveness.

At 2560x1440, Low settings produce 46.1 FPS, which is marginally playable but noticeably less fluid than the 1080p Low result. The Medium preset at 1440p drops to 28.7 FPS, and High falls to 28.2 FPS, while Ultra bottoms out at 23.9 FPS. These numbers indicate that 1440p is only viable at the lowest preset, and even then, the experience will involve frequent frame rate dips during intensive scenes.

For 3840x2160, the data shows no playable configuration. The best result is Low at 26.6 FPS, with Medium at 21.2 FPS, High at 18.2 FPS, and Ultra at 17.8 FPS. These figures are all well below the threshold for smooth gameplay and suggest that 4K is not a realistic target for this hardware combination in Control. The recommendation from the data is unambiguous: run at 1920x1080 with Low settings to maximize playability, accepting that visual fidelity will be minimal but frame rates will be the highest achievable with this GPU.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is built on the TU117 chip with a Turing architecture and a 12 nm process node. Its base clock is 1485 MHz with a boost clock of 1665 MHz, and it has 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units. The memory configuration consists of 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, providing 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth. These specifications place the card in the 43rd percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 8713.

In Control, the GPU's limitations are evident across all resolutions. The data shows that the card's pixel rate of 53.28 GPixel/s and texture rate of 93.24 GTexel/s are insufficient for the game's demands at higher settings. The measured FPS at 1920x1080 Ultra (32.2 FPS) is only slightly better than the 2560x1440 High result (28.2 FPS), indicating that the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth are exhausted regardless of resolution when settings are raised.

The card's nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile (deltaPct -0.4), AMD Radeon 550X (deltaPct -0.4), NVIDIA Quadro P2200 (deltaPct 0.5), and AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 (deltaPct -0.5). These comparisons show that the GTX 1650 sits in a narrow performance band with no significant headroom over its closest competitors. The 4 GB memory capacity is particularly problematic for Control, which is known for using substantial texture data in its environments. The benchmark results suggest that the GPU's memory pressure causes frame rates to plummet when settings are increased, as evidenced by the 17.5 FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured FPS data for this combo is as follows. At 1920x1080, Low settings produce 55.9 FPS, Medium produces 38.4 FPS, High produces 33.6 FPS, and Ultra produces 32.2 FPS. At 2560x1440, Low produces 46.1 FPS, Medium produces 28.7 FPS, High produces 28.2 FPS, and Ultra produces 23.9 FPS. At 3840x2160, Low produces 26.6 FPS, Medium produces 21.2 FPS, High produces 18.2 FPS, and Ultra produces 17.8 FPS.

Analyzing these numbers across the resolution ladder, the drop from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings is 9.8 FPS, and the drop from 1440p to 4K at Low is 19.5 FPS. At Ultra settings, the corresponding drops are 8.3 FPS (1080p to 1440p) and 6.1 FPS (1440p to 4K). This data shows that the absolute FPS penalty for increasing resolution is larger at lower settings, but the relative penalty is more severe at higher settings. For example, moving from 1080p Low to 1440p Low represents a 17.5% reduction, while moving from 1080p Ultra to 1440p Ultra represents a 25.8% reduction.

The min and max FPS values are not provided in the data, so the analysis relies solely on averages. However, the consistent pattern across all 12 measured configurations points to a GPU that is uniformly stressed. The highest average FPS in any configuration is 55.9 at 1080p Low, and the lowest is 17.8 at 4K Ultra. No configuration achieves 60 FPS, and only two configurations exceed 45 FPS (1080p Low at 55.9 and 1440p Low at 46.1).

How This Combo Ranks

In the database for Control, this combo ranks 1579 out of 1636 total tested combinations. This places it in the bottom 3.5% of all combos, which is consistent with the low measured FPS values. The ranking reflects that the GTX 1650's performance is severely inadequate for this game, regardless of the CPU's capabilities.

The Ryzen 7 9800X3D's synthetic benchmarks are exceptional, with an average benchmark score of 37780 and a percentile rank of 90 among all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 6353P (deltaPct -0.1), Intel Core Ultra 5 225 (deltaPct -0.1), Intel Core i9-13900HK (deltaPct -0.6), and Intel Core i5-13600KF (deltaPct -0.7). These rivals all have slightly higher or slightly lower average scores, but the differences are within 1%. Despite this CPU strength, the combo rank in Control is dominated by the GPU's weakness.

The data indicates that pairing a top-tier CPU with an entry-level GPU results in a bottleneck that pins performance to the GPU's limits. The rank of 1579 out of 1636 suggests that most other combos, even those with weaker CPUs, achieve better frame rates in Control because they have more capable graphics cards. This is a clear demonstration that in GPU-bound scenarios, the graphics card is the primary determinant of gaming performance.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D is a 9000 series processor built on the Zen 5 architecture with the Granite Ridge codename. It features 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 4.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The processor has a 96 MB shared L3 cache, which is substantial for gaming workloads. Its synthetic benchmarks are strong: Cinebench R23 multi-core scores 34004, single-core scores 4800, and Geekbench multi-core scores 18413 with single-core at 3341.

In Control, the CPU's role is largely neutralized by the GPU bottleneck. The data shows that frame rates are consistently low across all configurations, and there is no evidence of CPU-related performance cliffs or stutters that would indicate thread saturation. The 8 cores and 16 threads are more than sufficient for Control's threading model, which typically scales well up to 8 threads but does not require the full 16 threads for smooth operation.

The processor's 3DMark scores provide context for its gaming potential: 16-thread score of 10081, 8-thread score of 8252, and single-thread score of 1212. These numbers, combined with the large L3 cache, would normally enable high frame rates in CPU-bound scenarios. However, the measured FPS in Control tops out at 55.9, which is far below what the CPU could support with a more powerful GPU. The conclusion from the data is that the Ryzen 7 9800X3D has ample headroom for this game, but it is wasted due to the GTX 1650's limitations. If the GPU were upgraded, the CPU would not be a limiting factor for achieving significantly higher frame rates in Control.