Control

The AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D and AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT pairing delivers a distinctly capable experience in Control, a 2019 Action Adventure title that leans heavily on both CPU physics and GPU rendering. The data shows a combo that scales predictably across resolutions, with the 1080p results suggesting a CPU that can keep pace with a high-refresh display, while the 4K figures reveal the GPU’s limitations at the most demanding settings. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS, the role of each component, and what the numbers imply for gameplay at different quality presets.

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

The AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D is an 8-core, 16-thread processor from the 9000 series, built on the Zen 5 architecture using the Granite Ridge codename. It operates on a 4 nm process node from TSMC, with a base clock of 4.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. This CPU has a substantial 96 MB of shared L3 cache, alongside 80 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per core. The multi-threaded design is evident in its benchmark scores, including a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 22807 and a single-core score of 2228, while the Passmark multithread score reaches 41318.

In the context of Control, a game that features dynamic destruction and complex physics interactions, the CPU’s role is to manage these calculations without becoming a bottleneck. The measured FPS at 1080p with Low settings hits 179 frames per second, which is the highest figure in the entire dataset. This number strongly suggests that the Ryzen 7 9850X3D provides ample headroom for the game’s logic, as the frame rate is far beyond what most displays can show. Even at 1440p Low, the average FPS remains at 136, indicating that the CPU is not the limiting factor at lower graphical loads. The 16 threads allow for efficient distribution of the game’s background tasks, while the large L3 cache helps with data locality for the engine’s object updates. The data implies that for players targeting high refresh rates at 1080p, this CPU will not hold back the RX 6800 XT, as the 179 FPS result at Low settings is a clear indicator of CPU capability. The processor’s position in the global percentile is 92 out of 100, placing it well above average, and its average benchmark score of 58386 puts it in close competition with the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M, which scores 58323 with a delta of 0.1%, and the Intel Core i9-14900 at 58115 with a 0.5% delta. These rival scores confirm that the 9850X3D is a high-end desktop part, well-suited to the demands of modern action titles.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Ryzen 7 9850X3D and the RX 6800 XT is ranked 852 out of 2888 tested combos in Control. This percentile position, roughly in the top 30% of all tested systems, is a strong indicator of overall performance. A rank of 852 means there are 851 other combinations that produce higher average frame rates across the tested scenarios, but it also places this setup ahead of more than 2000 others. This is a notable achievement when considering that the GPU, the RX 6800 XT, is from the previous RDNA 2.0 generation and is now marked as end-of-life, while the CPU is a newer 2026 release. The data shows that the pairing is balanced, with neither component drastically dragging down the other in the aggregate ranking.

To contextualize this rank, consider the GPU’s nearest rivals. The RX 6800 XT has an average benchmark score of 48477, with the NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile scoring 47743 (a 1.5% delta) and the Intel Arc A550M scoring 49737 (a -2.5% delta). The CPU’s rivals are similarly close in synthetic tests, but the in-game rank of 852 suggests that Control responds well to the combination of the 9850X3D’s strong single-thread performance and the RX 6800 XT’s raw rasterization power. The rank is not merely an average of component scores; it reflects the actual measured FPS in this specific game. The fact that this combo breaks into the top 30% implies that Control is not extremely sensitive to any single bottleneck, allowing both the CPU and GPU to contribute effectively. For comparison, the rank of 852 out of 2888 places this system in a solidly upper-mid tier, meaning that while there are faster setups, this configuration is far from entry-level. The data indicates that users with this combo can expect a smooth experience at most settings, with the rank serving as a summary of the measured FPS across all resolution and quality combinations.

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

The measured FPS data shows a clear trend of decreasing performance as resolution increases, which is typical for a system where the GPU becomes more stressed at higher pixel counts. At 1080p High, the average FPS is 113, while at 1440p High it drops to 86, and at 4K High it falls further to 58. This represents a 24% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a 49% drop from 1080p to 4K. The scaling is not perfectly linear, but the pattern is consistent with a GPU-bound scenario at higher resolutions. The CPU’s role becomes less critical as resolution increases, because the frame rate is increasingly limited by the number of pixels the GPU can render.

Looking at the Low settings, the difference is even more pronounced. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 179 FPS, but this drops to 136 FPS at 1440p Low and 92 FPS at 4K Low. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 24%, and from 1080p to 4K is 49%, mirroring the percentage drops seen at High settings. This consistency suggests that the scaling factor is primarily due to resolution, not the quality settings themselves. However, the fact that the FPS at 4K Low (92) is higher than the FPS at 1080p Ultra (98) is a key indicator. It shows that the graphical settings have a significant impact on performance, but the resolution still dictates the overall ceiling. The data implies that at 1080p, the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU enough frames to reach very high numbers, but as the resolution climbs, the RX 6800 XT’s pixel throughput becomes the limiting factor. The 4K Medium result of 65 FPS and 4K Ultra of 50 FPS further confirm this, as the GPU struggles to maintain high frame rates at the highest pixel count. This analysis points to the GPU being the primary constraint at 4K, while the CPU remains a capable partner at lower resolutions.

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

The dataset provides exact average FPS figures for three resolutions and four quality presets, with some additional min and max values for the Medium settings. At 1920x1080, the performance ranges from a high of 179 FPS at Low settings to a low of 98 FPS at Ultra. The High preset averages 113 FPS, while Medium averages 127 FPS. For the Medium preset at 1080p, the measured min FPS is 108 and the max is 146, indicating a variance of 38 FPS during gameplay. This suggests that even at Medium settings, there are moments of significant frame rate fluctuation, though the average remains well above 60.

Moving to 2560x1440, the average FPS figures are lower across the board. Low settings produce 136 FPS, High produces 86 FPS, Medium produces 96 FPS, and Ultra produces 74 FPS. The Medium preset at 1440p has a min of 82 and a max of 111, which is a slightly narrower range than at 1080p, but still shows a 29 FPS spread. At 3840x2160, the averages drop further: Low settings yield 92 FPS, High yields 58 FPS, Medium yields 65 FPS, and Ultra yields 50 FPS. For 4K Medium, the min is 55 and the max is 75, representing a 20 FPS variance. The data shows a consistent hierarchy where lower settings always produce higher FPS, and lower resolutions always produce higher FPS. The Ultra preset at 4K is the only scenario that falls below the 60 FPS threshold, averaging 50 FPS, which may feel less smooth on a standard 60 Hz display. The High preset at 4K, at 58 FPS, is also just below 60, while the Medium preset at 4K, at 65 FPS, crosses that line. This breakdown provides a clear picture: 1080p and 1440p are generally playable at all settings, while 4K requires careful setting selection to maintain smoothness.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT is a RDNA 2.0 architecture GPU, built on the Navi 21 chip using a 7 nm process from TSMC. It has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 512.0 GB/s. The GPU’s base clock is 1825 MHz, with a boost clock of 2250 MHz and a game clock of 2015 MHz, while the memory runs at an effective 16 Gbps. The card features 4608 shading units, 288 texture mapping units, and 128 raster operation units, along with 72 ray tracing cores. Its peak FP32 performance is 20.74 TFLOPS, which is substantial for a previous-generation card.

In Control, the GPU’s role is to handle the rendering of the game’s environments, which include complex lighting, particle effects, and the destruction physics that the game is known for. The 16 GB of VRAM is more than sufficient for this game at any resolution, as Control does not typically require that much memory even at 4K Ultra. The data supports this, as the performance drops from 1080p to 4K are consistent with a GPU that is limited by its compute throughput rather than its memory capacity. The RX 6800 XT’s benchmark scores, such as a Passmark G3D score of 24980 and a Geekbench OpenCL score of 171304, place it in the 85th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile with a score of 47743 (1.5% delta) and the Intel Arc A550M with 49737 (-2.5% delta), showing that the 6800 XT is competitive with mobile workstation and mid-range desktop parts. The 4K Ultra average of 50 FPS is a direct reflection of the GPU’s limits when pushed to maximum settings at the highest resolution. The fact that 4K Low reaches 92 FPS shows that the GPU has headroom, but it is the combination of high resolution and high settings that taxes the RDNA 2 architecture. The 72 ray tracing cores are present, but the game’s implementation of DX12 Ultimate features may not be fully optimized for this older architecture, potentially explaining why the Ultra preset at 4K falls below 60 FPS. Overall, the GPU is a strong performer for 1440p gaming and can handle 4K with adjusted settings, but it is clearly the component that determines the upper bound of performance in this title.

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

The measured FPS data allows for specific recommendations based on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For 1920x1080, all presets deliver average FPS above 98, meaning even Ultra settings provide a smooth experience on a 60 Hz or 144 Hz monitor. The Medium preset at 127 FPS with a min of 108 FPS is particularly attractive, as it offers a high frame rate with a relatively small variance, ensuring consistent performance. For players with a 144 Hz display, the Low preset at 179 FPS is the only way to fully utilize the refresh rate, but the jump to High at 113 FPS is still acceptable for most. The Ultra preset at 98 FPS is playable but not ideal for high refresh displays, and the data suggests that High or Medium provides a better balance of visual quality and smoothness at 1080p.

At 2560x1440, the recommendation shifts slightly. The High preset averages 86 FPS, which is above 60 and suitable for most gaming experiences. The Medium preset at 96 FPS is even better, and with a min of 82 FPS, it maintains a high level of consistency. The Ultra preset at 74 FPS is also viable, but the average is lower than Medium and High, and the visual difference between High and Ultra may not be worth the performance cost. For 1440p, the data suggests Medium or High as the best presets, as they both stay comfortably above 60 FPS while offering good visual fidelity. The Low preset at 136 FPS is an option for competitive play, but it sacrifices too much visual quality for the marginal FPS gain.

At 3840x2160, the situation is more constrained. The Medium preset averages 65 FPS, which is just above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay, and its min of 55 FPS indicates occasional dips below that line. The High preset at 58 FPS is slightly below 60, which may be noticeable on a standard 60 Hz display. The Ultra preset at 50 FPS is the only one that clearly underperforms, and it is not recommended for a smooth experience. The Low preset at 92 FPS is the best option for 4K if frame rate is the priority, but it significantly reduces visual quality. For most users at 4K, the Medium preset appears to be the sweet spot, as it provides the best balance between acceptable FPS and graphical settings. The data indicates that the RX 6800 XT can handle 4K, but only with settings reduced from the maximum.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 1080p with High settings?

A: The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 with High settings is 113 frames per second.

Q: Does the CPU or GPU limit performance at 4K resolution?

A: The data shows a significant drop in FPS from 1080p to 4K at all settings, with the 4K Ultra average falling to 50 FPS. This indicates that the GPU is the limiting component at 4K, as the CPU’s performance at lower resolutions is sufficient to reach high frame rates.

*Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded for this combo in Control?*

A: The highest average FPS is 179, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

Q: How does the combo rank compared to other tested systems in this game?

A: The combo is ranked 852 out of 2888 tested combos, placing it in the top third of all tested systems for Control.

Q: Is the 4K Ultra preset playable with this hardware?

A: The 4K Ultra preset averages 50 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold commonly considered smooth. The Medium preset at 4K averages 65 FPS and is a better option for consistent performance.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for the 1440p Medium preset?

A: At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the minimum FPS is 82, while the maximum is 111 and the average is 96.