Control

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for Control with the AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 shows a steep and consistent performance drop as resolution climbs from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 61 FPS at 1080p to 46 FPS at 1440p, then down to 31 FPS at 4K. That represents a roughly 24% reduction moving from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 33% drop when stepping up to 4K. The scaling pattern is nearly linear, which points to the GTX 1070 being the primary limiting factor as pixel count increases.

Looking at Low settings, the same trend appears but with higher absolute numbers. The average FPS goes from 97 at 1080p to 73 at 1440p, and finally 49 at 4K. The percentage losses are similar: about 25% from 1080p to 1440p, then 33% from 1440p to 4K. This consistent scaling ratio across different quality presets strongly suggests that the GPU's raw throughput—not CPU limitations or memory bandwidth—is what governs performance in this title at these resolutions. If the Ryzen 7 9850X3D were the bottleneck, you would expect the 4K results to degrade less relative to 1080p, since higher resolutions shift the workload more heavily onto the graphics card.

Ultra settings tell the clearest story. At 1080p Ultra, the average FPS is 53; at 1440p Ultra, it drops to 40; and at 4K Ultra, it falls to 27. The 4K Ultra result is below the 30 FPS threshold that many players consider the minimum for playable action, and the 1440p Ultra number is also marginal. The gap between High and Ultra at each resolution is relatively small—around 8 FPS at 1080p, 6 FPS at 1440p, and 4 FPS at 4K—which suggests that Ultra presets in Control add visual fidelity without a disproportionate cost, but the GTX 1070 simply lacks the headroom to make them viable at higher resolutions.

What this scaling data reveals about the limiting component is unambiguous: the GTX 1070 is the bottleneck across all tested configurations. The Ryzen 7 9850X3D, with its 8 cores and 16 threads, has ample processing power for this game, and the CPU's benchmark scores (including a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 22807 and a PassMark single-thread score of 4704) indicate it is far from being a constraint in a title like Control. The measured FPS at 4K Ultra—just 27 FPS average—is a clear indicator that the Pascal GPU's 6.463 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 256.3 GB/s memory bandwidth are insufficient for this workload at that resolution.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 is the decisive factor in these benchmark results. This Pascal-generation GPU, built on TSMC's 16 nm process with 7,200 million transistors, offers 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, yielding 256.3 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock is 1506 MHz with a boost clock of 1683 MHz, and it has 1920 shading units, 120 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. These specifications are modest by modern standards, and the benchmark scores reflect that: the GPU holds a 47th percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 9780.

The VRAM situation is worth noting. Control is a game that can use significant memory at high resolutions, and the GTX 1070's 8 GB frame buffer is adequate for 1080p and 1440p but becomes a potential constraint at 4K, especially with higher quality settings. The measured data supports this: at 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 27, and at 4K High, it is 31, but dropping to Low at 4K raises the average to 49 FPS. That dramatic improvement from Low to High at 4K (49 vs 31 FPS) indicates that texture and shading quality settings are heavily taxing the GPU's memory subsystem, not just its compute units.

The GTX 1070's nearest rivals in the benchmark database include the AMD FirePro W5000 (with a deltaPct of -0.2, meaning the GTX 1070 scores 0.2% lower) and the NVIDIA Quadro M2000M (deltaPct -0.5). The NVIDIA Tesla M10 is 0.6% ahead, and the Tesla C2070 is 0.7% ahead. These are all older or workstation-class parts, which underscores that the GTX 1070 is now at the lower end of the performance spectrum. In Control specifically, this translates to playable frame rates at 1080p with medium to high settings, but the GPU struggles to maintain smooth performance at 1440p and cannot achieve acceptable results at 4K with high-quality presets.

The clock speeds and memory configuration of the GTX 1070 also matter when considering overclocking headroom, though the data here is based on stock settings. The 1506 MHz base and 1683 MHz boost clocks are typical for this generation, and the 8 Gbps effective memory speed is standard for GDDR5. The fact that the GPU's PassMark G3D score is 13498 and its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 1082 places it in a performance tier where it can handle esports titles and older AAA games comfortably, but Control—released in 2019—pushes it toward its limits at higher resolutions.

FAQ

Q: Can this combination run Control at 4K with playable frame rates?

A: No, not with any quality preset that looks good. The measured data shows 4K High averaging 31 FPS, 4K Medium averaging 35 FPS, and 4K Ultra averaging just 27 FPS. Only 4K Low reaches 49 FPS average, but that requires sacrificing most visual quality. For a consistent 60 FPS experience at 4K, this GPU is not sufficient.

Q: What is the best resolution for this setup?

A: The data indicates 1920x1080 is the sweet spot. At 1080p, the GTX 1070 delivers 61 FPS on High settings and 69 FPS on Medium, with Low hitting 97 FPS and Ultra managing 53 FPS. These are playable numbers, with High or Medium offering the best balance of visual quality and smoothness.

Q: How does the Ryzen 7 9850X3D affect performance in Control?

A: The CPU's role is minimal in these results. With 8 cores, 16 threads, and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz, it has far more processing power than Control requires. The CPU's benchmark scores (Cinebench R23 multi-core 22807, PassMark multithread 41318) show it is not the limiting factor. The performance differences between resolutions are entirely attributable to the GPU.

Q: Is the GTX 1070's 8 GB VRAM enough for Control?

A: At 1080p and 1440p, yes. The measured FPS at 1440p High (46 FPS) and 1440p Medium (52 FPS) are playable, and the VRAM is sufficient for these settings. At 4K, the 8 GB frame buffer appears to be a constraint, as evidenced by the steep drop to 31 FPS at High and 27 FPS at Ultra, which may indicate memory pressure or bandwidth limitations.

Q: What settings should I use at 1440p?

A: Medium settings at 1440p yield 52 FPS average, with minimums at 44 FPS and maximums at 60 FPS. This is the most stable option. High settings drop to 46 FPS average, and Low reaches 73 FPS. If you prioritize smoothness over visuals, Low or Medium are the safer choices; if you can tolerate occasional dips, High is acceptable.

Q: How does this GPU compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The GTX 1070 is essentially tied with the AMD FirePro W5000 (0.2% slower), NVIDIA Quadro M2000M (0.5% slower), NVIDIA Tesla M10 (0.6% faster), and Tesla C2070 (0.7% faster). This means it sits in a narrow performance band where small differences between parts are negligible, and all are similarly limited in Control at high resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete set of measured frame rates for Control with this configuration is as follows. At 1920x1080, Low settings produce an average of 97 FPS, Medium produces 69 FPS (with a minimum of 58 and maximum of 79), High produces 61 FPS, and Ultra produces 53 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 44 FPS, which is substantial but expected for a GPU of this tier.

Stepping up to 2560x1440, the numbers compress. Low averages 73 FPS, Medium averages 52 FPS (minimum 44, maximum 60), High averages 46 FPS, and Ultra averages 40 FPS. The delta between Low and Ultra is now 33 FPS, indicating that the GPU is beginning to hit its limits as pixel count increases. The minimum frame rate at Medium—44 FPS—is still acceptable for most players, but it shows that even mid-range settings can cause noticeable dips.

At 3840x2160, the results become marginal for anything above Low. Low averages 49 FPS, Medium averages 35 FPS (minimum 30, maximum 40), High averages 31 FPS, and Ultra averages 27 FPS. The Medium preset's minimum of 30 FPS is exactly at the threshold of what many consider playable, and the High and Ultra results fall below that. The 4K data shows the GTX 1070 is not a viable option for this game at that resolution unless you are willing to accept Low settings and still deal with frame times that may feel inconsistent.

The pattern across all resolutions is consistent: Low settings provide roughly 1.6 to 1.8 times the frame rate of Ultra settings. At 1080p, that ratio is 97/53 (1.83); at 1440p, it is 73/40 (1.83); and at 4K, it is 49/27 (1.81). This uniformity suggests that the performance scaling is driven by the GPU's compute and memory resources being consumed proportionally by the quality settings, with no sudden bottlenecks appearing at any specific resolution.

Settings Recommendations

For this specific hardware combination, the measured FPS data points to a clear set of recommendations based on resolution. At 1920x1080, High settings (61 FPS average) are the best choice for most players, as they offer a solid balance of visual quality and smoothness. If you prefer a higher frame rate for fast-paced action, Medium (69 FPS with a 58 FPS minimum) is a safer option that stays above 60 FPS for the majority of the time. Ultra (53 FPS) is playable but not consistently smooth, and Low (97 FPS) is only worth considering if you are chasing maximum refresh rates.

At 2560x1440, the data suggests Medium is the sweet spot. The 52 FPS average with a 44 FPS minimum is acceptable for a game like Control, which is not a competitive shooter. High (46 FPS) is also viable if you have a G-Sync or FreeSync monitor that can smooth out frame rate fluctuations, but the lower minimums may cause noticeable stutter on fixed-refresh displays. Low (73 FPS) is the only preset that consistently stays above 60 FPS at this resolution, so if smoothness is your priority, that is the choice.

At 3840x2160, the recommendation is straightforward: avoid this resolution unless you are willing to use Low settings (49 FPS average) and accept that you will not get a locked 60 FPS. Medium (35 FPS) is technically playable but will feel sluggish, and High (31 FPS) or Ultra (27 FPS) are not recommended for anything other than screenshots or slow-paced exploration. The data strongly indicates that 4K is beyond the GTX 1070's capabilities for this game, regardless of the CPU paired with it.

The overall best experience per the measured rows is 1920x1080 with High settings. This configuration delivers 61 FPS average, which is above the 60 FPS threshold that most PC gamers target, while still providing the visual fidelity that Control's atmospheric environments benefit from. If you have a 1440p monitor, Medium settings at that resolution (52 FPS) is a reasonable compromise, but you will be sacrificing some smoothness compared to the 1080p experience.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D plays a supporting role in these Control benchmark results, and the data shows it is not a limiting factor at any resolution. This processor features 8 cores and 16 threads based on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge), with a base clock of 4.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. It has 96 MB of shared L3 cache, which is substantial for gaming workloads, and its benchmark scores are strong: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 22807 and a single-core score of 2228, along with a PassMark multithread score of 41318 and a single-thread score of 4704.

The CPU's performance relative to its nearest rivals reinforces that it is more than adequate for Control. The Intel Core i9-14900 is 0.5% ahead in average benchmark score, while the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 is 0.7% behind, and the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M is 0.1% behind. These are all high-end or workstation-class processors, and the Ryzen 7 9850X3D sits comfortably among them, ranking in the 92nd percentile of all CPUs. This means it has far more single-thread and multi-thread performance than a game like Control can utilize, especially when paired with a GPU that is the clear performance ceiling.

Evidence for the GPU being the bottleneck comes from the resolution scaling pattern. If the CPU were limiting performance, you would see similar FPS numbers across 1080p, 1440p, and 4K, since the CPU workload does not increase significantly with resolution. Instead, the FPS drops consistently as resolution rises—from 61 FPS at 1080p High to 46 FPS at 1440p High to 31 FPS at 4K High—which is a classic sign of GPU-bound rendering. The Ryzen 7 9850X3D's 120 W TDP and 4 nm TSMC process node (with 8,315 million transistors on a 70.6 mm² die) indicate it is a modern, efficient processor that can handle any game, but in this combination, its capabilities are largely untapped.

The practical implication is that if you were to upgrade the GPU to something faster, the Ryzen 7 9850X3D would be able to feed it without becoming a new bottleneck. The CPU's high boost clock of 5.60 GHz and large L3 cache are well-suited for gaming, and its PassMark data compression score of 474501 and integer math score of 123140 show it excels at the kind of general-purpose tasks that game logic and physics require. In Control specifically, the CPU is not the reason for any frame rate limitation; the GTX 1070's 6.463 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is simply insufficient for the game's demands at higher resolutions.