Control

The AMD Ryzen 9 5900X paired with the AMD Radeon RX 9060 delivers a solid, if not spectacular, 1440p experience in Control, with 1080p performance that is more than adequate for high-refresh-rate displays. Benchmark results show a system that is clearly GPU-bound at higher resolutions, while the twelve-core processor provides ample headroom to prevent frame pacing issues even at lower settings.

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

The AMD Ryzen 9 5900X is a 12-core, 24-thread processor based on the Zen 3 architecture, codenamed Vermeer. It operates on the AMD Socket AM4 platform with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. This is a 7 nm part from TSMC, featuring 8,300 million transistors across a dual-die design with a total of 64 MB of L3 cache. The processor supports DDR4 memory via a dual-channel bus, providing 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth, and its 105 W TDP indicates a high-performance desktop part. It was released in November 2020 with a launch MSRP of $549.

In Control, the CPU's role is primarily to feed the GPU with draw calls and handle the game's physics and AI systems. The 5900X’s benchmark scores illustrate its capability. In Cinebench R23, it scores 16262 points in multi-core and 1527 points in single-core. Its Geekbench scores are 14118 multi-core and 2083 single-core. These results place the processor in the 87th percentile of all CPUs, indicating top-tier performance that is unlikely to bottleneck the GPU in this title. The PassMark multi-thread score of 39002 and single-thread score of 3469 further corroborate its strength.

Comparing the 5900X to its nearest rivals in the database, the data shows a tight grouping. The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H has an average score of 41263, which is 0.3% higher than the 5900X. The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H and AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 score 41215 and 41208, respectively, both 0.4% higher. The Intel Core i7-14650HX sits slightly behind at 41576, which is -0.5% relative to the 5900X. These sub-1% differences are negligible in gaming scenarios. The 5900X’s high single-thread performance, as evidenced by its 3dmark_single_thread score of 941, ensures that Control's primary game thread is well-served. The processor's 12 cores and 24 threads provide massive headroom, meaning that even if the game engine is well-optimized for multi-threading, this CPU will not be the limiting factor in the measured frame rates.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture with the Navi 44 chip, codenamed Strix Point. It is a 4 nm part from TSMC with 29,700 million transistors on a 199 mm² die. The GPU operates with a base clock of 1700 MHz, a game clock of 2400 MHz, and a boost clock of 2990 MHz. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The card has 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units, along with 28 ray tracing cores. Its compute power is rated at 21.43 TFLOPS for FP32 operations. The GPU has a 132 W TDP and requires a single 8-pin power connector with a suggested 300 W power supply.

In the context of Control, the RX 9060 is the primary determinant of frame rate. The game's visual effects, particularly its use of ray tracing and particle physics, are demanding on the GPU. The GPU's benchmark scores provide context for its performance. In 3DMark Steel Nomad (DX12), it scores 3322, and in Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 39476. Its PassMark G3D score is 17631. These results place the GPU in the 59th percentile of all GPUs, which is a mid-range positioning.

The nearest rivals in the database show the RX 9060's standing. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti has an average score of 16129, which is -0.7% relative to the RX 9060's avgBenchmarkScore of 16014. The AMD Radeon R9 370X and AMD Radeon RX 7700 are 1% higher, with scores of 15862 and 15852 respectively. The AMD Radeon Pro W5500 is 2.1% higher at 15679. These deltas are small, indicating that the RX 9060 performs in the same class as these cards. However, the 8 GB VRAM capacity is a crucial factor for Control. At 4K Ultra settings, the game's texture memory requirements can exceed this limit, potentially causing stuttering or texture pop-in, which is reflected in the measured FPS drops. The GPU's 128-bit memory bus and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth are adequate for 1080p and 1440p, but the 4K results show the card struggling to maintain playable frame rates.

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

The measured FPS data reveals a clear trend: the system is heavily GPU-bound, especially as resolution increases. At 1080p Low settings, the average frame rate is 130 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops this to 98 FPS, a 24.6% decrease. At 4K Low, the average falls to 66 FPS, a further 32.7% drop from 1440p. This scaling pattern is typical of a GPU-limited scenario; the CPU can handle the frame generation at lower resolutions, but the GPU's pixel throughput becomes the bottleneck.

The scaling for High settings shows a similar pattern. At 1080p High, the average is 82 FPS. At 1440p High, it drops to 62 FPS (a 24.4% decrease), and at 4K High, it falls to 42 FPS (a 32.3% decrease from 1440p). The consistent percentage drops across resolutions indicate that the GPU's compute units and memory bandwidth are the limiting factors. The CPU's performance, as evidenced by its high benchmark scores, is not degrading with resolution; it is the GPU that is being taxed more heavily.

This behavior confirms that the Ryzen 9 5900X has ample headroom. Even at 1080p Low, where the CPU would be most likely to bottleneck, the 130 FPS average suggests the processor is keeping up without issue. The scaling from 1080p to 4K is almost purely a function of the GPU's rendering workload. The RX 9060's 8 GB VRAM also plays a role at 4K, as the game's assets at that resolution may require more memory than available, leading to the lower frame rates and potential frame time spikes, as indicated by the min FPS of 40 at 4K Medium.

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

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of performance across nine different configurations. At 1920x1080, the system performs well across all settings. With Low settings, the average FPS is 130. Moving to Medium, the average drops to 92 FPS, with a minimum of 78 and a maximum of 106. At High settings, the average is 82 FPS. The Ultra preset yields an average of 71 FPS. These numbers show that at 1080p, the system is capable of high refresh rates on lower presets and remains playable even at the highest settings.

At 2560x1440, the performance scales down as expected. The Low preset delivers an average of 98 FPS. The Medium preset averages 70 FPS, with a minimum of 59 and a maximum of 80. The High preset falls to an average of 62 FPS. The Ultra preset produces an average of 54 FPS. This resolution is the sweet spot for this combo, as even the Ultra preset maintains an average above 50 FPS, which is generally considered the threshold for smooth gameplay in a title like Control.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly overburdened. The Low preset averages 66 FPS, which is playable but not ideal. The Medium preset averages 47 FPS, with a minimum of 40 and a maximum of 54, indicating noticeable frame dips. The High preset averages 42 FPS, and the Ultra preset drops to an average of 36 FPS. These results show that 4K gaming is not a viable option with this GPU, as even the lowest settings struggle to maintain a consistent 60 FPS, and higher settings produce a stuttery experience.

The data also shows a clear trend in the delta between presets. At every resolution, the jump from Low to Medium incurs a significant FPS cost, while the jump from High to Ultra is less severe. This suggests that the Medium and High presets offer a better balance of visual quality and performance than Ultra, which is confirmed by the FPS numbers. For example, at 1440p, the difference between High (62 FPS) and Ultra (54 FPS) is only 8 FPS, while the difference between Low (98 FPS) and Medium (70 FPS) is 28 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X and the AMD Radeon RX 9060 is ranked 1632 out of 2888 tested combos in Control. This places the system in the 43rd percentile of all tested hardware combinations. This ranking is a holistic view of performance across all resolutions and settings, and it indicates that while this setup is not a top-tier performer, it is also not at the bottom of the barrel.

Given the GPU's 59th percentile ranking among all GPUs and the CPU's 87th percentile ranking, the combo's overall rank of 1632 suggests that the GPU is the primary limiting factor. A better GPU would likely push this combo much higher in the rankings, as the CPU has significant headroom. The data shows that the system is capable of handling 1080p and 1440p gaming with high frame rates, but the 4K results drag down its overall standing. The combo's rank is a reflection of the RX 9060's mid-range positioning; it is not a high-end card, but it is capable of delivering a good experience at mainstream resolutions.

The ranking also implies that many other tested combos, likely those with higher-end GPUs, outperform this pairing. However, the 5900X CPU's strength ensures that this combo is not held back by processor limitations. In scenarios where the GPU is not the bottleneck, such as at 1080p with less demanding games, this combo would perform admirably. In Control, the GPU is almost always the limiting factor, as shown by the resolution scaling analysis. Therefore, the combo's rank of 1632 is a direct consequence of the RX 9060's performance ceiling.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal experience for this combo depends heavily on the target resolution. For 1080p, the High preset is the best choice. It delivers an average of 82 FPS, which is smooth and responsive, while still providing a significant visual upgrade over Medium. The Ultra preset at 71 FPS is also playable, but the 11 FPS loss for the extra visual fidelity is not worth it for most players. The Medium preset at 92 FPS is a good alternative for those who prioritize frame rate, but High offers the best balance.

For 1440p, the Medium preset is the recommended starting point. It averages 70 FPS, with a minimum of 59, which ensures a mostly smooth experience. The High preset at 62 FPS is also viable, but it is closer to the 60 FPS threshold. The Ultra preset at 54 FPS is not recommended, as the frame rate is too low for a fast-paced action game. The Low preset at 98 FPS is an option for competitive play, but it sacrifices too much visual quality. The Medium preset provides a good compromise between the game's atmospheric visuals and playable performance.

For 4K, the data suggests that this combo is not suitable for a high-quality experience. The Low preset averages 66 FPS, which is technically playable, but the visual quality is severely degraded. The Medium preset at 47 FPS is borderline unplayable due to frame pacing issues, as indicated by the 40 FPS minimum. The High and Ultra presets at 42 and 36 FPS respectively are not recommended. If a user must play at 4K, the Low preset is the only viable option, but it is not an enjoyable experience. The best advice based on the data is to play at 1440p with the Medium or High preset. This provides a stable frame rate that is well within the playable range, and the visual fidelity is significantly better than 1080p. The 8 GB VRAM is sufficient for these settings, avoiding the potential stuttering that occurs at 4K.