Control

# How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 9 7900X paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT lands at rank 1076 out of 1636 tested combos in Control. That places this configuration in the lower-middle portion of the database, which is a meaningful signal given the hardware involved. The CPU is a high-end 7000-series part, but the GPU is a mid-range RDNA 2.0 card, and the ranking reflects that imbalance clearly.

In percentile terms, the CPU sits at the 93rd percentile against all processors, while the GPU sits at the 72nd percentile against all graphics cards. The gap between those two percentiles is the story here: this is a system where the processor is dramatically more capable than the graphics card in raw benchmark terms. The combo ranking of 1076 out of 1636 suggests that for Control specifically, the pairing does not translate the CPU's strength into top-tier gameplay performance. The data indicates that the GPU is likely the constraining factor, which becomes more evident when examining resolution scaling and settings sensitivity in the measured FPS rows.

# GPU Role

The Radeon RX 6650 XT is built on the Navi 23 chip using RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It packs 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units, along with 32 ray tracing cores. The GPU's base clock is 2055 MHz, with a boost clock of 2635 MHz and a game clock of 2410 MHz. Memory is 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 280.3 GB/s of bandwidth.

For Control, these specifications produce a clear pattern in the measured frames. At 4K Ultra, the GPU manages only 31.7 FPS average. Dropping to 4K High raises that to 38.4 FPS, and 4K Medium reaches 43.9 FPS. Even at 4K Low, the card only hits 59.6 FPS. The fact that 4K Low cannot break 60 FPS average indicates the GPU is heavily taxed at this resolution, regardless of settings. The 8 GB VRAM buffer and 128-bit memory bus are likely contributors, as Control's environments can be demanding on memory bandwidth.

At 1440p, the picture improves but remains constrained. Ultra delivers 48.3 FPS, High reaches 59.2 FPS, Medium hits 65.4 FPS, and Low achieves 94.5 FPS. The jump from Ultra to Low at 1440p is substantial — a 46.2 FPS difference — which shows how sensitive this GPU is to settings changes. At 1080p, the card finally shows its strengths: Ultra averages 69.5 FPS, High 78 FPS, Medium 89.2 FPS, and Low 124.8 FPS. These numbers suggest that the RX 6650 XT is best suited for 1080p gaming in this title, with 1440p being playable only at lower presets.

# CPU Role

The Ryzen 9 7900X is a 12-core, 24-thread processor from the 7000 series, built on Zen 4 architecture with the Raphael codename. It uses a 5 nm process at TSMC, with a base clock of 4.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3. Memory support is DDR5 with dual-channel bandwidth rated at 83.2 GB/s.

In synthetic benchmarks, this CPU is formidable. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score is 43695, and single-core is 6168. Geekbench multicore reaches 17830, with single-core at 2952. The CPU's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 (0.1% slower), AMD Ryzen 9 5900XT (0.4% slower), Intel Core i7-13850HX (0.5% slower), and Intel Core i9-13980HX (0.8% slower). These deltas are tight, meaning the 7900X is essentially at parity with those parts in average benchmark score.

For Control, the question is whether this CPU's power is ever the bottleneck. Looking at the measured FPS data, the CPU appears to be more than sufficient. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 124.8 FPS average, which is a high frame rate but not extreme. The fact that 1080p Ultra drops to 69.5 FPS — a 55.3 FPS reduction — strongly suggests the GPU is the limiting factor, not the CPU. If the processor were the constraint, the FPS would remain relatively flat across settings at a given resolution. Instead, the data shows consistent scaling with settings, which is a hallmark of GPU-bound performance. The 7900X's 12 cores and 24 threads are likely underutilized in this scenario, since Control is not known for heavy multi-threading. The CPU's high single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core of 6168) should ensure that even the most demanding gameplay moments are handled without issue.

# Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of how this combo performs across three resolutions and four quality presets. At 1920x1080, the averages are: Low 124.8 FPS, Medium 89.2 FPS, High 78 FPS, and Ultra 69.5 FPS. This represents a 55.3 FPS spread between the lowest and highest settings, with each preset step producing a notable drop. The 1080p Low result is the only configuration in the entire dataset that exceeds 120 FPS, indicating that high-refresh-rate monitors can be satisfied only at the lowest settings.

Moving to 2560x1440, the averages are: Low 94.5 FPS, Medium 65.4 FPS, High 59.2 FPS, and Ultra 48.3 FPS. The spread here is 46.2 FPS, slightly narrower than at 1080p, which suggests diminishing returns as resolution increases. The 1440p Low result is still above 90 FPS, but Medium and High fall into the 60-65 FPS range, and Ultra dips below 50 FPS. This resolution represents a compromise point where the GPU can handle most presets at playable frame rates.

At 3840x2160, the averages are: Low 59.6 FPS, Medium 43.9 FPS, High 38.4 FPS, and Ultra 31.7 FPS. The spread is 27.9 FPS, the smallest of any resolution. This compression of frame rates at 4K indicates that the GPU is saturated even at Low settings — the card simply cannot produce much more than 60 FPS at this resolution, regardless of quality. The jump from 1440p Low (94.5 FPS) to 4K Low (59.6 FPS) is a 34.9 FPS drop, which is substantial. For 4K gaming, only Low settings approach playability, and even then, the average is just under 60 FPS.

# FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Control?

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 is the only resolution where all four presets exceed 60 FPS. At 1440p, only Low and Medium average above 60 FPS (94.5 and 65.4 respectively), while High and Ultra fall short. At 4K, no preset reaches 60 FPS average.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The RX 6650 XT has an average benchmark score of 29024. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6800M, scores 29011, which is essentially identical (0% delta). The AMD Radeon RX 470 scores 28996 (0.1% faster), the Intel Arc A370M scores 29175 (0.5% slower), and the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH scores 29197 (0.6% slower).

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The measured FPS data indicates the GPU is the limiting factor. At 1080p, FPS drops from 124.8 at Low to 69.5 at Ultra, a 55.3 FPS reduction that tracks with GPU workload. If the CPU were the bottleneck, frame rates would remain more constant across settings. The CPU's high benchmark scores (93rd percentile) compared to the GPU's (72nd percentile) further support this conclusion.

Q: What frame rate can be expected at 4K with High settings?

A: The measured average FPS at 3840x2160 with High settings is 38.4 FPS. This is below the 60 FPS threshold typically considered smooth, and even below 40 FPS, which may cause noticeable stuttering in fast-paced action sequences.

Q: How does the CPU's single-thread performance compare to its multicore performance?

A: In Cinebench R23, the CPU scores 6168 in single-core and 43695 in multicore. The single-core score is 14.1% of the multicore score, which reflects the 12-core, 24-thread design. In 3DMark, the single-thread score is 1093, while the max-threads score is 12536.

Q: Is this combo ranked higher or lower than average in the database?

A: The combo ranks 1076 out of 1636 tested combos in Control. This places it in the 34th percentile of all tested configurations, meaning approximately 66% of tested combos performed better in this game.

# Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution and frame rate. At 1920x1080, the High preset delivers 78 FPS average, which is a solid balance between visual quality and performance. The Ultra preset at 69.5 FPS is also viable, offering a modest 8.5 FPS reduction for presumably better image quality. For players with 120 Hz or higher refresh rate monitors, the Low preset at 124.8 FPS is the only option that fully utilizes such displays. The Medium preset at 89.2 FPS is a reasonable middle ground, but High provides a better frame rate-to-quality ratio.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset at 65.4 FPS is the recommended choice for most users, as it stays above 60 FPS while offering moderate visual fidelity. The High preset at 59.2 FPS is just barely below the 60 FPS mark and may be acceptable for those who prioritize visuals over a smooth frame rate. The Low preset at 94.5 FPS is the best choice for competitive play or high-refresh-rate monitors at this resolution. Ultra at 48.3 FPS is not recommended, as the frame rate drops too low for a title with fast-paced combat.

At 3840x2160, only the Low preset at 59.6 FPS approaches playability. The Medium preset at 43.9 FPS is marginal, and High and Ultra at 38.4 and 31.7 FPS respectively are not suitable for a responsive experience. For 4K users, the Low preset is the only viable option, but even then, the frame rate hovers near the edge of acceptability. Overall, the data suggests that this combo is best utilized at 1080p with High or Ultra settings, or at 1440p with Medium settings.

# Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K reveals important information about the limiting component. At Low settings, the averages are 124.8 FPS at 1080p, 94.5 FPS at 1440p, and 59.6 FPS at 4K. This represents a 30.3 FPS drop from 1080p to 1440p (24.3% reduction) and a 34.9 FPS drop from 1440p to 4K (36.9% reduction). The scaling is not linear — the percentage drop increases as resolution rises, which is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario where pixel throughput becomes the primary constraint.

At Ultra settings, the averages are 69.5 FPS at 1080p, 48.3 FPS at 1440p, and 31.7 FPS at 4K. The drops are 21.2 FPS (30.5%) and 16.6 FPS (34.4%) respectively. The percentage reductions are more consistent at Ultra, but the absolute frame rates are much lower. This pattern indicates that the RX 6650 XT is being pushed to its limits at higher resolutions, regardless of the quality preset.

The fact that 4K Low (59.6 FPS) is barely higher than 1080p Ultra (69.5 FPS) is telling. A 10 FPS difference for a 4x increase in pixel count means the GPU is nearly saturated at 4K even at the lowest settings. The CPU, with its 12 cores and 24 threads, is not showing signs of bottlenecking — if it were, the 1080p frame rates would be capped at a lower value, and the scaling from 1080p to 4K would be more gradual. Instead, the steep drops at each resolution step point squarely at the GPU as the performance limiter. For users seeking higher frame rates at 1440p or 4K, the data suggests that a more powerful GPU would be necessary, while the Ryzen 9 7900X has ample headroom to support it.