Control

Control is an action-adventure title from 2019 that stresses both the CPU and GPU, and this pairing of an AMD Ryzen 9 7900X with an AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT delivers a measured, data-backed experience. The benchmark data shows a combo that ranks 1422 out of 3720 tested configurations, placing it comfortably in the upper portion of the field. This analysis breaks down exactly what the CPU and GPU contribute, how the parts interact with the game's demands, and which settings provide the best balance of smoothness and fidelity based on the measured FPS rows.

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

The AMD Ryzen 9 7900X is a 12-core, 24-thread processor built on the Zen 4 architecture (codenamed Raphael) and manufactured on a 5 nm process by TSMC. It runs on the AMD Socket AM5 platform with a base clock of 4.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. The chip has a TDP of 170 W and supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, offering 83.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth. It also provides 24 PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU. The cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 64 MB of L3 cache. This processor launched in September 2022 with a launch MSRP of $549.

For a game like Control, which features complex physics and destruction systems, the CPU's threading and single-core speed matter. The 7900X's 12 cores and 24 threads give it substantial parallel processing headroom, which helps maintain consistent frame pacing when the game's physics engine is under load. The high boost clock of 5.60 GHz is critical for the game's main simulation thread, which often cannot utilize all cores efficiently. In synthetic benchmarks, the 7900X scores 1093 in 3DMark single-thread, 2137 in 3DMark 2-thread, and 4151 in 3DMark 4-thread tests. Multi-threaded performance scales well, with scores of 7798 in 3DMark 8-thread and 12536 in 3DMark max-thread tests. Cinebench results reinforce this, with 323 in Cinebench R15 single-core and 4820.5 in R15 multi-core, while R23 shows 2016.5 single-core and 29300 multi-core. Geekbench scores are 2617 single-core and 19267 multi-core.

The CPU's overall average benchmark score is 53288, placing it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals in average score include the AMD EPYC 7313P (53206, 0.2% ahead of the 7900X), the Intel Xeon Phi 7290 (53469, 0.3% behind), the Intel Xeon 634 (52974, 0.6% ahead), and the Intel Core i7-14700F (53620, 0.6% behind). These deltas are all within a single percentage point, indicating that the 7900X sits in a tightly contested performance band for general compute, but its specific combination of high single-thread speed and 24 threads is well-suited to Control's mixed workload.

In this game, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and handle the game's physics and AI. The measured FPS data shows that at 1080p Low, the combo hits 162 FPS average, which is high enough that the CPU is likely not a bottleneck at lower resolutions. As resolution increases to 1440p and 4K, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, but the 7900X's strong single-thread performance ensures that frame times remain stable even when the GPU is saturated. The data suggests that this CPU will not hold back the RX 7700 XT in Control under any of the tested settings.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture (codenamed Wheat Nas) using the Navi 32 chip, manufactured on a 5 nm process by TSMC. It has a base clock of 1435 MHz, a game clock of 2171 MHz, and a boost clock of 2544 MHz. The memory subsystem consists of 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, providing 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU has 3456 shading units, 216 texture mapping units, 96 render output units, and 54 ray tracing cores. Its theoretical performance is 35.17 TFLOPS for FP32, with a pixel rate of 244.2 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 549.5 GTexel/s. The card has a TDP of 245 W, requires a 550 W suggested PSU, uses 2x 8-pin power connectors, and is a dual-slot design measuring 267 mm in length. It launched in September 2023 with a launch MSRP of $449.

For Control, the GPU's 12 GB of VRAM is more than sufficient for the game's textures and effects at all tested resolutions, from 1080p to 4K. The memory bandwidth of 432.0 GB/s is ample for the game's streaming assets and should prevent texture pop-in or stutter. The boost clock of 2544 MHz ensures high fill rates, which is particularly relevant for Control's use of volumetric effects and particle systems. In synthetic benchmarks, the RX 7700 XT scores 3316 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 138383 in Geekbench OpenCL, and 46443 in Geekbench Vulkan. Passmark results include 22547 in G3D and 12912 in GPU compute.

The GPU's average benchmark score is 22549, placing it in the 67th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile (22435, 0.5% ahead of the 7700 XT), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile (22729, 0.8% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (22895, 1.5% behind), and the AMD Radeon RX 5700 (22170, 1.7% ahead). These comparisons show that the 7700 XT performs in line with a desktop RTX 2080 and slightly above a mobile RTX 5060, making it a solid mid-range option for 1440p gaming.

In Control, the GPU is the dominant factor at higher resolutions. At 4K Ultra, the combo drops to 45 FPS average, which is below the 60 FPS threshold for smooth play. At 1440p Ultra, it hits 67 FPS average, which is playable but not ideal for fast-paced action. The 1080p results are strong, with 89 FPS at Ultra and 102 FPS at High, indicating that the GPU can handle the game's maximum settings at lower resolutions. The 12 GB VRAM ensures that even at 4K, the card does not run out of memory, as evidenced by the 52 FPS average at 4K High.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to maintain 60+ FPS on Ultra settings?

A: At 1920x1080 Ultra, the combo averages 89 FPS, and at 2560x1440 Ultra it averages 67 FPS. Both exceed 60 FPS, so 1440p Ultra is the highest resolution that remains above the 60 FPS threshold without lowering settings.

Q: How does the RX 7700 XT compare to the RTX 2080 in raw benchmark score?

A: The RX 7700 XT has an average benchmark score of 22549, while the RTX 2080 scores 22895. The RTX 2080 is 1.5% ahead of the 7700 XT, making them nearly identical in overall compute performance.

Q: Is the Ryzen 9 7900X's single-thread performance strong enough for this game's main simulation thread?

A: Yes, the 7900X scores 1093 in 3DMark single-thread and 2617 in Geekbench single-core. These scores indicate strong single-core capability, which is essential for Control's physics-heavy main thread.

Q: Does the GPU's 12 GB VRAM cause any bottlenecks at 4K?

A: No, the 12 GB VRAM is sufficient. The 4K High preset averages 52 FPS and 4K Medium averages 59 FPS, showing the GPU is the limiting factor rather than memory capacity.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1080p Low, the combo averages 162 FPS, while at 1080p Ultra it averages 89 FPS. This is a 73 FPS difference, or approximately 45% lower performance at Ultra compared to Low.

Q: How does this combo's overall ranking compare to other tested configurations?

A: The combo ranks 1422 out of 3720 tested combos, placing it in the top 38% of all configurations tested for Control.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Ryzen 9 7900X and RX 7700 XT ranks 1422 out of 3720 tested combos in Control. This places it in the top 38% of all configurations, which is a solid mid-to-upper tier result for a mid-range GPU paired with a high-end CPU. The ranking reflects that while the CPU is a top-tier part (91st percentile among all CPUs), the GPU's 67th percentile standing pulls the overall combo down relative to configurations with higher-end graphics cards.

The rank of 1422 suggests that in Control, the GPU is the primary determinant of performance, as the game is visually intensive and scales heavily with GPU rasterization power. The 7900X's 91st percentile CPU score ensures that even at low resolutions where the CPU could become a bottleneck, the combo still performs well—evidenced by the 162 FPS at 1080p Low. However, the RX 7700 XT's 67th percentile GPU score limits the combo's ability to reach the top ranks, which are likely occupied by systems with GPUs in the 90th percentile or above.

Compared to other combos in the database, this pairing is best suited for 1440p gaming, where it can hold above 60 FPS on High settings (77 FPS) and approach it on Ultra (67 FPS). The 4K results are playable but not ideal, with High settings at 52 FPS and Ultra at 45 FPS. The data indicates that this combo is a well-balanced 1440p machine that can also handle 1080p at very high frame rates, but it is not designed for 4K max settings.

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

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, 3840x2160) and four settings presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra), with average FPS recorded for all, and min/max FPS recorded only for Medium settings.

At 1920x1080, the results are as follows:

• Low: 162 FPS average
• Medium: 115 FPS average, with min 98 and max 133
• High: 102 FPS average
• Ultra: 89 FPS average

At 2560x1440:

• Low: 123 FPS average
• Medium: 87 FPS average, with min 74 and max 100
• High: 77 FPS average
• Ultra: 67 FPS average

At 3840x2160:

• Low: 83 FPS average
• Medium: 59 FPS average, with min 50 and max 68
• High: 52 FPS average
• Ultra: 45 FPS average

The frame time data for Medium settings shows that at 1080p, the min FPS of 98 is still well above 60 FPS, ensuring a smooth experience. At 1440p Medium, the min FPS of 74 remains above 60 FPS, but the margin is tighter. At 4K Medium, the min FPS drops to 50, which can cause noticeable stutter in action sequences. The average FPS deltas between settings are consistent: dropping from Ultra to High at 1080p gains 13 FPS (89 to 102), while at 1440p the same step gains 10 FPS (67 to 77), and at 4K it gains 7 FPS (45 to 52). The step from High to Medium provides larger gains: 13 FPS at 1080p (102 to 115), 10 FPS at 1440p (77 to 87), and 7 FPS at 4K (52 to 59). The step from Medium to Low is the largest, with gains of 47 FPS at 1080p (115 to 162), 36 FPS at 1440p (87 to 123), and 24 FPS at 4K (59 to 83).

These numbers show that the performance scaling is resolution-dependent, with lower resolutions benefiting more from setting reductions. The 4K data reveals that even at Low settings, the combo only reaches 83 FPS, which is below the 1080p Ultra result of 89 FPS. This indicates that at 4K, the GPU is heavily taxed, and users should not expect high refresh rates at this resolution.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings preset depends on the target resolution and desired frame rate.

For 1920x1080, the best experience is achieved at High settings, which delivers 102 FPS average. This is well above the 60 FPS threshold and provides a significant visual upgrade over Medium (115 FPS) without the performance cost of Ultra (89 FPS). The 13 FPS difference between High and Ultra is not worth the visual fidelity loss, as High still offers excellent image quality. Players with 144 Hz monitors may prefer Medium at 115 FPS, but High offers a better balance of smoothness and detail.

For 2560x1440, High settings at 77 FPS average is the sweet spot. It stays above 60 FPS and offers good visual quality. Ultra at 67 FPS is also playable, but the 10 FPS penalty may be noticeable in combat sequences. Medium at 87 FPS provides a smoother experience but at a noticeable visual cost. The min FPS of 74 at Medium (from the measured range) suggests that High settings will likely have min FPS in the mid-60s, which is still acceptable. For a 1440p monitor, High is recommended for the best combination of frame rate and fidelity.

For 3840x2160, no preset achieves 60 FPS average. The highest is Low at 83 FPS, followed by Medium at 59 FPS, High at 52 FPS, and Ultra at 45 FPS. For 4K, the recommendation is to use Medium settings, which delivers 59 FPS average with a min of 50 FPS. This is the closest to 60 FPS while maintaining acceptable visual quality. High at 52 FPS is playable but may feel less responsive. Low at 83 FPS sacrifices too much visual quality for a 4K experience. Users with variable refresh rate monitors may tolerate High at 52 FPS, but Medium is the practical choice for 4K.

Overall, the data supports using High settings at 1080p and 1440p for the best balance, and Medium at 4K for the most playable experience. The combo's strength is in 1440p, where it can maintain high frame rates with good visual fidelity, making it a strong choice for gamers with 1440p displays.