Control

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X and AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT combination ranks 591st out of 1636 tested combos for Control, placing it in the upper-middle tier of the database. This placement indicates a balanced pairing where neither component drastically bottlenecks the other, though the data shows the system is not near the top of the charts for this title. The combo's percentile positioning aligns with the GPU's overall standing, as the RX 7800 XT sits at the 76th percentile among all GPUs, while the CPU holds a stronger 94th percentile rank. This suggests the graphics card is the primary limiter in this pairing, a conclusion supported by the FPS scaling across resolutions and settings measured in the benchmark rows.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 591 out of 1636 tested combinations puts it in the 64th percentile of all tested systems for Control, meaning roughly one-third of tested combos deliver higher average frame rates in this game. This is a respectable position, but the data reveals that the CPU is not the constraint here. The Ryzen 9 9900X outperforms the GPU in relative terms: the CPU's average benchmark score of 54450 places it in the 94th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU's average score of 32619 puts it in the 76th percentile of all GPUs. The gap between these percentiles strongly indicates that the RX 7800 XT is the limiting component in this pairing.

Looking at the CPU's nearest rivals, the performance deltas are minimal. The Ryzen 9 9900X3D scores 54681, a mere -0.4% difference from the 9900X. The Intel Core i7-14700F trails by 0.7% with a score of 54097, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K and 245KF come in at 55304 and 55421 respectively, putting them 1.5% and 1.8% ahead. These sub-2% differences mean that swapping the 9900X for any of these alternatives would produce nearly identical frame rates in Control, reinforcing that the GPU is the decisive factor.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals are less familiar names but show similarly tight margins. The AMD FirePro S9300 X2 scores 32540 (0.2% behind), the NVIDIA P104-100 scores 32747 (0.4% ahead), the NVIDIA T600 Mobile scores 32849 (0.7% ahead), and the AMD FirePro S10000 scores 32388 (0.7% behind). These deltas are all under one percent, meaning the RX 7800 XT's performance in this benchmark database is essentially on par with these four rivals, and any of them would yield comparable results in Control.

FAQ

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck for this combo in Control?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the limiting component. The CPU sits at the 94th percentile while the GPU sits at the 76th percentile, and the FPS scaling across resolutions (detailed below) shows diminishing returns as resolution increases, which is characteristic of GPU-bound scenarios.

Q: How does the Ryzen 9 9900X compare to its closest rival, the 9900X3D?

A: The 9900X scores 54450 on average benchmarks, while the 9900X3D scores 54681, a delta of -0.4%. This is a negligible difference that would not produce a measurable change in Control's frame rates.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 4K gameplay?

A: At 3840x2160, the High preset delivers 53.9 FPS average, which is playable. The Ultra preset drops to 50 FPS, while Medium yields 63.8 FPS and Low reaches 86.8 FPS. High offers a better balance than Ultra for 4K.

Q: Can this combo hit 144 FPS at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the average FPS is 172.2, and with Medium it is 123.4. Only the Low preset exceeds 144 FPS; High and Ultra fall short at 111.8 and 94.4 FPS respectively.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 1440p at High settings?

A: The average FPS drops from 111.8 at 1920x1080 to 84.4 at 2560x1440 on High settings, a reduction of 27.4 FPS or approximately 24.5%. This is a typical scaling pattern for a GPU-bound workload.

Q: What is the CPU's multi-threaded performance relative to its single-threaded score?

A: The CPU's Cinebench R23 multicore score is 46438, while the single-core score is 6555, giving a scaling factor of roughly 7.1x across its 12 cores and 24 threads. The 3DMark max threads score of 13929 versus single thread score of 1286 shows similar scaling.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS rows provide a clear picture of how each preset performs across resolutions. For 4K gaming, the High preset at 53.9 FPS is the most sensible choice for a smooth experience, as Ultra drops to exactly 50 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold many players prefer. Medium at 63.8 FPS is actually playable at 4K and offers a better frame rate than High, though it comes with visual quality trade-offs. Low at 86.8 FPS is the only 4K preset that approaches high refresh rates, but the visual degradation is substantial.

At 1440p, the situation improves considerably. High delivers 84.4 FPS, Medium 94.2 FPS, and Low 133.4 FPS, all of which are playable. Ultra sits at 71.2 FPS, still above the 60 FPS baseline but noticeably lower than the other presets. For 1440p, the Medium or High presets offer the best balance of visual quality and performance, with High being the recommended choice for most users who want a quality experience without sacrificing frame rate.

At 1080p, all presets are playable, but the differences are stark. Low hits 172.2 FPS, Medium 123.4 FPS, High 111.8 FPS, and Ultra 94.4 FPS. For competitive play or high refresh rate monitors, Low is the only preset that exceeds 144 FPS. For general use, High at 111.8 FPS is the most balanced option, while Ultra remains above 90 FPS for those who prioritize image quality. The recommendation is to use High at 1080p and 1440p, and High or Medium at 4K depending on whether visual fidelity or frame rate matters more.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the data shows a clear progression across presets. Low settings produce an average of 86.8 FPS, Medium drops to 63.8 FPS, High further reduces to 53.9 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 50 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 36.8 FPS, indicating that Control's settings have a significant impact on GPU load at 4K. The jump from Low to Medium costs 23 FPS, while the jump from Medium to High costs 9.9 FPS, and High to Ultra costs 3.9 FPS, showing diminishing returns as settings increase.

At 2560x1440, the same pattern holds but with higher absolute numbers. Low averages 133.4 FPS, Medium 94.2 FPS, High 84.4 FPS, and Ultra 71.2 FPS. The delta between Low and Ultra is 62.2 FPS, which is proportionally larger than at 4K, suggesting the GPU has more headroom at this resolution. The step from Low to Medium is the largest single drop at 39.2 FPS, while Medium to High costs only 9.8 FPS, and High to Ultra costs 13.2 FPS.

At 1920x1080, the numbers are highest overall. Low reaches 172.2 FPS, Medium 123.4 FPS, High 111.8 FPS, and Ultra 94.4 FPS. The total spread from Low to Ultra is 77.8 FPS. The step from Low to Medium is the largest at 48.8 FPS, while Medium to High costs 11.6 FPS, and High to Ultra costs 17.4 FPS. These figures indicate that at 1080p, the CPU has ample headroom, and the GPU is the sole determinant of frame rate across all presets.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K reveals the nature of the bottleneck. At High settings, the average FPS goes from 111.8 at 1920x1080 to 84.4 at 2560x1440 to 53.9 at 3840x2160. This represents a 24.5% reduction from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 36.1% reduction from 1440p to 4K. The total drop from 1080p to 4K is 57.9 FPS, or approximately 51.8% of the original frame rate.

At Low settings, the scaling is different. The average FPS goes from 172.2 at 1080p to 133.4 at 1440p to 86.8 at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 22.5%, while the drop from 1440p to 4K is 34.9%. The total drop is 85.4 FPS, or 49.6%. These percentages are similar to the High settings, confirming that resolution scaling is consistent regardless of preset.

This pattern indicates a GPU-bound scenario. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS would stay roughly constant across resolutions because the CPU work per frame does not change with resolution. Instead, the FPS drops substantially as pixel count increases, which is the hallmark of a GPU-limited workload. The RX 7800 XT's 16 GB of GDDR6 memory and 624.1 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for 4K, but the raw compute power of 37.32 TFLOPS is what limits frame rates at higher resolutions.

CPU Role

The Ryzen 9 9900X is a 12-core, 24-thread processor based on the Zen 5 architecture, built on a 4 nm process. It has a base clock of 4.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz, with 64 MB of shared L3 cache. Its benchmark results show exceptional multi-threaded performance: Cinebench R23 scores 46438 in multicore and 6555 in single-core, while 3DMark shows 13929 in max threads and 1286 in single thread. These numbers place the CPU in the 94th percentile of all CPUs, far above the GPU's 76th percentile.

In the context of Control, these specifications mean the CPU is never the limiting factor. The game is an action-adventure title from 2019, and the measured FPS at 1080p Low reaches 172.2, which is well below what the CPU could theoretically push. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 12552 and the Cinebench R20 multicore score of 19503 indicate that even heavily threaded scenarios are handled with ease. The CPU's ability to maintain high single-thread performance, evidenced by the Geekbench single-core score of 3341, is also relevant since many games rely on a few well-optimized threads.

The CPU's cache configuration, with 80 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per core plus 64 MB of shared L3, provides ample bandwidth for game data. The DDR5 memory support with dual-channel 89.6 GB/s bandwidth further ensures that memory access is not a bottleneck. However, the data shows that even with this strong CPU, the combo's rank in Control is determined by the GPU. The FPS scaling across resolutions and settings is consistent with GPU-bound behavior, and the CPU's percentile advantage over the GPU confirms this conclusion. For this game, the Ryzen 9 9900X provides more than enough computational headroom, and the RX 7800 XT is the component that sets the performance ceiling.