Control

Control with the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 presents a data profile where the CPU’s substantial multi-threaded headroom is largely secondary to the GPU’s rendering workload. The Ryzen 9 9900X, a 12-core, 24-thread Zen 5 part on the AMD Socket AM5 platform, operates with a base clock of 4.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. This architectural foundation delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 46438 and a single-core score of 6555, positioning it in the 94th percentile among all tested CPUs. However, the actual gameplay metrics for Control indicate that this processing power is not the primary constraint, as the frame rates scale almost entirely with GPU-bound settings and resolution changes rather than CPU frequency limits.

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

The Ryzen 9 9900X’s specification sheet suggests a processor built for heavy parallel workloads, with its 12 cores and 24 threads supported by 64 MB of shared L3 cache. In synthetic benchmarks, this translates to a PassMark multi-thread score of 54643 and a Geekbench multi-core score of 19827, placing it statistically even with its nearest rivals: it trails the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D by a mere 0.4% and the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K by 1.5% in average benchmark score. For Control, a title from 2019, the game engine rarely leverages such thread counts; the data shows that the CPU’s role is to maintain a high enough ceiling that the GPU becomes the limiting factor. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 12552 and max-thread score of 13929 illustrate strong scaling, but the measured FPS across all resolutions and settings does not show any scenario where the CPU would bottleneck, as even the lowest frame rate recorded (54.1 FPS at 4K Ultra) is well above typical CPU-thrash territory.

The CPU’s single-thread performance, evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 6555 and a PassMark single-thread score of 4672, is more relevant to Control’s frame pacing. The game’s physics and game logic often rely on a few primary threads, and the 9900X’s high boost clock ensures that these threads are not starved. Yet, the benchmark data reveals that the delta in FPS between Low and Ultra settings at the same resolution is far larger than any variance attributable to CPU clock scaling. For instance, at 1080p, the Low preset yields 194.5 FPS while Ultra drops to 107.2 FPS, a 45% reduction that points directly at GPU shading and memory workload, not CPU core count. The processor’s 120W TDP and 4 nm process node allow sustained boost clocks, but the game does not appear to push the CPU to its limits, as the FPS does not scale linearly with the 5.60 GHz boost capability when compared to lower resolutions.

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

Q: How does the Ryzen 9 9900X compare to its closest competitor in synthetic CPU benchmarks?

A: The Ryzen 9 9900X averages a benchmark score of 54450, which is 0.4% lower than the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D’s 54681 and 0.7% higher than the Intel Core i7-14700F’s 54097. It sits in the 94th percentile of all CPUs, with the data showing a negligible performance gap to its immediate rivals.

Q: What is the highest average frame rate achieved by this combo in Control, and at what settings?

A: The highest recorded average FPS is 194.5, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with the Low settings preset. This is nearly double the 4K Ultra result of 54.1 FPS, demonstrating the GPU’s scaling with resolution.

Q: Does the RTX 4070’s benchmark percentile align with its in-game performance?

A: The RTX 4070 holds an 81st percentile rank among all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 37283, yet its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 (37507, 0.6% higher) and the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A (38008, 1.9% higher). In Control, the GPU delivers playable frame rates at 1440p High (94 FPS) and 4K High (62.5 FPS), indicating that its percentile rank understates its gaming capability in this title.

Q: How much does the CPU’s multi-threaded performance influence the frame rates in Control?

A: The data shows minimal influence. The CPU’s Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 19503 and PassMark physics score of 3381 are strong, but the FPS differences between settings (e.g., 69 FPS at 4K Medium vs 96.8 FPS at 4K Low) are far more attributable to GPU load, as the CPU’s 24 threads remain underutilized in this game.

Q: What is the combo’s ranking among all tested systems for this game?

A: The combo ranks 383rd out of 1636 total tested combinations, placing it in the top 23% of all systems. This rank reflects the balance between the CPU’s high percentile (94th) and the GPU’s slightly lower percentile (81st).

Q: Is there a significant FPS jump between Medium and High settings at 1440p?

A: Yes, the average FPS drops from 104.5 at Medium to 94 at High, a 10% decrease. This is a smaller relative drop than the 22% decrease from High (94 FPS) to Ultra (83 FPS), suggesting diminishing returns at higher presets.

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

The measured FPS data across resolutions reveals a classic GPU-bound scaling pattern, with the RTX 4070 acting as the primary limiter. At 1080p High, the combo produces 123.8 FPS; moving to 1440p High reduces this to 94 FPS (a 24% drop), and 4K High further reduces it to 62.5 FPS (a 50% drop from 1080p). This consistent halving of frame rates with each doubling of pixel count (from 1080p to 4K is four times the pixels) indicates that the GPU’s 12 GB of GDDR6X memory and 504.2 GB/s bandwidth are being saturated. The CPU’s role is negligible here, as the Ryzen 9 9900X’s 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth and dual-channel DDR5 support are far more than adequate for the game’s data streaming needs.

Looking at the Low preset, the scaling is even more pronounced: 194.5 FPS at 1080p, 149.1 FPS at 1440p, and 96.8 FPS at 4K. The fact that 4K Low (96.8 FPS) still exceeds 1080p Ultra (107.2 FPS) by a small margin, while 4K Ultra (54.1 FPS) is nearly half of 1080p Ultra, demonstrates that the GPU’s shading units (5888) and ray tracing cores (46) are the bottleneck, not the CPU’s 12 cores. The RTX 4070’s FP32 throughput of 29.15 TFLOPS is the theoretical peak, but the game’s implementation of visual effects at Ultra settings likely stresses the memory bus and ROPs (64) more than raw compute. The data shows that resolution scaling is smooth and predictable, with no anomalous spikes that would suggest a CPU limitation, confirming that the 9900X is a passive enabler in this configuration.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

With a rank of 383 out of 1636 tested combinations, this pairing of the Ryzen 9 9900X and RTX 4070 slots into the upper quartile of systems tested for Control. This ranking is notable because it aligns more closely with the GPU’s percentile (81st) than the CPU’s (94th), reinforcing the interpretation that the RTX 4070 is the defining component for this game’s performance. The 1636 total combos include a wide range of hardware pairings, and being in the top 23% indicates that this system delivers above-average frame rates, particularly at 1440p where the average FPS across settings (ranging from 83 to 149.1) is consistently smooth. The rank also suggests that while the CPU is overkill for this title, it does not hurt the combo’s standing, as the 0.4% delta to the 9900X3D in synthetic benchmarks would translate to negligible FPS differences in Control.

Comparing this rank to the CPU’s rivals, the data implies that a cheaper processor would likely achieve a similar frame rate, but the 9900X’s 94th percentile ensures no CPU-related frame drops in demanding scenes. The GPU’s nearest rivals, such as the RTX 4080 Mobile (which scores 2.2% higher in synthetic benchmarks), would likely push the combo higher in the rankings if paired with the same CPU, but the current configuration’s 383rd place is a solid result for a 1440p-focused or 4K-capable system. The ultra preset at 4K (54.1 FPS) is the only setting that falls below the 60 FPS threshold, indicating that the combo’s rank is partially limited by the RTX 4070’s memory bandwidth at extreme resolutions.

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

The benchmark data provides a clear hierarchy for optimizing the experience in Control with this hardware. For 1080p displays, the High preset at 123.8 FPS offers a superior balance, as it is only 15% slower than Low (194.5 FPS) but provides substantially better visual quality. The Ultra preset at 107.2 FPS is still smooth, but the 13% drop from High to Ultra is not justified by the marginal visual gains typically seen in this game. At 1440p, the Medium preset at 104.5 FPS is the recommended starting point, as it stays above 100 FPS while the High preset (94 FPS) and Ultra (83 FPS) both dip lower. The Low preset at 149.1 FPS is unnecessarily fast for most gameplay, sacrificing too much visual fidelity for a frame rate that exceeds most monitors’ refresh rates.

For 4K resolution, the choice is more constrained. The High preset at 62.5 FPS is the only preset that approaches a stable 60 FPS, while Medium (69 FPS) offers a slight edge in frame rate but with reduced detail. The Ultra preset at 54.1 FPS is below the 60 FPS target and is not recommended for a consistent experience. The Low preset at 96.8 FPS is playable but visually sparse, and the data suggests that High is the best compromise for 4K, as it maintains playability without the severe quality cut of Low. Across all resolutions, the Medium preset provides the most consistent experience relative to its FPS cost, with the 1440p Medium result of 104.5 FPS being the standout figure for a high-refresh-rate monitor. The data does not include min FPS values, so these recommendations rely solely on average FPS, but the pattern is clear: this combo favors Medium to High settings, with Ultra reserved for 1080p or lower-demanding scenes.