Control

Control pairs AMD’s 12-core Ryzen 9 9900X with NVIDIA’s RTX 4080 in a 2019 action-adventure title that still stresses modern hardware. The measured rows show a system that delivers high refresh rates at 1440p and remains comfortably playable at 4K, though the scaling behavior exposes where the bottleneck shifts. This analysis uses only the provided benchmark data to interpret the combo’s strengths, its position among 3,720 tested configurations, and the practical settings choices for each resolution.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K is steep but predictable, and the pattern reveals a GPU-bound scenario at higher resolutions. At Low settings, the average FPS falls from 246 at 1920x1080 to 186 at 2560x1440, a 24.4% reduction, then to 126 at 3840x2160, another 32.3% drop from the 1440p figure. This is a classic sign that the RTX 4080’s rendering workload, not the CPU, is the limiting factor as pixel count rises. The 9900X’s 12 cores and 5.60 GHz boost clock have ample headroom to feed frames at 1080p, but the GPU’s fill rate and memory bandwidth become the ceiling once the resolution climbs.

At Ultra settings, the same trend holds but with lower absolute numbers: 135 FPS at 1080p, 102 at 1440p, and 69 at 4K. The percentage drop from 1080p to 1440p is 24.4%, nearly identical to Low’s 24.4% drop, suggesting that the GPU’s compute units are scaling linearly with pixel count regardless of the preset. From 1440p to 4K Ultra, the reduction is 32.4%, matching the Low preset’s 32.3% drop almost exactly. This consistency implies that the game’s engine is not introducing CPU-side bottlenecks at any resolution tested; the RTX 4080’s 16 GB of GDDR6X memory and 716.8 GB/s bandwidth are being utilized fully as resolution increases.

The Medium preset offers the only complete data with min and max FPS values, and it shows the scaling pattern clearly. At 4K Medium, the average is 89 FPS with a 76 FPS minimum and 103 FPS maximum, while at 1440p Medium, the average jumps to 132 FPS with a 113 FPS minimum and 152 FPS maximum. The 1080p Medium row shows 175 FPS average with a 149 FPS minimum and 201 FPS maximum. The gap between min and max FPS widens at lower resolutions—52 FPS at 1080p versus 27 FPS at 4K—indicating that at 1080p, the CPU is occasionally stalling the GPU, while at 4K, the GPU’s consistent workload smooths out frame delivery.

The data suggests that for this combo, 1440p is the sweet spot where the GPU is still fully engaged but the CPU’s high single-thread performance (3dmark_single_thread score of 1286) prevents any frame pacing issues. At 1080p, the 246 FPS Low result shows the system can exceed 240 Hz, but the variance in Medium preset hints that CPU overhead becomes relevant. At 4K, the RTX 4080’s 48.74 TFLOPS of FP32 compute is the clear limiter, as the 9900X’s 64 MB L3 cache and 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth are more than sufficient for the game’s physics and logic.

How This Combo Ranks

Among 3,720 tested combos, this pairing of the Ryzen 9 9900X and RTX 4080 ranks 241st overall in Control. That places it in the top 6.5% of all configurations tested, a strong result for a game that can be demanding on both CPU and GPU. The rank reflects the balance between the 9900X’s 92nd percentile CPU score and the RTX 4080’s 86th percentile GPU score, but the game’s engine appears to weight GPU performance more heavily at the resolutions measured.

The CPU’s nearest rivals show that the 9900X is not the absolute fastest in synthetic tests, but it is close. The AMD EPYC 9015 scores 57,555 versus the 9900X’s 57,498, a delta of -0.1%, meaning the 9900X is essentially tied with that server chip. The Intel Core i9-14900 scores 58,115, which is 1.1% higher, while the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M scores 58,323, 1.4% higher. These small deltas in CPU benchmarks do not translate into significant FPS differences in Control, as the game’s frame rates are more dependent on the RTX 4080’s performance.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals are all within a few percentage points. The RTX 4080 SUPER scores 54,209, just 0.1% higher than the RTX 4080’s 54,247, making them effectively identical in synthetic tests. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X scores 54,828, 1.1% higher, and the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB scores 55,698, 2.6% higher. These rivals do not appear in the measured FPS data, so the comparison is limited to synthetic scores, but the deltaPct values suggest that the RTX 4080’s real-world Control performance is unlikely to be meaningfully different from the 4080 SUPER.

The rank of 241 is notable because it is higher than the average of the individual component percentiles might suggest. A 92nd percentile CPU and 86th percentile GPU would typically land around the 88th percentile, but the 241st rank out of 3,720 is the 93.5th percentile. This implies that the combination is well-matched for Control’s specific workload, where the CPU’s high boost clock and the GPU’s large memory pool work together efficiently. The 16 GB VRAM is particularly relevant, as Control’s textures at Ultra settings can consume significant memory, and the RTX 4080’s 16 GB capacity avoids any swapping that would hurt frame times.

GPU Role

The RTX 4080’s specifications are central to understanding the measured FPS. Its chip, AD103 on TSMC’s 5 nm process, contains 45,900 million transistors across a 379 mm² die. The boost clock of 2505 MHz allows it to reach 48.74 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is the raw compute power that drives Control’s particle effects and physics-based destruction. The 16 GB of GDDR6X memory operates at 22.4 Gbps effective, delivering 716.8 GB/s of bandwidth over a 256-bit bus. This bandwidth is critical for 4K textures, and the data supports that the GPU is not memory-starved: the 4K Ultra average of 69 FPS is within the expected range for this class of GPU.

The RTX 4080’s 76 RT cores and 304 tensor cores are present in the specs, but Control’s measured FPS rows do not explicitly test ray tracing, so their impact is not directly quantified. The pixel rate of 280.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 761.5 GTexel/s are more relevant to the rasterized rendering that the benchmark data reflects. These rates explain why the GPU scales nearly perfectly with resolution: doubling the pixel count from 1080p to 4K quadruples the fill rate requirement, but the RTX 4080’s 112 ROPs and 304 TMUs handle the load, as seen in the 246 FPS Low at 1080p dropping to 126 FPS Low at 4K.

The GPU’s average benchmark score of 54,247 places it at the 86th percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rival, the RTX 4080 SUPER, is only 0.1% faster in synthetic tests. In Control specifically, the data shows that the RTX 4080 is the bottleneck at 4K, as evidenced by the consistent 32% FPS drop from 1440p to 4K across all settings. This is not a deficiency but rather a sign that the CPU is never holding it back. The 320 W TDP and triple-slot cooler are not reflected in FPS numbers, but the sustained performance across all 12 measured rows indicates no thermal throttling under load, which would otherwise show up as inconsistent averages.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its highest frame rates. Low settings average 246 FPS, which is exceptionally high and suggests the game is CPU-limited at this point, as the RTX 4080’s GPU utilization would be low. Medium averages 175 FPS with a minimum of 149 FPS and maximum of 201 FPS, showing a 52 FPS spread that indicates some CPU frame pacing variance. High averages 156 FPS, and Ultra averages 135 FPS. The drop from Low to Ultra is 111 FPS, or 45.1%, which is a larger percentage than at higher resolutions, reinforcing that the CPU’s single-thread performance (3dmark_single_thread score of 1286) is the limiting factor at 1080p.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates remain high but the GPU starts to take over. Low averages 186 FPS, Medium averages 132 FPS with a minimum of 113 FPS and maximum of 152 FPS, High averages 118 FPS, and Ultra averages 102 FPS. The Medium preset’s min-max spread narrows to 39 FPS, compared to 52 FPS at 1080p, which suggests that the GPU’s more consistent workload is smoothing out frame delivery. The drop from Low to Ultra is 84 FPS, or 45.2%, similar to the 1080p percentage, but the absolute numbers are lower, indicating that the GPU’s fill rate is becoming more significant.

At 3840x2160, the RTX 4080 is clearly the dominant component. Low averages 126 FPS, Medium averages 89 FPS with a minimum of 76 FPS and maximum of 103 FPS, High averages 79 FPS, and Ultra averages 69 FPS. The Medium preset’s min-max spread is 27 FPS, the tightest of any resolution, which indicates that the GPU is consistently saturated and there is no CPU-induced stutter. The drop from Low to Ultra is 57 FPS, or 45.2%, maintaining the same proportional reduction across resolutions. This consistency across all three resolutions and four settings is a strong indicator of a well-balanced system where neither component is severely underutilized.

Settings Recommendations

For 4K, the Ultra preset at 69 FPS average is playable but close to the edge of smoothness for fast-paced action. The High preset at 79 FPS average provides a 14.5% improvement over Ultra while likely offering visually similar fidelity, as the difference between High and Ultra in most games is subtle. The Medium preset at 89 FPS average is the best choice for 4K if the user prioritizes frame rate over maximum detail, as it delivers a 29% improvement over Ultra and maintains a 76 FPS minimum, which keeps it above the 60 FPS threshold for most displays. Low at 126 FPS is not recommended for 4K because the visual quality loss is significant, but it shows the headroom available if needed.

At 1440p, the Ultra preset at 102 FPS average is the recommended sweet spot, as it provides a high refresh rate experience without sacrificing detail. The High preset at 118 FPS is a 15.7% improvement over Ultra and could be preferable for 144 Hz displays, but the visual difference between High and Ultra is often minor. Medium at 132 FPS and Low at 186 FPS are available for competitive play, but the GPU’s performance at this resolution means that even Ultra is well above the 60 FPS baseline. The 113 FPS minimum on Medium shows that frame pacing is solid, so any preset from Medium upward will feel smooth.

At 1080p, the Ultra preset at 135 FPS average is the best balance for most users, as it maximizes visual quality while still exceeding 120 FPS. The High preset at 156 FPS is a 15.6% improvement and is ideal for 144 Hz monitors, while Medium at 175 FPS and Low at 246 FPS cater to high-refresh displays. The Medium preset’s 149 FPS minimum is the only row at 1080p with a recorded floor, and it shows that even under heavy load, the system stays above 144 FPS. For esports or competitive play, Low at 246 FPS is the clear choice, but for a single-player action-adventure game like Control, Ultra or High provides a better experience.

CPU Role

The Ryzen 9 9900X’s 12 cores and 24 threads are more than sufficient for Control, which is a game that does not scale beyond a handful of threads. The 4.40 GHz base clock and 5.60 GHz boost clock, combined with a 3dmark_single_thread score of 1286, ensure that the game’s primary thread is never starved. The 64 MB L3 cache, split across two CCDs, provides fast access to frequently used data, and the 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth over DDR5 dual-channel is adequate for feeding the GPU at all resolutions.

The synthetic benchmarks show that the 9900X is a top-tier CPU, with a 3dmark_max_threads score of 13,929 and a cinebench_r23_multicore score of 32,172. Its 92nd percentile ranking among all CPUs places it above the vast majority of processors, and its nearest rivals are all within 1.4% of its average benchmark score. In Control, however, the CPU’s role diminishes as resolution increases. At 1080p Low, the 246 FPS average is likely CPU-limited, as the GPU would be capable of higher frame rates if the CPU could feed them faster. At 4K Ultra, the 69 FPS average is entirely GPU-bound, and the CPU is idle for much of the frame.

The 9900X’s performance in Control is consistent with its 3dmark_2_threads score of 2519, which reflects the single-threaded nature of the game’s engine. The 24 threads are not fully utilized, but the high boost clock ensures that the few active threads run at maximum speed. The CPU’s 120 W TDP and AM5 socket are not directly relevant to FPS, but the architecture’s efficiency (4 nm process from TSMC) means that power draw does not limit sustained boost clocks during long gaming sessions. The data shows no evidence of CPU-induced frame drops, as the min FPS values on Medium presets align with the GPU’s expected performance envelope.