Control

Control is a 2019 action-adventure title that stresses both CPU and GPU, and the combination of AMD Ryzen 9 9900X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 shows a clear split between high refresh rate 1080p capability and 4K struggles. The data indicates a system that can deliver smooth gameplay at lower resolutions but requires settings adjustments to maintain playable frame rates at higher fidelity levels. This analysis draws exclusively from measured FPS rows, hardware specifications, and benchmark scores in the provided fact pack.

FAQ

Q: What is the average frame rate at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings?

A: The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings is 68 frames per second. This is the highest quality preset tested at that resolution, and while playable, it is notably lower than the 124 FPS average seen with Low settings.

Q: How does the RTX 5050’s 8 GB VRAM affect 4K performance?

A: At 3840x2160, the highest average FPS recorded is 63 with Low settings. With High and Ultra settings, the averages drop to 40 and 35 FPS respectively, suggesting that the 8 GB GDDR6 memory and 320.0 GB/s bandwidth are limiting factors at this resolution when higher quality assets are loaded.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 1440p gaming?

A: At 2560x1440, Medium settings produce an average FPS of 67 with a minimum of 57 FPS, which is the only preset at this resolution with min/max data. High settings yield 59 FPS average, and Low yields 94 FPS. Medium offers a balanced experience, though Low provides higher headroom.

Q: How does the Ryzen 9 9900X compare to its nearest rival in CPU benchmarks?

A: The Ryzen 9 9900X has an average benchmark score of 57498, which is 0.1% lower than the AMD EPYC 9015 (57555) and 0.2% higher than the AMD EPYC 7313 (57399). It sits 1.1% below the Intel Core i9-14900 (58115) and 1.4% below the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M (58323).

Q: What is the combo’s rank among all tested CPU-GPU combinations?

A: This specific pairing of Ryzen 9 9900X and RTX 5050 is ranked 1756 out of 2888 total tested combos in Control. This places it in the lower-middle portion of the database, reflecting the GPU’s mid-range standing relative to the CPU’s high-end position.

Q: Are there any settings where the minimum FPS is recorded?

A: Yes, the only rows with minimum FPS values are at Medium settings across all resolutions. At 3840x2160, the minimum is 38 FPS; at 2560x1440, it is 57 FPS; and at 1920x1080, it is 75 FPS. All other settings presets lack min/max data in the fact pack.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data reveals a consistent pattern: Low settings always deliver the highest average frame rates, followed by Medium, High, and Ultra in descending order. At 1920x1080, Low settings achieve 124 FPS average, which is more than double the 68 FPS average at Ultra. For players prioritizing smoothness over visual fidelity, Low at 1080p is the clear choice, offering a high refresh rate experience that the RTX 5050 can sustain without issue. Medium at 1080p provides 88 FPS average with a minimum of 75 FPS, which still meets the threshold for most 75Hz monitors and offers better visual quality than Low.

At 2560x1440, the situation is more nuanced. Low settings produce 94 FPS average, which is excellent for a 1440p panel. Medium settings drop to 67 FPS average with a 57 FPS minimum, which is still acceptable for 60Hz displays but leaves little headroom for demanding scenes. High settings at 59 FPS average are borderline, and Ultra at 52 FPS average will likely feel stuttery in action sequences. The best experience at 1440p is Low settings for competitive play or Medium for a balanced visual upgrade, given that the minimum FPS for Medium (57) is still above the 50 FPS threshold that many consider minimum playability.

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves a fully smooth experience. Low settings reach 63 FPS average, which is technically playable but not ideal for a genre that benefits from fast response times. Medium drops to 45 FPS average with a 38 FPS minimum, indicating noticeable stutter. High and Ultra are worse at 40 and 35 FPS averages respectively. For 4K, the only viable option is Low, and even then, players should expect occasional dips below 60 FPS. If the display supports it, using a lower resolution like 1440p with Medium settings would provide a better overall experience than any 4K preset.

The data suggests that Medium is the sweet spot for this combo across all resolutions, offering the only set of minimum FPS values in the dataset, which implies more stable performance. At 1080p, Medium’s 75 FPS minimum ensures consistent frame pacing. At 1440p, Medium’s 57 FPS minimum is the lowest recorded value that still stays above 55 FPS. At 4K, Medium’s 38 FPS minimum is low, but it is still higher than the average FPS of High and Ultra, making it the most consistent high-quality option. Players with adaptive sync displays may prefer Medium at their native resolution, while those on 1440p or 1080p monitors should consider Low for maximum frame rates.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is a 12-core, 24-thread processor based on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge), manufactured on a 4 nm process by TSMC. Its base clock is 4.40 GHz with a boost clock of 5.60 GHz, and it has a 64 MB L3 cache. In Control, a game that scales reasonably well with multi-threading, the CPU’s role is to feed the GPU with enough draw calls and physics calculations to avoid bottlenecking. The benchmark data shows the CPU’s multi-core strength: Cinebench R23 multicore score of 32172 and Geekbench multicore score of 22174. These numbers indicate strong parallel processing capability, which is relevant for Control’s destructible environments and particle effects.

However, the measured FPS results reveal that the CPU is not the limiting factor in most scenarios. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the average FPS is 124, which approaches the refresh rate of many gaming monitors. This high frame rate indicates that the Ryzen 9 9900X can handle the game’s CPU-bound tasks at lower resolutions where GPU load is lighter. The single-thread performance, as shown by Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2253 and Geekbench single-core score of 3010, ensures that the game’s main thread is well serviced. Control is known for having a primary game thread that can bottleneck on weaker CPUs, but the 9900X’s 5.60 GHz boost clock mitigates this.

Compared to its nearest rivals, the 9900X’s average benchmark score of 57498 is statistically tied with the AMD EPYC 9015 (57555, -0.1% delta) and AMD EPYC 7313 (57399, +0.2% delta). It is 1.1% slower than the Intel Core i9-14900 and 1.4% slower than the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M. These deltas are minor, suggesting that in CPU-bound scenarios, the 9900X performs similarly to those server and high-end desktop parts. In Control, this means that at 1080p Low settings, the CPU is capable of pushing over 120 FPS, but the RTX 5050’s limits become apparent at higher settings and resolutions.

The 24 threads are more than Control can fully utilize, but they provide headroom for background tasks and future game patches. The 120 W TDP and DDR5 memory support with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth are typical for a modern desktop CPU, and the PCIe Gen 5 interface with 24 lanes ensures ample bandwidth for the RTX 5050, which uses PCIe 5.0 x8. The CPU’s percentile ranking of 92 out of all CPUs tested places it in the top 8% of processors, reinforcing that the Ryzen 9 9900X is not a bottleneck in this system.

How This Combo Ranks

This combination of AMD Ryzen 9 9900X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 is ranked 1756 out of 2888 tested combos in Control, placing it at approximately the 60th percentile of all tested configurations. This ranking reflects the imbalance between the high-end CPU and the mid-range GPU. The Ryzen 9 9900X is a top-tier processor with a percentile of 92 among all CPUs, while the RTX 5050 has a percentile of 66 among all GPUs. The combo rank is lower than both individual percentiles, indicating that the GPU holds back the system’s overall performance in this game.

The GPU’s average benchmark score of 21035 places it just below the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL (21153, -0.6% delta) and above the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (20713, +1.6% delta). It is also 1% slower than the AMD Radeon HD 8970M and 1.6% slower than the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile. These rival comparisons show that the RTX 5050 performs in the range of older mid-range GPUs, which explains why the combo rank is not higher despite the powerful CPU. In Control, the GPU’s 8 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory bus are significant constraints at higher resolutions.

The rank of 1756 out of 2888 means that 1132 combos perform better, and 1755 perform worse. This places the combo in the lower half of the distribution, but not at the bottom. The data suggests that with a more powerful GPU, the Ryzen 9 9900X could achieve much higher frame rates, but as configured, the RTX 5050 limits the system to mid-range performance. For context, the CPU’s nearest rivals (EPYC 9015, EPYC 7313) have similar benchmark scores, so pairing them with the same GPU would likely yield similar combo ranks. The CPU is not the differentiator here; the GPU is.

In practical terms, this combo is suitable for 1080p gaming at high refresh rates with Low or Medium settings, as shown by the 124 FPS and 88 FPS averages at those presets. At 1440p, it can maintain playable frame rates with Medium settings (67 FPS average), but Ultra is not recommended. At 4K, even Low settings (63 FPS average) are borderline. The combo rank reflects this reality: it is a capable 1080p machine, a moderate 1440p machine, and a weak 4K machine.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 is based on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture (chip GB207), manufactured on a 5 nm process by TSMC. It has 2560 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores. The GPU’s base clock is 2317 MHz with a boost clock of 2572 MHz, and it has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 320.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This memory configuration is the primary constraint in Control, as the game’s high-resolution textures and effects can exceed 8 GB at 4K with high settings.

The GPU’s FP32 performance is 13.17 TFLOPS, and its pixel rate is 82.30 GPixel/s with a texture rate of 205.8 GTexel/s. These figures place it in the mid-range tier of GPUs, which is corroborated by its benchmark scores: 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2502 and Passmark G3D score of 17326. The GPU’s percentile of 66 among all GPUs indicates it outperforms two-thirds of the database, but it lags behind higher-end cards. In Control, this translates to the measured FPS numbers: the GPU is capable of 124 FPS at 1080p Low but only 35 FPS at 4K Ultra.

The RTX 5050’s nearest rivals in terms of average benchmark score are the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL (21153, -0.6% delta), AMD Radeon HD 8970M (21237, -1% delta), AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (20713, +1.6% delta), and NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile (21379, -1.6% delta). These are all older or mobile parts, indicating that the RTX 5050 is positioned as a budget desktop GPU. In Control, the GPU’s role is to render the game’s physics-based environments and particle effects, which is demanding on both rasterization and memory bandwidth.

The 130 W TDP and 300 W suggested PSU are modest, and the dual-slot cooler with a single 8-pin power connector is typical for this class. The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which includes features like ray tracing and mesh shaders that Control can use, but the 8 GB VRAM limits the effectiveness of high-quality textures. The boost clock of 2572 MHz is high for a mid-range card, helping to maintain frame rates at lower resolutions where memory bandwidth is less of an issue. At 1080p, the GPU’s 320.0 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient, but at 4K, it becomes a bottleneck.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the RTX 5050 delivers its best performance. Low settings produce an average FPS of 124, which is ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors. Medium settings yield 88 FPS average with a minimum of 75 FPS and a maximum of 101 FPS, providing a smooth experience with moderate visual upgrades. High settings drop to 78 FPS average, which is still playable but less consistent. Ultra settings average 68 FPS, which is the lowest at this resolution but still above the 60 FPS threshold. The data shows a clear progression: each step up in settings costs roughly 10-20 FPS on average.

At 2560x1440, the performance scales down predictably. Low settings achieve 94 FPS average, which is excellent for 1440p. Medium settings produce 67 FPS average with a minimum of 57 FPS and a maximum of 77 FPS, making it the only preset with recorded min/max data at this resolution. This indicates that Medium has more consistent frame pacing than High or Ultra, which lack min/max figures. High settings average 59 FPS, which is just below the 60 FPS target, and Ultra averages 52 FPS, which is noticeably less smooth. The gap between Low and Medium is 27 FPS, while the gap between Medium and Ultra is 15 FPS, suggesting diminishing returns at higher settings.

At 3840x2160, the GPU struggles to maintain playable frame rates. Low settings average 63 FPS, which is the only preset that exceeds 60 FPS. Medium settings drop to 45 FPS average with a minimum of 38 FPS and a maximum of 52 FPS, indicating significant frame drops in demanding scenes. High settings average 40 FPS, and Ultra averages 35 FPS, both of which are below the threshold for smooth gameplay. The data shows that 4K is only viable with Low settings, and even then, the 63 FPS average leaves little headroom for fluctuations. For 4K gaming, players would need to reduce resolution or accept lower frame rates.

Comparing across resolutions, the RTX 5050’s performance scales roughly proportionally with pixel count. At Low settings, 1080p (124 FPS) is 1.3x faster than 1440p (94 FPS) and 1.97x faster than 4K (63 FPS). At Medium settings, 1080p (88 FPS) is 1.31x faster than 1440p (67 FPS) and 1.96x faster than 4K (45 FPS). At High settings, 1080p (78 FPS) is 1.32x faster than 1440p (59 FPS) and 1.95x faster than 4K (40 FPS). At Ultra settings, 1080p (68 FPS) is 1.31x faster than 1440p (52 FPS) and 1.94x faster than 4K (35 FPS). This consistent scaling indicates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck across all settings, with the CPU providing sufficient headroom.

The minimum FPS data at Medium settings provides additional insight into frame stability. At 1080p, the minimum is 75 FPS, which is 85% of the average (88 FPS). At 1440p, the minimum is 57 FPS, which is 85% of the average (67 FPS). At 4K, the minimum is 38 FPS, which is 84% of the average (45 FPS). This suggests that the GPU maintains similar frame pacing across resolutions, with the minimum always about 15-16% below the average. For players seeking consistent performance, Medium settings at any resolution will provide the most predictable frame times, based on the available data.