Control

# Control with AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D + AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT

Control, Remedy’s supernatural action-adventure from 2019, presents an interesting challenge for this pairing. The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D is a 12-core, 24-thread processor based on Zen 5 architecture, while the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT is a mid-range RDNA 2.0 graphics card with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory. The measured frame rates across resolutions and settings reveal a system where the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions, while the CPU’s strong single-thread performance keeps 1080p gameplay fluid. The data shows a combo that ranks 2054th out of 2888 tested combinations in this game, placing it in the lower-middle portion of the database. This makes sense for a pairing that pairs a top-tier processor with a mainstream GPU — the processor has headroom to spare, but the graphics card limits overall performance in most scenarios.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Control?

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 is the only resolution where all settings presets achieve playable frame rates. At Low settings, the average FPS is 118, while Ultra still delivers 65 FPS. At 2560x1440, only Low (89 FPS) and Medium (63 FPS) break the 60 FPS threshold, and at 3840x2160, only Low (60 FPS) reaches that mark.

Q: How does the RX 6600 XT compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The GPU’s average benchmark score of 24442 places it 0.7% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 and 1.1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER, while sitting 0.8% behind the Intel Arc A350M. This suggests the RX 6600 XT performs in a tight cluster with these cards, despite being from a different generation than some.

Q: What is the CPU’s single-thread performance relative to its multi-thread performance?

A: The Ryzen 9 9900X3D scores 6739 in Cinebench R23 single-core and 47737 in multi-core, showing strong scaling. Its single-thread score of 1269 in 3DMark single-thread and 3041 in Geekbench single-core indicate capable per-core performance, which benefits games like Control that rely on fewer threads for physics and logic.

Q: Does the 8 GB VRAM on the RX 6600 XT limit performance at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, the average FPS drops to 38 on High and 33 on Ultra. The 8 GB GDDR6 memory, paired with a 128-bit bus providing 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, likely contributes to these lower results, although the data does not isolate VRAM capacity as the sole cause — the GPU’s overall compute power is also a factor.

Q: What is the combo’s percentile ranking among all CPUs and GPUs?

A: The CPU ranks in the 91st percentile among all CPUs, while the GPU sits in the 70th percentile among all GPUs. This disparity highlights a significant performance gap between the two components, which is reflected in the measured FPS where the GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

Q: How does the Ryzen 9 9900X3D compare to the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF?

A: The Ryzen 9 9900X3D has an average benchmark score of 54762, which is 0.6% lower than the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF’s 55093. This places the two processors in a virtual tie, despite the Ryzen having more cores (12 vs. the Intel’s unspecified count in the data).

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT, built on the Navi 23 chip with RDNA 2.0 architecture, operates at a base clock of 1968 MHz and a boost clock of 2589 MHz, with a game clock of 2359 MHz. It features 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units, providing 10.60 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. The 8 GB of GDDR6 memory runs at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) across a 128-bit bus, yielding 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. In Control, these specifications translate to measurable performance differences across settings: at 1920x1080, the average FPS ranges from 118 at Low to 65 at Ultra, showing a 45% drop from the lowest to highest preset. The GPU’s 32 ray tracing cores are present but Control’s implementation is not reflected in the measured data, so the standard rasterization performance is what drives these results.

The GPU’s synthetic benchmark scores provide context: it achieves 16461 in Passmark G3D and 1804 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, with a Passmark GPU compute score of 7520. Its percentile rank of 70th among all GPUs indicates it sits above the median but below enthusiast-tier cards. The nearest rivals include the GTX 1630 (0.7% slower), RTX 2080 SUPER (1.1% slower), and Arc A350M (0.8% faster), which suggests the RX 6600 XT performs admirably for its class. However, in Control at 3840x2160, the GPU’s limitations become evident — the average FPS at Ultra is 33, which is below the 60 FPS target most players expect. The 8 GB VRAM might be sufficient for 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K, texture-heavy scenes could exceed this capacity, although the data does not explicitly confirm this.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution and desired frame rate. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset delivers 84 FPS on average (with a minimum of 71 and maximum of 96), offering a balanced experience that maintains smooth gameplay while improving visual quality over Low. High at 1080p yields 74 FPS, which is still playable, but Ultra drops to 65 FPS — acceptable for slower-paced action but not ideal for fast combat sequences. For players prioritizing frame rate, Low at 118 FPS provides the headroom needed for high-refresh-rate monitors.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset achieves 63 FPS (minimum 54, maximum 73), which is the highest quality setting that maintains an average above 60 FPS. High sits at 56 FPS, which may feel slightly stuttery in intense scenes, while Ultra drops to 49 FPS. Low is the only preset that comfortably exceeds 60 FPS at 89 FPS, but the visual compromise is significant. At 3840x2160, Low is the only playable option at exactly 60 FPS, while Medium drops to 43 FPS (minimum 36, maximum 49), making it marginal for gameplay. Ultra at 33 FPS is not recommended for anything beyond screenshots.

The data suggests that Medium is the sweet spot for this combo at 1080p and 1440p, as it provides the best balance of visual fidelity and performance. At 4K, Low is the only practical choice, and even then, the 60 FPS average leaves little margin for dips. Players with adaptive sync monitors might tolerate the 43 FPS Medium at 4K, but the minimum of 36 FPS could cause noticeable stutter in fast-paced scenes.

How This Combo Ranks

This combination of AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D and AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT ranks 2054th out of 2888 tested combos in Control, placing it in the 29th percentile of all systems tested. This ranking reflects the significant mismatch between the CPU and GPU: the processor is in the 91st percentile among all CPUs, while the GPU is in the 70th percentile among all GPUs. The combo’s position suggests that many systems with less capable processors but stronger graphics cards outperform it in this game, which is GPU-bound at higher resolutions.

The CPU’s nearest rivals provide context: the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF scores 55093 (0.6% higher), the Core Ultra 5 245K scores 54053 (1.3% lower), and the Xeon 6505P scores 53701 (2.0% lower). This shows the Ryzen 9 9900X3D is competitive with other high-end processors, but the GPU’s nearest rivals — the GTX 1630, Arc A350M, GTX 780 Ti, and RTX 2080 SUPER — all cluster within 1.1% of the RX 6600 XT’s average score. This tight grouping indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor in this combo, as its performance class is far below what the CPU can support.

In practical terms, this ranking means the combo is better suited for 1080p gaming where the GPU can keep up with the CPU’s frame-generation capability. At 1440p and 4K, the GPU’s limitations become more pronounced, and the combo falls behind systems with mid-range CPUs paired with higher-end GPUs. The data implies that upgrading the GPU would yield significant performance gains in Control, while a CPU upgrade would provide minimal benefit.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D is a 12-core, 24-thread processor from the 9000 series, based on Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge) and manufactured on TSMC’s 4 nm process. It has a base clock of 4.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, with a 120 W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 128 MB of L3 cache, which is substantial for gaming workloads. It supports DDR5 memory with dual-channel configuration and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, and operates on the AMD Socket AM5 platform with PCIe Gen 5 (24 lanes from the CPU).

In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU demonstrates strong multi-threaded performance: Cinebench R23 multi-core scores 47737, while single-core scores 6739. Geekbench multi-core reaches 22884 and single-core 3041. The 3DMark results show scaling from 1269 (single-thread) to 13795 (max threads), with 16-thread performance at 12490. Passmark scores include 56154 for multi-thread and 4646 for single-thread. The CPU’s 91st percentile ranking among all CPUs confirms its high-end positioning.

For Control, the CPU’s role is to handle game logic, physics, and AI, which are typically less demanding than rendering. The high single-thread performance (6739 in R23 single-core) ensures that the game’s main thread does not become a bottleneck at 1080p, where the GPU is still able to deliver 118 FPS at Low settings. However, at higher resolutions, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, and the CPU’s performance is underutilized. The 128 MB L3 cache may help with game asset streaming, but the measured data does not isolate this effect. The CPU’s 12 cores and 24 threads provide ample headroom for background tasks and future games, but Control does not appear to leverage more than a few threads based on the frame rates observed.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the average FPS values are: Low 118, Medium 84 (minimum 71, maximum 96), High 74, and Ultra 65. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 45% reduction in frame rate, with each step up in settings costing roughly 10-15% performance. The Medium preset’s minimum of 71 FPS indicates that even in demanding scenes, the frame rate stays above 60, making it the safest choice for consistent gameplay.

At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low 89, Medium 63 (minimum 54, maximum 73), High 56, and Ultra 49. The drop from 1080p to 1440p costs approximately 25% performance at Low (118 to 89), 25% at Medium (84 to 63), 24% at High (74 to 56), and 25% at Ultra (65 to 49). This consistent scaling indicates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck, as the resolution increase affects all settings equally. The Medium preset’s minimum of 54 FPS suggests occasional dips below 60, which could be noticeable on a standard 60 Hz display.

At 3840x2160, the averages are: Low 60, Medium 43 (minimum 36, maximum 49), High 38, and Ultra 33. The resolution increase from 1440p to 4K costs approximately 33% performance at Low (89 to 60), 32% at Medium (63 to 43), 32% at High (56 to 38), and 33% at Ultra (49 to 33). This consistent scaling continues, reinforcing the GPU-bound nature of the system. The 4K Low preset’s 60 FPS average is exactly at the threshold, but the lack of minimum FPS data for Low suggests that dips below 60 are possible without being recorded.

Resolution Scaling

The resolution scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a clear pattern: frame rates drop by roughly 25% when moving from 1080p to 1440p, and then by another 33% when moving from 1440p to 4K. This compounding effect means that 4K performance is approximately 50% of 1080p performance across all settings. For example, at High settings, the frame rate drops from 74 FPS at 1080p to 56 FPS at 1440p to 38 FPS at 4K — a total reduction of 49%. At Low settings, the drop is from 118 to 89 to 60 FPS, a 49% reduction.

This scaling pattern indicates that the RX 6600 XT is the limiting component, as the CPU’s performance is sufficient to maintain high frame rates at lower resolutions but cannot compensate for the GPU’s inability to process the increased pixel count. The consistent percentage drops across all settings suggest that the GPU’s compute and memory bandwidth are the bottlenecks, rather than any specific setting like textures or shadows. The 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 128-bit bus become increasingly strained at higher resolutions, where larger frame buffers require more data transfer.

The data implies that for this combo, 1080p is the sweet spot where the CPU and GPU are balanced, with the GPU able to deliver high frame rates across all settings. At 1440p, the GPU begins to struggle, and at 4K, only Low settings maintain playable performance. This suggests that players with 1440p or 4K monitors would need to either lower settings significantly or consider a GPU upgrade to fully utilize the CPU’s capabilities. The CPU’s strong performance (91st percentile) is wasted at higher resolutions, as the GPU (70th percentile) becomes the clear bottleneck.