Control

Control, the 2019 action-adventure title from Remedy Entertainment, stresses hardware in a way that clearly separates GPU-bound rasterization from CPU-driven simulation. The combination of an AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D and an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 presents a dataset where the graphics card is the dominant bottleneck, particularly at higher resolutions. This analysis examines the measured FPS rows to explain how resolution scaling, CPU headroom, and GPU limitations interact, providing a methodical walkthrough of the benchmark data.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a steep and predictable decline as resolution increases, confirming that the GTX 1070 is the limiting component in this pairing. At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves 99.9 FPS, which drops to 76.1 FPS at 1440p (a reduction of 23.8 FPS) and further to 46.8 FPS at 4K (a reduction of 53.1 FPS from 1080p). This pattern is consistent across all settings presets, but the percentage drop from 1080p to 4K is most pronounced at the Low preset, where the frame rate falls by approximately 53%. The High preset shows a similar relative decline, moving from 59.4 FPS at 1080p to 47.5 FPS at 1440p and finally to 31.8 FPS at 4K.

The scaling behavior indicates that the GTX 1070’s fillrate and memory bandwidth are saturated early. The GPU has a pixel rate of 107.7 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 202.0 GTexel/s, which are modest figures by modern standards. At 4K, the pixel throughput demand quadruples compared to 1080p, and the measured 31.8 FPS at High settings reflects the card’s inability to keep up. Interestingly, the difference between 1440p and 4K at Medium settings is only 19.3 FPS (53.8 to 34.5), suggesting that the card’s memory subsystem, with 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus delivering 256.3 GB/s, becomes a hard ceiling beyond 1440p.

The data also reveals that the Ryzen 9 9950X3D is not the constraint here. If the CPU were limiting, the frame rate would remain relatively flat across resolutions. Instead, the FPS scales inversely with pixel count, which is the classic signature of a GPU-bound scenario. The 9950X3D’s 16 cores and 32 threads, boosting to 5.70 GHz, provide far more computational headroom than Control’s engine can utilize, especially when paired with a GPU that ranks in the 51st percentile against all GPUs.

CPU Role

The Ryzen 9 9950X3D is a desktop processor built on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge) with 16 cores, 32 threads, a base clock of 4.30 GHz, and a boost clock of 5.70 GHz. Its benchmark results are exceptional, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 59712 and a single-core score of 8430. In Control, however, these numbers do not translate into proportional FPS gains because the game’s workload is not heavily threaded beyond a few cores. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 16374 and the 8-thread score of 9259 show strong scaling, but Control’s engine typically relies on a handful of threads for gameplay logic.

The processor’s 128 MB of shared L3 cache is a notable asset for gaming, as it reduces memory latency for frequently accessed data. Yet the measured FPS at 1080p Low (99.9 FPS) is still below the 144 Hz mark that this CPU could theoretically support with a more powerful GPU. The nearest rivals in the CPU benchmark database include the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X, which scores 1.8% lower on average, and the Intel Core i7-14700KF, which trails by 2.2%. This indicates the 9950X3D is among the fastest consumer chips available, but its advantage is wasted in this particular pairing.

The percentile ranking of 96 (vs all CPUs) puts the 9950X3D in the top 4% of all processors. In Control, the CPU’s role is to maintain a stable frame time floor, which it does effortlessly. The data shows no scenario where the CPU becomes the bottleneck; even at 1080p Low, where the GPU workload is lightest, the FPS does not exceed 100, suggesting a driver or engine-level cap rather than a CPU limitation. For context, the CPU’s single-thread PassMark score of 4737 and Geekbench single-core score of 3401 are strong, but Control’s rendering pipeline is not sensitive to these metrics at the GPU-bound settings tested.

FAQ

Q: Why does the FPS drop so much from 1080p to 4K?

A: The GTX 1070 is the limiting component. At 1080p Low, the system hits 99.9 FPS, but at 4K Low it falls to 46.8 FPS, a 53% reduction. This is due to the GPU’s fixed pixel rate of 107.7 GPixel/s and memory bandwidth of 256.3 GB/s, which cannot handle the fourfold increase in pixels at 4K.

Q: Is the Ryzen 9 9950X3D holding back performance in Control?

A: No. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multicore score of 59712 and single-core score of 8430 indicate massive headroom. The FPS scales inversely with resolution, which is the signature of a GPU bottleneck, not a CPU one.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 1080p gaming?

A: At 1080p, the Medium preset delivers 71.1 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS target, while High drops to 59.4 FPS. Ultra yields 52.3 FPS. Medium offers the best balance for smooth gameplay, though Low at 99.9 FPS is available for high-refresh-rate monitors.

Q: How does the GTX 1070 compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The GTX 1070 has an average benchmark score of 12331, which is 0.7% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro K4200, but 1.3% lower than the GTX 880M and 1.4% lower than the GTX 1650 SUPER. Its percentile rank is 51, meaning it sits near the median of all GPUs.

Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Control?

A: Only at Low settings with 46.8 FPS, which is playable but not ideal. At Medium, the 34.5 FPS is borderline, and at Ultra, the 26.2 FPS is below the 30 FPS threshold for smoothness. 1440p is the practical ceiling for this GPU.

Q: Does the CPU’s 3D V-Cache impact Control’s performance?

A: The 9950X3D has 128 MB of shared L3 cache, which helps with CPU-bound scenarios. However, in this dataset, the GPU is always the bottleneck, so the cache’s benefit does not show up in the measured FPS. The cache would matter more with a faster GPU.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The dataset provides 12 measured FPS rows across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves 99.9 FPS, Medium reaches 71.1 FPS, High drops to 59.4 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 52.3 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 47.6 FPS, showing that graphics settings have a large impact at this resolution. For 2560x1440, Low yields 76.1 FPS, Medium 53.8 FPS, High 47.5 FPS, and Ultra 42.5 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra narrows to 33.6 FPS, indicating that the GPU is becoming more constrained. At 3840x2160, the numbers are 46.8 FPS (Low), 34.5 FPS (Medium), 31.8 FPS (High), and 26.2 FPS (Ultra). Here, the difference between Low and Ultra is only 20.6 FPS, as the GPU’s pixel throughput limits all presets.

The High preset is particularly interesting: it shows nearly linear scaling from 59.4 FPS at 1080p to 47.5 FPS at 1440p and 31.8 FPS at 4K. This suggests that High settings impose a consistent load on the GPU’s shading units and ROPs. The Ultra preset, by contrast, has a disproportionately large drop from 1080p (52.3 FPS) to 1440p (42.5 FPS), but a smaller drop from 1440p to 4K (26.2 FPS). This nonlinearity may be due to memory bandwidth saturation at higher resolutions, where the 8 GB frame buffer becomes a limiting factor.

The combination rank for this CPU-GPU pair is 1374 out of 1636 combos, placing it in the lower 16% of tested configurations. This rank reflects the GTX 1070’s age (released 2016-06-09) and its end-of-life production status. The GPU’s average benchmark score of 12331 is modest, and its nearest rivals include the GTX 1650 SUPER (1.4% faster) and the Tesla K20Xm (1.7% faster). For Control specifically, the data shows that 1080p Medium is the only preset that comfortably exceeds 60 FPS, while 1440p requires Low settings to stay above 60 FPS.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 is a Pascal-architecture card (GP104 chip) built on a 16 nm process. It has 1920 shading units, 120 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs, with base and boost clocks of 1506 MHz and 1683 MHz respectively. The memory configuration is 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, providing 256.3 GB/s of bandwidth. These specifications are now dated, and the GPU’s performance percentile of 51 (vs all GPUs) confirms it sits exactly at the median of the database.

In Control, the GPU’s limitations are evident at every resolution above 1080p. The 4K Ultra result of 26.2 FPS is below the playable threshold, and even 1440p High (47.5 FPS) struggles to maintain a smooth 60 FPS. The card’s FP32 performance of 6.463 TFLOPS is adequate for older titles, but Control’s advanced effects, such as volumetric lighting and physics-based destruction, tax the shading units heavily. The measured data shows that lowering settings from Ultra to Low at 4K yields a 20.6 FPS improvement (26.2 to 46.8), which highlights the impact of reducing shader and texture complexity.

The GPU’s nearest rivals in the benchmark database include the NVIDIA Quadro K4200 (0.7% slower) and the GTX 880M (1.3% faster). The GTX 1070’s average score of 12331 is closely matched by these cards, but in real gaming workloads like Control, the GTX 1070’s 8 GB VRAM and 256-bit bus give it an edge over older 4 GB cards. However, the card’s 150 W TDP and 8-pin power connector indicate it was designed for a different era of gaming, and the data suggests it is now best suited for 1080p or 1440p with reduced settings.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience with this CPU-GPU combination, the measured FPS rows point to 1080p Medium as the optimal choice. The Medium preset delivers 71.1 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS standard for smooth gameplay, while High drops to 59.4 FPS and Ultra to 52.3 FPS. The jump from Low to Medium costs 28.8 FPS (99.9 to 71.1), but the visual quality improvement is substantial, making Medium the sweet spot. For users with 144 Hz monitors, 1080p Low at 99.9 FPS is the only preset that approaches that refresh rate, though it sacrifices significant visual fidelity.

At 1440p, the recommendation shifts to Low settings, which produce 76.1 FPS. Medium (53.8 FPS) and High (47.5 FPS) are playable but may exhibit stutter during intense scenes, while Ultra (42.5 FPS) is best avoided. For 4K, the data shows that even Low settings (46.8 FPS) are only marginally playable, and Medium (34.5 FPS) is below the 40 FPS console-style target. The High preset at 4K (31.8 FPS) and Ultra (26.2 FPS) are not recommended for a consistent experience.

The GPU’s 8 GB VRAM is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p at all settings, but at 4K, texture-heavy presets like Ultra may exceed the available memory, causing dips. The measured data does not include min FPS, so the analysis relies on averages, but the trend is clear: this pairing is best suited for 1080p gaming with Medium settings, or 1440p with Low settings, to maintain a stable frame rate above 60 FPS.