Control

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 pairing delivers a distinctly GPU-bound experience in Control, with frame rates scaling almost entirely with resolution and preset rather than CPU capability. Across the measured resolution ladder, this combo produces a playable-to-smooth range of results, though the gap between Low and Ultra presets reveals a performance curve that will shape how users configure the game.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows that Control scales predictably with resolution, but the magnitude of the drop from 1080p to 4K is substantial. At 1080p High, the combo averages 122 FPS. Moving to 1440p High reduces that to 93 FPS, a 24% decrease. At 4K High, the average falls to 62 FPS, which is roughly half of the 1080p figure. This steep decline indicates that the RTX 4090, despite its high absolute performance, is being pushed hard by Control’s rendering load at higher resolutions.

The Low preset tells a similar story. At 1080p Low, the system hits 194 FPS. At 1440p Low, it drops to 147 FPS, and at 4K Low, it lands at 99 FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 4K Low is a 49% reduction, while the High preset loses 49% as well—suggesting that the resolution penalty is relatively consistent across settings. However, the absolute numbers reveal that even at 4K Low, the combo remains comfortably above 60 FPS, meaning users who prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity have a viable path.

The Medium preset shows the tightest min-max range in the data. At 1080p Medium, the average is 138 FPS with a minimum of 117 and a maximum of 158. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 104 FPS, with a minimum of 89 and a maximum of 120. At 4K Medium, the average is 70 FPS, with a minimum of 60 and a maximum of 81. The 4K Medium minimum of exactly 60 FPS is notable—it suggests that the GPU is right at the edge of maintaining a 60 FPS floor, and any heavier scene could dip below.

Ultra settings impose the heaviest load. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 106 FPS. At 1440p Ultra, it is 80 FPS. At 4K Ultra, the average drops to 54 FPS, which is below the commonly cited 60 FPS target. This is the only measured configuration where the combo fails to reach 60 FPS on average, indicating that 4K Ultra is beyond what this pairing can sustain in Control.

Overall, the scaling pattern points to the RTX 4090 as the limiting component. The CPU, with its 16 cores and 32 threads, does not appear to bottleneck at any resolution—the FPS changes align with the GPU’s rendering workload rather than any CPU-side constraint. At 1080p Low, where CPU overhead might typically surface, the combo still produces 194 FPS, suggesting the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 has ample headroom.

FAQ

Q: What is the average frame rate at 4K Ultra settings?

A: At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the average FPS is 54. This is the lowest measured average across all configurations and falls below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Can this combo maintain 60 FPS at 4K Medium?

A: Yes, but marginally. The average at 4K Medium is 70 FPS, with a minimum of 60 FPS and a maximum of 81 FPS. The minimum exactly matches the 60 FPS floor, so heavier scenes could cause dips.

Q: What is the highest average frame rate recorded in the data?

A: The highest average is 194 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only configuration that approaches 200 FPS.

Q: How does the 1440p High result compare to 1080p High?

A: At 1080p High, the average is 122 FPS. At 1440p High, the average is 93 FPS, representing a 24% reduction in frame rate for the resolution increase.

Q: Is there any configuration where the minimum FPS is not reported?

A: Yes, the measured data only includes minimum and maximum FPS for the Medium preset at each resolution. For Low, High, and Ultra presets, only the average FPS is provided.

Q: Does the RTX 4090’s percentile ranking suggest it is a high-performing GPU?

A: The GPU’s percentile vs all GPUs is 88, meaning it outperforms the majority of GPUs in the database. Its average benchmark score is 60,347, with nearest rivals including the Intel Arc Pro A60 and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48, both within 0-0.3% of its score.

How This Combo Ranks

In Control, this CPU-GPU combination ranks 612 out of 2,888 tested combos, placing it in the top 21% of all systems in the database. That rank reflects the aggregate of the measured FPS results across all resolutions and settings, and it underscores that while the RTX 4090 is a high-end part, the overall combo is not at the absolute top tier for this specific game. The rank of 612 suggests that a meaningful number of other pairings—likely those with even stronger GPUs or more favorable CPU-GPU balance—produce higher aggregate scores.

The GPU itself holds a percentile of 88 against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 60,347. Its nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Arc Pro A60 (avg score 60,326, delta 0%), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 (avg score 60,140, delta 0.3%), and the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M (avg score 61,896, delta -2.5%). These deltas are small, indicating that the RTX 4090’s benchmark performance is closely clustered with several other GPUs, despite its high absolute score. The fact that the combo still ranks 612th suggests that the CPU side may be dragging the aggregate slightly, or that Control’s specific workload favors other pairings.

The CPU, with a percentile of 95 against all CPUs, is clearly a strong performer. Its average benchmark score is 77,740, with nearest rivals including the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX (avg score 76,513, delta 1.6%), the AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P (avg score 76,492, delta 1.6%), and the Intel Core i9-14900K (avg score 79,097, delta -1.7%). The Ryzen AI Max+ 395 sits within 2% of these heavy hitters, and its 95th percentile rank means it outpaces the vast majority of CPUs in the database. When paired with a GPU that holds an 88th percentile, the resulting combo rank of 612 out of 2,888 is consistent with a system that is strong overall but not the single best configuration for Control.

The data also shows that the combo’s measured FPS results are genuine—the `dataIsMeasured` field is true—so the rank reflects actual testing rather than estimates. This lends credibility to the observed scaling patterns and the conclusion that the GPU is the primary limiter at higher resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its strongest results. Low settings produce an average of 194 FPS, which is the highest in the entire dataset. Medium settings yield 138 FPS, with a minimum of 117 and a maximum of 158. High settings produce 122 FPS on average, while Ultra settings drop to 106 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra at 1080p is 88 FPS, indicating that the preset choice has a massive impact on performance even at the lowest resolution tested.

At 2560x1440, the numbers scale down across the board. Low settings average 147 FPS, which is still well above the 120 FPS mark. Medium settings average 104 FPS, with a minimum of 89 and a maximum of 120. High settings produce 93 FPS on average, and Ultra settings drop to 80 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra at 1440p is 67 FPS, narrower than at 1080p but still substantial. The 1440p Medium minimum of 89 FPS is the highest minimum recorded in the dataset, suggesting that this resolution is well within the combo’s comfort zone.

At 3840x2160, the performance falls to its lowest levels. Low settings average 99 FPS, which is still smooth for most displays. Medium settings average 70 FPS, with a minimum of 60 and a maximum of 81. High settings drop to 62 FPS on average, and Ultra settings fall to 54 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra at 4K is 45 FPS, the smallest of any resolution, which indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor across all presets—there simply isn’t enough headroom to differentiate settings as much as at lower resolutions.

The Medium preset is the only one where both minimum and maximum FPS are recorded for all three resolutions. At 1080p, the range is 117-158 FPS. At 1440p, it is 89-120 FPS. At 4K, it is 60-81 FPS. These ranges show that even the minimum FPS at 4K Medium exactly hits the 60 FPS target, which is cutting it close for users who demand a strict frame rate floor.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the Medium preset offers the best balance of visual quality and frame rate stability across all three resolutions. At 1080p Medium, the combo produces an average of 138 FPS with a minimum of 117, which is far above any playability threshold. At 1440p Medium, the average is 104 FPS with a minimum of 89, still smooth with plenty of margin. At 4K Medium, the average is 70 FPS with a minimum of exactly 60, meaning the system can hold a 60 FPS floor in most scenes but may dip in heavier moments.

For users with a 1080p display, High settings are also a strong choice. The average of 122 FPS at 1080p High is only 16 FPS below the Medium preset, and the visual uplift from Medium to High is typically more noticeable at lower resolutions where pixel density is lower. Ultra settings at 1080p, at 106 FPS, are also viable, but the jump from High to Ultra yields diminishing returns relative to the 16 FPS loss.

At 1440p, High settings are again recommended. The 93 FPS average is well above 60 FPS, and the visual quality improvement over Medium (104 FPS) is worth the 11 FPS hit for most users. Ultra settings at 1440p, at 80 FPS, are still playable but represent a 14% drop from High, which may be noticeable on high-refresh-rate monitors.

At 4K, the recommendation shifts decisively toward Medium. The 70 FPS average at Medium is the only 4K preset that comfortably exceeds 60 FPS on average. High settings at 4K, at 62 FPS, are right at the edge, and the minimum FPS data is not recorded for that preset, so there is no guarantee of a stable floor. Ultra settings at 4K, at 54 FPS, should be avoided if frame rate consistency is a priority. Low settings at 4K, at 99 FPS, are technically smooth but sacrifice too much visual fidelity for this GPU; the Medium preset provides a much better visual experience for only a 29 FPS loss.

The data suggests that the Medium preset is the sweet spot for this combo in Control, particularly at 4K where the GPU is most stressed. At lower resolutions, users can afford to push to High or even Ultra, but Medium ensures the largest margin of safety across all scenarios.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is a 16-core, 32-thread processor based on the Zen 5 architecture, with a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. It features 64 MB of shared L3 cache, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 80 KB of L1 cache per core. The CPU is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC, with a TDP of 55 W, and it supports LPDDR5X memory over a quad-channel bus with a bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s.

In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU performs strongly. It scores 35,314 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 2,044 in single-core. In Geekbench, it scores 20,992 multicore and 2,464 single-core. Passmark results show 549,34 for multithread and 4,147 for single-thread. These numbers place the CPU in the 95th percentile against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 77,740.

The CPU’s role in Control appears to be secondary to the GPU. The measured FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K shows a consistent decline that aligns with GPU load, not CPU capability. At 1080p Low, where CPU overhead is most likely to surface, the combo still achieves 194 FPS. This suggests that the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is not a bottleneck, even at high frame rates.

The CPU’s 16 cores and 32 threads are more than sufficient for Control’s threading model, which is not particularly demanding on multi-core processors. The high boost clock of 5.10 GHz ensures strong single-thread performance, which is more relevant for this game’s frame pacing. The 64 MB of shared L3 cache helps with memory access patterns, though the game’s reliance on GPU throughput dominates the overall performance picture.

Compared to its nearest rivals, the CPU holds its own. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX has an average score of 76,513, just 1.6% lower. The AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P is also 1.6% lower at 76,492. The Intel Core i9-14900K is 1.7% higher at 79,097, and the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX is 2% lower at 76,212. These deltas are small, meaning the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is competitive with some of the best desktop and workstation CPUs in the database.

In Control, the practical upshot is that the CPU does not limit the combo’s performance. The frame rates are dictated by the RTX 4090’s ability to render the game’s effects and geometry at each resolution and preset. Users upgrading from a weaker CPU would likely see no FPS improvement in this game, as the GPU is already the constraint. Conversely, pairing this CPU with a weaker GPU would yield lower FPS, confirming that the GPU is the dominant factor in this pairing for Control.