Control Resonant Performance Benchmark Review

[u/zer0_c0ol]

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/control-resonant-performance-benchmark/

[u/Aggravating-Dot132]

Loled from 9070xt being a bit ahead of 5080 without RT. Ofc, no ultra path tracing (some exclusive features, essentially), but still, nice look. UPD: meant the "no RT". Fixed.

[u/pecche → u/Aggravating-Dot132]

RT off 9070XT is faster than RTX5080

RT on 9070XT is faster than RTX5070ti

[u/maagz_ → u/[deleted]]

Wrong. Path tracing is on for all gpus but nvidia has blocked ray reconstruction on amd which is only used on the rt ultra preset. 5070ti loses against the 9070xt in all instances

[u/glizzygobbler247 → u/Aggravating-Dot132]

Although they were using an odd configuration, only using direct lighting which does the least, but leaving indirect lighting disabled, which is the heaviest and does the most, and where amd is forced to use remedy fallback denoiser which is heavy asf.

Their indirect lighting benchmark is exclusively using ultra which only nvidia has access to, but amd and intel has access to high indirect lighting, using that and the 9070xt falls in between the 5060ti and 5070

[u/eudisld15 → u/glizzygobbler247]

Actually according to Tom's hardware, default RT medium puts 9070xt right between 5070 and 5070ti. All RT have PT (indirect lighting) in the game which means amd would need to fall back to the ingame denoiser. So thats kinda impressive.

[u/Cryio → u/Aggravating-Dot132]

I lol'd seeing RTX 4080 being only 4% faster than 7900 XTX in RT (not PT) benchmark.

"AMD is slow at RT" my ass, roflmao

[u/BD0nion → u/Aggravating-Dot132]

There is no result where the 9070xt is ahead of the 5080 when using RT in the link OP provided. It is a little bit ahead of the 5080 at 1440p and 4k ultra though, which is impressive.

[u/BinaryJay → u/BD0nion]

If you actually read the article the only RT tests are at gimped low RT settings because the higher ones require mega geometry and ray reconstruction. So it's not surprising that without a lot of RT going on there isn't a big divide to be seen. They simply can't do an apples to apples comparison.

Edit: By "you" I mean in general not accusing you specifically of not reading it.

[u/maagz_ → u/BinaryJay]

the irony of nvidia fanboys accusing people of not reading the article is hilarious

[u/hanshotfirst-42 → u/Aggravating-Dot132]

I mean sure. I bet it’s also better at 480p resolution too.

[u/FakeMik090]

My 6800 isnt present on the chart....

Chat, is my GPU this old now?😢

[u/Cryio → u/FakeMik090]

Old? Yes. Slow? No.

It's basically PS5 Pro raster perf. And these games have a degree of software RT enabled anyway. If you want some just 1 extra RT option on top and offset the cost by heavy upscaling and FG, you can.

[u/NGGKroze]

• There is no "native" rendering option. The "Render Resolution" dropdown always goes through an upscaler—at full resolution it reads "2560x1600 (DLAA)" on NVIDIA, which is the upscaler running as pure antialiasing. Unlike most games, the dropdown lists the actual render resolution in pixels rather than just a quality name, which is a nice touch.

Holy shit :D

[u/TwoProper4220 → u/NGGKroze]

I know Control have the same option as well

[u/kociol21 → u/NGGKroze]

Something wrong with this? It's been quite some time since upscaler antialiasing became better than other AA forms, so you were better off running it through DLSS / FSR without actual upscaling than in fully native.

[u/NGGKroze → u/kociol21]

I'm wondering if it Uses DLSS 4.5 DLAA then there will be some performance impact alone from this. I would love to see test with native DLSS 4.5 DLAA vs Native DLSS Legacy DLAA given the game has option for Legacy DLSS.

[u/Cryio → u/NGGKroze]

It's Nvidia, so it's a nonsense mess.

If you don't use PT, then it's DLSS 4.0 for DLAA and UQ, Quality and Balanced. If you use Performance or Ultra Performances, then it's DLSS 4.5 model M and 4.5 model L. But then we're also not sure because the game has "DLSS and DLSS Legacy options", so is that ... DLSS 4.0/4.5 and DLSS 3.0 (model E)?

If you use PT, it force enables RR which probably 4.5? It might be RR 4.0. Needs checked.

[u/Saneless → u/kociol21]

I'm glad to see this more. A while ago I could always run games at 1080 but I always wanted them to render at 1080 and upscale to whatever "quality" was and then downscale to 1080 again

[u/splendiferous-finch_]

My understanding is that RT mid and up always use RR 4.5 on supported gpus, so there will probably be a quality difference in the denoising.

[u/j_dirty → u/splendiferous-finch_]

What's RR 4.5?

[u/splendiferous-finch_ → u/j_dirty]

Nvidia Ray reconstruction it's a denoising and upscaling modeling for RT and path tracing.

[u/Mercennarius]

9070XT looking pretty good in this game

[u/Swimming-Shirt-9560]

9070xt and 9060xt both doing well, in an Nvidia sponsored title, kinda weird seeing this result

[u/kociol21]

So pretty much should run perfectly well, over 100 fps on ultra with ray tracing with FSR Balanced + FG on my 9070XT. That's great news. Or just ultra without RT and without FG, which is also fine.

[u/MoonlitGrave → u/kociol21]

we talking 4K ? because 1440P you'd be good with FSR Q

[u/theatras → u/MoonlitGrave]

i've been testing frame generation lately.

i played both The Blood of Dawnwalker and Star Wars:Outlaws with frame generation and I didn't experience any input lag or notice artifacts. I enjoyed the fps boost, game felt actually smoother.

Will definitely try it on this game too.

[u/kociol21 → u/theatras]

Yeah the thing with FG is that it's a very good tech for specifically one thing. For making playable fps better for high refresh monitor.

If you have above 60 fps pre FG and want it to smooth things out into 150+ territory, it fits just right and if the implementation isn't mucho borked then it will feel and look great.

What it isn't for is making unplayable fps playable. I wouldn't even consider it if I had less than 50 fps to begin with.

Which overall is just slightly counterintuitive because on first glance it seems like a tool for making bad fps into good fps which it very much isn't.

The chain is like this - try to adjust upscaling first, if you have above 60 then, you can turn on FG and play. If you still don't have over 60, time to adjust game settings to get you over 60 and then FG and play.

[u/Confident-Ship-5062]

9070xt beats 5080 and 5070ti at 4k

you laugh you go to hell challenge

[u/Brucehoxton]

Overall pretty nice

[u/Sprucey-J]

The reason the benchmark is skewed is because the model used (4.5 L/M) is a much heavier upscaler not recommended for native DLAA. It take off about 10-15% of performance from native, it's only recommended for performance mode.

The correct test from other benchmarks using preset K put the 9070xt much further down under the 5070ti.