Control

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Control at 4K resolution?

A: No. The recorded data shows no playable settings at 3840x2160. The highest average FPS at 4K is 57.5 on Low settings, which falls below the 60 FPS playable threshold. High, Medium, and Ultra presets average 36.1, 41.9, and 32.6 FPS respectively.

Q: What is the best setting at 1440p for this combo?

A: Medium is the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS at 2560x1440. It delivers an average of 66.1 FPS. Low averages 87.7 FPS, while High and Ultra drop to 55.6 and 48.2 FPS respectively.

Q: Does the RTX 2060 SUPER support ray tracing in this game?

A: The GPU includes 34 RT cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). However, the measured FPS data in the database does not include ray tracing-specific benchmarks, so performance with ray tracing enabled cannot be quantified from these results.

Q: How does this CPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3600 has an average benchmark score of 17035, which is within 0.2% of the Intel Core i7-1260P (17007) and the AMD EPYC 7742 (16998). It sits 0.2% below the Intel Core i5-11400 (17067) and the AMD EPYC 7573X (17070).

Q: What is the GPU's performance percentile?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER ranks in the 62nd percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its average benchmark score is 18093, placing it near the RTX 3060 Mobile (18159, 0.4% higher) and the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 (18189, 0.5% higher).

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the system achieves 120.6 FPS on Low and 66.5 FPS on Ultra, indicating the GPU becomes the primary constraint as settings increase. The CPU's 6 cores and 12 threads with a 71st percentile ranking provide sufficient headroom for this game's demands.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals a clear shift in component responsibility as resolution and preset levels change. At 1920x1080, the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU well beyond the playable threshold. The Low preset averages 120.6 FPS, which is 2.0 times the 60 FPS threshold. This suggests the Ryzen 5 3600, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, comfortably handles the game's logic and draw calls at this resolution.

Moving from Low to Ultra at 1080p, the average FPS drops from 120.6 to 66.5, a reduction of 54.1 FPS. This steep decline indicates that the RTX 2060 SUPER is increasingly burdened as graphical effects, texture quality, and post-processing scale up. The GPU's 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth handle the data throughput, but the rendering load at Ultra settings pushes the system to 66.5 FPS, only 6.5 FPS above the playable threshold.

At 2560x1440, the balance shifts further toward the GPU. The Low preset averages 87.7 FPS, which remains playable, but High drops to 55.6 FPS and Ultra to 48.2 FPS. The transition from Low to Medium at 1440p costs 21.6 FPS (from 87.7 to 66.1), while the transition from Medium to High costs another 10.5 FPS. This pattern shows the GPU's rendering pipeline becoming the dominant constraint as pixel count increases by 78% compared to 1080p.

At 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS. The Low preset averages 57.5 FPS, just 2.5 FPS below the threshold. This narrow miss indicates that the GPU is the sole limiting factor at 4K. The CPU's performance is largely irrelevant at this resolution, as the RTX 2060 SUPER's 7.181 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 105.6 GPixel/s pixel rate are insufficient to maintain playable frame rates even at Low settings.

The scaling between resolutions confirms the GPU-centric nature of Control's performance profile. At Low settings, 1080p to 1440p costs 32.9 FPS, and 1440p to 4K costs 30.2 FPS. The consistent per-resolution cost at Low settings points to a fixed rendering overhead per pixel, while the larger drops at higher presets reflect the GPU's memory bandwidth and shader throughput limits.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU's nearest rivals in the database are all within 0.2% of its average benchmark score of 17035. The Intel Core i7-1260P, a mobile processor, scores 17007 and is 0.2% slower. The Intel Core i5-11400 scores 17067 and is 0.2% faster. Two AMD EPYC server chips, the 7573X (17070) and the 7742 (16998), also sit within this tight band. In practical terms, any of these processors would deliver nearly identical frame rates in Control when paired with the same GPU, since the game's CPU demands at playable settings are well within the capabilities of all four.

The GPU's nearest rivals show a similar pattern. The RTX 3060 Mobile scores 18159, which is 0.4% higher than the RTX 2060 SUPER's 18093. The AMD Radeon Pro 5700 scores 18189 (0.5% higher), the AMD Radeon RX 460 scores 18373 (1.5% higher), and the Intel Arc A770M scores 18383 (1.6% higher). These deltas are small enough that in-game performance differences would be negligible, typically less than one frame per second at any given preset.

However, the RX 460 and Arc A770M results warrant caution. Their higher average benchmark scores do not necessarily translate to better Control performance, as the benchmark suite includes compute and API-specific tests that may not reflect this game's rendering workload. The RTX 2060 SUPER's 34 RT cores and 272 tensor cores, which the RX 460 lacks entirely, could provide advantages in games that use DirectX 12 Ultimate features, though the measured FPS data does not isolate this factor.

For users considering alternative hardware, the practical takeaway is that swapping the Ryzen 5 3600 for any of its four nearest rivals would produce essentially identical results in Control. Similarly, swapping the RTX 2060 SUPER for the RTX 3060 Mobile or Radeon Pro 5700 would yield frame rates within 1% of the recorded values. The RX 460 and Arc A770M, despite their higher aggregate scores, should be treated as unknown quantities for this specific game.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 3600 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER ranks 2718 out of 3720 tested combos in the database for Control. This places the system in the 73rd percentile of all tested combinations, meaning roughly 27% of tested combos perform better. The rank reflects the GPU's mid-tier positioning (62nd percentile among all GPUs) and the CPU's solid but not exceptional standing (71st percentile among all CPUs).

The gap between the combo's rank and the individual component percentiles suggests that Control's performance is more heavily weighted toward the GPU. The CPU's 71st percentile ranking is higher than the combo's 73rd percentile position among combos, which indicates that the GPU's 62nd percentile pulls the overall ranking down. This interpretation aligns with the resolution scaling data, which shows the GPU becoming the bottleneck at higher resolutions and presets.

Within the 3720 tested combos, the 2718th rank means 1002 combos perform worse and 2717 perform better. The system's ability to clear 60 FPS at 1080p Ultra and 1440p Medium puts it in a comfortable position for 1080p gaming, but the 4K results (no playable settings) prevent it from ranking higher. Combos that achieve playable frame rates at 4K would necessarily rank above this system, and the database shows many such combinations exist given the total count.

The Verdict

This PC can run Control, but the playable resolutions and presets are strictly limited. At 1920x1080, all four tested presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) clear the 60 FPS threshold. The Ultra preset averages 66.5 FPS, providing a comfortable margin above the playable threshold. At 2560x1440, only Low (87.7 FPS) and Medium (66.1 FPS) are playable. High falls to 55.6 FPS and Ultra to 48.2 FPS, both below the 60 FPS mark.

At 3840x2160, the system cannot maintain 60 FPS at any preset. The closest result is Low at 57.5 FPS, which misses the threshold by 2.5 FPS. The verdict by resolution confirms this: no playable settings exist at 4K, while 1440p supports Low and Medium, and 1080p supports all four presets.

The practical recommendation is to use this system at 1080p with Ultra settings for the best visual quality while staying playable, or at 1440p with Medium settings for a higher resolution with slightly reduced graphical fidelity. 4K gaming is not viable with this hardware in Control.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, with an average of 66.5 FPS. This setting provides the highest visual quality while maintaining a playable frame rate.

At 2560x1440, the most demanding playable preset is Medium, averaging 66.1 FPS. This setting balances resolution and visual fidelity while keeping performance above the threshold.

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves 60 FPS. The best recorded result is Low at 57.5 FPS, which falls short of the playable threshold. No recommended settings can be provided for 4K.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the recorded average FPS values are as follows: Low 57.5, Medium 41.9, High 36.1, Ultra 32.6. The spread from Low to Ultra is 24.9 FPS, with each preset step costing approximately 5 to 8 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium (15.6 FPS) is the largest single-step drop at this resolution, indicating that the Medium preset introduces significant rendering costs.

At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low 87.7, Medium 66.1, High 55.6, Ultra 48.2. The Low to Medium step costs 21.6 FPS, the Medium to High step costs 10.5 FPS, and the High to Ultra step costs 7.4 FPS. The diminishing cost per step suggests that the High and Ultra presets share many rendering features, with Ultra adding incremental effects.

At 1920x1080, the averages are: Low 120.6, Medium 84.5, High 72.6, Ultra 66.5. The Low to Medium step is the largest at 36.1 FPS, followed by Medium to High at 11.9 FPS and High to Ultra at 6.1 FPS. At 1080p, the system has enough headroom that even the largest preset step leaves the frame rate well above the playable threshold.

No minimum or maximum FPS values were recorded for any test, so the analysis relies solely on average frame rates. The database did not capture frame time variance or 1% low data for this configuration.