Control

Measured FPS Breakdown

The benchmark data for Control with the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER shows a wide performance spread across resolutions and presets. At 1920x1080, the combo delivers consistently smooth frame rates. Low settings produce an average of 118 FPS, Medium averages 84 FPS with a minimum of 71 FPS and a maximum of 96 FPS, High averages 74 FPS, and Ultra averages 65 FPS. Every preset at this resolution clears the 60 FPS playability threshold, making 1080p a fully playable environment for this title.

Moving to 2560x1440, performance remains respectable but the margin narrows. Low settings average 89 FPS, Medium averages 63 FPS with a minimum of 54 FPS and a maximum of 73 FPS, High drops to 56 FPS, and Ultra falls to 49 FPS. The data shows that only Low and Medium presets maintain an average at or above 60 FPS at this resolution. High and Ultra fall short of the playability threshold, with High sitting just 4 FPS below the mark and Ultra trailing by 11 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the RTX 2060 SUPER becomes the limiting factor. Low settings average exactly 60 FPS, which is the minimum acceptable for smooth gameplay. Medium averages 43 FPS with a minimum of 36 FPS and a maximum of 49 FPS, High averages 38 FPS, and Ultra averages 33 FPS. The 4K resolution clearly demands more graphics throughput than this GPU can provide at higher presets, and only the Low setting delivers a playable experience.

The frame time consistency also varies by resolution. The recorded minimum and maximum values for Medium settings show tighter variance at 1080p (71 to 96 FPS) compared to 1440p (54 to 73 FPS) and 2160p (36 to 49 FPS). This pattern indicates that higher resolutions produce both lower averages and wider relative swings, which can affect perceived smoothness even when the average FPS is acceptable.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Control at 60 FPS on a 4K monitor?

A: Yes, but only at Low settings. The measured data shows an average of exactly 60 FPS at 3840x2160 with Low settings. Medium, High, and Ultra presets all fall below 60 FPS, with averages of 43, 38, and 33 FPS respectively.

Q: What is the best preset for 1440p gaming with this combo?

A: Medium is the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS at 2560x1440, averaging 63 FPS. High and Ultra presets drop to 56 and 49 FPS respectively, so they cannot maintain smooth gameplay.

Q: Is Ultra settings playable at 1080p?

A: Yes. At 1920x1080 with Ultra settings, the combo averages 65 FPS, which exceeds the 60 FPS playability threshold. This makes Ultra the recommended preset for 1080p, as it delivers the highest visual quality while remaining playable.

Q: How does the CPU compare to similar processors in benchmark performance?

A: The Ryzen 9 7900X has an average benchmark score of 53,288 and sits in the 91st percentile among all CPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 7313P, scores 53,206, which is just 0.2% lower. The Intel Core i7-14700F scores 53,620, putting it 0.6% ahead of the Ryzen chip.

Q: How does the GPU compare to similar graphics cards in benchmark performance?

A: The RTX 2060 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 18,093 and sits in the 62nd percentile among all GPUs. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile scores 18,159, only 0.4% higher, while the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 scores 18,189, 0.5% higher. The Intel Arc A770M trails by 1.6% with a score of 18,383.

Q: Does the game run smoothly at Medium settings in 4K?

A: No. At 3840x2160 with Medium settings, the average FPS is 43, well below the 60 FPS threshold. The minimum recorded frame rate is 36 FPS and the maximum is 49 FPS, indicating that even the best-case scenario does not reach playable levels.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU and GPU in this combo each have nearby hardware that would deliver comparable benchmark performance. For the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X, the closest rival is the AMD EPYC 7313P, which scores 53,206 in average benchmarks, just 0.2% below the Ryzen's 53,288. The Intel Xeon Phi 7290 scores 53,469, putting it 0.3% higher, while the Intel Xeon 634 scores 52,974, 0.6% lower. The Intel Core i7-14700F leads this group with a score of 53,620, 0.6% higher than the Ryzen 9 7900X. In practical terms, any of these processors would produce nearly identical frame rates in Control, as the differences are within 1% of each other.

For the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER, the nearest performance neighbors are all within 1.6% of its average score of 18,093. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile scores 18,159, a 0.4% difference, making it virtually indistinguishable in gaming workloads. The AMD Radeon Pro 5700 scores 18,189, also 0.5% higher, and would deliver similar FPS in Control. The AMD Radeon RX 460 scores 18,373, which is 1.5% higher, while the Intel Arc A770M scores 18,383, 1.6% higher. These deltas are small enough that users would not notice a meaningful difference in frame rates when playing Control at the same settings and resolution.

The practical implication is that swapping in any of these rival components would yield nearly identical performance in this game. The CPU is not a bottleneck in most scenarios, as even the 12-core Ryzen 9 7900X provides ample headroom for the RTX 2060 SUPER to reach its limits. The GPU is the primary determinant of FPS in Control, and the rival GPUs listed would behave similarly across all resolutions and presets.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations, this pairing of the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER ranks 2,650 out of 3,720 tested combos for Control. This places the system in the lower portion of the rankings, at approximately the 71st percentile of all tested configurations. The rank reflects the GPU's mid-range position in the overall performance hierarchy, as the RTX 2060 SUPER is an end-of-life product from the GeForce 20-series.

The ranking is heavily influenced by the GPU rather than the CPU. The Ryzen 9 7900X is a high-end desktop processor with a 91st percentile score among all CPUs, but the RTX 2060 SUPER sits at only the 62nd percentile among GPUs. Since Control is a graphically demanding title, the GPU's capabilities dominate the final FPS results. The combination of a top-tier CPU with a mid-range GPU produces a system that is CPU-overprovisioned for this workload, meaning the processor is rarely the limiting factor.

Within the rank structure, this combo sits below configurations that pair higher-end GPUs with similar or weaker CPUs. The data indicates that a stronger graphics card would improve the ranking substantially, while a stronger CPU would yield minimal gains in this game. For users considering an upgrade path, the GPU would be the component to replace first if higher FPS is the goal.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows that this system can run Control, but the playable experience depends heavily on the chosen resolution and settings. At 1920x1080, all four presets clear the 60 FPS threshold: Low averages 118 FPS, Medium averages 84 FPS, High averages 74 FPS, and Ultra averages 65 FPS. This makes 1080p fully playable at any visual quality level.

At 2560x1440, the playable settings narrow to Low and Medium, which average 89 and 63 FPS respectively. High falls below the threshold at 56 FPS, and Ultra drops further to 49 FPS. Users with 1440p monitors can still enjoy smooth gameplay, but they must compromise on visual quality to stay above 60 FPS.

At 3840x2160, only Low settings are playable, with an average of exactly 60 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra all fail to reach playable levels, with averages of 43, 38, and 33 FPS. The verdict is clear: 4K gaming is possible only at the lowest preset, and even then the experience is right at the edge of the playability threshold.

Overall, this PC is a capable 1080p machine for Control, offering a fully smooth experience at Ultra settings. It can handle 1440p with some quality adjustments, and it can barely manage 4K at the lowest settings. Users who prioritize resolution over visual fidelity will find the Low preset at 4K acceptable, but those who want higher quality at 4K will need a more powerful GPU.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Low, with an average of exactly 60 FPS. This is the only playable option at 4K, and it delivers the minimum acceptable frame rate. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall short, so Low is the recommended choice for 4K displays.

At 2560x1440, the best playable preset is Medium, which averages 63 FPS. This provides a balance between visual quality and performance, staying just above the 60 FPS threshold. Low averages 89 FPS and is also playable, but Medium offers better graphics while maintaining smoothness. High and Ultra are not recommended at this resolution, as they average 56 and 49 FPS respectively.

At 1920x1080, the best playable preset is Ultra, which averages 65 FPS. This is the highest quality setting available in the game, and the combo delivers a playable frame rate at this level. High averages 74 FPS, Medium averages 84 FPS, and Low averages 118 FPS, all of which are also playable, but Ultra provides the best visual experience without sacrificing smoothness.

The data indicates a clear progression: higher resolutions require lower presets to maintain 60 FPS. For users with a 1080p monitor, Ultra is the optimal choice. For 1440p, Medium is the sweet spot. For 4K, Low is the only viable option. These recommendations maximize visual quality while ensuring the frame rate never drops below the playable threshold.