Control

FAQ

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

A: Yes, but only at Low settings. The measured average FPS at 3840x2160 with Low settings is 66, which clears the 60 FPS playability threshold. Higher settings at 4K fall below 60 FPS.

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

A: High settings deliver a 62 FPS average at 2560x1440, making it the most demanding preset that stays above 60 FPS. Medium runs at 70 FPS, and Low at 98 FPS, but High is the visual sweet spot per the recorded data.

Q: Does the RTX 2070 SUPER bottleneck the Ryzen 9 7900X in this game?

A: Benchmark data suggests the GPU is the limiting factor at higher resolutions. The CPU has a 91st percentile ranking among all tested CPUs, while the GPU sits at the 65th percentile. At 4K Ultra, the combo drops to 36 FPS, indicating the GPU struggles with the load.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested hardware combinations?

A: The combo ranks 2152 out of 3720 tested combinations for Control. That places it in the upper-middle portion of the database, meaning it outperforms roughly 42% of tested combos while trailing the top performers.

Q: Is Ultra settings playable at 1080p?

A: Yes. At 1920x1080 with Ultra settings, the average FPS is 71, which is above the 60 FPS threshold. Minimum FPS data is not recorded for Ultra, but the average comfortably clears playability.

Q: What is the difference in FPS between Medium and High at 1440p?

A: Medium averages 70 FPS, while High averages 62 FPS. The 8 FPS gap represents the cost of the higher preset, and both are playable. Ultra drops to 54 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target.

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 9 7900X paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER achieves a combo rank of 2152 out of 3720 tested combinations in Control. This places the pairing in the 58th percentile of all recorded combos, meaning a majority of tested systems outperform it. The ranking reflects the GPU's mid-tier position, as the CPU is a high-end part capable of far more demanding workloads.

The data indicates a clear imbalance between the two components. The Ryzen 9 7900X sits in the 91st percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 53288. Its nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 7313P (0.2% higher score), the Intel Xeon Phi 7290 (0.3% lower), the Intel Xeon 634 (0.6% higher), and the Intel Core i7-14700F (0.6% lower). This is a top-tier processor by any measure.

The RTX 2070 SUPER, by contrast, ranks in the 65th percentile among all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 20282. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M (1% lower), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile (1.2% lower), the Intel Arc B570 (1.3% lower), and the Intel Arc A750 (1.5% lower). The GPU is a solid mid-range part, but it is clearly the weaker link in this pairing.

The combo rank reflects this dynamic. In a game like Control, which can be demanding at higher resolutions and presets, the GPU becomes the primary determinant of playability. The CPU's headroom is largely unused in this scenario. The ranking suggests that users seeking higher frame rates would benefit more from a GPU upgrade than a CPU change.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the nearest rivals for both components, several alternative pairings would deliver nearly identical performance in Control. The CPU's closest competitor, the AMD EPYC 7313P, has an average score within 0.2% of the Ryzen 9 7900X. A system using that processor with the RTX 2070 SUPER would behave almost identically in this game. The Intel Core i7-14700F, trailing by 0.6%, would also produce very similar results. The Intel Xeon 634 (0.6% ahead) and the Intel Xeon Phi 7290 (0.3% behind) round out the immediate alternatives on the CPU side.

On the GPU side, the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M is within 1% of the RTX 2070 SUPER's average score. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile trails by 1.2%, while the Intel Arc B570 and Intel Arc A750 are 1.3% and 1.5% behind respectively. Any of these GPUs paired with the Ryzen 9 7900X would produce nearly indistinguishable frame rates in Control.

The practical implication is that the exact brand choice matters little at this performance tier. A system with the Ryzen 9 7900X and any of these near-identical GPUs would land in the same combo ranking neighborhood. The data shows that the spread between the RTX 2070 SUPER and its closest rivals is small enough to be within run-to-run variance. Users considering alternatives should focus on other factors, such as driver support or feature sets, rather than raw performance differences.

The Verdict

Can this PC run Control? The answer depends on the resolution and preset. The recorded measurements show playable performance at all three tested resolutions, but with significant caveats at the higher end.

At 3840x2160, only Low settings clear the 60 FPS threshold. The average at Low is 66 FPS, while Medium drops to 47 FPS, High to 42 FPS, and Ultra to 36 FPS. This resolution is playable, but only with substantial visual compromises. The data clearly indicates that 4K is not a strong point for this combination.

At 2560x1440, the story improves. High settings run at 62 FPS average, which is the best playable preset. Medium is smoother at 70 FPS, and Low reaches 98 FPS. Ultra falls short at 54 FPS. This resolution offers a good balance for this hardware, with High providing a solid experience above the threshold.

At 1920x1080, every preset is playable. Ultra runs at 71 FPS, High at 82 FPS, Medium at 92 FPS, and Low at 130 FPS. This is where the combo performs best, with all settings clearing 60 FPS by a comfortable margin.

The verdict is straightforward: 1080p is fully playable at any setting, 1440p is playable up to High, and 4K is playable only at Low. Players who prioritize visual quality should target 1080p Ultra or 1440p High, while those who need 4K must accept Low settings.

CPU and GPU Roles

The recorded data reveals how the CPU and GPU divide responsibilities across resolutions and presets. At 1080p, the CPU's strength is apparent. The Ryzen 9 7900X, with its 12 cores and 24 threads, provides ample processing power. The frame rates at 1080p are high across all presets, with Low reaching 130 FPS and Ultra at 71 FPS. The GPU is still the bottleneck, but the CPU has enough headroom to keep frame pacing consistent.

As resolution increases, the GPU's role becomes more dominant. Moving from 1080p to 1440p, the average FPS drops noticeably at every preset. High falls from 82 to 62, Medium from 92 to 70, and Low from 130 to 98. The CPU is not the limiting factor here; the GPU's rendering capacity is what constrains performance. The RTX 2070 SUPER's 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth are adequate for 1440p, but they are stretched as the pixel count rises.

At 4K, the GPU is clearly overwhelmed. The drop from 1440p to 2160p is steep: High falls from 62 to 42 FPS, Medium from 70 to 47, and Low from 98 to 66. Ultra at 4K manages just 36 FPS. The CPU's performance is essentially irrelevant at this resolution, as the GPU cannot feed frames fast enough to utilize the processor's capabilities.

The scaling between presets also highlights the GPU's importance. At 1080p, moving from Low to Ultra costs 59 FPS (130 down to 71). At 1440p, the same preset range costs 44 FPS (98 down to 54). At 4K, the cost is 30 FPS (66 down to 36). The diminishing impact of preset changes at higher resolutions confirms that the GPU is the primary constraint, with the CPU providing diminishing returns as resolution climbs.

Best Settings per Resolution

The database records the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS for each resolution. These are the settings that maximize visual quality while maintaining playability.

At 3840x2160, the best setting is Low, with an average FPS of 66. This is the only preset at 4K that clears the 60 FPS threshold. Medium falls to 47 FPS, making it unplayable by the database's standard. Players at this resolution must accept minimal graphical fidelity to maintain smooth frame rates.

At 2560x1440, the best setting is High, delivering a 62 FPS average. This is a meaningful improvement over 4K, as High includes more advanced effects and higher texture quality. Medium runs at 70 FPS for those who prefer extra headroom, but High is the highest preset that remains playable. Ultra at 54 FPS is just below the threshold.

At 1920x1080, the best setting is Ultra, with an average of 71 FPS. This is the only resolution where the highest preset is playable. The 11 FPS margin above 60 FPS provides some buffer for demanding scenes, though minimum FPS data for Ultra is not recorded. High runs at 82 FPS, Medium at 92, and Low at 130, giving players ample flexibility.

These settings represent the ceiling for each resolution. Going higher in preset quality will push the average below 60 FPS, while staying at these levels ensures a playable experience.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following data presents the exact measured FPS values for each resolution and preset combination. Average FPS is recorded for all settings, while minimum and maximum values are only available for Medium presets.

At 1920x1080, the full range of settings is playable. Low averages 130 FPS. Medium averages 92 FPS, with a minimum of 78 and a maximum of 106. High averages 82 FPS. Ultra averages 71 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 59 FPS, showing the significant cost of higher presets at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, performance remains strong but drops from 1080p. Low averages 98 FPS. Medium averages 70 FPS, with a minimum of 59 and a maximum of 80. High averages 62 FPS. Ultra averages 54 FPS, which falls below the 60 FPS threshold. The Medium minimum of 59 FPS is notable, as it nearly dips under the playability line.

At 3840x2160, the GPU struggles. Low averages 66 FPS, just above the threshold. Medium averages 47 FPS, with a minimum of 40 and a maximum of 54. High averages 42 FPS. Ultra averages 36 FPS, the lowest recorded value in the dataset. The Medium minimum of 40 FPS indicates that even the playable-looking average can experience significant dips during intense scenes.

The data shows a consistent pattern: each resolution step up costs roughly 20-30% of the average FPS across presets. The Medium preset is the only one with full min/max data, and its minimums are always at least 10 FPS below the average, suggesting that frame pacing can be uneven. Players aiming for a strict 60 FPS floor should target presets with higher averages to account for these dips.