Control

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 lands at rank 2888 out of 3720 tested combos for Control. That places this configuration in the lower third of all tested pairings, which is a direct reflection of the GPU's modest standing rather than the CPU's capability. The processor itself sits in the 92nd percentile among all CPUs, while the graphics card rests in the 58th percentile among all GPUs. This imbalance means the system's overall ranking is dragged down by the graphics side, and the data confirms that Control's performance ceiling here is set by the RTX 2060, not the Ryzen 9 9900X.

Benchmark results indicate that this combo is not a top-tier performer for this title, but it is far from unusable. At 1920x1080, the system clears the 60 FPS playable threshold on three out of four tested settings presets. The recorded data shows a clear pattern: as resolution climbs, the playable options shrink quickly. The verdict by resolution is unambiguous. At 3840x2160, no settings preset reaches 60 FPS. At 2560x1440, only Low settings manage to stay above the threshold. At 1920x1080, High, Medium, and Low all remain playable, with High delivering the best visual quality while still holding an average of 70.3 FPS.

The CPU's strength is evident in synthetic workloads. The Ryzen 9 9900X scores 32,172 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 22,174 in Geekbench multi-core, numbers that put it far beyond what Control requires. The GPU, however, posts a PassMark G3D score of 14,111 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,242, which are modest figures for a 2019-era card. The result is a system that is CPU-rich and GPU-limited, and the frame rates reflect that bottleneck consistently across all resolutions.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the CPU and GPU provide context for what other hardware would behave similarly in this pairing. On the processor side, the Ryzen 9 9900X has an average benchmark score of 57,498. The closest competitor is the AMD EPYC 9015, which scores 57,555, a difference of just 0.1%. The AMD EPYC 7313 scores 57,399, also within 0.2%. The Intel Core i9-14900 scores 58,115, putting it 1.1% ahead, while the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M scores 58,323, which is 1.4% ahead. These four CPUs would deliver nearly identical CPU-bound performance in Control, meaning any of them paired with the RTX 2060 would produce similar frame rates.

On the GPU side, the RTX 2060 has an average benchmark score of 15,290. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 matches it almost exactly at 15,283, a delta of 0%. The AMD Radeon 680M scores 15,270, just 0.1% behind. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM scores 15,199, which is 0.6% behind, and the AMD Radeon RX 7600 scores 15,171, trailing by 0.8%. These four graphics cards would behave nearly identically to the RTX 2060 in Control, so swapping in any of them would yield frame rates within a couple of percent of what is recorded here. For a user looking for similar performance, any of these GPUs paired with a high-end CPU would land in the same performance band.

The practical takeaway is that the CPU can be swapped among several high-end server and desktop parts without changing the gaming outcome, while the GPU alternatives all sit at a similar performance tier. The recorded data shows that the RTX 2060's nearest rivals are not faster cards, they are equivalent ones, so there is no meaningful upgrade path within this immediate cluster.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Control at 1920x1080 with High settings?

A: Yes. The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 with High settings is 70.3, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold by a comfortable margin.

Q: What is the best settings preset at 2560x1440 that stays above 60 FPS?

A: Low settings is the only preset at 2560x1440 that remains playable, with an average of 82.4 FPS. Medium drops to 56.5 FPS, which falls below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Are there any playable settings at 3840x2160?

A: No. The highest average FPS at 3840x2160 is 57.1 on Low settings, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold. High, Medium, and Ultra all score lower, at 35.5, 39.5, and 28.2 FPS respectively.

Q: How does the Ryzen 9 9900X compare to its nearest CPU rivals?

A: The Ryzen 9 9900X averages a benchmark score of 57,498. The AMD EPYC 9015 is 0.1% behind, the AMD EPYC 7313 is 0.2% ahead, the Intel Core i9-14900 is 1.1% ahead, and the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M is 1.4% ahead. All are effectively within the same performance class.

Q: Which GPU alternatives would perform similarly to the RTX 2060?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 matches the RTX 2060 exactly at 0% delta, the AMD Radeon 680M is 0.1% behind, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM is 0.6% behind, and the AMD Radeon RX 7600 is 0.8% behind. Any of these would produce nearly identical frame rates in Control.

Q: What is the overall rank of this combo among tested systems?

A: This combo ranks 2888 out of 3720 tested combinations for Control. That places it in the lower third, primarily due to the GPU's modest performance tier relative to the CPU's high standing.

The Verdict

This PC can run Control, but the experience depends heavily on the chosen resolution. The data is clear: at 1920x1080, the system delivers playable performance across three presets, with High settings achieving 70.3 FPS on average. At 2560x1440, only Low settings clear the 60 FPS bar, hitting 82.4 FPS. At 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS, with the best result being 57.1 FPS on Low.

The verdict by resolution is straightforward. For 1080p gaming, this combo is a solid choice, offering smooth frame rates with High visual quality. For 1440p, users must accept Low settings to stay playable, which compromises the visual experience. For 4K, the system is not viable at any tested preset, as even Low falls short of the 60 FPS threshold.

The CPU is not the limiting factor. The Ryzen 9 9900X has ample processing headroom, as shown by its top-tier synthetic scores. The GPU, however, is a mid-range part from 2019, and its performance ceiling is what defines the playable envelope. Users should target 1920x1080 for the best balance of visual fidelity and smoothness, or 2560x1440 with reduced settings if they prefer a higher resolution. 4K gaming is not recommended with this configuration.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data provides average FPS for each resolution and settings preset combination. Minimum and maximum FPS values were not captured, so the analysis relies on average frame rates.

At 3840x2160, the results are as follows:

• Ultra: 28.2 FPS
• High: 35.5 FPS
• Medium: 39.5 FPS
• Low: 57.1 FPS

All four presets at 4K fall below the 60 FPS playable threshold. The spread from Ultra to Low is 28.9 FPS, showing that settings adjustments have a significant impact, but even the lowest preset cannot reach playable levels.

At 2560x1440, the results improve:

• Ultra: 48.2 FPS
• High: 51.7 FPS
• Medium: 56.5 FPS
• Low: 82.4 FPS

Only Low settings exceed 60 FPS. Medium comes close at 56.5 FPS but misses the threshold by 3.5 FPS. High and Ultra are further behind, at 51.7 and 48.2 FPS respectively. The jump from Medium to Low is 25.9 FPS, indicating that the Low preset unlocks significantly more headroom.

At 1920x1080, the system performs best:

• Ultra: 57.5 FPS
• High: 70.3 FPS
• Medium: 74.3 FPS
• Low: 109.5 FPS

High, Medium, and Low all clear the 60 FPS threshold. Ultra falls just short at 57.5 FPS, missing by 2.5 FPS. Low delivers the highest average at 109.5 FPS, which is more than 80% above the playable threshold. The difference between High and Ultra is 12.8 FPS, highlighting that the Ultra preset imposes a notable cost.

The overall pattern across resolutions is consistent. The RTX 2060 scales predictably with settings, and the CPU never appears to constrain frame rates. The largest FPS gains come from dropping to Low settings, which is particularly effective at 2560x1440 and above.

Best Settings per Resolution

For each resolution, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is identified based on the recorded averages.

At 3840x2160, there is no playable preset. The closest is Low at 57.1 FPS, which is 2.9 FPS below the threshold. Users at 4K cannot achieve smooth performance with this combo at any tested settings.

At 2560x1440, the best playable preset is Low, with an average of 82.4 FPS. This is the only option that clears 60 FPS. Medium is the next step up but falls to 56.5 FPS, so it is not recommended if maintaining 60 FPS is the goal. Low settings at 1440p provide a playable experience with a comfortable margin, leaving 22.4 FPS of headroom above the threshold.

At 1920x1080, the best playable preset is High, with an average of 70.3 FPS. This offers the highest visual quality among playable options. Medium is slightly faster at 74.3 FPS, but High provides better graphics while still staying 10.3 FPS above the threshold. Ultra is not playable, as it drops to 57.5 FPS, which is below 60. Low is the fastest at 109.5 FPS but offers the lowest visual fidelity. For users prioritizing image quality, High is the recommended choice at 1080p.

In summary, the best settings per resolution are: none at 3840x2160, Low at 2560x1440, and High at 1920x1080. These selections maximize visual quality while maintaining the 60 FPS playable threshold.