Control

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER is a combination that lands in the lower half of the database’s tested configurations for Control. With a combo rank of 2608 out of 3720 tested combos, this system sits in the 30th percentile of all recorded pairings for this title. That ranking places it below the median, but the raw frame rates tell a more nuanced story across different resolutions and settings. The recorded data shows a system that is clearly capable of running the game, but the margin of comfort narrows considerably as resolution and graphical load increase. The CPU and GPU are from very different generations and market positions, and their interaction in this specific title produces a performance profile that is best understood by examining each resolution tier independently.

How This Combo Ranks

The database ranks this pairing at 2608 out of 3720 tested combos for Control, placing it in the lower 30% of all recorded configurations. This rank is heavily influenced by the GPU’s overall performance percentile, which sits at 62 when compared to all graphics cards in the database. The CPU, by contrast, is a high-end part with a percentile rank of 92 against all tested processors. The discrepancy between these two percentiles is the defining characteristic of this combo: the Ryzen 9 9900X is far more capable than the RTX 2060 SUPER, and in a game like Control, the graphics card becomes the limiting factor at higher resolutions and settings.

The combo rank of 2608 reflects that this is not a top-tier gaming pairing for this specific title, but it is far from the bottom. The recorded average frame rates across all tested configurations show that the system handles 1080p with ease, struggles at 1440p with only the lighter presets, and only passes the 60 FPS threshold at 4K when settings are dropped to Low. The ranking is a composite measure, but the resolution-by-resolution data provides the clearest picture of where this system excels and where it falls short.

CPU and GPU Roles

The Ryzen 9 9900X is a 12-core, 24-thread processor based on the Zen 5 architecture, with a boost clock of 5.60 GHz and a substantial 64 MB of L3 cache. Its benchmark scores are impressive, including a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 32172 and a single-core score of 2253. The RTX 2060 SUPER, on the other hand, is a Turing-generation card with 2176 shading units and 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its PassMark G3D score of 16462 and 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 2011 place it as a mid-range GPU from its era.

In Control, the data shows that the GPU is the dominant bottleneck at higher resolutions. At 3840x2160, the frame rate drops from 61.9 FPS at Low settings to 31.6 FPS at Ultra, a decline of approximately 49%. This steep drop is characteristic of GPU-limited rendering, where the graphics card’s fill rate and shading power are overwhelmed by the pixel count. At 2560x1440, the same pattern appears: 87.1 FPS at Low falls to 50.4 FPS at Ultra, a 42% reduction. At 1920x1080, the impact of settings is less severe but still substantial: 120.3 FPS at Low drops to 64.7 FPS at Ultra, a 46% reduction.

The CPU’s role becomes more apparent at lower resolutions and lighter settings, where the frame rates are high enough to expose any processor limitations. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 120.3 FPS, a figure that requires strong single-thread performance. The Ryzen 9 9900X’s single-core score in Cinebench R23 of 2253 and its 3DMark single-thread score of 1286 indicate that it has ample headroom for this workload. The data suggests that at 1080p, the CPU is not the limiting factor, even at Ultra settings where the GPU still delivers 64.7 FPS.

The scaling between resolutions confirms this split. Moving from 1080p to 1440p at High settings reduces the average FPS from 73.6 to 54.7, a 26% drop. Moving from 1440p to 4K at High settings reduces it further to 39 FPS, a 29% drop. These consistent percentage declines across resolution steps point to a GPU-bound scenario at High and above. At Low settings, the drops are smaller in absolute terms but still present: 120.3 to 87.1 to 61.9 FPS across the three resolutions. The CPU is capable of feeding the GPU at all tested points, but the RTX 2060 SUPER simply cannot maintain high frame rates at 4K or even 1440p with demanding presets.

Best Settings per Resolution

The playable threshold in the database is set at 60 FPS, and the recorded data shows which presets clear that bar at each resolution.

At 3840x2160, only Low settings achieve a playable frame rate. The average FPS at Low is 61.9, which just clears the 60 FPS threshold. Medium drops to 43.8 FPS, High to 39 FPS, and Ultra to 31.6 FPS. None of these are playable by the database’s standard. The best settings for 4K are therefore Low, with an average of 61.9 FPS.

At 2560x1440, two presets are playable: Low at 87.1 FPS and Medium at 63.8 FPS. High falls to 54.7 FPS, and Ultra to 50.4 FPS, both below the threshold. The best settings for 1440p are Medium, which provides an average of 63.8 FPS, offering a better visual experience than Low while still maintaining playability.

At 1920x1080, all four presets exceed 60 FPS. The averages are 120.3 FPS for Low, 83.1 FPS for Medium, 73.6 FPS for High, and 64.7 FPS for Ultra. The Ultra preset remains above 60 FPS, making it the best choice for 1080p gaming on this system. The 64.7 FPS average at Ultra is not a large margin over the threshold, but it is sufficient.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The database’s nearest rivals for the CPU and GPU provide context for what other hardware would behave similarly in this game. For the Ryzen 9 9900X, the closest matches are the AMD EPYC 9015, the AMD EPYC 7313, the Intel Core i9-14900, and the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M. The EPYC 9015 has an average benchmark score of 57555, which is 0.1% lower than the 9900X’s 57498. The EPYC 7313 scores 57399, 0.2% higher. The Core i9-14900 scores 58115, which is 1.1% higher, and the Xeon Platinum 8260M scores 58323, 1.4% higher. These differences are small, indicating that any of these CPUs would produce nearly identical frame rates in Control when paired with the same GPU, since the game is not CPU-bound at the tested settings.

For the RTX 2060 SUPER, the nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile, the AMD Radeon Pro 5700, the AMD Radeon RX 460, and the Intel Arc A770M. The RTX 3060 Mobile has an average score of 18159, which is 0.4% lower than the 2060 SUPER’s 18093. The Radeon Pro 5700 scores 18189, 0.5% lower. The RX 460 scores 18373, which is 1.5% higher, and the Arc A770M scores 18383, 1.6% higher. These percentage deltas are minimal, so a system with one of these GPUs and the Ryzen 9 9900X would produce very similar frame rates to the tested configuration. The RX 460 and Arc A770M are particularly close in raw score, suggesting they would deliver nearly identical performance in Control, though architectural differences could manifest in specific scenes.

It is important to note that these rival comparisons are based on overall benchmark averages, not game-specific scores. The database does not provide Control-specific scores for these alternatives, so the similarity in synthetic benchmarks is the only available metric. In practice, the RTX 2060 SUPER’s Turing architecture with 34 RT cores and 272 tensor cores may have specific advantages in Control’s ray-traced effects, but the measured FPS data in this page does not separate ray tracing from standard rendering.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded measurements provide a complete picture of performance across all resolution and settings combinations.

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its highest frame rates. Low settings produce an average of 120.3 FPS, Medium produces 83.1 FPS, High produces 73.6 FPS, and Ultra produces 64.7 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 55.6 FPS, a significant range that gives players a wide choice between visual fidelity and frame rate headroom. Even at Ultra, the average remains above 60 FPS, so the system never fails the playability test at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the averages are lower but still respectable for lighter presets. Low settings yield 87.1 FPS, Medium yields 63.8 FPS, High yields 54.7 FPS, and Ultra yields 50.4 FPS. The transition from Medium to High is the critical point where the system crosses below the 60 FPS threshold. Players who want to stay above 60 FPS must cap their settings at Medium, while those who accept lower frame rates can use High or Ultra.

At 3840x2160, the system is severely constrained. Low settings produce 61.9 FPS, barely clearing the threshold. Medium drops to 43.8 FPS, High to 39 FPS, and Ultra to 31.6 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 30.3 FPS, and the system cannot maintain playable frame rates at any setting above Low. The 4K Ultra average of 31.6 FPS is less than half of the 1080p Ultra average of 64.7 FPS, illustrating the massive load increase from pixel count.

The database records no minimum or maximum frame rate values for any configuration, only averages. This means the data cannot speak to frame time consistency or stuttering. The averages suggest a stable experience, but without min/max data, it is not possible to assess worst-case drops during intense combat or particle-heavy scenes. The absence of this data is a limitation of the record, but the average values are sufficient to determine playability at the 60 FPS threshold.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows that this system can run Control, but the quality of the experience depends heavily on resolution and settings. At 1920x1080, the system is fully capable of playing the game at any preset, including Ultra with an average of 64.7 FPS. This is the resolution where the combo performs best, and it clears the 60 FPS threshold across the board.

At 2560x1440, the system is playable at Low and Medium settings, with Medium averaging 63.8 FPS. High and Ultra fall short at 54.7 and 50.4 FPS respectively. Players at this resolution must make a trade-off between visual quality and frame rate, but a solid 60 FPS experience is achievable at Medium.

At 3840x2160, the system is only playable at Low settings, which average 61.9 FPS. Any higher preset drops below the threshold, with Ultra falling to 31.6 FPS. This is not a 4K gaming system for Control beyond the most basic visual settings.

The verdict by resolution is clear: 1080p is fully playable at all presets, 1440p is playable at Low and Medium, and 4K is playable only at Low. The Ryzen 9 9900X provides more than enough CPU performance for this game, as evidenced by the high frame rates at low resolutions where the processor would be stressed. The RTX 2060 SUPER is the limiting component, and its mid-range GPU class shows in the steep performance drop as resolution increases. For players targeting 1080p, this is a strong combo for Control. For 1440p, it is adequate with settings compromises. For 4K, it is marginal at best. The data does not suggest any configuration instability, only that the GPU’s capabilities are exhausted at higher resolutions.