Control

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER combination delivers consistently high frame rates in Control, with all tested settings presets at every resolution clearing the 60 FPS playable threshold. The data shows a system that scales predictably from 1080p to 4K, maintaining a comfortable margin above the playability baseline even under the most demanding visual load.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset remains fully playable, with an average frame rate of 62.7 FPS. This is the most demanding configuration tested, and while the margin above the 60 FPS threshold is slim, it is sufficient. The data shows that High settings yield 72.1 FPS, Medium reaches 76.1 FPS, and Low produces 107.5 FPS, but the Ultra preset is the recommended choice because it stays above the playable threshold while delivering maximum visual quality.

Moving to 2560x1440, the Ultra preset achieves 88.6 FPS on average. This represents a substantial improvement over the 4K result, providing a 41% performance uplift over the 4K Ultra figure. The High preset runs at 103.2 FPS, Medium at 114.2 FPS, and Low at 163.7 FPS. Again, Ultra is the recommended setting, as it comfortably exceeds the 60 FPS target with room to spare.

At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset produces 118.6 FPS on average. This is the highest performance tier tested, with High reaching 136.2 FPS, Medium at 155.4 FPS, and Low at 212.6 FPS. The Ultra setting at this resolution offers nearly double the frame rate of the 4K Ultra result, confirming that this combination handles the game with exceptional headroom at the most common gaming resolution.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Control at 4K with maximum settings?

A: Yes. The Ultra preset at 3840x2160 produces an average of 62.7 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS playable threshold defined in the data.

Q: What is the highest average frame rate recorded for this combination?

A: The Low preset at 1920x1080 delivers 212.6 FPS on average, which is the highest figure across all tested resolutions and settings.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 4K at Ultra settings?

A: The average frame rate drops from 118.6 FPS at 1920x1080 to 62.7 FPS at 3840x2160, representing a 47% reduction in performance.

Q: Is the Medium preset at 4K faster than the High preset at 4K?

A: Yes. Medium produces 76.1 FPS on average, while High achieves 72.1 FPS. The difference is 4 FPS, or roughly 5.5%.

Q: Which resolution shows the smallest gap between Low and Ultra settings?

A: At 3840x2160, the gap between Low (107.5 FPS) and Ultra (62.7 FPS) is 44.8 FPS. At 2560x1440 the gap is 75.1 FPS, and at 1920x1080 it is 94.0 FPS. The 4K resolution shows the smallest absolute difference.

Q: Does every settings preset at every resolution clear the 60 FPS threshold?

A: Yes. The data lists all four settings presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) as playable at all three tested resolutions, with the lowest recorded average being 62.7 FPS at 4K Ultra.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the measured averages are 107.5 FPS for Low, 76.1 FPS for Medium, 72.1 FPS for High, and 62.7 FPS for Ultra. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a steady decline, with the largest single step occurring between Low and Medium, a drop of 31.4 FPS. The step from Medium to High is smaller at 4.0 FPS, and from High to Ultra the drop is 9.4 FPS. This pattern suggests that the Medium to High transition is the least demanding visual upgrade in the 4K configuration.

At 2560x1440, the averages are 163.7 FPS for Low, 114.2 FPS for Medium, 103.2 FPS for High, and 88.6 FPS for Ultra. The drop from Low to Medium is 49.5 FPS, from Medium to High is 11.0 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 14.6 FPS. Compared to the 4K results, the absolute frame rates are higher across the board, but the relative scaling between presets follows a similar pattern.

At 1920x1080, the averages are 212.6 FPS for Low, 155.4 FPS for Medium, 136.2 FPS for High, and 118.6 FPS for Ultra. The Low to Medium drop is 57.2 FPS, Medium to High is 19.2 FPS, and High to Ultra is 17.6 FPS. At 1080p, the system is clearly CPU-bound at Low settings, as the 212.6 FPS figure represents a ceiling that the GPU cannot exceed regardless of further reductions in visual load.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU benchmarks place the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X at the 92nd percentile among all tested processors, with an average benchmark score of 57498. The nearest rival is the AMD EPYC 9015, which scores 57555, a difference of just 0.1%. The AMD EPYC 7313 comes in at 57399, also 0.2% away from the 9900X. The Intel Core i9-14900 scores 58115, putting it 1.1% ahead, while the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M reaches 58323, a 1.4% lead. These four processors represent the closest performance envelope, with all deltas within a 2.5% band, meaning any of them would deliver nearly identical frame rates in CPU-bound scenarios.

On the GPU side, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER sits at the 83rd percentile among all tested graphics cards, with an average benchmark score of 43223. The nearest rival is the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB at 43262, a 0.1% difference. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile scores 43268, also 0.1% away, and the Quadro M6000 reaches 43301, a 0.2% gap. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile is the farthest rival at 43667, still only 1.0% ahead. This tight clustering indicates that swapping the RTX 4070 SUPER for any of these alternatives would produce statistically indistinguishable frame rates in Control.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER ranks 629th out of 3720 tested combinations for Control. This places the system in the top 17% of all configurations evaluated for this game. The ranking reflects the strength of both components individually, as the CPU sits at the 92nd percentile and the GPU at the 83rd percentile. The combined performance places this system well above the median configuration, aligning with the measured frame rates that show high performance even at 4K Ultra settings.

The Verdict

This PC can run Control with exceptional ease. The verdict data lists all four settings presets as playable at every resolution tested, with the playable threshold set at 60 FPS. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset delivers 118.6 FPS, which is nearly double the threshold. At 2560x1440, Ultra produces 88.6 FPS, providing a 47.7% margin above the 60 FPS minimum. Even at 3840x2160, the most demanding configuration, Ultra achieves 62.7 FPS, clearing the threshold by 4.5%. The system never drops below the playable threshold in any tested configuration, making it a robust performer for this game across all common gaming scenarios.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals how component roles shift across resolutions. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves 212.6 FPS, while the Ultra preset drops to 118.6 FPS, a 44% reduction. This large scaling with settings at 1080p indicates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck when visual load increases, as the CPU has ample headroom to feed the graphics card at lower settings. The small gap between Medium (155.4 FPS) and High (136.2 FPS) at this resolution further suggests that the GPU handles these transitions with relative efficiency.

At 2560x1440, the performance pattern changes. The Low preset produces 163.7 FPS, which is 23% lower than the 1080p Low result. This reduction shows that the GPU is becoming more constrained as pixel count rises. The Ultra preset at 88.6 FPS represents a 25% drop from the 1080p Ultra figure. The consistent proportional scaling between resolutions indicates that both components contribute to performance, with the GPU carrying an increasing load as resolution increases.

At 3840x2160, the GPU's role becomes dominant. The Low preset drops to 107.5 FPS, a 34% reduction from the 1440p Low result, and the Ultra preset falls to 62.7 FPS, a 29% reduction. The narrowing spread between settings at 4K — from 107.5 FPS at Low to 62.7 FPS at Ultra — shows that the GPU is nearing its limits, as visual settings have less impact on frame rate when pixel throughput is the primary constraint. The CPU, with its high benchmark scores and 92nd percentile ranking, has sufficient headroom to avoid becoming a bottleneck at any tested resolution. The data indicates that Control scales predictably with resolution, and this combination maintains playable performance throughout, with the GPU being the limiting factor at 4K and the CPU providing ample support at lower resolutions.