Control

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 combination presents a curious split: the CPU ranks in the 92nd percentile of all processors, while the GPU sits in the 72nd percentile of all graphics cards. For Control, a 2019 action-adventure title, the measured frame rates show this pairing is capable of 60 FPS across most settings, but with notable constraints at 4K. The CPU carries a launch MSRP of $499, and the GPU a launch MSRP of $299. Benchmark results indicate the combo ranks 1648th out of 3720 tested configurations for this game, placing it in the lower-middle of the pack despite strong individual component scores.

Best Settings per Resolution

The most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS at each resolution is determined by the measured average FPS data.

At 3840x2160 (4K), the only preset that clears 60 FPS is Low, with an average of 77.2 FPS. The next step up, Medium, averages 54 FPS, which falls below the playable threshold of 60 FPS. Therefore, Low is the best setting for 4K play.

At 2560x1440 (1440p), High is the highest preset that maintains 60 FPS, averaging 69.5 FPS. Medium also qualifies at 82.6 FPS, but High delivers a better visual experience while staying above the threshold. Ultra just misses the mark at 59.8 FPS, so High is the optimal choice.

At 1920x1080 (1080p), every preset exceeds 60 FPS. Ultra averages 82.9 FPS, making it the best setting for full visual quality. Lower presets run even faster, with Medium at 106.5 FPS, High at 96.1 FPS, and Low at 150.8 FPS, but none are necessary for smooth gameplay.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 1648th out of 3720 tested combinations for Control. This places it in the 44th percentile of all configurations, meaning roughly 56% of tested systems perform better. That result is surprising given the CPU's 92nd percentile standing and the GPU's 72nd percentile standing. The data suggests that the pairing is not optimally balanced for this title, or that Control's engine is particularly demanding on one component in a way that drags the overall score down.

The CPU's nearest rivals show it is tightly clustered: the AMD EPYC 9015 scores 57555 (0.1% lower), the EPYC 7313 scores 57399 (0.2% higher), the Intel Core i9-14900 scores 58115 (1.1% lower), and the Xeon Platinum 8260M scores 58323 (1.4% lower). The GPU's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon 860M at 26401 (0.3% lower), the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 at 26421 (0.3% lower), the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary at 26553 (0.8% lower), and the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT at 26011 (1.2% higher). These small deltas mean that swapping to any of these components would yield nearly identical in-game performance, but the combination's overall rank reflects that the GPU is likely the limiting factor in Control.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) at three resolutions, with only average FPS values reported—no min or max figures are available.

At 3840x2160, the progression is stark. Low averages 77.2 FPS, Medium drops to 54 FPS, High to 51.2 FPS, and Ultra falls to 40.8 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 23.2 FPS, while the gap between Medium and Ultra is only 13.2 FPS, suggesting that the preset scaling is non-linear and the GPU becomes a hard bottleneck beyond Low.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates are more playable. Low averages 112.1 FPS, Medium 82.6 FPS, High 69.5 FPS, and Ultra 59.8 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra is just 9.7 FPS, which is why High is the recommended preset—it delivers 69.5 FPS while Ultra barely misses the 60 FPS mark.

At 1920x1080, all presets run comfortably above 60 FPS. Low averages 150.8 FPS, Medium 106.5 FPS, High 96.1 FPS, and Ultra 82.9 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra represents a 45% reduction in average FPS, but the lowest result is still 82.9 FPS, leaving headroom for high refresh-rate displays.

The data shows that the largest absolute FPS loss occurs between 1080p Low (150.8) and 1440p Low (112.1), a drop of 38.7 FPS. From 1440p Low to 4K Low, the drop is 34.9 FPS. This consistent reduction across settings indicates that the GPU's memory bandwidth and compute are the primary constraints, as the CPU's scores are high enough to keep up at all resolutions.

Similar Performance Alternatives

If you were to swap the CPU or GPU for a component with nearly identical average benchmark scores, the in-game FPS would remain effectively unchanged. The CPU's nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 9015, has an average score of 57555, which is 0.1% lower than the 9900X's 57498. The EPYC 7315 is 0.2% higher, the Intel Core i9-14900 is 1.1% lower, and the Xeon Platinum 8260M is 1.4% lower. None of these differences would move the measured FPS by more than a fraction of a frame per second.

On the GPU side, the AMD Radeon 860M scores 26401, which is 0.3% lower than the RTX 5060's 26331. The NVIDIA GeForce MX550 scores 26421, also 0.3% lower. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary scores 26553, 0.8% lower, and the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT scores 26011, which is 1.2% higher. In practice, swapping the RTX 5060 for an RX 6750 XT would produce a negligible performance gain—around 1%—which would not change the playability verdict at any resolution. Similarly, the MX550 or 860M would be nearly indistinguishable in Control.

These alternatives are relevant for system builders who cannot find the exact components, but the data shows that the RTX 5060 is positioned in a tightly packed cluster of GPUs. The CPU's rivals are server-class chips, but their average scores are so close that they would not shift the gameplay experience.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Control at 4K with 60 FPS?

A: Yes, but only at Low settings. The measured average FPS at 3840x2160 Low is 77.2 FPS. All higher presets fall below 60 FPS, with Medium at 54 FPS, High at 51.2 FPS, and Ultra at 40.8 FPS.

Q: What is the best preset for 1440p?

A: High is the best preset that stays at or above 60 FPS, averaging 69.5 FPS. Ultra just misses the threshold at 59.8 FPS, while Medium and Low are also playable at 82.6 and 112.1 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the more limiting factor in Control?

A: The data shows the GPU is the bottleneck at higher resolutions and settings. The FPS drops dramatically when moving from 1080p to 1440p to 4K, while the CPU's benchmark scores are far above the GPU's relative standing. The CPU ranks in the 92nd percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU ranks in the 72nd percentile of all GPUs.

Q: How does this combo compare to other tested systems?

A: It ranks 1648th out of 3720 combinations, placing it in the 44th percentile of all tested systems for Control. This is lower than the individual component percentiles, indicating that the pairing does not fully leverage the CPU's strength.

Q: What settings are playable at 1080p?

A: All four presets are playable at 1080p. The highest preset, Ultra, averages 82.9 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold. Low averages 150.8 FPS, Medium 106.5 FPS, and High 96.1 FPS.

Q: What is the best preset at 4K for this system?

A: Low is the best and only preset that clears 60 FPS at 4K, averaging 77.2 FPS. The next preset up, Medium, drops to 54 FPS, so there is no alternative for higher quality at 4K.

The Verdict

Yes, this PC can run Control, and it clears the 60 FPS threshold at every resolution if the right preset is selected. At 3840x2160, the only playable setting is Low, with an average of 77.2 FPS. At 2560x1440, the best playable setting is High, with 69.5 FPS, and Medium and Low also qualify. At 1920x1080, all four presets are playable, with Ultra at 82.9 FPS being the best visual option.

The verdict by resolution is explicit: 4K is playable only at Low, 1440p is playable at High, Low, and Medium, and 1080p is playable at every preset. If you want to run Control at 4K with higher visual quality, this system will not meet the 60 FPS target. For 1440p, you can enjoy High settings without sacrificing smoothness. For 1080p, you can max out the game and still have 23 FPS of headroom above the threshold.

CPU and GPU Roles

The CPU and GPU play distinct roles depending on the resolution and preset. The measured FPS scaling reveals which component governs performance.

At 1920x1080, the GPU is the primary constraint because FPS drops significantly as settings increase. Low produces 150.8 FPS, but Ultra drops to 82.9 FPS—a 45% reduction. The CPU, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 32172 and a single-core score of 2253, is likely not limiting at any setting; even at Low, the frame rate is high enough that the GPU's rasterization and pixel throughput are the deciding factors. The GPU's Passmark G3D score of 20891 aligns with this interpretation.

At 2560x1440, the same pattern holds. The gap between Low (112.1) and Ultra (59.8) is 52.3 FPS, a 47% drop. The CPU's 3DMark scores, such as 12552 for 16 threads and 13929 for max threads, suggest it can feed the GPU adequately at these frame rates. The GPU's memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s becomes more critical as the pixel count rises.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is overwhelmingly the limiting factor. The jump from Low to Medium drops FPS by 23.2 FPS, and from Medium to Ultra by another 13.2 FPS. The CPU's performance is far from the bottleneck, as even the weakest preset at 4K yields 77.2 FPS, which is still high. The GPU's 8 GB of GDDR7 memory and 128-bit bus may be under pressure at 4K, but the data does not isolate memory capacity; it simply shows that the GPU compute and memory bandwidth are insufficient for higher presets at this resolution.

The CPU's high single-thread and multi-thread scores (Geekbench single-core 3010, multi-core 22174) mean that even at low settings, the system is not held back by processor performance. The scaling between resolutions is consistent with a GPU-bound scenario: the FPS at each setting drops by roughly 30-50% when moving from 1080p to 4K, regardless of preset. This indicates that the GPU's throughput is the primary determinant of frame rate, and the CPU's role is secondary across all tested configurations.