Control

This analysis evaluates the Intel Core i5-13400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D combination specifically for running Control, based on measured benchmark data. The data shows a clear performance picture across three resolutions and four quality presets, with the combo ranking 41st out of 3,720 tested combinations.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-13400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D achieves a combo rank of 41 out of 3,720 tested configurations in Control. This places the pairing in the top 1.1% of all tested combos, indicating exceptional headroom for this title. The ranking reflects the aggregate performance across all resolution and preset combinations, and the data confirms that this system is far beyond what Control demands for smooth gameplay.

The CPU itself sits at the 77th percentile among all processors in the database, with an average benchmark score of 25,292. Its nearest rivals in overall CPU performance are the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS (average score 25,284, delta 0%), the Intel Core 5 120 (25,362, -0.3%), and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D (25,365, -0.3%). These deltas are negligible, meaning the i5-13400F's compute performance is effectively identical to those alternatives in synthetic workloads.

The GPU, meanwhile, ranks at the 92nd percentile among all graphics cards, with an average benchmark score of 77,712. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT (76,904, delta 1.1%), the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT (78,940, -1.6%), and the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB (79,396, -2.1%). The small delta percentages here indicate that the RTX 5090 D's raw GPU compute is closely matched by those three cards, despite the massive architectural differences.

The combination's high rank is driven primarily by the GPU's dominance in rasterization-heavy workloads like Control. The CPU's 77th percentile standing is adequate for feeding the GPU at high frame rates, but the measured FPS data shows that the GPU is the limiting factor at every resolution and preset tested.

CPU and GPU Roles

The measured FPS data reveals how the balance shifts between CPU and GPU as resolution changes. At 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the system delivers 243 FPS on Low settings, 211 FPS on Medium, 188 FPS on High, and 163 FPS on Ultra. The gap between Low and Ultra is 80 FPS, or 33%, showing that preset scaling has a substantial impact even at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, the numbers drop predictably: 221 FPS on Low, 160 FPS on Medium, 142 FPS on High, and 124 FPS on Ultra. The percentage drop from 1080p to 1440p ranges from 9% at Low (243 to 221 FPS) to 24% at Ultra (163 to 124 FPS). This scaling pattern indicates that the GPU is becoming more stressed as pixel count increases, but the CPU still has enough headroom to maintain high frame rates.

At 3840x2160, the resolution scaling becomes more pronounced. Low settings yield 152 FPS, Medium 108 FPS, High 96 FPS, and Ultra 83 FPS. The drop from 1440p to 4K is steepest at Low settings (221 to 152 FPS, a 31% reduction) and most moderate at Ultra (124 to 83 FPS, a 33% reduction). This consistent ~30% reduction across presets when moving from 1440p to 4K strongly suggests that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at all resolutions, as CPU load does not scale with resolution.

The preset scaling within each resolution reinforces this conclusion. At 1080p, moving from Low to Ultra reduces FPS by 33% (243 to 163 FPS). At 1440p, the same preset change reduces FPS by 44% (221 to 124 FPS). At 4K, the reduction is 45% (152 to 83 FPS). The larger relative drops at higher resolutions indicate that the GPU's rendering work increases disproportionately with preset quality, while the CPU's contribution remains relatively constant.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS, Intel Core 5 120, and AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D. All three have average benchmark scores within 0.4% of the i5-13400F. In practical terms, any of these processors would deliver nearly identical frame rates in Control when paired with the RTX 5090 D, because the GPU dominates performance at all tested settings. The Ryzen 9 6900HS is a mobile chip, while the Core 5 120 and Ryzen 5 5600X3D are desktop parts, but their synthetic performance parity means the choice between them would not materially affect gameplay.

For the GPU, the AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT, AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT, and NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe variants (12 GB and 16 GB) are the nearest rivals. The RX 6650M XT is 1.1% slower than the RTX 5090 D in average benchmark score, while the RX 6850M XT is 1.6% faster and the Tesla P100 cards are 2.1% to 2.4% faster. These deltas are within the margin of measurement error for many games, so any of these GPUs would produce similar FPS in Control. However, the Tesla P100 cards lack modern game-oriented features, which could affect real-world performance in ways synthetic benchmarks do not capture.

The practical takeaway is that this combo's performance envelope is well-defined by its GPU tier. Swapping the CPU for any of its nearest rivals would change Control's FPS by less than 1%, while swapping the GPU for a nearby rival would change FPS by roughly 1-2% based on the average score deltas.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: this system can run Control at every resolution and preset tested, with all configurations clearing the 60 FPS playable threshold. At 3840x2160, the lowest average FPS is 83 on Ultra settings, which is 38% above the 60 FPS threshold. At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset delivers 124 FPS on average, more than double the threshold. At 1920x1080, Ultra settings achieve 163 FPS, nearly triple the threshold.

The verdict by resolution confirms that all four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) are playable at each of the three resolutions. The best settings at 4K are Ultra with an average of 83 FPS, at 1440p Ultra with 124 FPS, and at 1080p Ultra with 163 FPS. There is no scenario in the measured data where this combo drops below 60 FPS, even at the most demanding combination of 4K and Ultra settings.

The minimum FPS values recorded for Medium settings provide additional confidence. At 4K Medium, the minimum is 92 FPS; at 1440p Medium, the minimum is 136 FPS; and at 1080p Medium, the minimum is 180 FPS. These minimums are all well above 60 FPS, suggesting that frame time spikes are unlikely to cause noticeable stutter. For High and Ultra presets, minimum FPS data is not provided, but the average values are sufficiently high that dips below 60 FPS would require a 28% or greater drop at 4K Ultra (83 to under 60 FPS), which is unlikely given the Medium preset's minimum-to-average ratio.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured frame rates are as follows: Low settings average 243 FPS with no minimum or maximum recorded. Medium settings average 211 FPS, with a minimum of 180 FPS and a maximum of 243 FPS. High settings average 188 FPS. Ultra settings average 163 FPS. The Medium preset's minimum of 180 FPS represents a 15% drop from its average, while the maximum matches the Low preset's average exactly.

At 2560x1440, Low settings average 221 FPS. Medium settings average 160 FPS, with a minimum of 136 FPS and a maximum of 184 FPS. High settings average 142 FPS. Ultra settings average 124 FPS. The Medium preset's minimum of 136 FPS is 15% below its average, and the maximum of 184 FPS is 15% above, showing typical variance for this workload.

At 3840x2160, Low settings average 152 FPS. Medium settings average 108 FPS, with a minimum of 92 FPS and a maximum of 124 FPS. High settings average 96 FPS. Ultra settings average 83 FPS. The Medium preset's minimum of 92 FPS is 15% below its average, consistent with the variance seen at lower resolutions. The spread between minimum and maximum at 4K Medium is 32 FPS, which is proportionally similar to the spreads at 1440p (48 FPS) and 1080p (63 FPS).

Looking at the progression across presets within each resolution, the step from Low to Medium is the largest: at 1080p it drops 32 FPS (243 to 211), at 1440p it drops 61 FPS (221 to 160), and at 4K it drops 44 FPS (152 to 108). The step from High to Ultra is also significant: 25 FPS at 1080p, 18 FPS at 1440p, and 13 FPS at 4K. The Medium to High step is smaller: 23 FPS at 1080p, 18 FPS at 1440p, and 12 FPS at 4K.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Control at 60 FPS on 4K Ultra settings?

A: Yes. The measured average FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings is 83 FPS, which is 38% above the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: What is the best preset at 1440p that stays above 60 FPS?

A: Ultra settings at 2560x1440 deliver an average of 124 FPS, making it the most demanding preset that clears the threshold. All four presets at this resolution are playable.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core i5-13400F has an average benchmark score of 25,292, which is within 0.4% of the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS, Intel Core 5 120, and AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D. The performance differences are negligible.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU more important for Control at 1080p?

A: The GPU dominates. Moving from Low to Ultra at 1920x1080 reduces FPS by 33% (243 to 163), while the CPU's contribution remains constant regardless of resolution. The GPU is the bottleneck at all settings.

Q: What minimum FPS can be expected at 1440p Medium?

A: The measured minimum FPS at 2560x1440 with Medium settings is 136 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold. The average is 160 FPS.

Q: How does the RTX 5090 D compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The RTX 5090 D has an average benchmark score of 77,712. The AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT is 1.1% slower, while the Radeon RX 6850M XT is 1.6% faster and the Tesla P100 cards are 2.1% to 2.4% faster.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that maintains at least 60 FPS is Ultra, with an average of 83 FPS. This is the highest quality setting available and provides a 38% margin above the playable threshold, so there is no need to compromise on visual quality at 4K.

At 2560x1440, Ultra settings also achieve the best balance, delivering 124 FPS on average. This is more than double the 60 FPS threshold, providing substantial headroom for demanding scenes or future driver overhead.

At 1920x1080, Ultra settings average 163 FPS, which is nearly triple the threshold. The system is heavily GPU-bound at this resolution, and even the most demanding preset leaves significant performance on the table.

In all three cases, the recommendation is to use Ultra settings. The data shows no scenario where dropping to a lower preset is necessary to maintain playable frame rates. The lowest average FPS across all tested combinations is 83 FPS at 4K Ultra, which still clears the 60 FPS threshold by a comfortable margin. For users with high-refresh-rate displays at 1080p or 1440p, the frame rates are high enough to take advantage of 144 Hz or even 240 Hz monitors at lower presets, though Ultra remains the default recommendation for visual fidelity.