Control

# Best Settings per Resolution

The recorded data for Control with the Intel Core i5-14400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER shows a clear progression of playable settings across resolutions. At 3840x2160, the only preset that maintains at least 60 FPS is Low, which delivers an average of 63 FPS. The Medium preset falls to 45.9 FPS, High drops to 40.2 FPS, and Ultra sits at 35.6 FPS, so none of those clear the 60 FPS threshold at 4K.

At 2560x1440, the best preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Medium, with an average of 65.7 FPS. Low runs at 89.4 FPS, but Medium is the highest quality option that still clears the threshold. High at 55.2 FPS and Ultra at 47.4 FPS both fall short.

At 1920x1080, the situation is far more favorable. The most demanding preset that remains playable is Ultra, which averages 63.6 FPS. This is the only resolution where Ultra settings are viable. High runs at 76.9 FPS, Medium at 85.9 FPS, and Low at 120.2 FPS, but Ultra is the recommended ceiling since it stays above 60 FPS.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Control at 4K resolution?

A: Yes, but only at Low settings. The recorded average FPS at 3840x2160 with Low is 63 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall below 60 FPS, with averages of 45.9, 40.2, and 35.6 FPS respectively.

Q: What is the highest quality preset available at 1440p?

A: Medium is the highest preset that maintains at least 60 FPS at 2560x1440, with an average of 65.7 FPS. High averages 55.2 FPS, and Ultra averages 47.4 FPS, so those presets are not considered playable at this resolution.

Q: Is Ultra settings playable at 1080p?

A: Yes. At 1920x1080, Ultra averages 63.6 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold. This is the only resolution in the dataset where Ultra qualifies as playable.

Q: How does the RTX 2060 SUPER compare to nearby GPUs in overall benchmark scores?

A: The GPU has an average benchmark score of 18093, placing it in the 62nd percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile with a score of 18159, which is 0.4% higher. Other close competitors include the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 at 18189 (0.5% higher) and the AMD Radeon RX 460 at 18373 (1.5% higher).

Q: What is the CPU performance position relative to other processors?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400F has an average benchmark score of 32279, placing it in the 83rd percentile among all CPUs. Its nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U with a score of 32233, a 0.1% difference. The Intel Core i9-11900 scores 32226 (0.2% higher), and the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS scores 32354 (0.2% lower).

Q: Which resolution offers the most headroom for higher settings?

A: At 1920x1080, all four presets are playable, with Ultra still maintaining 63.6 FPS. This gives the most flexibility. At 2560x1440, only Low and Medium are playable, while at 3840x2160, only Low is playable.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The database contains measured average FPS values for 12 combinations of resolution and settings. No minimum or maximum FPS values were recorded, so the analysis relies entirely on average FPS.

At 3840x2160, the results are as follows: Low averages 63 FPS, Medium averages 45.9 FPS, High averages 40.2 FPS, and Ultra averages 35.6 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is a reduction of 17.1 FPS, indicating a substantial performance cost when moving from the lowest to the second-lowest preset.

At 2560x1440, the measured averages are: Low at 89.4 FPS, Medium at 65.7 FPS, High at 55.2 FPS, and Ultra at 47.4 FPS. The step from Medium to High costs 10.5 FPS, while High to Ultra costs 7.8 FPS. Notably, the gap between Low and Medium at this resolution is 23.7 FPS, which is the largest single-preset drop in the entire dataset.

At 1920x1080, the averages are: Low at 120.2 FPS, Medium at 85.9 FPS, High at 76.9 FPS, and Ultra at 63.6 FPS. The scaling from Low to Medium costs 34.3 FPS, from Medium to High costs 9 FPS, and from High to Ultra costs 13.3 FPS. Ultra remains above 60 FPS, but the margin is only 3.6 FPS, which suggests limited headroom for demanding scenes.

Across resolutions, the data shows a consistent pattern: Low settings always clear 60 FPS, Medium clears at 1440p and 1080p but not at 4K, High clears only at 1080p, and Ultra clears only at 1080p.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The database lists nearest rivals for both the CPU and GPU, based on average benchmark scores. These alternatives would be expected to deliver broadly similar performance in Control, though the exact FPS values would depend on other system components and driver behavior.

For the Intel Core i5-14400F, the closest alternatives are the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U (0.1% higher average score), the Intel Core i9-11900 (0.2% higher), the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS (0.2% lower), and the Intel Core i7-12800H (0.5% higher). The differences are small, all within 0.5% of the i5-14400F's average score of 32279. In CPU-bound scenarios, these processors would likely produce nearly identical frame rates.

For the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER, the nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile (0.4% lower average score), the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 (0.5% lower), the AMD Radeon RX 460 (1.5% lower), and the Intel Arc A770M (1.6% lower). The RTX 2060 SUPER's average score is 18093, so the RTX 3060 Mobile and Radeon Pro 5700 are the most direct equivalents. The RX 460 and Arc A770M trail by a slightly larger margin but remain within 1.6%.

For Control specifically, the GPU is the dominant factor at higher resolutions and settings, so the RTX 3060 Mobile or Radeon Pro 5700 would be the most relevant substitutes. At 1080p with lower settings, the CPU differences could become more noticeable, but the near-identical average scores suggest the i5-14400F and its rivals would behave similarly.

CPU and GPU Roles

The measured FPS data shows how the balance between CPU and GPU load shifts across resolutions. At 1920x1080, the GPU has the easiest job, and the results reflect that: Ultra still averages 63.6 FPS, and Low reaches 120.2 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 1080p is a drop of 56.6 FPS, which is entirely attributable to GPU workload, since the resolution is constant.

At 2560x1440, the GPU begins to struggle. Low averages 89.4 FPS, but Medium drops to 65.7 FPS, and Ultra falls to 47.4 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 42 FPS, which is smaller than at 1080p (56.6 FPS). This suggests that as resolution increases, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, and the CPU has less influence on the frame rate.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly the bottleneck. Low averages 63 FPS, but Medium drops to 45.9 FPS, High to 40.2 FPS, and Ultra to 35.6 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is only 27.4 FPS, which is the smallest range across all resolutions. This indicates that at 4K, the GPU is saturated even at Low settings, and the CPU has very little room to affect performance.

The data also reveals how resolution scaling works for this combination. Moving from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings reduces the average from 120.2 to 89.4 FPS, a drop of 30.8 FPS. Moving from 1440p to 4K at Low settings reduces the average from 89.4 to 63 FPS, a drop of 26.4 FPS. At Ultra settings, the scaling is even steeper: 63.6 FPS at 1080p, 47.4 FPS at 1440p, and 35.6 FPS at 4K.

For players targeting 60 FPS, the CPU is sufficient at all resolutions, but the GPU is the deciding factor. At 4K, only Low settings are viable, and even then the margin is just 3 FPS. At 1440p, Medium is the ceiling, with a margin of 5.7 FPS. At 1080p, Ultra is playable, with a margin of 3.6 FPS.

The Verdict

The verdict by resolution is clear: this PC can run Control, but the playable settings depend heavily on the target resolution.

At 3840x2160, the only playable setting is Low, which averages 63 FPS. This clears the 60 FPS threshold, but the margin is narrow. Medium (45.9 FPS), High (40.2 FPS), and Ultra (35.6 FPS) are all below the playable threshold.

At 2560x1440, Low and Medium are playable, with averages of 89.4 and 65.7 FPS respectively. Medium is the best playable preset, but its margin above 60 FPS is only 5.7 FPS. High at 55.2 FPS and Ultra at 47.4 FPS are not playable.

At 1920x1080, all four presets are playable. Low averages 120.2 FPS, Medium averages 85.9 FPS, High averages 76.9 FPS, and Ultra averages 63.6 FPS. Ultra is the most demanding playable setting, and it clears the 60 FPS threshold by 3.6 FPS.

Overall, the combination of the Intel Core i5-14400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER is capable of running Control at 60 FPS, but only at 1080p with the highest settings. At 1440p, medium settings are the realistic ceiling, and at 4K, only low settings are viable.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations, this specific pairing of the Intel Core i5-14400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER ranks 2487 out of 3720 combos for Control. This places it in the lower third of tested systems, which aligns with the measured FPS data showing limited playability at higher resolutions.

The ranking reflects the GPU's position in the 62nd percentile among all GPUs, which is moderate but not high. The CPU's 83rd percentile ranking is stronger, but the GPU becomes the limiting factor in Control at higher resolutions and settings. The combination's rank of 2487 out of 3720 means that a substantial number of other tested configurations deliver better performance, particularly those with newer or higher-tier graphics cards.

For reference, the GPU's nearest rivals all have similar average benchmark scores, so systems using those alternatives would likely rank in a similar range. The CPU's nearest rivals are also closely matched, so swapping the i5-14400F for a comparable processor would not significantly change the overall ranking. The data indicates that the RTX 2060 SUPER is the primary constraint for this game, and the ranking reflects that reality.