Control

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS for this combo at 1080p with Ultra settings in Control?

A: The recorded average is 96.6 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold by a substantial margin.

Q: Can this PC run Control at 4K without dropping below 60 FPS on average?

A: At 3840x2160, the data shows playable settings are Low (90.3 FPS) and Medium (63.7 FPS). High and Ultra averages fall to 58.6 FPS and 52.3 FPS respectively, so they miss the 60 FPS target.

Q: Which resolution gives the highest headroom above the 60 FPS threshold?

A: At 1920x1080, even the most demanding preset (Ultra) averages 96.6 FPS. Low settings reach 163.3 FPS, which is the highest recorded average in the entire measured set.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-9400 has an average benchmark score of 2254. The nearest rival, the Intel Core i7-1068NG7, scores 2259, a delta of -0.2%. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 2246, a delta of 0.4%. Performance is effectively within a fraction of a percent across all listed neighbors.

Q: What is the GPU's percentile ranking among all GPUs in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT sits at the 85th percentile, with an average benchmark score of 48477. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile, scores 47743, which is 1.5% lower.

Q: What is the combo's overall rank among all tested combinations for Control?

A: The combo ranks 1246 out of 3720 tested combinations, placing it in the upper third of all recorded pairings for this game.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the CPU side, the Intel Core i5-9400 produces an average benchmark score of 2254. The nearest rivals are nearly identical in output: the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 scores 2259 (-0.2%), the Intel Core i3-10305 scores 2264 (-0.4%), the Intel Core i7-10710U scores 2248 (+0.3%), and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 2246 (+0.4%). In practical terms, any of these processors would deliver nearly indistinguishable CPU-bound performance in Control, assuming the GPU remains constant. The differences are all under half a percent, so users moving between these chips should not notice any change in frame pacing or average output.

On the GPU side, the AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT averages 48477. Its closest competitor is the NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile at 47743, which is 1.5% slower. The Intel Arc A550M scores 49737, which is 2.5% faster. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti scores 49957, 3% faster. The AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 scores 50001, also 3% faster. These deltas are small enough that in a game like Control, which is not extremely demanding on GPU resources at lower presets, the user would see very similar FPS numbers across these alternatives. The RX 6800 XT holds its own against these rivals, with the gap to the faster cards being well within typical run-to-run variance for many titles.

For a user considering a system swap, the data suggests that pairing any of these rival CPUs with the RX 6800 XT would yield nearly the same Control performance. Likewise, swapping the GPU for one of the listed rivals would change average FPS by only a few points at most. The bottleneck in this combo is more likely the CPU at lower resolutions and lower presets, given that the GPU is strong enough to push very high frame rates.

How This Combo Ranks

The recorded combo rank for this pairing in Control is 1246 out of 3720 tested combinations. This places the system in roughly the 66th percentile of all recorded pairings, meaning about one-third of tested combos outperform it and two-thirds sit below it. Given that the GPU is at the 85th percentile among all GPUs, the CPU drags the overall rank down. The i5-9400 sits at only the 47th percentile among all CPUs, so the processor is clearly the weaker link in this pairing.

The rank is still respectable: a top-third placement across thousands of combos indicates that this system can handle Control comfortably at most settings. However, it is not a top-tier combo. The gap between the GPU's high percentile and the CPU's mid-range percentile explains why the 4K High preset falls just short of 60 FPS. At lower resolutions, the CPU becomes more of a limiting factor, but the GPU's raw power compensates enough to keep averages well above the threshold.

The data shows that the combo performs best at 1080p and 1440p, where it clears 60 FPS on every preset. At 4K, the medium preset is the highest playable option. The rank reflects this pattern: strong overall, but with a clear ceiling imposed by the CPU when the resolution drops and frame rates climb.

The Verdict

Yes, this PC can run Control. The data shows playable performance at all three tested resolutions, though the settings ceiling varies.

At 1920x1080, every preset clears 60 FPS. The Ultra preset averages 96.6 FPS, which is far above the threshold. High averages 112.8 FPS, Medium 126 FPS, and Low 163.3 FPS. Users with a 1080p display can enable maximum settings without concern.

At 2560x1440, the situation is equally positive. Ultra averages 73.5 FPS, which is still well above 60. High averages 85.7 FPS, Medium 95.2 FPS, and Low 136.9 FPS. All presets are playable, and the headroom is comfortable.

At 3840x2160, the ceiling drops. Low and Medium are playable, with averages of 90.3 FPS and 63.7 FPS respectively. High falls to 58.6 FPS, just below the threshold, and Ultra averages 52.3 FPS. For 4K users, Medium is the recommended maximum preset, as it maintains an average above 60 FPS with only 3.7 FPS of headroom. High is not recommended for a consistent experience, as the average is already below the target.

The verdict is clear: this combo is a solid 1080p and 1440p performer, and a capable 4K medium-settings machine.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals how the balance shifts across resolutions. At 1080p, the GPU is powerful enough that the CPU becomes the primary constraint. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 66.7 FPS (163.3 to 96.6), which is a significant drop, but the absolute numbers are high enough that neither component bottlenecks the other into sub-60 territory. The CPU's 47th percentile ranking suggests it is the limiting factor when frame rates climb past 120 FPS.

At 1440p, the GPU starts to take on more responsibility. The spread between Low and Ultra narrows to 63.4 FPS (136.9 to 73.5), but the Ultra preset still averages 73.5 FPS. This indicates that the GPU is still capable of heavy lifting at this resolution, while the CPU remains sufficient to feed it.

At 4K, the GPU becomes the clear bottleneck. The spread between Low and Ultra narrows further to 38 FPS (90.3 to 52.3), and the High preset fails to hit 60 FPS. The CPU's role diminishes because the GPU is saturated by the pixel workload. The fact that the 4K High average (58.6 FPS) is so close to the 4K Medium average (63.7 FPS) suggests that the GPU is struggling to maintain high throughput at this resolution, regardless of preset.

The scaling pattern is consistent: as resolution increases, the GPU matters more and the CPU matters less. At 1080p, the CPU's mid-range performance is sufficient to keep frames high. At 4K, the GPU's limitations are the deciding factor.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, with an average of 96.6 FPS. This is the recommended setting for 1080p users.

At 2560x1440, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is also Ultra, with an average of 73.5 FPS. The headroom is smaller than at 1080p but still comfortable.

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Medium, with an average of 63.7 FPS. This preset has only 3.7 FPS of headroom, so users who prefer a safety margin might consider Low (90.3 FPS), but Medium does meet the threshold.

The data shows a clear pattern: Ultra is viable at 1080p and 1440p, while Medium is the ceiling at 4K.

Measured FPS Breakdown

1920x1080:

• Low: 163.3 FPS average
• Medium: 126.0 FPS average
• High: 112.8 FPS average
• Ultra: 96.6 FPS average

All presets at 1080p are far above the 60 FPS threshold. The gap from Low to Ultra is 66.7 FPS, showing a substantial performance cost for higher visual fidelity.

2560x1440:

• Low: 136.9 FPS average
• Medium: 95.2 FPS average
• High: 85.7 FPS average
• Ultra: 73.5 FPS average

The 1440p results show a similar pattern, with all presets clearing 60 FPS. The gap from Low to Ultra is 63.4 FPS. The Ultra preset still has 13.5 FPS of headroom above the threshold.

3840x2160:

• Low: 90.3 FPS average
• Medium: 63.7 FPS average
• High: 58.6 FPS average
• Ultra: 52.3 FPS average

At 4K, the picture changes. Low is the only preset with substantial headroom (30.3 FPS above threshold). Medium barely clears 60 FPS. High and Ultra fall short, with 58.6 FPS and 52.3 FPS respectively. The gap from Low to Ultra is 38 FPS, the smallest spread across all resolutions, confirming that the GPU is the limiting factor at this resolution.