Control

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded benchmark data for Control with the Intel Core i5-9400 and AMD Radeon RX 9060 shows a clear performance curve across three resolutions and four settings tiers. The database includes average frame rates for all combinations, with minimum and maximum values recorded only for Medium settings at each resolution.

At 1920x1080, the most complete picture emerges. Low settings produce an average of 130 FPS, which is the highest frame rate recorded for this combo in any configuration. Medium settings average 92 FPS, with a minimum of 78 FPS and a maximum of 106 FPS. High settings drop to 82 FPS on average, while Ultra settings still maintain 71 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra spans 59 FPS, indicating that the preset choice has a substantial impact on performance at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates scale down predictably. Low settings average 98 FPS, a 32 FPS reduction compared to the same preset at 1080p. Medium settings average 70 FPS, with a minimum of 59 FPS and a maximum of 80 FPS. High settings hold at 62 FPS on average, while Ultra falls to 54 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra here is 44 FPS, which is proportionally similar to the 1080p spread.

At 3840x2160, performance becomes more constrained. Low settings are the only tier that clears the 60 FPS threshold, averaging 66 FPS. Medium settings average 47 FPS, with a minimum of 40 FPS and a maximum of 54 FPS. High settings drop to 42 FPS on average, and Ultra settings bottom out at 36 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is 30 FPS, a smaller absolute spread than at lower resolutions, but the percentage reduction is larger. The data shows that Ultra at 4K delivers only 55% of the frame rate achieved at Low.

The Medium preset measurements provide the only min/max data in the entire set. At 1080p, the 78 to 106 FPS range suggests a stable frame delivery with no severe dips. At 1440p, the 59 to 80 FPS range indicates that the combination can occasionally touch the 60 FPS boundary but generally stays above it. At 4K, the 40 to 54 FPS range confirms that Medium is not viable for smooth play at that resolution, as even the maximum recorded frame rate sits below the playable threshold.

Best Settings per Resolution

The verdict data identifies the most demanding preset that maintains an average of at least 60 FPS at each resolution. These are the settings that offer the highest visual quality while still clearing the playability threshold.

At 1920x1080, Ultra settings are the best playable option. The recorded average is 71 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS threshold by 11 FPS. This means the full visual feature set of Control is available at 1080p without sacrificing smoothness. All four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) are listed as playable at this resolution, so the user has complete freedom in choosing visual fidelity.

At 2560x1440, High settings are the best playable option. The average is 62 FPS, which is just 2 FPS above the threshold. Medium settings average 70 FPS and Low settings average 98 FPS, both of which are also playable. Ultra settings at 54 FPS fall short of the 60 FPS requirement, so that preset is excluded from the playable list. The data indicates that High at 1440p is a borderline case, with only a narrow margin above the playable boundary.

At 3840x2160, Low settings are the only playable option. The average of 66 FPS clears the threshold by 6 FPS. Medium settings at 47 FPS, High at 42 FPS, and Ultra at 36 FPS all fall well below the playable threshold. At 4K, the visual quality must be reduced to the minimum preset to maintain smooth frame rates with this hardware combination.

CPU and GPU Roles

The scaling patterns between resolutions and presets reveal which component dominates performance in Control with this combination. The CPU, an Intel Core i5-9400 with 6 cores and 6 threads, has a benchmark percentile of 47 against all CPUs, placing it in the middle of the distribution. The GPU, an AMD Radeon RX 9060, has a percentile of 59 against all GPUs, slightly higher in the distribution. The frame rate data suggests that the GPU becomes the limiting factor as resolution increases.

Comparing the same preset across resolutions isolates the GPU scaling. At Low settings, the frame rate drops from 130 FPS at 1080p to 98 FPS at 1440p, a 25% reduction, and then to 66 FPS at 4K, a further 33% reduction. This steep decline with increasing pixel count is characteristic of GPU-bound rendering. If the CPU were the primary bottleneck, the frame rate would remain more constant across resolutions because the CPU workload does not scale directly with pixel count.

At Ultra settings, the frame rate drops from 71 FPS at 1080p to 54 FPS at 1440p, a 24% reduction, and then to 36 FPS at 4K, a 33% reduction. The similar percentage drops across presets indicate that the GPU is consistently the limiting factor regardless of visual settings. The CPU has enough headroom to feed the GPU at all tested configurations.

The preset scaling at a fixed resolution further confirms this interpretation. At 1080p, moving from Low to Ultra reduces the frame rate from 130 FPS to 71 FPS, a 45% reduction. At 4K, the same preset change reduces the frame rate from 66 FPS to 36 FPS, a 45% reduction. The consistent proportional impact of preset changes across resolutions suggests that the GPU's shading and memory throughput are the dominant constraints, while the CPU maintains sufficient frame pacing.

At 1440p, the Medium preset records a minimum of 59 FPS, which is just below the 60 FPS threshold. This momentary dip could indicate a brief CPU-related stall or a GPU workload spike, but the average of 70 FPS shows that such events are infrequent. The single-thread performance of the i5-9400, as measured by Cinebench R23 at 935 points, is adequate for this game's engine, but the data does not isolate CPU-specific bottlenecks directly.

How This Combo Ranks

The database ranks this specific CPU and GPU combination for Control at position 2152 out of 3720 tested combos. This places the combo in the lower half of all tested configurations, specifically at the 58th percentile of the tested set (calculated from the rank and total). The percentile ranking of the individual components, 47 for the CPU and 59 for the GPU, broadly aligns with the overall combo performance.

The rank of 2152 out of 3720 indicates that a significant number of tested combinations outperform this setup. However, the measured frame rates show that the combo still achieves playable performance at 1080p with all presets and at 1440p with most presets. The ranking is a relative measure against the full database, which includes higher-end CPUs and GPUs, while the absolute frame rates demonstrate practical capability for this game.

The GPU's average benchmark score of 16014 places it at the 59th percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti with a score of 16129, which is 0.7% higher. The CPU's average benchmark score of 2254 places it at the 47th percentile of all CPUs, with its nearest rival being the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 at 2259, which is 0.2% higher. The combo's mid-pack ranking reflects the combination of a mid-tier CPU and a slightly above-mid-tier GPU.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The database provides nearest rival comparisons for both the CPU and GPU, which suggest alternative hardware that would likely produce similar frame rates in Control.

For the CPU, the Intel Core i5-9400 has an average benchmark score of 2254. Its nearest rivals are all within a narrow band: the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 scores 2259, which is 0.2% higher; the Intel Core i7-10710U scores 2248, which is 0.3% lower; the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 2246, which is 0.4% lower; and the Intel Core i3-10305 scores 2264, which is 0.4% higher. These four CPUs would be expected to deliver nearly identical frame rates in Control when paired with the same GPU, with differences well under 1%.

For the GPU, the AMD Radeon RX 9060 has an average benchmark score of 16014. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti at 16129, which is 0.7% higher; the AMD Radeon R9 370X at 15862, which is 1% lower; the AMD Radeon RX 7700 at 15852, which is 1% lower; and the AMD Radeon Pro W5500 at 15679, which is 2.1% lower. Swapping the RX 9060 for any of these GPUs while keeping the i5-9400 would produce frame rates within a few percent of the measured values, meaning the same playable preset recommendations would apply.

The delta percentages are all below 2.1%, which is a tight cluster. This suggests that the performance tier occupied by this CPU and GPU combination is well defined, and users with any of these alternative parts would experience nearly identical behavior in Control.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Control at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings?

A: Yes. The recorded average frame rate at 1080p Ultra is 71 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold. All four presets at 1080p are listed as playable.

Q: What is the best playable preset at 2560x1440?

A: High settings are the best playable option at 1440p, with an average of 62 FPS. Medium settings average 70 FPS and Low settings average 98 FPS, but Ultra settings at 54 FPS are not playable.

Q: Is 3840x2160 playable with this hardware?

A: Only with Low settings. The average at 4K Low is 66 FPS, which clears the threshold. Medium settings average 47 FPS, High averages 42 FPS, and Ultra averages 36 FPS, all below 60 FPS.

Q: Does the CPU or GPU limit performance more in Control?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the primary limiter. Frame rates drop sharply as resolution increases, from 130 FPS at 1080p Low to 66 FPS at 4K Low, which is characteristic of GPU-bound rendering.

Q: How does this combination rank against other tested PCs for Control?

A: The combo ranks 2152 out of 3720 tested combinations, placing it in the lower half of the database. Despite this, it achieves playable frame rates at 1080p and most presets at 1440p.

Q: What hardware would perform similarly to the Core i5-9400 and RX 9060 combo?

A: For the CPU, the Intel Core i7-1068NG7, Intel Core i7-10710U, AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500, and Intel Core i3-10305 are all within 0.4% of the i5-9400's average score. For the GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, AMD Radeon R9 370X, AMD Radeon RX 7700, and AMD Radeon Pro W5500 are all within 2.1% of the RX 9060's average score.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows that this PC can run Control, but the playable range depends heavily on resolution. At 1920x1080, the system clears 60 FPS on every preset, with Ultra at 71 FPS, High at 82 FPS, Medium at 92 FPS, and Low at 130 FPS. This is the fully playable environment where visual quality can be maximized without compromise.

At 2560x1440, the system remains playable on High, Medium, and Low presets. High settings deliver 62 FPS on average, which is functional but leaves little headroom for demanding scenes. Medium settings provide a more comfortable 70 FPS average with a recorded minimum of 59 FPS, meaning occasional dips below the threshold are possible. Low settings at 98 FPS offer the most consistent experience at this resolution. Ultra settings at 54 FPS are not recommended for smooth play.

At 3840x2160, the system is only playable on Low settings, which average 66 FPS. Every higher preset falls below the 60 FPS threshold: Medium at 47 FPS, High at 42 FPS, and Ultra at 36 FPS. The verdict data confirms that 4K gaming with this hardware requires accepting the lowest visual settings, and even then the margin above the threshold is only 6 FPS.

The overall assessment is that the Intel Core i5-9400 and AMD Radeon RX 9060 combination is a capable 1080p performer for Control, a passable 1440p option with reduced settings, and a limited 4K option that only works at minimum quality. The ranking of 2152 out of 3720 combos reflects this mid-tier positioning, but the absolute frame rates demonstrate that the game is playable for the majority of users who target 1080p or 1440p displays.