Control

Control is an Action Adventure title that stresses both the CPU and GPU, and the pairing of the Intel Core i5-9400 with the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT produces a wide spread of results depending on resolution and quality preset. The recorded data covers three resolutions and four settings levels, all measured with a 60 FPS playability threshold. The combination ranks 1044 out of 3720 tested combos in this game, placing it in the upper portion of the database. The benchmark results show a system that can handle the game comfortably at lower resolutions but begins to strain at 4K with maximum settings. The CPU, a 6-core, 6-thread Coffee Lake part from 2018, sits at the 47th percentile compared to all CPUs, while the GPU, a RDNA 4.0 part with 16 GB of GDDR6 memory, rests at the 55th percentile compared to all GPUs. This imbalance suggests the processor may be the limiting factor in certain scenarios, especially at high frame rates where the GPU has spare capacity. The following sections break down the data, compare nearby hardware, and provide a clear set of recommendations for each resolution.

FAQ

Q: What is the best preset at 1920x1080 for this CPU and GPU combo?

A: The Ultra preset delivers an average of 107.1 FPS at 1920x1080, which is the highest average among all tested settings at that resolution and still clears the 60 FPS threshold by a wide margin.

Q: Is Control playable at 3840x2160 with this hardware?

A: Yes, but only up to the High preset. The recorded data shows High at 63.5 FPS, Medium at 69.3 FPS, and Low at 97.1 FPS at 4K, while the Ultra preset drops to 54.5 FPS, which is below the playable threshold of 60 FPS.

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 closest rival, the Intel Core i7-1068NG7, scores 2259, which is 0.2 percent higher. The Intel Core i7-10710U scores 2248, 0.3 percent lower, and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 2246, 0.4 percent lower.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra at 2560x1440?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 143.4 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 82 FPS. The gap between the two settings is 61.4 FPS, showing that the quality preset has a substantial impact on performance at this resolution.

Q: Does the GPU outperform its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT has an average benchmark score of 13543. The nearest rival, the AMD Radeon HD 7770M, scores 13536, which is 0.1 percent lower. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570 scores 13515, 0.2 percent lower, and the NVIDIA P106-090 scores 13470, 0.5 percent lower.

Q: Which resolution offers the highest average frame rate for the Ultra preset?

A: The Ultra preset reaches its highest average at 1920x1080 with 107.1 FPS. At 2560x1440 it drops to 82 FPS, and at 3840x2160 it drops further to 54.5 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-9400 and the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT ranks 1044 out of 3720 tested combos in Control. This places the pairing in the upper 28 percent of all tested configurations, which is a strong showing for a system that pairs a 2018 mid-range processor with a 2025 high-end graphics card. The rank reflects the measured FPS data across all resolutions and settings, and the result suggests that the GPU carries most of the workload while the CPU keeps pace adequately at most settings.

The CPU sits at the 47th percentile against all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 2254. The GPU, by contrast, sits at the 55th percentile against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 13543. The gap between these percentiles indicates that the processor is the weaker component in this pairing, though it is not weak enough to drag the system below playable frame rates in most scenarios. The ranking also benefits from the game's release date in 2019, which means the title does not demand the latest multi-core processors or the highest memory bandwidth. The data shows that the combo rank is respectable, but the CPU's percentile position hints that frame rates could be higher with a stronger processor, particularly in scenes that are not GPU-bound.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its highest frame rates. The Low preset averages 161.5 FPS, Medium averages 135.7 FPS, High averages 121.4 FPS, and Ultra averages 107.1 FPS. Every preset at this resolution clears the 60 FPS threshold, and even the most demanding setting leaves a comfortable margin of 47.1 FPS above the playability line. The scaling from Low to Ultra shows a drop of 54.4 FPS, which is a 33.7 percent reduction in average frame rate. This is a typical pattern for a GPU-heavy title at 1080p, where the graphics card has enough headroom to absorb the increased load from higher quality settings.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates remain strong but the gaps between presets widen. The Low preset averages 143.4 FPS, Medium averages 106.2 FPS, High averages 92.5 FPS, and Ultra averages 82 FPS. All presets stay above 60 FPS, with the lowest result being the Ultra preset at 82 FPS, which is still 22 FPS above the playability threshold. The difference between Low and Ultra at this resolution is 61.4 FPS, a larger absolute gap than at 1080p. The data indicates that the GPU is still the dominant factor here, but the increased pixel count begins to show in the diminishing returns of the Ultra preset.

At 3840x2160, the system starts to show its limits. The Low preset averages 97.1 FPS, Medium averages 69.3 FPS, High averages 63.5 FPS, and Ultra averages 54.5 FPS. The Ultra preset falls below the 60 FPS threshold, making it unplayable by the database's standard. The High preset remains playable but only by a margin of 3.5 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is 42.6 FPS, which is smaller in absolute terms than at lower resolutions, but the relative impact is greater because the baseline frame rate is much lower. The data suggests that 4K resolution demands more from the GPU than the other tested resolutions, and the RX 9070 XT, while powerful, cannot maintain 60 FPS at the highest quality setting.

The absence of min and max FPS values in the recorded data means the analysis relies on average frame rates alone. The average values show consistent performance across presets, with no unexpected spikes or drops that would indicate a stuttering problem. The scaling between resolutions follows the expected pattern: doubling the pixel count from 1080p to 4K reduces the Ultra preset average from 107.1 FPS to 54.5 FPS, a reduction of 52.6 FPS. The Low preset drops from 161.5 FPS to 97.1 FPS, a reduction of 64.4 FPS. These numbers reflect the GPU's bandwidth and shading capabilities, which are substantial but not unlimited.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the Intel Core i5-9400 in the database are the Intel Core i7-1068NG7, the Intel Core i7-10710U, the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500, and the Intel Core i3-10305. The i7-1068NG7 has an average score of 2259, which is 0.2 percent higher than the i5-9400's 2254. The i7-10710U scores 2248, 0.3 percent lower. The Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 2246, 0.4 percent lower. The i3-10305 scores 2264, 0.4 percent higher. These four processors are all within a narrow band of performance, meaning that replacing the i5-9400 with any of these parts would produce nearly identical results in Control. The differences are small enough that they would not change the frame rate averages by a noticeable amount.

The nearest rivals for the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT are the AMD Radeon HD 7770M, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570, the NVIDIA P106-090, and the AMD Radeon Pro 555. The HD 7770M scores 13536, 0.1 percent lower than the RX 9070 XT's 13543. The GTX 570 scores 13515, 0.2 percent lower. The P106-090 scores 13470, 0.5 percent lower. The Radeon Pro 555 scores 13407, 1 percent lower. These GPUs are clustered closely in average benchmark score, but the RX 9070 XT stands apart in its specifications, including 16 GB of GDDR6 memory and a 256-bit memory bus. In Control, the game's reliance on GPU memory and shading performance means the RX 9070 XT would likely outperform these rivals in actual gameplay, despite the similar average scores. The benchmark averages do not tell the whole story, and the recorded FPS data for this specific game confirms that the GPU is capable of high frame rates even at 1440p.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data shows that the GPU plays the dominant role in Control for this pairing, but the CPU's influence becomes visible at lower resolutions. At 1920x1080, the difference between the Low and Ultra presets is 54.4 FPS, and the Ultra preset still reaches 107.1 FPS. The high frame rates at 1080p suggest that the GPU has enough power to push well beyond 100 FPS, but the CPU may limit the absolute maximum, as the Low preset only reaches 161.5 FPS rather than a higher number. This is a common sign of a CPU bottleneck at very high frame rates, where the processor cannot feed the GPU fast enough.

At 2560x1440, the GPU becomes more clearly the limiting factor. The Ultra preset drops to 82 FPS, a reduction of 25.1 FPS compared to 1080p Ultra. The Low preset drops to 143.4 FPS, a reduction of 18.1 FPS. The consistent drop across all presets indicates that the increased pixel count is taxing the GPU, while the CPU has more headroom to keep up. The data suggests that at 1440p, the system is balanced, with the GPU handling the additional load without the CPU becoming a bottleneck.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is overwhelmingly the limiting factor. The Ultra preset falls to 54.5 FPS, below the playable threshold, while the CPU's workload does not increase significantly with resolution. The scaling from 1440p to 4K shows a drop of 27.5 FPS for the Ultra preset, and a drop of 46.3 FPS for the Low preset. These large reductions point directly to the GPU's rendering capacity. The RX 9070 XT has 4096 shading units and a boost clock of 2970 MHz, but the 4K resolution demands more pixel processing than the card can deliver at the highest quality settings. The CPU's role at 4K is minimal, as the frame rates are determined almost entirely by the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth.

The preset scaling also reveals the CPU's contribution. At 1080p, moving from Low to Ultra reduces the frame rate by 33.7 percent. At 1440p, the reduction is 42.8 percent. At 4K, the reduction is 43.9 percent. The larger relative drops at higher resolutions confirm that the GPU is doing more work per frame, while the CPU's workload remains relatively constant. The i5-9400's six cores and six threads are sufficient for Control's engine, which does not appear to scale heavily with additional threads based on the measured results.

The Verdict

The data clearly answers the question of whether this PC can run Control. At 1920x1080, all four presets clear the 60 FPS threshold, with the Ultra preset averaging 107.1 FPS. At 2560x1440, all four presets also clear the threshold, with the Ultra preset averaging 82 FPS. At 3840x2160, the High, Medium, and Low presets clear the threshold, but the Ultra preset falls short at 54.5 FPS. The verdict by resolution confirms that the system is fully playable at 1080p and 1440p across all settings, and playable at 4K with the High preset or lower. The best settings at 4K are High, with an average of 63.5 FPS, which is just above the 60 FPS line. The system cannot maintain 60 FPS at 4K Ultra, so users with a 4K display should select the High preset to stay above the playability threshold.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, with an average of 107.1 FPS. This allows users to enable the highest quality settings without sacrificing smooth gameplay. At 2560x1440, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is also Ultra, with an average of 82 FPS. The margin above the threshold is 22 FPS, which provides some headroom for demanding scenes. At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is High, with an average of 63.5 FPS. The margin above the threshold is only 3.5 FPS, so users should be aware that complex scenes could dip closer to the 60 FPS line. The Low preset at 4K reaches 97.1 FPS and the Medium preset reaches 69.3 FPS, both of which are more comfortable options if the High preset proves too close to the limit. The data supports the conclusion that this CPU and GPU combination is best suited for 1440p gaming, where it can run the game at maximum settings with a solid margin above 60 FPS.