Control

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for Control with the Intel Core i5-9400 and Intel Arc B580 covers three resolutions and four quality presets. The measurements are average frame rates only; no minimum or maximum frame rate data was captured for any configuration. At 1920x1080, the combo is comfortably fast across the board. Low settings deliver 111.4 FPS, Medium drops to 79.7 FPS, High lands at 72 FPS, and Ultra still holds 62.5 FPS. Every preset at this resolution clears the 60 FPS playable threshold, which makes 1080p the strongest showing for this pairing.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates step down noticeably. Low settings produce 86.8 FPS, which is still well above the threshold. Medium settings yield 62.4 FPS, just barely clearing 60 FPS. High settings fall to 56 FPS, which misses the playable mark. Ultra drops further to 48.3 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 38.5 FPS, a substantial spread that shows how much headroom the preset selection controls at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the picture changes entirely. Low settings average 59.1 FPS, just shy of the 60 FPS threshold. Medium settings produce 42.5 FPS, High settings drop to 38.3 FPS, and Ultra falls to 33.4 FPS. The scaling from 1440p to 4K is steep: High settings lose 17.7 FPS, Medium loses 19.9 FPS, and Low loses 27.7 FPS. The data indicates that 4K is only viable at the lowest preset, and even then it misses the playable threshold by a small margin.

The preset scaling within each resolution follows a consistent pattern. At 1080p, moving from Low to Medium costs 31.7 FPS, from Medium to High costs 7.7 FPS, and from High to Ultra costs 9.5 FPS. At 1440p, the Low to Medium drop is 24.4 FPS, Medium to High is 6.4 FPS, and High to Ultra is 7.7 FPS. At 4K, Low to Medium costs 16.6 FPS, Medium to High costs 4.2 FPS, and High to Ultra costs 4.9 FPS. The largest single step is always Low to Medium, while the differences between Medium, High, and Ultra are comparatively smaller. This suggests that the biggest performance hit comes from enabling the initial tier of quality improvements, while the higher presets add progressively less visual cost.

How This Combo Ranks

The database ranks this CPU and GPU combination at position 2802 out of 3720 tested combos for Control. That places it in the lower third of all tested configurations, which is a relevant context for interpreting the frame rate results. Despite the modest rank, the combo still manages to clear 60 FPS at 1080p on all four presets and at 1440p on Low and Medium. The rank reflects the overall pool of tested hardware, which includes far more powerful combinations, so it does not by itself indicate an unplayable experience.

The CPU sits at the 47th percentile among all tested processors, meaning roughly half of the CPUs in the database score higher. The GPU is stronger relative to its own field, sitting at the 68th percentile among all tested GPUs. This imbalance is worth noting: the graphics card is a more capable component than the processor in this pairing. In Control, a game that relies heavily on GPU throughput for its visual effects, the Arc B580 likely carries most of the workload, while the i5-9400 provides sufficient but not exceptional CPU support.

The combo rank of 2802 out of 3720 translates to roughly the 75th percentile from the bottom, or the 25th percentile from the top. That means about one in four tested combinations performs worse in this game. The data suggests this is a mid-to-lower tier configuration for Control specifically, even though the GPU alone ranks above average in the broader benchmark pool.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Control at 1080p with all settings maxed out?

A: Yes. At 1920x1080 with Ultra settings, the measured average frame rate is 62.5 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold. This is the best settings preset available at this resolution.

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

A: Medium settings at 1440p produce an average of 62.4 FPS, which is the best preset that stays at or above 60 FPS. High settings fall to 56 FPS, below the threshold.

Q: Is 4K playable with this combo?

A: No. The best result at 3840x2160 is Low settings with 59.1 FPS average, which misses the 60 FPS threshold. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall further behind, with averages of 42.5, 38.3, and 33.4 FPS respectively.

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

A: The Intel Core i5-9400 has an average benchmark score of 2254. The closest rival is the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 with a score of 2259, which is 0.2% faster. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 2246, which is 0.4% slower. The Intel Core i3-10305 scores 2264, which is 0.4% faster. All four CPUs are within 1% of each other.

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

A: The Intel Arc B580 has an average benchmark score of 23021. The AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP scores 23061, which is 0.2% faster. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 scores 22895, which is 0.6% slower. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 scores 23172, which is 0.7% faster. The NVIDIA P106-100 scores 23249, which is 1% faster.

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 1080p on Low settings?

A: The measured average is 111.4 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the highest frame rate recorded for this combo in Control across all tested resolutions and presets.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU's nearest rivals in the database are all within a narrow performance band. The Intel Core i7-1068NG7 scores 2259, just 0.2% above the i5-9400's 2254. The Intel Core i3-10305 scores 2264, 0.4% higher. On the slower side, the Intel Core i7-10710U scores 2248, 0.3% lower, and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 2246, 0.4% lower. Any of these processors would likely produce nearly identical frame rates in Control when paired with the same GPU, since the performance deltas are all under half a percent.

On the GPU side, the nearest rivals are more interesting because they span very different hardware generations. The AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP scores 23061, essentially tied with the Arc B580 at 0.2% higher. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 scores 22895, 0.6% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 scores 23172, 0.7% higher. The NVIDIA P106-100 scores 23249, 1% higher. The RTX 2080 and RTX 3080 are both significantly more powerful cards in absolute terms, but their average benchmark scores in this database place them in the same neighborhood as the Arc B580. The practical takeaway is that swapping the Arc B580 for any of these GPUs would shift Control's frame rates by only a few percent, not enough to change which presets clear 60 FPS in most cases.

A system with the i5-9400 paired with any of these rival GPUs would behave similarly to the tested combo. The CPU differences are negligible, and the GPU differences are small enough that the playable preset tiers at each resolution would remain largely unchanged. At 1440p, for example, the RTX 3080's 0.7% advantage would push the Medium preset from 62.4 FPS to roughly 62.8 FPS, still just barely above the threshold. The RX 580 2048SP's 0.2% advantage would have an even smaller effect.

CPU and GPU Roles

The scaling between resolutions reveals which component dominates in Control. From 1080p to 1440p, the frame rate drops by 24.6 FPS on Low settings, 17.3 FPS on Medium, 16 FPS on High, and 14.2 FPS on Ultra. From 1440p to 4K, the drops are 27.7 FPS on Low, 19.9 FPS on Medium, 17.7 FPS on High, and 14.9 FPS on Ultra. The resolution scaling is substantial at every preset, which points to the GPU being the primary performance driver. If the CPU were the bottleneck, frame rates would stay relatively flat as resolution increases, since the CPU workload does not scale with pixel count.

The GPU's strong percentile ranking, 68th among all tested GPUs, supports this interpretation. The Arc B580 has 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192 bit bus with 456.0 GB/s of bandwidth, and its 13.67 TFLOPS of FP32 compute is substantial for rasterized workloads. Control's heavy use of real-time effects and particle systems places significant load on the GPU, and the data shows that the Arc B580's performance degrades predictably as pixel count rises.

The CPU's role is secondary but not irrelevant. The i5-9400 has 6 cores and 6 threads with a boost clock of 4.10 GHz, and it sits at the 47th percentile among all CPUs. In Control, the CPU must feed the GPU with draw calls and game logic. At 1080p, where the GPU has more headroom, the CPU's influence is likely more visible. The fact that 1080p Low reaches 111.4 FPS suggests the CPU can keep up at that level, but the relatively modest 47th percentile ranking indicates it may constrain higher frame rates in CPU-bound scenes. At 4K, the GPU becomes the clear bottleneck, and the CPU's limitations matter far less.

The preset scaling also hints at the division of labor. Low to Medium transitions cost the most frames at every resolution, which suggests those settings introduce GPU-heavy features. The smaller gaps between Medium, High, and Ultra indicate that those steps add less rendering load. Since the CPU workload is mostly independent of quality presets, the consistent pattern across resolutions reinforces that the GPU is doing the heavy lifting.

The Verdict

The verdict is straightforward based on the measured data. At 1920x1080, this PC can run Control at every preset above 60 FPS. The Ultra preset averages 62.5 FPS, which clears the threshold with modest headroom. High averages 72 FPS, Medium averages 79.7 FPS, and Low averages 111.4 FPS. The database lists all four presets as playable at this resolution, with Ultra as the best settings option.

At 2560x1440, the verdict is more limited. Low and Medium are both playable, with averages of 86.8 FPS and 62.4 FPS respectively. Medium is the best playable preset, but it clears the threshold by only 2.4 FPS, leaving little margin for demanding scenes. High and Ultra are not playable at 1440p, with averages of 56 FPS and 48.3 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the verdict is negative. No preset reaches 60 FPS. Low comes closest at 59.1 FPS, but that is still below the threshold. Medium, High, and Ultra are progressively further behind. The database lists no playable settings at 4K for this combo. Overall, this system is a solid 1080p machine for Control, a borderline 1440p machine at Medium settings, and not viable at 4K.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, with an average of 62.5 FPS. This is the maximum quality setting available, so the system can run the game at full visual fidelity while maintaining playable frame rates. The margin above the threshold is small, only 2.5 FPS, so players who prefer extra stability might choose High at 72 FPS instead, but the data confirms Ultra is technically playable.

At 2560x1440, the best playable preset is Medium, with an average of 62.4 FPS. This clears the threshold by just 2.4 FPS. High settings at 1440p average 56 FPS, which falls short. The recommendation is Medium for 1440p, with the caveat that the margin is thin and some scenes may dip below 60 FPS even if the average stays above it.

At 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS. The best option is Low at 59.1 FPS, which misses the threshold by 0.9 FPS. Since the database defines playable as 60 FPS or higher, 4K is not recommended for this game with this hardware. Players who insist on 4K would need to accept frame rates in the 33 to 59 FPS range depending on preset, or consider lowering the resolution to 1440p for a smoother experience.