Control

Control pairs an older mid-range Coffee Lake processor with a modern Ada Lovelace GPU, and the recorded data shows this combination handles Remedy's action adventure comfortably at 1080p and 1440p while struggling at 4K beyond its lowest preset. The Intel Core i5-9400 is a 6-core, 6-thread CPU with a 2.90 GHz base and 4.10 GHz boost on a 14 nm process, sitting in the 47th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 brings 3072 shading units, 24 RT cores, 96 tensor cores, and 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 272.0 GB/s of bandwidth, placing it in the 61st percentile of all GPUs. Below is the full analysis of how this pairing performs in Control, resolution by resolution.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the data shows headroom across the entire settings range. Low averages 138.7 FPS, Medium reaches 102 FPS, High lands at 88.5 FPS, and even Ultra holds a 79 FPS average. That is a spread of roughly 59.7 FPS between the lowest and highest presets, which indicates the RTX 4060's 8 GB frame buffer and 272.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth are never pushed to a breaking point at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, every preset remains above the 60 FPS playable threshold. Low averages 108.6 FPS, Medium 76.9 FPS, High 68.3 FPS, and Ultra 60.5 FPS. The Ultra result is the critical data point: it clears 60 FPS, but only by 0.5 frames, meaning any particularly heavy scene in Control's destructible environments could dip the experience below smooth. Medium offers a much safer cushion at 76.9 FPS while sacrificing visual fidelity.

At 3840x2160, the picture changes sharply. Low averages 73.7 FPS, Medium drops to 53.4 FPS, High falls to 43.6 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 36.9 FPS. Only the Low preset stays above 60 FPS. The step from Low to Medium alone costs 20.3 FPS, and the gap between the 1080p Ultra average of 79 FPS and the 4K Ultra average of 36.9 FPS is more than a halving of performance as pixel count quadruples.

The database records average FPS only for this title; minimum and maximum frame rates were not captured in these runs.

CPU and GPU Roles

The scaling data points clearly to a GPU-bound configuration at every resolution tested. From 1080p to 1440p, Ultra falls from 79 FPS to 60.5 FPS, a drop of about 23 percent. From 1440p to 4K, Ultra falls again from 60.5 FPS to 36.9 FPS, a drop of about 39 percent. If the Core i5-9400 were the limiting factor, frame rates would plateau as resolution increased, because the CPU workload is largely independent of pixel count. Instead, performance degrades in close proportion to the added pixel load, which is the signature of a graphics-limited system.

Within a fixed resolution, the preset scaling reinforces this. At 1080p, moving from Low to Ultra costs 59.7 FPS, a 43 percent reduction driven entirely by rendering load. The i5-9400's six threads never manifest as a ceiling here: the Low preset at 1080p reaches 138.7 FPS, which means the CPU is capable of feeding frames at least that fast in Control. The recorded 6629 multi-core and 935 single-core Cinebench R23 scores place this processor in the middle of the pack (47th percentile), but Control's engine simply does not demand more thread throughput than the 9400 provides at the frame rates the RTX 4060 delivers.

The practical takeaway: upgrading the GPU would raise frame rates in this game, while upgrading the CPU would not, at least within the performance envelope measured here.

FAQ

Q: Can the i5-9400 + RTX 4060 run Control at 4K?

A: Only at the Low preset, where the average is 73.7 FPS. Medium (53.4 FPS), High (43.6 FPS), and Ultra (36.9 FPS) all fall below the 60 FPS threshold at 3840x2160.

Q: What is the FPS at 1080p Ultra?

A: 79 FPS average, well above the 60 FPS playable threshold. 1080p is the most comfortable resolution for this combo, with every preset from Low (138.7 FPS) to Ultra staying smooth.

Q: Is 1440p Ultra playable?

A: Technically yes, at 60.5 FPS average, but the margin over 60 FPS is just half a frame. Medium at 76.9 FPS or High at 68.3 FPS offers more consistent headroom.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck this game?

A: The data indicates no. Frame rates scale downward with resolution and preset intensity, which is characteristic of GPU-bound behavior. The 138.7 FPS result at 1080p Low shows the i5-9400 can drive frame rates well beyond what the RTX 4060 renders at higher settings.

Q: How much performance is lost going from 1440p to 4K?

A: At Ultra, average FPS drops from 60.5 to 36.9, a loss of about 39 percent. At Low, it drops from 108.6 to 73.7, a loss of about 32 percent.

Q: Does the RTX 4060's 8 GB of VRAM handle Control?

A: The recorded data shows no VRAM-related cliff: performance degrades smoothly with resolution and settings rather than collapsing, and 1080p Ultra at 79 FPS suggests the 8 GB GDDR6 buffer on the 128-bit bus is sufficient for the settings tested.

Similar Performance Alternatives

On the CPU side, the database identifies several processors with nearly identical aggregate scores. The Intel Core i7-1068NG7 averages 2259 against the i5-9400's 2254, a difference of just 0.2 percent in the i7's favor. The Intel Core i7-10710U sits at 2248, 0.3 percent behind, and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 at 2246 is 0.4 percent behind. The Intel Core i3-10305, at 2264, is 0.4 percent ahead. Any of these pairings would be expected to behave effectively the same in Control, since the game is GPU-bound on this configuration anyway.

On the GPU side, the nearest rivals listed by average score include the AMD Radeon HD 7790 at 17666 (0.2 percent above the RTX 4060's 17639), the AMD Radeon 780M at 17588 (0.3 percent below), the AMD Radeon Pro 560 at 17551 (0.5 percent below), and the AMD Radeon Pro 460 at 17509 (0.7 percent below). While aggregate scores cluster tightly, real-world behavior in a DirectX 12 Ultimate title with hardware ray tracing may differ from these composite figures, since the RTX 4060's 24 dedicated RT cores and 96 tensor cores are not fully reflected in general-purpose GPU scores.

How This Combo Ranks

Across all configurations tested in Control in the database, the i5-9400 + RTX 4060 pairing ranks 1949 out of 3720 combos. That places it almost exactly at the median, in the 52nd percentile of tested combinations for this specific game. This aligns well with the component-level percentiles: the CPU sits in the 47th percentile of all CPUs and the GPU in the 61st percentile of all GPUs, and the combined result lands between those two reference points. In other words, this is a thoroughly average Control configuration by the database's standards, neither near the top of the leaderboard nor anywhere near the bottom. Given that Control released in 2019 and remains a demanding title, a median rank with full 60 FPS capability at two of three tested resolutions is a solid outcome for mid-range hardware.

The Verdict

Yes, this PC can run Control, with important qualifications by resolution. At 1920x1080, the verdict is unambiguous: all four presets clear 60 FPS, from Low at 138.7 FPS to Ultra at 79 FPS. At 2560x1440, the verdict is also positive: all four presets clear 60 FPS, though Ultra does so narrowly at 60.5 FPS. At 3840x2160, the verdict is conditional: only the Low preset at 73.7 FPS is playable, while Medium at 53.4 FPS, High at 43.6 FPS, and Ultra at 36.9 FPS all miss the threshold. Players targeting 4K would need to accept reduced settings, while 1080p and 1440p players can max out the game and stay smooth.

Best Settings per Resolution

• 1920x1080: Ultra, 79 FPS average. The most demanding preset stays comfortably above 60 FPS with an 18 percent cushion. There is no reason to lower settings at this resolution.
• 2560x1440: Ultra, 60.5 FPS average. Ultra technically qualifies as the best playable preset, but the margin is minimal. Players sensitive to dips should use High at 68.3 FPS, which retains most of the visual quality with a 13.8 FPS buffer over the threshold.
• 3840x2160: Low, 73.7 FPS average. This is the only preset at 4K that clears 60 FPS, leaving a 13.7 FPS cushion. The next step up, Medium at 53.4 FPS, falls short by 6.6 frames.