Control

FAQ

Q: What is the highest quality preset that keeps Control at or above 60 FPS on this system?

A: At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset averages 68 FPS. At 2560x1440, the Medium preset averages 67 FPS. At 3840x2160, only the Low preset reaches the 60 FPS threshold, averaging 63 FPS.

Q: How does this CPU compare to its closest performance peers?

A: The Intel Core i5-9400 has an average benchmark score of 2254. The nearest rival, the Intel Core i7-1068NG7, scores 2259, which is 0.2% higher. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 2246, 0.4% lower. The Intel Core i3-10305 scores 2264, 0.4% higher. The Intel Core i7-10710U scores 2248, 0.3% lower.

Q: What is the GPU's standing among all tested graphics cards?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 sits in the 66th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL, has an average score of 21153, which is 0.6% higher. The NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile scores 21379, 1.6% higher. The AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT scores 20713, 1.6% lower.

Q: Which resolution offers the best balance for this game?

A: The recorded data shows 2560x1440 at Medium provides 67 FPS average with a minimum of 57 FPS and a maximum of 77 FPS. This is the most demanding preset that stays above the 60 FPS playable threshold at that resolution, while 1920x1080 at Ultra reaches 68 FPS average.

Q: Can this system handle Control at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, only the Low preset reaches playable performance with an average of 63 FPS. High averages 40 FPS, Medium averages 45 FPS, and Ultra averages 35 FPS. The 4K Low preset is the single playable option.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested combinations?

A: This CPU and GPU pairing ranks 2296 out of 3720 tested combos for Control. That places it in the lower-middle portion of the database, meaning many other systems deliver higher frame rates in this title.

Best Settings per Resolution

3840x2160 (4K): The most demanding preset that maintains 60 FPS or higher is Low, with an average of 63 FPS. This is the only preset at 4K that crosses the playable threshold. The Medium preset drops to 45 FPS average, High to 40 FPS, and Ultra to 35 FPS.

2560x1440 (1440p): The most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Medium, averaging 67 FPS. The recorded minimum for this preset is 57 FPS, which dips just below the threshold, but the average remains above it. High averages 59 FPS, just short of the target, while Ultra averages 52 FPS. Low averages 94 FPS.

1920x1080 (1080p): The most demanding preset that clears 60 FPS is Ultra, averaging 68 FPS. This is the full visual experience at this resolution. High averages 78 FPS, Medium averages 88 FPS, and Low averages 124 FPS. All four presets at 1080p exceed the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Similar Performance Alternatives

CPU side: The Intel Core i5-9400 performs nearly identically to several other processors. The Intel Core i7-1068NG7 is 0.2% faster in average benchmark score, while the Intel Core i7-10710U is 0.3% slower. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 is 0.4% slower, and the Intel Core i3-10305 is 0.4% faster. In practical terms, any of these CPUs would produce nearly the same frame rates in Control when paired with the same GPU. The differences are within measurement noise, so users upgrading or building with any of these processors should expect similar gameplay behavior.

GPU side: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 has close rivals in the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL, which scores 0.6% higher, and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile, which scores 1.6% higher. The AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT scores 1.6% lower. These deltas are small, meaning the RTX 5050 and RX 5600 XT would produce very similar frame rates in Control. The RTX A4000 Mobile would be marginally faster, and the RX Vega M GL would be almost indistinguishable. For this game, any of these GPUs paired with the i5-9400 would yield comparable performance at each resolution and preset.

The Verdict

The database verdict indicates that this system can run Control at all three tested resolutions, but with significant preset restrictions at higher resolutions.

At 1920x1080, the system clears the 60 FPS threshold on every preset, including Ultra at 68 FPS. This is the recommended environment for full visual quality. The minimum recorded FPS at Medium is 75, which is well above the playable threshold, suggesting consistent performance.

At 2560x1440, the system clears 60 FPS on Low (94 FPS) and Medium (67 FPS). High falls just short at 59 FPS, and Ultra drops to 52 FPS. The Medium preset is the best choice for 1440p, though the minimum of 57 FPS indicates occasional dips below the target.

At 3840x2160, only the Low preset reaches playable performance, averaging 63 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall below 50 FPS, making them unsuitable for smooth gameplay. The 4K Low preset is technically playable, but users seeking higher visual fidelity should consider 1440p instead.

CPU and GPU Roles

The scaling data reveals how each component contributes across resolutions and presets.

At 1920x1080: The GPU is the primary performance driver. The delta from Low (124 FPS) to Ultra (68 FPS) is 56 FPS, a 45% drop caused by increasing graphical load. The CPU has enough headroom at this resolution to feed the GPU in all presets, as even the Ultra preset maintains 68 FPS. The CPU's 6 cores and 6 threads are sufficient for Control's demands at 1080p.

At 2560x1440: The GPU continues to dominate performance scaling. Low averages 94 FPS, Medium 67 FPS, High 59 FPS, and Ultra 52 FPS. The drop from Low to Ultra is 42 FPS. The CPU is less of a factor here, as the GPU is increasingly limited by pixel throughput and shading work. The i5-9400's benchmark scores (6629 in Cinebench R23 multi-core) indicate it can keep up with the RTX 5050 at this resolution.

At 3840x2160: The GPU becomes the overwhelming bottleneck. The difference between Low (63 FPS) and Ultra (35 FPS) is 28 FPS, but more importantly, all presets except Low fall below the playable threshold. The RTX 5050's 8 GB of memory and 320.0 GB/s bandwidth are likely limiting factors at 4K. The CPU's role diminishes further, as the GPU is fully saturated at this resolution. The recorded data shows the CPU's performance ceiling is not reached here.

The pattern across resolutions is consistent: the RTX 5050 is the limiting component at higher resolutions, while the i5-9400 provides adequate processing power throughout. At 1080p, the combination is well balanced, with the GPU still being the primary constraint. At 1440p and 4K, the GPU's workload scales faster than the CPU's, reinforcing the GPU-centric nature of this title's performance profile.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo of Intel Core i5-9400 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 ranks 2296 out of 3720 tested combinations for Control. This places it in the 38th percentile of all combos, meaning roughly 62% of tested systems deliver higher frame rates. The rank reflects the combined performance of the CPU and GPU in this specific game.

The CPU alone sits in the 47th percentile of all CPUs based on average benchmark scores. The GPU alone sits in the 66th percentile of all GPUs. The combo rank is lower than the GPU percentile would suggest, indicating that the CPU may be holding back the system in some scenarios, particularly at lower resolutions where CPU overhead matters more. At 1080p, the i5-9400's 6 threads may limit peak frame rates compared to CPUs with higher single-thread performance or more threads.

The rank of 2296 also reflects the age of the CPU. Released in 2018, the i5-9400 is now several generations old. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 6629 is modest by current standards. However, the GPU's 66th percentile standing shows it is a more modern, capable component. The mismatch between CPU generation and GPU generation explains why the combo rank is lower than the GPU's individual percentile.

Measured FPS Breakdown

3840x2160:

• Low: average 63 FPS
• Medium: average 45 FPS, minimum 38 FPS, maximum 52 FPS
• High: average 40 FPS
• Ultra: average 35 FPS

2560x1440:

• Low: average 94 FPS
• Medium: average 67 FPS, minimum 57 FPS, maximum 77 FPS
• High: average 59 FPS
• Ultra: average 52 FPS

1920x1080:

• Low: average 124 FPS
• Medium: average 88 FPS, minimum 75 FPS, maximum 101 FPS
• High: average 78 FPS
• Ultra: average 68 FPS

The measured data shows clear scaling trends. At each resolution, the step from Low to Medium produces the largest relative drop: at 1080p, from 124 to 88 FPS (29% drop); at 1440p, from 94 to 67 FPS (29% drop); at 4K, from 63 to 45 FPS (29% drop). The drop from Medium to High is smaller: at 1080p, from 88 to 78 FPS (11% drop); at 1440p, from 67 to 59 FPS (12% drop); at 4K, from 45 to 40 FPS (11% drop). The drop from High to Ultra is the smallest: at 1080p, from 78 to 68 FPS (13% drop); at 1440p, from 59 to 52 FPS (12% drop); at 4K, from 40 to 35 FPS (13% drop).

The minimum and maximum values recorded for Medium presets show the frame time variance. At 1080p Medium, the range spans 26 FPS (75 to 101). At 1440p Medium, the range spans 20 FPS (57 to 77). At 4K Medium, the range spans 14 FPS (38 to 52). The lower resolution shows more variance, likely due to CPU-related frame pacing fluctuations that are less pronounced at higher resolutions where GPU time dominates.

The 1440p High preset averages 59 FPS, just 1 FPS below the playable threshold. This suggests that minor settings tweaks, such as reducing a few graphics options, could push it to 60 FPS. However, the database records only the presets as tested, so no modified configurations are available.

Overall, the measured data indicates this system is best suited for 1080p gaming with all presets playable, 1440p gaming with Medium or lower presets, and 4K gaming only at Low preset. The RTX 5050's performance scaling is consistent, and the i5-9400 does not appear to introduce unusual bottlenecks at any tested configuration.