Control

Similar Performance Alternatives

The Intel Core i7-13700K sits in a tightly contested performance bracket. Its average benchmark score of 46881 places it within a fraction of a percent of several comparable processors. The AMD Ryzen 9 5900 trails by only 0.2%, while the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 is 0.3% behind. On the other side, the AMD Ryzen 9 7845HX and Intel Xeon w3-2535 both lead by 0.5%. In practical terms, any of these CPUs would deliver nearly identical frame pacing in Control, so the choice between them would come down to platform features rather than measurable gaming performance.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 occupies a similarly crowded segment. Its average benchmark score of 15290 is matched almost exactly by the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580, which shows a 0% delta. The AMD Radeon 680M is 0.1% ahead, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM is 0.6% ahead, and the AMD Radeon RX 7600 leads by 0.8%. These deltas are so small that in a real gameplay session, the differences would be imperceptible. Anyone considering a GPU in this class should expect essentially identical behavior from any of these four cards when running Control.

The CPU sits at the 89th percentile among all tested processors, meaning it outperforms the vast majority of installed hardware. The GPU, by contrast, is at the 58th percentile. This is a lopsided pairing: the processor has far more headroom than the graphics card can exploit. When building or upgrading around this combo, the recorded data suggests that the RTX 2060 is the limiting factor in nearly every scenario, so future GPU upgrades would yield immediate gains without needing to touch the CPU.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark results across resolutions make the division of labor clear. At 1920x1080, the CPU has enough power to feed the GPU efficiently, and the frame rates scale predictably with graphics settings. The jump from Low to Medium at 1080p costs about 33 frames per second (from 109.8 to 76.8), and the jump from Medium to High costs another 7.7 frames (from 76.8 to 69.1). This scaling is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario: the CPU is not the bottleneck, and each increase in graphical load translates directly into lower frame rates.

At 2560x1440, the GPU begins to struggle. The average frame rate drops from 79.9 on Low to 60.3 on Medium, then to 53.2 on High, and finally to 45.9 on Ultra. The gap between Low and Medium at this resolution is 19.6 frames, which is a larger absolute drop than the 33-frame gap seen at 1080p between the same two settings, but the percentages tell the story: the GPU is running out of headroom as pixel count rises. The CPU is still not the constraint here, as the i7-13700K has ample single-thread and multi-thread capability.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is thoroughly overwhelmed. Even on Low settings, the average frame rate is only 55.4, which falls below the 60 FPS playable threshold. Medium drops to 37.1, High to 35.1, and Ultra to 30.5. The scaling from Low to Medium at 4K is a 18.3-frame drop, and from Medium to High only 2 frames, which indicates that the GPU is so saturated that additional graphical settings have diminishing impact. At this resolution, the CPU is essentially irrelevant; the RTX 2060 is the sole determinant of performance.

The data shows a clear pattern: at 1080p, the CPU still matters somewhat, but the GPU dominates the frame rate. At 1440p, the GPU is the primary constraint. At 4K, the GPU is the only thing that matters. For anyone playing Control with this combo, the CPU will never be the bottleneck at any resolution tested.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i7-13700K and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 ranks 2874 out of 3720 tested combinations in Control. This places it in the lower half of the database, which is expected given the GPU's modest standing. The CPU's 89th percentile performance is largely wasted in this pairing because the GPU cannot translate that processing power into higher frame rates.

The ranking reflects the reality of the measured data: this combo produces playable frame rates at 1080p on all settings, and at 1440p on Low and Medium, but it falls short at 4K across every settings preset. The rank of 2874 out of 3720 means that roughly three-quarters of tested combos deliver better performance in this game, which is consistent with a mid-range GPU paired with a high-end CPU.

The data indicates that this combo is not balanced for Control. A more modest CPU paired with a stronger GPU would likely rank higher in this specific title, since the game's performance is so heavily GPU-bound at higher resolutions. However, the combo does offer a clear upgrade path: swapping the RTX 2060 for a more powerful GPU would dramatically improve the ranking without requiring a CPU change.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Control at 1920x1080 on Ultra settings?

A: Yes. The measured average frame rate is 60.7 FPS, which is just above the 60 FPS playable threshold.

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

A: Medium is the best setting that stays at or above 60 FPS, with an average of 60.3 FPS. High drops to 53.2 FPS and is not playable by the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Is 4K playable with this hardware?

A: No. The highest average frame rate at 3840x2160 is 55.4 FPS on Low settings, which misses the 60 FPS threshold. All other settings are below that.

Q: How does the RTX 2060 compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The RTX 2060 averages 15290 in benchmark scores. The GeForce GTX 580 is exactly 0% apart, the Radeon 680M is 0.1% ahead, the RTX 3050 OEM is 0.6% ahead, and the Radeon RX 7600 is 0.8% ahead.

Q: How does the i7-13700K compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The i7-13700K averages 46881. The Ryzen 9 5900 is 0.2% behind, the Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 is 0.3% behind, the Ryzen 9 7845HX is 0.5% ahead, and the Xeon w3-2535 is 0.5% ahead.

Q: Which component limits performance in Control?

A: The GPU. At every resolution, the frame rates scale with graphics settings in a way that indicates GPU saturation. The CPU's 89th percentile ranking is never the constraint in the measured data.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the frame rates are as follows:

• Low: 109.8 average
• Medium: 76.8 average
• High: 69.1 average
• Ultra: 60.7 average

All four presets stay above the 60 FPS threshold, and the difference between the lowest and highest settings is 49.1 frames. The step from Low to Medium is the largest single drop at 33 frames, while the step from High to Ultra is only 8.4 frames.

At 2560x1440, the results are:

• Low: 79.9 average
• Medium: 60.3 average
• High: 53.2 average
• Ultra: 45.9 average

Only Low and Medium meet the playable threshold. The gap between Low and Ultra is 34 frames, and the step from Medium to High is 7.1 frames, which is the smallest drop between consecutive settings at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the results are:

• Low: 55.4 average
• Medium: 37.1 average
• High: 35.1 average
• Ultra: 30.5 average

No preset reaches 60 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 24.9 frames, and the step from Medium to High is only 2 frames, showing how heavily the GPU is saturated at 4K.

The data shows a consistent pattern: as resolution increases, the gap between Low and Ultra narrows because the GPU is increasingly unable to process additional graphical effects. At 1080p, the spread is 49.1 frames. At 1440p, it is 34 frames. At 4K, it is 24.9 frames.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, with an average of 60.7 FPS. This is the highest quality setting available, and it still clears the threshold by a small margin.

At 2560x1440, the best playable setting is Medium, with an average of 60.3 FPS. High drops to 53.2 FPS, so it cannot be recommended for a 60 FPS target.

At 3840x2160, no settings preset reaches the 60 FPS threshold. The closest is Low at 55.4 FPS, but since it misses the threshold, there is no recommended setting at this resolution.

For a practical recommendation: players targeting 60 FPS should run Ultra at 1080p or Medium at 1440p. At 4K, the only option is to reduce resolution or accept frame rates below 60 FPS. The measured data does not include any settings between the four presets, so tuning individual options may yield results not captured here, but the recorded presets provide a clear picture of what this hardware can deliver in Control.