Control

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for Control with the Intel Core i9-14900K and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER shows a clear performance curve across resolutions and presets. At 1920x1080, the combination delivers its strongest results. Low settings produce an average of 115.5 FPS, Medium reaches 83.3 FPS, High hits 75.3 FPS, and Ultra maintains 65.8 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra is roughly 50 FPS, indicating that the GPU has enough headroom at this resolution to absorb substantial graphical load increases while staying above the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Moving to 2560x1440, the averages drop noticeably. Low settings yield 86.6 FPS, Medium settles at 63.4 FPS, High falls to 56.1 FPS, and Ultra drops to 51.3 FPS. The transition from Medium to High costs over 7 FPS, and the jump from High to Ultra costs nearly 5 more FPS. Only Low and Medium clear the 60 FPS line here, with High and Ultra falling short by roughly 4 and 9 FPS respectively.

At 3840x2160, the performance picture becomes more constrained. Low settings still manage 62.4 FPS, barely surpassing the playable threshold. Medium drops to 42.3 FPS, High reaches 36.2 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 31 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium at 4K is over 20 FPS, which suggests the rendering workload at this resolution quickly overwhelms the GPU's capabilities once texture quality and effects scale upward. The database records no minimum or maximum frame times for these runs, so the analysis relies on average FPS alone, but the pattern is consistent: 4K is only viable at the lowest preset.

CPU and GPU Roles

The scaling between resolutions and presets reveals which component dominates in this pairing. The i9-14900K is a 24-core, 32-thread processor with a boost clock of 6.00 GHz and a 36 MB shared L3 cache. It ranks in the 95th percentile among all CPUs in the database. The RTX 2060 SUPER, meanwhile, sits in the 62nd percentile among GPUs, with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus and 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This imbalance becomes evident in the frame rate data.

At 1920x1080, the GPU is the primary constraint. The CPU can feed frames far faster than the GPU can render them, which explains why Low settings deliver 115.5 FPS while Ultra still holds 65.8 FPS. The delta between resolutions at the same preset tells the story: going from 1080p Low to 1440p Low costs 29 FPS, and from 1440p Low to 4K Low costs another 24 FPS. That is a GPU-bound scaling pattern. The CPU's role at lower resolutions is to keep up with draw calls and physics, which the i9-14900K does effortlessly given its single-core and multi-core benchmark strengths.

At 2560x1440, the balance shifts slightly. Medium settings still hit 63.4 FPS, but High and Ultra fall below 60. This indicates the GPU's shading units, 2176 in total, and its 7.181 TFLOPS of FP32 compute are the limiting factor. The CPU has plenty of headroom, as evidenced by its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39399.5 and single-core score of 2262.5, but those resources go unused when the GPU cannot render frames fast enough.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is unequivocally the bottleneck. Even Low settings only reach 62.4 FPS, and Ultra drops to 31 FPS. The pixel rate of 105.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 224.4 GTexel/s are simply insufficient for 4K Ultra workloads in Control. The CPU's contribution at this resolution is minimal; the data shows that no amount of processor headroom can compensate for the GPU's memory bandwidth and compute limits. The 8 GB VRAM capacity also matters here, as 4K textures plus effects likely exceed what the GDDR6 buffer can comfortably hold, forcing the renderer to swap or reduce quality.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the i9-14900K provide context for how this CPU compares to other high-end options. The Intel Core i9-14900KF scores 79371 in the database's average benchmark, which is 0.3% higher than the i9-14900K's 79097. That difference is negligible in real-world gaming. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus scores 79574, 0.6% higher, and the AMD EPYC 7413 scores 80041, 1.2% higher. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 scores 77740, which is 1.7% lower. For Control specifically, any of these CPUs would behave nearly identically when paired with the RTX 2060 SUPER, because the GPU is the limiting factor in most tested scenarios. The CPU's benchmark percentile of 95 means it outperforms the vast majority of processors, but that advantage does not translate into higher frame rates when the GPU maxes out first.

On the GPU side, the RTX 2060 SUPER's nearest rivals are closely bunched. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile scores 18159, 0.4% lower than the 2060 SUPER's 18093. The AMD Radeon Pro 5700 scores 18189, 0.5% lower. The AMD Radeon RX 460 scores 18373, 1.5% higher, and the Intel Arc A770M scores 18383, 1.6% higher. These delta values are small, meaning a user with any of these GPUs paired with a similar high-end CPU would see frame rates within a few percent of the recorded Control results. The RTX 3060 Mobile, despite being a laptop part, lands almost exactly on par with the desktop 2060 SUPER in aggregate benchmarks, so its Control performance would track closely. The Radeon Pro 5700 and RX 460 also fall within a tight band, though the RX 460's higher average score is curious given its older architecture; the database shows it as a valid comparable.

FAQ

Q: Can this combination run Control at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings?

A: Yes. The recorded data shows 65.8 FPS average at 1080p Ultra, which exceeds the 60 FPS playable threshold. This is the most demanding preset that remains fully playable at this resolution.

Q: What is the best settings preset at 2560x1440 for this hardware?

A: Medium settings provide 63.4 FPS average, which clears the 60 FPS threshold. High settings drop to 56.1 FPS, so Medium is the highest preset that maintains playability at 1440p.

Q: Is 3840x2160 viable with this CPU and GPU combination?

A: Only at Low settings, which deliver 62.4 FPS average. Medium drops to 42.3 FPS, High reaches 36.2 FPS, and Ultra falls to 31 FPS, all below the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 1440p at the same settings?

A: At Low settings, the drop is from 115.5 FPS to 86.6 FPS, a reduction of about 29 FPS. At Ultra, the drop is from 65.8 FPS to 51.3 FPS, a reduction of about 14.5 FPS. The relative loss is larger at lower presets because the GPU has more headroom to lose.

Q: Does the CPU or GPU limit performance more in this game?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor in nearly all tested scenarios. The i9-14900K ranks in the 95th percentile among CPUs, while the RTX 2060 SUPER ranks in the 62nd percentile among GPUs. The frame rate scaling across resolutions confirms that GPU rendering capacity, not CPU processing, determines the final FPS.

Q: How does this combination rank among all tested combos in the database?

A: It ranks 2724 out of 3720 tested combinations, placing it in the lower third of all recorded configurations. This ranking reflects the GPU's mid-range position rather than the CPU's high-end performance.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the i9-14900K and RTX 2060 SUPER ranks 2724 out of 3720 tested combos in the database for Control. That puts it in the 27th percentile of all recorded configurations, meaning roughly 73% of tested combos perform better in this game. The ranking is heavily influenced by the GPU's 62nd percentile position among all GPUs, while the CPU's 95th percentile standing does little to boost the overall result. This is a classic case of a high-end processor paired with a mid-range graphics card; the CPU's potential is largely unrealized in a GPU-bound title like Control.

The rank also suggests that many other combos, likely those with more balanced GPU choices or higher-tier graphics cards, deliver better frame rates. The i9-14900K's nearest CPU rivals, such as the i9-14900KF or the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus, would produce nearly identical rankings when paired with the same GPU, since their benchmark scores differ by less than 1.2%. The GPU's nearest rivals, including the RTX 3060 Mobile and Radeon Pro 5700, would also land in a similar rank band. To move significantly up the ranking, a user would need a substantially stronger GPU, not a different CPU.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the only preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Low, with an average of 62.4 FPS. This is the maximum playable setting at 4K, and it barely clears the threshold. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall below 60 FPS, with averages of 42.3, 36.2, and 31 respectively.

At 2560x1440, Medium settings are the most demanding preset that maintains 60 FPS, delivering 63.4 FPS average. Low settings reach 86.6 FPS, providing a smoother experience, but Medium offers the best balance of visual quality and playability. High and Ultra drop to 56.1 and 51.3 FPS, respectively, missing the threshold.

At 1920x1080, Ultra settings deliver 65.8 FPS average, making it the best playable preset. Low settings reach 115.5 FPS, Medium hits 83.3 FPS, and High achieves 75.3 FPS, all comfortably above 60. Ultra is the most demanding option that still clears the threshold, so it represents the optimal visual configuration at this resolution.

The Verdict

This PC can run Control, but the experience depends heavily on resolution and settings. At 1920x1080, the verdict is clear: all four presets, Low, Medium, High, and Ultra, clear the 60 FPS threshold, with Ultra averaging 65.8 FPS. This is the ideal environment for this hardware, offering full visual fidelity at playable frame rates. At 2560x1440, the combination remains viable but requires compromise: Low and Medium settings are playable, with Medium at 63.4 FPS, while High and Ultra fall short at 56.1 and 51.3 FPS. A user targeting 1440p should stick to Medium for a stable experience. At 3840x2160, the hardware barely qualifies as playable, with only Low settings reaching 62.4 FPS. Everything above Low drops below 60 FPS, making 4K an impractical choice for this pairing unless the user is willing to accept lower visual quality.

The database's verdict by resolution confirms this: 4K has Low as its best playable setting, 1440p has Medium, and 1080p has Ultra. The i9-14900K provides ample CPU headroom, but the RTX 2060 SUPER's mid-range GPU position, 62nd percentile, caps the overall performance. For a game like Control, which was released in 2019 and features demanding real-time effects, this combination delivers a satisfying experience at 1080p, a workable one at 1440p with reduced settings, and a marginal one at 4K with minimal settings. The data shows a system that is CPU-overqualified but GPU-limited, resulting in a playable but not high-end gaming experience.