Control

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 lands at rank 2,950 out of 3,720 tested combinations for Control. This places the combo in the bottom 21% of all tested hardware pairings, a position that reflects a significant imbalance between the two components. The CPU is exceptionally strong, sitting in the 96th percentile among all processors, while the GPU is far more modest, resting in the 58th percentile among all graphics cards. The recorded data shows that this pairing is heavily CPU-limited in theory, but in practice, the GPU becomes the decisive factor at higher resolutions and settings, pulling the overall experience down to a level where only the lightest settings at 1440p and a few presets at 1080p clear the 60 FPS threshold.

The database records Control as an Action Adventure title, and the measured frame rates indicate that this hardware combination is best suited for 1080p gaming with some headroom at medium settings. At 4K, none of the tested presets reach playable levels, and even the lowest setting falls short. The verdict is clear: this is a 1080p-oriented machine for Control, with 1440p possible only at the lowest quality preset.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 2,950 out of 3,720 tested combinations places this CPU-GPU pairing in the lower quartile of the database for Control. The percentile data tells a telling story: the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus ranks in the 96th percentile among all CPUs, a top-tier result, while the RTX 2060 ranks in the 58th percentile among all GPUs. This 38-point gap between the two components highlights a severe bottleneck, where the CPU is vastly more capable than the GPU can utilize.

The average benchmark score for the CPU is 84,003, while the GPU averages 15,290. The CPU's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K with an average score of 83,807, just 0.2% behind, and the AMD EPYC 4584PX at 83,090, which is 1.1% slower. On the GPU side, the nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 at 15,283 (0% difference), the AMD Radeon 680M at 15,270 (0.1% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM at 15,199 (0.6% behind). These margins are all within 1%, meaning the RTX 2060 performs essentially identically to a GTX 580 from 2010 in the database's aggregate GPU metrics, despite being a much newer architecture.

For Control specifically, the low combo rank is driven entirely by the GPU's limited capacity. The CPU's 24 cores and 24 threads, with a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, are far beyond what this game requires. The data shows that the game's frame rates scale almost exclusively with GPU load, as evidenced by the sharp drops when moving from 1080p to 1440p and then to 4K. At 1080p Low, the combo produces 107 FPS, but at 4K Low, it drops to 55 FPS, a 49% reduction that points squarely at the GPU as the limiting factor.

Best Settings per Resolution

For 3840x2160, the verdict data lists no playable settings, meaning no preset achieves an average of 60 FPS or higher. The best measured result at this resolution is Low settings with an average of 55 FPS, which falls below the playable threshold. The database therefore records no recommended settings for 4K.

At 2560x1440, the best playable setting is Low, which delivers an average of 81 FPS. This is the only preset at this resolution that clears the 60 FPS threshold. The Medium preset produces 58 FPS, just short of playable, while High drops to 51 FPS and Ultra to 45 FPS.

For 1920x1080, the best playable setting is High, which achieves an average of 68 FPS. This is the highest quality preset that remains at or above 60 FPS. The Medium preset records 76 FPS, Low reaches 107 FPS, and Ultra sits at 59 FPS, just one frame below the threshold. The database lists High as the best settings at 1080p because it offers the highest visual quality among the playable options.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Control at 4K resolution?

A: No. The database records no playable settings at 3840x2160. The best result is Low settings with an average of 55 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold. Ultra settings at 4K produce only 30 FPS on average.

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

A: Low settings is the only playable option at 1440p, delivering an average of 81 FPS. Medium falls short with 58 FPS, and both High and Ultra are below 60 FPS as well.

Q: Is the Ultra preset playable at 1920x1080?

A: No. Ultra at 1080p produces an average of 59 FPS, which is one frame below the 60 FPS threshold. The highest playable preset at 1080p is High, with an average of 68 FPS.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has an average benchmark score of 84,003. Its closest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, scores 83,807, a 0.2% difference. The AMD EPYC 4584PX scores 83,090, which is 1.1% lower, and the AMD EPYC 9135 scores 82,980, also 1.2% lower.

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

A: The RTX 2060 has an average benchmark score of 15,290. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 scores 15,283, essentially identical at 0% difference. The AMD Radeon 680M scores 15,270 (0.1% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM scores 15,199 (0.6% behind).

Q: What frame rate does the Medium preset achieve at 1080p?

A: Medium settings at 1920x1080 produce an average of 76 FPS, with a minimum of 65 FPS and a maximum of 88 FPS. This preset is comfortably above the playable threshold.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the nearest rivals in the database are all within a narrow performance band. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K is the closest match, with a delta of just 0.2%, meaning the 290K Plus is effectively 0.2% faster in aggregate benchmarks. The AMD EPYC 4584PX and AMD EPYC 9135 are 1.1% and 1.2% slower respectively, while the AMD EPYC 7F72 is 1.3% faster. These differences are negligible in real-world gaming scenarios, and any of these CPUs would deliver nearly identical frame rates in Control when paired with the same GPU.

For the GPU, the situation is more interesting. The RTX 2060's nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580, which has a delta of 0%, meaning the database records no performance difference between these two cards in aggregate benchmarks. This is an unusual result, as the GTX 580 is a much older architecture, but the data is clear. The AMD Radeon 680M is 0.1% behind, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM is 0.6% behind, and the AMD Radeon RX 7600 is 0.8% behind. All four of these GPUs would produce nearly identical frame rates in Control when paired with the same CPU, meaning the gameplay experience would be indistinguishable among them.

When considering alternative pairings, a user with the same CPU but a GPU in the 15,200 to 15,300 score range would see essentially the same performance in Control. Conversely, pairing the RTX 2060 with a CPU in the 83,000 to 85,000 score range would also yield similar results. The data suggests that the combo's performance is so GPU-bound that CPU choice has minimal impact on the final frame rates.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The database provides exact measurements for all tested resolutions and settings. At 3840x2160, the results are as follows: High settings average 35 FPS, Low settings average 55 FPS, Medium settings average 39 FPS with a minimum of 33 and maximum of 45, and Ultra settings average 30 FPS. None of these reach the 60 FPS threshold, and the gap between Low and High is 20 FPS, indicating that the GPU struggles significantly at 4K regardless of quality level.

At 2560x1440, the measurements improve substantially. Low settings average 81 FPS, Medium averages 58 FPS with a minimum of 49 and maximum of 66, High averages 51 FPS, and Ultra averages 45 FPS. The jump from Low to Medium is 23 FPS, which is the largest single-step drop in the entire dataset, showing that the Medium preset at 1440p places a significantly heavier load on the GPU.

At 1920x1080, the results are the most playable. Low settings average 107 FPS, Medium averages 76 FPS with a minimum of 65 and maximum of 88, High averages 68 FPS, and Ultra averages 59 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a steady decline: 107 to 76 to 68 to 59. The difference between Medium and High is only 8 FPS, while the difference between High and Ultra is 9 FPS, suggesting that the Ultra preset at 1080p is the first setting where the GPU becomes fully saturated.

The minimum and maximum frame rates are only recorded for Medium settings at each resolution. At 4K Medium, the range is 33 to 45 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the range is 49 to 66 FPS. At 1080p Medium, the range is 65 to 88 FPS. These ranges indicate that the Medium preset at 1080p has a 23 FPS variance, which is the largest recorded spread, likely due to scene complexity variations.

The Verdict

The verdict data is unambiguous. At 3840x2160, the database lists no playable settings, meaning this combo cannot run Control at 4K with an acceptable frame rate. The best 4K result is 55 FPS at Low, which is below the 60 FPS threshold.

At 2560x1440, only Low settings are playable, achieving 81 FPS on average. This is the sole playable preset at this resolution. The Medium preset at 58 FPS is close but does not clear the bar, and High and Ultra are even further behind.

At 1920x1080, the combo clears the 60 FPS threshold at three settings: High (68 FPS), Low (107 FPS), and Medium (76 FPS). The best playable preset is High, which offers the highest quality among the playable options. Ultra at 59 FPS misses the threshold by a single frame.

In summary, this PC can run Control, but only under specific conditions. The optimal experience is at 1080p with High settings, delivering 68 FPS. Users seeking 1440p must accept Low settings for 81 FPS. 4K is not viable. The data indicates that the system is playable but with significant compromises at higher resolutions.

CPU and GPU Roles

The measured data reveals a clear division of labor between the CPU and GPU in Control. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is vastly overqualified for this game. Its 96th percentile CPU ranking and average benchmark score of 84,003 place it in the top tier of processors, yet the game's frame rates are almost entirely determined by the RTX 2060's performance.

Evidence for GPU dominance comes from the scaling between resolutions. At 1080p Low, the combo produces 107 FPS. At 1440p Low, it drops to 81 FPS, a 24% reduction. At 4K Low, it falls to 55 FPS, a further 32% reduction. This scaling pattern is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario, where increasing resolution directly increases the GPU's workload without significantly affecting the CPU.

The CPU's role is more visible at lower resolutions and settings. The difference between 1080p Low and 1080p Ultra is 48 FPS (107 to 59), which is entirely attributable to the GPU's inability to handle the increased shader and texture work. The CPU, with its 24 threads and 5.80 GHz boost clock, is never the limiting factor in these measurements.

At higher resolutions, the GPU's dominance becomes even more pronounced. At 4K, the difference between Low and Ultra is 25 FPS (55 to 30), a narrower range than at 1080p, because the GPU is already saturated at Low settings. The CPU's contribution is effectively negligible at 4K, as the GPU is the sole bottleneck.

The data suggests that for Control, the GPU is the component that matters at all resolutions above 1080p. At 1080p, the CPU still has headroom, but the GPU's performance ceiling is reached at Ultra settings, where it produces 59 FPS. The CPU's 96th percentile ranking provides no benefit for this specific game, as the RTX 2060's 58th percentile ranking is the definitive constraint on the combo's performance. Users seeking better frame rates would need to upgrade the GPU, not the CPU, as the processor is already far more capable than this game requires.