Control

Control pairs an older-generation GPU with a current-generation CPU, and the measured results show a combination that is heavily skewed toward graphics load. The AMD Ryzen 5 9600X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER deliver playable frame rates at 1080p and 1440p, but 4K Ultra pushes the system to its limits. The data indicates a clear hierarchy: the CPU has ample headroom, while the GPU becomes the deciding factor as resolution climbs. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS across resolutions and settings, interprets the role of each component, and provides practical guidance for configuring the game.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this CPU-GPU combo in Control?

A: Based on the measured FPS, 2560x1440 offers the best balance. At High settings, the system averages 62 FPS, which is comfortably playable, while 1920x1080 High reaches 82 FPS and 3840x2160 High drops to 42 FPS. The 1440p figure sits in the sweet spot between visual fidelity and performance.

Q: How does the RTX 2070 SUPER compare to its nearest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The RTX 2070 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 20282, which places it 1% below the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M (20480), 1.2% below the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile (20534), 1.3% below the Intel Arc B570 (20556), and 1.5% below the Intel Arc A750 (20582). The differences are minimal, indicating near-identical overall performance.

Q: What is the CPU's percentile ranking among all processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 9600X sits in the 81st percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 29713. Its closest rival, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755GE, scores 29656, a mere 0.2% difference, showing the 9600X is competitively positioned.

Q: Does the RTX 2070 SUPER have enough VRAM for Control at high settings?

A: The GPU comes with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory across a 256-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The measured FPS at 1440p High (62 FPS) and 4K High (42 FPS) suggests the memory capacity is sufficient for the game's demands, though the 4K Ultra result of 36 FPS indicates the GPU's compute limits are reached before VRAM becomes a bottleneck.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, Low settings produce 130 FPS, while Ultra settings drop to 71 FPS. This represents a 59 FPS reduction, or roughly 45% lower performance, showing the significant cost of maxing out graphical options.

Q: How does the CPU's single-thread performance compare to its multi-thread performance?

A: The Ryzen 5 9600X scores 1253 in 3DMark single-thread and 7590 in max-thread tests. In Cinebench R23, it achieves 2183.5 single-core and 17528.5 multi-core. The ratio between these scores indicates strong scaling, with the multi-core result being approximately 8 times the single-core figure in 3DMark.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data shows a clear progression from Low to Ultra, with each preset tier costing a predictable amount of performance. At 1920x1080, Low settings yield 130 FPS, Medium drops to 92 FPS, High reaches 82 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 71 FPS. The gap between Medium and High is only 10 FPS, while the jump from High to Ultra costs another 11 FPS. This suggests that High is the most efficient preset at 1080p, delivering 82 FPS while avoiding the diminishing returns of Ultra.

At 2560x1440, the pattern shifts. Low produces 98 FPS, Medium 70 FPS, High 62 FPS, and Ultra 54 FPS. The difference between Medium and High narrows to just 8 FPS, while Ultra costs another 8 FPS. For a 60 FPS target, Medium is the minimum requirement, but High at 62 FPS provides a more stable experience without pushing into the sub-60 territory of Ultra. The 1440p High setting is the recommended choice for this resolution, as it maintains fluid gameplay while preserving visual quality.

The 4K results tell a different story. At 3840x2160, Low averages 66 FPS, Medium 47 FPS, High 42 FPS, and Ultra 36 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is substantial at 19 FPS, and each subsequent tier reduces performance further. To achieve a consistent 60 FPS at 4K, only Low settings are viable, and even then the average of 66 FPS leaves little margin for demanding scenes. Medium at 47 FPS is playable but not ideal for fast-paced action, while High and Ultra fall below acceptable thresholds.

For the best experience per the measured rows, the optimal configuration is 2560x1440 with High settings. This combination yields 62 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold typically considered smooth, while still allowing for detailed textures and effects. Players with 1080p monitors can comfortably use High settings at 82 FPS, but the 1440p option offers a superior balance of resolution and frame rate. Those with 4K displays should accept Low settings if they prioritize frame rate, or drop to 1440p to regain visual fidelity.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K reveals how the system's components scale with pixel count. At High settings, the transition from 1920x1080 (82 FPS) to 2560x1440 (62 FPS) represents a 24% performance loss, while moving from 1440p to 3840x2160 (42 FPS) costs another 32%. Overall, the 4K High result is 49% lower than the 1080p High figure. This steep decline indicates the GPU is the primary limiting factor, as the pixel count quadruples from 1080p to 4K but the FPS does not scale proportionally.

The same pattern appears across all settings. At Low, 1080p produces 130 FPS, 1440p 98 FPS, and 4K 66 FPS—a 49% reduction from 1080p to 4K. At Medium, the figures are 92, 70, and 47 FPS respectively, with 4K being 49% lower than 1080p. Ultra follows suit: 71, 54, and 36 FPS, a 49% drop. The consistency of this ~49% decrease across all presets strongly suggests that the RTX 2070 SUPER's rendering throughput, not memory bandwidth or CPU overhead, dictates the scaling behavior.

The CPU's role in this scaling is minimal. The Ryzen 5 9600X, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, has more than enough processing power to feed the GPU at all resolutions. Its 3DMark scores—7585 for 16 threads and 7590 for max threads—show that multi-threaded performance is nearly identical regardless of thread count, meaning the CPU is not a bottleneck even at 1080p where frame rates are highest. The consistent FPS drop pattern confirms that resolution scaling is purely a GPU-bound exercise for this combination.

The 49% reduction from 1080p to 4K is notably less than the 75% pixel increase, which suggests the game's rendering pipeline does not scale linearly with resolution. Some effects, such as certain post-processing and physics calculations, are resolution-independent, allowing the GPU to maintain a higher proportion of its performance at 4K than raw pixel counts would imply. However, the trend is clear: this system is not designed for 4K gaming, and users should target 1440p as the practical ceiling.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured FPS spans a wide range depending on settings. Low settings produce an average of 130 FPS, which is the highest figure recorded for this combo. Medium settings yield 92 FPS, with a minimum of 78 FPS and a maximum of 106 FPS, indicating some variability but generally smooth performance. High settings drop to 82 FPS, while Ultra settings bottom out at 71 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra is 59 FPS, showing how much performance headroom exists at 1080p for users willing to compromise on visual quality.

The 2560x1440 results show a tighter grouping. Low settings average 98 FPS, which remains well above playable thresholds. Medium settings produce 70 FPS, with a minimum of 59 FPS and a maximum of 80 FPS—the minimum being just shy of the 60 FPS target. High settings average 62 FPS, while Ultra settings drop to 54 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 44 FPS, less than at 1080p, reflecting the increased GPU load at higher resolutions.

At 3840x2160, the FPS figures compress further. Low settings average 66 FPS, which is the only 4K preset to exceed 60 FPS. Medium settings average 47 FPS, with a minimum of 40 FPS and a maximum of 54 FPS. High settings produce 42 FPS, and Ultra settings average 36 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is 30 FPS, narrower than at lower resolutions, indicating that the GPU is approaching its absolute limits and settings have less relative impact.

The Medium settings rows include minimum and maximum FPS data, providing insight into frame pacing. At 1080p Medium, the range is 78-106 FPS, a 28 FPS spread. At 1440p Medium, the range narrows to 59-80 FPS, a 21 FPS spread. At 4K Medium, the range is 40-54 FPS, a 14 FPS spread. This tightening of the frame time variance at higher resolutions suggests that the GPU is consistently saturated, reducing the impact of scene complexity on frame rates.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER is built on the TU104 chip using TSMC's 12 nm process, with 13,600 million transistors on a 545 mm² die. Its 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs provide the raw compute for Control's rendering. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1605 MHz and a boost clock of 1770 MHz, with memory running at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) across a 256-bit bus, yielding 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This memory configuration is crucial for handling the game's high-resolution textures and effects.

The GPU's benchmark scores place it in the 65th percentile among all GPUs, with an average score of 20282. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M, scores 20480, a 1% advantage. The RTX 3070 Mobile is 1.2% faster, the Intel Arc B570 is 1.3% faster, and the Intel Arc A750 is 1.5% faster. These margins are small, indicating that the RTX 2070 SUPER remains competitive despite its age. In DirectX 12, the GPU scores 67 in PassMark, while DirectX 11 scores 151, showing better performance in older APIs. The Vulkan score of 90637 in Geekbench suggests strong compute capabilities.

The GPU's 8 GB of GDDR6 memory is adequate for Control at the tested settings. The measured FPS at 1440p High (62 FPS) and 4K High (42 FPS) does not indicate memory capacity issues, as the frame rates decline smoothly with increasing resolution rather than exhibiting sudden drops from VRAM overflow. The 448.0 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient for the game's data throughput, and the GPU's FP32 performance of 9.062 TFLOPS provides the compute headroom for the game's physics and rendering effects.

The RTX 2070 SUPER's ray tracing cores (40) and tensor cores (320) are present but not directly utilized in the measured FPS data, as no ray tracing settings were specified in the test rows. The GPU's DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) ensures compatibility with modern rendering features, but the benchmark results reflect standard rasterization performance. The GPU's end-of-life status and launch MSRP of 499 USD position it as a previous-generation part, yet its performance remains relevant for 1080p and 1440p gaming.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 9600X is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Granite Ridge. It operates at a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The CPU is manufactured on TSMC's 4 nm process, with 8,315 million transistors on a 70.6 mm² die. Its cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3, providing ample fast storage for game data.

The CPU's benchmark scores demonstrate strong single-thread and multi-thread performance. In 3DMark, it scores 1253 in single-thread and 7590 in max-thread tests, with intermediate scores of 2456 for 2 threads, 4649 for 4 threads, 6726 for 8 threads, and 7585 for 16 threads. The near-identical scores for 16 threads (7585) and max threads (7590) indicate that the CPU reaches its performance ceiling with just 16 threads, which is expected for a 12-thread processor. Cinebench R23 scores of 2183.5 single-core and 17528.5 multi-core reinforce this pattern, with the multi-core result being 8 times the single-core figure.

The CPU's 81st percentile ranking among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 29713, places it in the upper tier of desktop processors. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755GE, scores 29656, a 0.2% difference. The AMD Ryzen 7 7840H is 0.5% slower, the AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT is 0.6% slower, and the AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS is 0.8% slower. These tight margins show that the 9600X is competitively positioned against both desktop and mobile parts.

In Control, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and physics calculations. The measured FPS patterns—consistent ~49% drops from 1080p to 4K across all settings—indicate that the CPU is not a limiting factor at any resolution. Even at 1080p Low, where the GPU produces 130 FPS, the CPU's single-thread performance of 1253 in 3DMark and 2183.5 in Cinebench R23 is sufficient to maintain frame rates. The 5.40 GHz boost clock ensures high IPC for game logic, while the 12 threads handle background tasks without contention.

The CPU's memory support for DDR5 with dual-channel configuration and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth provides adequate data transfer for the GPU, though the GPU's own 448.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is the more critical factor for game performance. The CPU's PCIe Gen 5 interface with 24 lanes ensures high-speed connectivity to the GPU, eliminating any potential bottleneck from data transfer. The 9600X's 65 W TDP and 4 nm process make it an efficient companion to the 215 W RTX 2070 SUPER, and the overall system is well-balanced for 1080p and 1440p gaming, with the GPU being the clear performance limiter at higher resolutions.