Control

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER delivers a robust performance profile in Control, as evidenced by the measured frame rates across a matrix of resolutions and presets. The data indicates that this combination is well-suited for high-refresh-rate gaming at 1440p and maintains playable performance at 4K, with the specific settings choices yielding significant variance in average FPS.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data suggests that the High preset offers the most balanced experience for this hardware combination. At 2560x1440, the High preset delivers an average of 103.2 FPS, which is a substantial 14.6% improvement over the Ultra preset's 88.6 FPS, while still providing the visual fidelity that the High tier implies. The gap between High and Medium at this resolution is smaller, with Medium hitting 114.2 FPS, but the incremental gain of 11 FPS may not justify the reduction in graphical quality for most users.

For users prioritizing maximum frame rates, the Low preset at 2560x1440 yields an impressive 163.7 FPS average, which is 58.6% higher than the High preset. However, this comes at the cost of visual features that are integral to Control's atmospheric presentation. At 1920x1080, the High preset achieves 136.2 FPS, comfortably exceeding the 120 FPS threshold for high-refresh-rate displays, while the Ultra preset drops to 118.6 FPS—still playable but below that mark.

At 3840x2160, the situation changes. The High preset manages a 72.1 FPS average, which is the recommended target for 4K gaming on this hardware. The Ultra preset falls to 62.7 FPS, which may introduce noticeable stutter on variable refresh rate displays, while Medium (76.1 FPS) and Low (107.5 FPS) offer higher headroom but with diminishing visual returns. The data suggests that High at 4K is the optimal compromise between fidelity and fluidity, delivering a 14.9% performance uplift over Ultra without the significant visual degradation seen in Medium or Low.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Ryzen 9 9900X and RTX 4070 SUPER ranks 268th out of 1636 tested combos in Control, placing it in the top 16.4% of all configurations tested. This is a strong result, indicating that this pairing sits well above the median performer. The ranking reflects the synergy between the CPU's multi-threaded capabilities and the GPU's rasterization power, though the game's engine appears to scale more heavily with GPU throughput than CPU core count.

The CPU itself holds a 94th percentile ranking against all tested processors, with an average benchmark score of 54450. Its nearest rivals in synthetic tests include the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D, which scores 54681 (a delta of -0.4%, meaning the 9900X is marginally slower), and the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF at 55421 (a delta of -1.8%). These small deltas suggest that the 9900X is not a bottleneck in this configuration, as its performance is within 2% of competing high-end parts.

On the GPU side, the RTX 4070 SUPER holds an 84th percentile ranking against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 42576. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA RTX A6000, scores 42653, a delta of -0.2%, indicating near-parity in raw compute. The AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE follows closely at 42723 (-0.3%), while the AMD Radeon Pro 580X trails at 41991 (+1.4%). These rival comparisons underscore that the 4070 SUPER is a mid-to-high-tier performer, and the combo's 268th rank in Control reflects a balanced system where neither component significantly limits the other.

GPU Role

The RTX 4070 SUPER's memory configuration plays a critical role in Control's performance at higher resolutions. With 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus, the card provides a bandwidth of 504.2 GB/s. This is sufficient for the game's texture-heavy environments at 4K, as evidenced by the 72.1 FPS average at High settings—a figure that would be unattainable if the memory subsystem were saturated.

The GPU's clock speeds are notable: a base clock of 1980 MHz and a boost clock of 2475 MHz. The boost behavior is particularly relevant to Control, as the game's dynamic scenes—especially during combat with particle effects—can trigger sustained boosts. The measured frame rates suggest that the card holds boost clocks effectively, as the scaling from Low to Ultra at each resolution follows a predictable pattern of diminishing returns, rather than showing a cliff that would indicate thermal or power throttling.

The 35.48 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 554.4 GTexel/s texture rate provide ample headroom for the game's physics and rendering workloads. At 1920x1080, the Low preset's 212.6 FPS average demonstrates that the GPU is not the limiting factor at lower resolutions; instead, the CPU's single-thread performance (a Geekbench single-core score of 3341) becomes the more relevant constraint. The 56 RT cores and 224 tensor cores are present but are not heavily utilized in Control, which primarily relies on traditional rasterization, explaining why the Ultra preset at 4K (62.7 FPS) still holds up reasonably well.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data reveals clear scaling patterns across resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves a 212.6 FPS average, which is 37.7% higher than Medium's 155.4 FPS. High lowers to 136.2 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 118.6 FPS. The transition from Low to Medium incurs a 57.2 FPS drop, while Medium to High only loses 19.2 FPS, indicating that the Medium and High presets are closer in GPU cost than Low to Medium.

At 2560x1440, the results are 163.7 FPS (Low), 114.2 FPS (Medium), 103.2 FPS (High), and 88.6 FPS (Ultra). The drop from Low to Medium is 49.5 FPS, but the gap from Medium to High narrows to 11 FPS. The Ultra preset's 88.6 FPS is 14.6% lower than High, making High the more efficient choice for 1440p displays with 100Hz+ refresh rates.

At 3840x2160, the scaling becomes more pronounced. Low delivers 107.5 FPS, which is 41.2% higher than Medium's 76.1 FPS. High follows at 72.1 FPS, and Ultra drops to 62.7 FPS. The delta between Medium and High is only 4 FPS (5.3%), while Ultra is 13.1% slower than High. This suggests that the GPU's memory bandwidth (504.2 GB/s) begins to constrain performance at 4K, as the pixel throughput requirements escalate faster than the silicon can process, despite the card's 198.0 GPixel/s pixel rate.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to use for a 144Hz monitor?

A: The data shows that at 2560x1440 with the High preset, the average FPS is 103.2, which exceeds 100Hz but falls short of 144Hz. For a true 144Hz experience, the Low preset at 1440p achieves 163.7 FPS, while at 1920x1080 the High preset hits 136.2 FPS, and Low reaches 212.6 FPS.

Q: How does the Ultra preset compare to High in terms of performance cost?

A: Across all resolutions, Ultra is consistently slower: at 1920x1080 it is 12.9% slower (118.6 vs 136.2 FPS), at 1440p it is 14.6% slower (88.6 vs 103.2 FPS), and at 4K it is 13.1% slower (62.7 vs 72.1 FPS). The visual uplift from Ultra is present, but the frame rate penalty is substantial.

Q: Is 4K gaming viable with this combination?

A: Yes, but with caveats. The High preset at 3840x2160 delivers 72.1 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold. The Ultra preset drops to 62.7 FPS, still playable, while Medium and Low offer 76.1 and 107.5 FPS respectively, providing headroom for higher refresh rates.

Q: How does this combo rank against other tested configurations?

A: It ranks 268th out of 1636 combos, placing it in the top 16.4% of all tested systems. This indicates a strong pairing that outperforms the vast majority of combinations in Control.

Q: What is the performance gap between Low and Medium settings?

A: The gap is significant: at 1080p, Low (212.6 FPS) is 36.8% faster than Medium (155.4 FPS); at 1440p, Low (163.7 FPS) is 43.3% faster than Medium (114.2 FPS); at 4K, Low (107.5 FPS) is 41.2% faster than Medium (76.1 FPS). This suggests that Low settings substantially reduce GPU load, likely by disabling certain post-processing effects.

*Q: Does the CPU or GPU bottleneck this system in Control?*

A: The data indicates a balanced pairing. At 1080p Low, the 212.6 FPS average approaches the CPU's single-thread limits (Geekbench single-core score of 3341), while at 4K Ultra, the 62.7 FPS is more reflective of GPU constraints. The combo rank of 268 suggests neither component is severely mismatched for the game's workload.