Control

The Intel Core i5-14600K paired with the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB delivers a playable but not elite experience in Control, with performance scaling predictably from a strong 1080p showing to a challenging 4K situation. The combo ranks in the 51st percentile overall (rank 1908 out of 3720 tested combos), indicating a mid-pack standing where the GPU's 8 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory bus become the primary constraints at higher resolutions. Benchmark results show the system achieves its best balance of smoothness and visual fidelity at 1440p Medium, where it holds a 77 FPS average, while 4K Ultra drops to 40 FPS, making that preset impractical for consistent play. The data reveals a classic CPU-headroom-then-GPU-bound scenario: at 1080p Low the i5-14600K pushes the RX 9060 XT to 143 FPS, but that headroom collapses as resolution climbs, with 4K High yielding just 46 FPS.

FAQ

*Q: What is the overall standing of this CPU-GPU combo in Control?*

A: The combo ranks 1908th out of 3720 tested combinations, placing it just past the midpoint of the database. This percentile suggests it performs adequately for mainstream gaming but does not approach top-tier results, likely due to the GPU's modest 8 GB memory capacity and 128-bit bus width.

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

A: The Intel Core i5-14600K has an average benchmark score of 48,618, which is 0.2% below the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H (48,698) and 0.3% above the AMD EPYC 4345P (48,470). It also sits 0.7% above the Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX (48,287) and 0.8% below the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 (48,995), showing near-identical performance among this cluster.

Q: What is the GPU's synthetic benchmark standing relative to its rivals?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB scores 4,093 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, which is 0.4% above the Intel HD Graphics 630 (4,075) and 1.5% above the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M (4,033). It trails the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M by 1.4% (4,151) and the AMD Radeon R5 M330 by 1.8% (4,170), indicating it sits in a low percentile (24th) among all GPUs.

Q: What FPS can I expect at 1080p with High settings?

A: At 1920x1080 with High settings, the combo delivers an average of 90 FPS. This is comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay, though it is 53 FPS lower than the 1080p Low result of 143 FPS, showing how dramatically settings impact frame rates.

Q: Does the combo maintain playable frame rates at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, only the Low preset (73 FPS average) and Medium preset (52 FPS average) remain playable. High settings drop to 46 FPS and Ultra falls to 40 FPS, both of which are below the 50 FPS mark typically considered acceptable for action-adventure titles, indicating the GPU is the limiting factor.

Q: Which settings preset offers the smoothest experience with visual quality?

A: The data shows 1440p Medium provides the best compromise, with a 77 FPS average and a minimum of 65 FPS. This is the lowest resolution/settings combination that stays above 60 FPS average while still offering moderate visual fidelity, unlike 1080p Low which hits 143 FPS but sacrifices most graphical features.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB is the decisive component in this combo's Control performance, and its specifications explain why. The GPU operates with a base clock of 1700 MHz and a boost clock of 3130 MHz, with a game clock of 2530 MHz. This headroom allows for solid performance at lower resolutions, but the 8 GB GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 322.3 GB/s of bandwidth, becomes a bottleneck as resolution increases.

The GPU's rendering capabilities are substantial on paper: it features 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units, delivering a pixel rate of 200.3 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 400.6 GTexel/s. Its FP32 performance of 25.64 TFLOPS suggests strong compute power, yet the memory subsystem limits how much of that power is usable in Control at higher settings.

Evidence from the measured FPS data points directly to VRAM and bandwidth constraints. At 1080p, the jump from Low to High settings costs 53 FPS (143 to 90), but the GPU still manages a playable frame rate. At 1440p, that same settings jump costs 40 FPS (108 to 68), and at 4K, the cost is 27 FPS (73 to 46). The diminishing returns as resolution rises indicate that the GPU's memory bandwidth is insufficient to feed its compute units efficiently at 4K, where even Low settings struggle to maintain 60 FPS consistently in demanding scenes.

The GPU's 4 nm process node (Navi 44 chip, RDNA 4.0 architecture) and 29,700 million transistors provide a modern foundation, but the 128-bit memory interface is a deliberate design choice that caps high-resolution performance. The 150 W TDP and dual-slot design suggest a mid-range thermal profile, but the data shows that in Control, this card is better suited to 1080p and 1440p gaming than 4K.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a system that is GPU-bound at higher resolutions but has CPU headroom at lower ones. At 1080p Low, the combo hits 143 FPS, which nearly saturates a 144 Hz display and demonstrates the i5-14600K's ability to feed the GPU efficiently. Moving to 1440p Low drops the average to 108 FPS (a 24.5% reduction), and 4K Low further reduces it to 73 FPS (a 32.4% reduction from 1440p). This scaling pattern is consistent with a GPU that has limited memory bandwidth.

For Medium settings, the progression is 101 FPS at 1080p, 77 FPS at 1440p, and 52 FPS at 4K. The 1080p-to-1440p drop is 23.8%, and the 1440p-to-4K drop is 32.5%, showing that the GPU's performance degrades more steeply as pixel count increases. High settings follow a similar trend: 90 FPS at 1080p, 68 FPS at 1440p, and 46 FPS at 4K, with percentage drops of 24.4% and 32.4% respectively.

Ultra settings show the most severe scaling: 78 FPS at 1080p, 59 FPS at 1440p, and 40 FPS at 4K. The 1080p-to-1440p drop is 24.4%, while the 1440p-to-4K drop is 32.2%. These consistent percentage drops across all settings presets indicate that the limiting component is the GPU's memory subsystem, not the CPU or the game's engine. The i5-14600K, with its 14 cores, 20 threads, and 24 MB of L3 cache, has ample processing power to handle Control's physics and logic, as evidenced by the high 1080p frame rates.

The data shows that the combo crosses the 60 FPS threshold at 1440p for Low and Medium settings, but fails to maintain 60 FPS at 4K for any preset. This makes 4K gaming viable only with Low settings (73 FPS), where visual quality is significantly compromised, or Medium settings (52 FPS), which is below the ideal smoothness threshold.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS rows provide clear guidance on which preset offers the best experience for this combo. The primary consideration is maintaining a stable frame rate above 60 FPS while preserving as much visual quality as possible. Based on the data, 1440p Medium is the standout choice, delivering a 77 FPS average with a minimum of 65 FPS and a maximum of 88 FPS. This settings level keeps the frame rate consistently above 60 FPS, avoids the visual degradation of Low settings, and stays well within the GPU's capabilities.

At 1080p, Medium settings (101 FPS average, 86 minimum, 117 maximum) offer an excellent experience for high-refresh-rate monitors, but the visual difference between 1080p and 1440p is significant in Control's detailed environments. The 1440p Medium result provides nearly 80% of the 1080p Medium frame rate while offering substantially better image clarity, making it the recommended preset for most users.

For players prioritizing maximum visual fidelity, 1440p High (68 FPS average) is playable but sits close to the 60 FPS threshold, with the potential to dip below during intense combat sequences. The 1080p Ultra preset (78 FPS average) is a safer alternative for those who want Ultra settings, as it maintains a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. However, the 1440p Medium preset's 77 FPS average is nearly identical to 1080p Ultra's 78 FPS, and the resolution bump provides more perceived quality than the Ultra-specific effects.

The 4K presets are generally not recommended for this combo. Only Low settings (73 FPS) achieve smooth gameplay, but the visual compromise is substantial. Medium at 4K (52 FPS) is borderline playable but risks stutter in busy scenes, while High (46 FPS) and Ultra (40 FPS) fall below acceptable thresholds for an action-adventure game. The data suggests that 4K gaming with this GPU is only viable with significant settings reductions, which undermines the purpose of high-resolution rendering.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 1908 out of 3720 tested combinations places it in the 51st percentile of all CPU-GPU pairs in the database for Control. This is a middling result that reflects the GPU's limitations more than the CPU's capabilities. The i5-14600K is a strong processor, ranking in the 90th percentile among all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 48,618, but the RX 9060 XT 8 GB sits in the 24th percentile among GPUs with a 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 4,093.

This disparity between CPU and GPU performance tiers explains the combo's overall ranking. The CPU has significant headroom that is wasted at higher resolutions, as evidenced by the 143 FPS at 1080p Low versus the 73 FPS at 4K Low. The GPU's nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks — the Intel HD Graphics 630, NVIDIA Quadro K2100M, NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M, and AMD Radeon R5 M330 — are all older or lower-tier parts, underscoring that the RX 9060 XT 8 GB is positioned as an entry-level or budget-friendly discrete GPU despite its modern RDNA 4.0 architecture.

In the context of the 3,720 combos tested, a rank of 1908 means this pairing is typical for mainstream gaming at 1080p and 1440p, but it will struggle in 4K scenarios. The combo's performance is adequate for its target market, but it does not offer the headroom for future-proofing at higher resolutions or with more demanding games. The data indicates that the CPU is not the bottleneck; rather, the GPU's 8 GB VRAM and 128-bit bus are the limiting factors that hold back the overall system performance.

Measured FPS Breakdown

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 143 FPS average — the fastest result in the entire dataset, showing the CPU's ability to drive the GPU to its limits.
• Medium: 101 FPS average, with a minimum of 86 and maximum of 117 — smooth and consistent for high-refresh displays.
• High: 90 FPS average — still well above 60 FPS, offering good visual quality without sacrificing responsiveness.
• Ultra: 78 FPS average — playable but with a 65 FPS drop from Low, indicating the GPU's memory bandwidth is already straining.

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 108 FPS average — a 24.5% reduction from 1080p Low, but still sufficient for smooth gameplay.
• Medium: 77 FPS average, with a minimum of 65 and maximum of 88 — the recommended preset, maintaining 60+ FPS with moderate visual fidelity.
• High: 68 FPS average — playable but close to the 60 FPS threshold, risking dips during demanding scenes.
• Ultra: 59 FPS average — just below the 60 FPS mark, making it a marginal choice for those who prioritize settings over frame rate.

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 73 FPS average — the only 4K preset that stays comfortably above 60 FPS, but with significant visual compromises.
• Medium: 52 FPS average, with a minimum of 44 and maximum of 60 — borderline playable, but the minimum FPS suggests occasional stutter.
• High: 46 FPS average — below the smoothness threshold, leading to noticeable frame pacing issues.
• Ultra: 40 FPS average — the worst result in the dataset, rendering this preset impractical for actual gameplay.

The data shows a clear performance hierarchy: the combo excels at 1080p across all settings, performs well at 1440p with Medium or lower presets, and struggles at 4K except with Low settings. The minimum FPS values recorded for Medium presets (86 at 1080p, 65 at 1440p, 44 at 4K) indicate that the combo maintains frame times reasonably well at lower resolutions, but 4K Medium's 44 FPS minimum confirms that the GPU cannot sustain consistent performance at this resolution.