Control

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core i5-14600KF compare to its closest rivals in overall CPU benchmark scores?

A: The i5-14600KF has an average benchmark score of 49,394. It sits 0.3% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (49,228) and 0.4% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (49,196). It is 0.8% faster than the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 (48,995) but trails the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 (49,796) by 0.8%. This places the chip in the 90th percentile of all CPUs.

Q: What is the GPU's performance percentile and how does it rank against similar cards?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9060 sits in the 59th percentile of all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 16,014. It is 0.7% slower than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti (16,129) but 1% faster than both the AMD Radeon R9 370X (15,862) and the AMD Radeon RX 7700 (15,852). It also leads the AMD Radeon Pro W5500 (15,679) by 2.1%.

Q: What is the best frame rate achievable at 1080p with this combo?

A: The highest measured average frame rate is 130 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The next best is 92 FPS at Medium settings, followed by 82 FPS at High and 71 FPS at Ultra. The minimum FPS recorded at 1080p is 78 FPS, which occurs on the Medium preset.

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

A: The CPU demonstrates strong scaling across cores. In Cinebench R23, it scores 32,544 in multi-core versus 4,594 in single-core. The Geekbench results show 17,085 multi-core and 2,445 single-core. PassMark multithread score is 38,697 while single-thread is 4,273. This indicates the 14 cores and 20 threads handle parallel workloads effectively, though single-thread performance remains robust for gaming.

Q: Does the GPU have enough VRAM for Control at high resolutions?

A: The Radeon RX 9060 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The measured data shows that at 4K Ultra the average FPS drops to 36, and at 4K High it is 42 FPS. The 8 GB frame buffer appears to limit performance at 3840x2160, where even lowering to Medium only yields 47 FPS.

Q: What is the combo's overall rank in the benchmark database for this game?

A: The combination of the Intel Core i5-14600KF and AMD Radeon RX 9060 ranks 1,632 out of 2,888 total combinations tested in Control. This places it in the middle of the pack, reflecting the GPU's mid-range positioning relative to the CPU's higher standing.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture with the Navi 44 chip on a 4 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 1700 MHz, a boost clock of 2990 MHz, and a game clock of 2400 MHz. The memory runs at 2250 MHz, which translates to 18 Gbps effective across an 8 GB GDDR6 frame buffer. The 128-bit memory bus delivers 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is a critical factor in how this card handles Control's demanding textures and effects.

The GPU has 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units. It also includes 28 ray tracing cores, which Control can leverage for its reflective surfaces and dynamic lighting. The card's raw compute capability is listed at 21.43 TFLOPS for FP32, with a pixel rate of 191.4 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 334.9 GTexel/s. These specifications explain why the card performs adequately at 1080p but struggles as resolution increases.

Looking at the measured results, the GPU's role becomes clear. At 1080p Low, the card achieves 130 FPS, showing it has enough headroom for esports-style frame rates. However, at 4K Ultra, the average drops to 36 FPS. The 8 GB VRAM is likely a bottleneck here, as Control's high-resolution textures and effects can exceed this capacity. The 288.0 GB/s bandwidth also limits how quickly the card can stream texture data at higher resolutions. The GPU's PassMark G3D score of 17,631 and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3,322 reflect a mid-range performer that sits in the 59th percentile overall. When compared to the RTX 3060 Ti, the RX 9060 is 0.7% slower on average, indicating very similar rasterization performance despite the architectural differences.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 130 FPS at 1080p to 98 FPS at 1440p, then to 66 FPS at 4K. This represents a 24.6% drop going from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 32.7% drop from 1440p to 4K. At High settings, the progression is 82 FPS to 62 FPS to 42 FPS, with the 4K result being less than half of the 1080p figure.

The scaling pattern indicates that the GPU becomes the primary limiting factor at higher resolutions. At 1080p, the CPU's strong single-thread performance (4,594 in Cinebench R23 single-core) and 5.30 GHz boost clock help maintain high frame rates. The gap between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p is 59 FPS (130 vs 71), which shows that settings have a significant impact even at this resolution. At 4K, the gap between Low and Ultra narrows to 30 FPS (66 vs 36), suggesting the GPU is saturated and settings changes have less relative impact.

The 1440p results provide the most balanced picture. At Medium settings, the card delivers 70 FPS with a minimum of 59 FPS and maximum of 80 FPS. This is the only resolution where the Medium preset maintains a minimum above 60 FPS. The 4K results are uniformly below 66 FPS even at Low, confirming that this resolution is not viable for smooth gameplay with this GPU. The data suggests that the 8 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory bus are the primary constraints at 4K, as the GPU's compute capabilities (21.43 TFLOPS) are sufficient for 1080p but the memory subsystem cannot keep pace with higher pixel counts.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution. At 1920x1080, the High preset delivers 82 FPS average, which is smooth for most action sequences in Control. The Ultra preset drops to 71 FPS, still playable but with diminishing returns for the visual upgrade. The Medium preset at 92 FPS offers a good balance if you prefer higher frame rates, with a minimum of 78 FPS ensuring no significant stutters. For competitive play or maximum smoothness, Low at 130 FPS is the clear choice.

At 2560x1440, the High preset yields 62 FPS, which is adequate but not ideal for fast-paced combat. The Medium preset provides 70 FPS average with a minimum of 59 FPS, making it the safest choice for maintaining playable performance throughout. Ultra drops to 54 FPS, which may feel inconsistent during intense scenes. Low at 98 FPS is viable if you prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity.

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves a consistently smooth experience. Low settings produce 66 FPS, which is borderline playable but may dip in demanding areas. Medium averages 47 FPS with a minimum of 40 FPS, which is likely too inconsistent for most players. High at 42 FPS and Ultra at 36 FPS are not recommended for anything other than screenshots or slow exploration. The data indicates that 4K gaming with this GPU requires significant settings compromises, and even then, the experience may not be satisfactory.

The best overall experience per the measured rows is 1080p High at 82 FPS, which balances visual quality with smooth performance. For 1440p, Medium at 70 FPS is the recommended preset, as it maintains a minimum above 59 FPS. At 4K, Low at 66 FPS is the only viable option, and even that may require accepting occasional frame dips. The Ultra preset is only worth using at 1080p, where it still delivers 71 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the card delivers its strongest results. Low settings produce an average of 130 FPS with no recorded minimum or maximum. Medium settings average 92 FPS with a minimum of 78 FPS and maximum of 106 FPS. High settings average 82 FPS. Ultra settings average 71 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 59 FPS difference, indicating that settings have a substantial impact at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, performance drops noticeably. Low settings average 98 FPS. Medium settings average 70 FPS with a minimum of 59 FPS and maximum of 80 FPS. High settings average 62 FPS. Ultra settings average 54 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 44 FPS, slightly narrower than at 1080p, suggesting the GPU is beginning to become more of a limiting factor.

At 3840x2160, the card struggles to maintain playable frame rates. Low settings average 66 FPS. Medium settings average 47 FPS with a minimum of 40 FPS and maximum of 54 FPS. High settings average 42 FPS. Ultra settings average 36 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is only 30 FPS, indicating that the GPU is saturated and settings changes have diminishing returns. The minimum FPS of 40 at Medium settings highlights the inconsistency that makes 4K challenging for this combo.

The overall pattern shows that the card is most comfortable at 1080p, where it can push well above 60 FPS even at Ultra settings. At 1440p, it maintains playable frame rates with Medium or High settings. At 4K, only Low settings approach the 60 FPS threshold, and even then, it falls short of a locked 60 FPS. The data confirms that this is a 1080p-focused GPU with acceptable 1440p capability and limited 4K performance.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-14600KF is a 14-core, 20-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-R refresh. It has a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, with a 125 W TDP. The chip features 24 MB of shared L3 cache, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 80 KB of L1 cache per core. It supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration and uses the Intel Socket 1700 platform with PCIe Gen 5 connectivity.

In Control, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and physics calculations. The game's action-adventure gameplay with destructible environments and telekinetic powers benefits from strong single-thread performance. The 5.30 GHz boost clock and 4,594 Cinebench R23 single-core score indicate excellent single-threaded capability. The 90th percentile ranking among all CPUs confirms that this processor is well above average for gaming workloads.

The multi-threaded performance is also substantial, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32,544 and a Geekbench multi-core score of 17,085. The PassMark multithread score of 38,697 shows that the 14 cores handle parallel tasks effectively. However, in Control, the measured FPS data suggests that the GPU is the limiting factor at higher resolutions. At 1080p Low, the CPU can push 130 FPS, indicating that it is not a bottleneck at this resolution. At 4K, the frame rates drop dramatically, which aligns with the GPU's mid-range positioning rather than any CPU limitation.

The CPU's average benchmark score of 49,394 places it just 0.3% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (49,228) and 0.4% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (49,196). It is also 0.8% faster than the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 (48,995) but 0.8% slower than the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 (49,796). This narrow performance band indicates that the i5-14600KF is competitive with its peers in synthetic benchmarks. In actual gaming, the 5.30 GHz boost clock and strong single-core performance should provide a solid foundation, though the GPU ultimately determines the playable settings and resolutions. The CPU's 125 W TDP and unlocked multiplier make it a flexible choice for builders who want headroom for overclocking, though the measured data does not include any overclocked results.