Control

Control’s benchmark data for the Intel Core i5-14600KF paired with the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB reveals a configuration that scales predictably with resolution, but with a notable shift in bottleneck behavior as pixel count rises. The dataset shows a clear progression from CPU-bound territory at 1080p to a firmly GPU-bound state at 4K, with the frame rate curves at each setting telling a consistent story about where this combo’s limits lie.

Resolution Scaling

The measured frame rates show a steep and consistent decline as resolution increases, which is the expected signature of a GPU-limited configuration at higher pixel counts. At Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 142.4 FPS at 1920x1080 to 108.8 FPS at 2560x1440, a reduction of roughly 24%, and then to 74 FPS at 3840x2160, another 32% drop from the 1440p figure. This scaling pattern indicates that the Radeon RX 9060 XT’s rendering throughput becomes the primary constraint as resolution climbs, with the CPU’s headroom becoming less relevant.

The High settings curve follows a similar trajectory: 90 FPS at 1080p, 67.4 FPS at 1440p, and 47.5 FPS at 4K. The percentage losses between steps are 25% and 30% respectively, which is slightly steeper than the Low preset’s scaling. This suggests that the higher preset’s additional shading and texture work amplifies the GPU’s workload disproportionately at higher resolutions. The Ultra preset shows the most severe scaling, starting at 77.4 FPS at 1080p, dropping to 59 FPS at 1440p (a 24% loss), and then falling to 42.1 FPS at 4K (a 29% loss from 1440p).

What the data reveals about the limiting component is most evident at 1080p. At Low settings, the 142.4 FPS figure is substantially higher than what the GPU delivers at 4K, but the gap between Low and Ultra at 1080p (142.4 vs 77.4) is nearly 2x, indicating that even at this resolution the GPU’s fill rate and shader throughput are being taxed heavily by the Ultra preset’s effects. The fact that the 1080p Low score exceeds 140 FPS while the 4K Ultra score sits at 42.1 FPS — a 3.4x difference — confirms that this is a GPU-bound pairing across the board, with the CPU only potentially becoming a factor at the very lowest settings and resolution.

Settings Recommendations

The measured rows provide a clear hierarchy for players seeking the best experience from this combination. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset delivers 103.2 FPS average, which is a comfortable margin above 60 FPS and only 39 FPS below the Low preset’s 142.4 FPS. The jump from Medium to High costs 13.2 FPS (103.2 to 90), while the leap from High to Ultra costs another 12.6 FPS (90 to 77.4). Given that Medium retains a 33% advantage over Ultra in frame rate, it represents the most balanced point at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the analysis shifts. Medium delivers 78.7 FPS, which is still above 60 FPS and notably smoother than High’s 67.4 FPS. The Ultra preset falls to 59 FPS, dipping below the 60 FPS threshold that many players consider the baseline for smooth action gameplay. The data suggests that Medium is the optimal choice at 1440p, as it maintains a 19.3 FPS advantage over High and a 19.7 FPS advantage over Ultra, while the visual quality difference between Medium and High in Control’s benchmark is unlikely to justify the frame rate penalty.

At 3840x2160, the situation becomes more constrained. None of the presets reach 60 FPS; the best option is Low at 74 FPS, followed by Medium at 51.8 FPS, High at 47.5 FPS, and Ultra at 42.1 FPS. For 4K players, the Low preset is the only one that maintains a playable frame rate above 60 FPS, though it comes with the expected reduction in visual fidelity. Medium at 51.8 FPS is borderline viable but will exhibit noticeable stutter in fast-paced scenes. The recommendation for this resolution is to accept Low settings or drop to 1440p and use Medium for a superior experience.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-14600KF brings substantial processing resources to this pairing, with 14 cores, 20 threads, a base clock of 3.50 GHz, and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. Its 24 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel memory support for both DDR4 and DDR5 provide ample bandwidth for feeding the GPU. In synthetic benchmarks, this CPU scores 32889 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 4643 in single-core, which places it in the 93rd percentile against all CPUs.

The relevance of this CPU to Control’s results is primarily in ensuring the GPU is never starved of draw calls or physics data. The benchmark data shows that at 1080p Low, the combo reaches 142.4 FPS, which is a frame rate where a weaker CPU would likely become a bottleneck, potentially limiting the GPU from reaching its full potential. The i5-14600KF’s high boost clock and strong single-thread performance, evidenced by its 468 score in Cinebench R15 single-core, are sufficient to keep pace with the RX 9060 XT’s output at lower resolutions.

However, the data also indicates that the CPU is not the limiting factor in this game. The scaling from 1080p to 4K shows a consistent frame rate drop that aligns with GPU workload increases, not CPU limitations. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rates at 1080p would plateau regardless of GPU settings, but the observed 65 FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p (142.4 vs 77.4) proves the GPU is the active constraint. The CPU’s role is therefore best described as enabling, not limiting — it provides enough headroom to avoid interfering with the GPU’s performance.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations, this pairing of the Intel Core i5-14600KF and AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB achieves a rank of 860 out of 1636 combos in Control. This places it in the 47th percentile of all tested systems, meaning roughly 53% of configurations deliver higher average frame rates in this game. The rank reflects a mid-pack position, which is consistent with the GPU’s 50th percentile standing among all GPUs and the CPU’s strong 93rd percentile position.

The disparity between the CPU’s high percentile and the combo’s middling rank underscores that Control is primarily GPU-bound in this pairing. The CPU’s performance class — with rivals like the Intel Core i5-14600K scoring 49166 in average benchmark score (a 0.4% delta), the AMD EPYC 4345P at 49595 (-0.5% delta), and the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X at 49062 (0.6% delta) — is not the differentiator here. Instead, the RX 9060 XT’s 8 GB VRAM and its 128-bit memory bus, delivering 322.3 GB/s of bandwidth, are the more likely determinants of the final ranking.

The rank of 860 suggests that for Control specifically, this combo sits in the middle of the pack. Systems with higher-tier GPUs will naturally surpass it, while those with lower-tier GPUs will fall behind. The 4K Ultra result of 42.1 FPS and the 1440p Ultra result of 59 FPS indicate that this is not a configuration for maximum settings at high resolutions, which aligns with its mid-pack rank. At 1080p Medium, the 103.2 FPS result is competitive, but the combo’s overall ranking reflects that it cannot dominate at higher resolutions.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB is the decisive component in this pairing’s gaming performance. Its specifications include a boost clock of 3130 MHz, a game clock of 2530 MHz, and a base clock of 1700 MHz. The GPU is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture with a 4 nm process from TSMC, featuring 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus provides 322.3 GB/s of bandwidth, which is a modest figure for 4K gaming and likely contributes to the steep frame rate drops at higher resolutions.

The GPU’s 50th percentile ranking among all GPUs is directly reflected in the measured frame rates. At 1080p, the GPU delivers between 77.4 FPS (Ultra) and 142.4 FPS (Low), which is a solid but not exceptional range. At 1440p, the spread narrows to 59 FPS (Ultra) to 108.8 FPS (Low), and at 4K it falls to 42.1 FPS (Ultra) to 74 FPS (Low). The 8 GB VRAM capacity is a likely limiting factor at 4K Ultra, where texture-heavy scenes can exceed this allocation, causing the GPU to fall back on slower memory operations.

The pixel rate of 200.3 GPixel/s and texture rate of 400.6 GTexel/s are the theoretical limits that govern how fast the GPU can fill the screen and apply textures. The benchmark results show that these limits are reached at 4K, where even the Low preset’s 74 FPS is substantially below the 1080p Low figure. The FP32 throughput of 25.64 TFLOPS is the raw compute available for shader work, and the data suggests that Control’s lighting and particle effects at High and Ultra settings are demanding enough to push the GPU to its limits, especially as resolution increases and per-pixel work multiplies.