Control

Control, the 2019 action-adventure title, presents a demanding real-time stress test for the Intel Core i5-9400 and AMD Radeon RX 7600 combination. This pairing, ranked 2608 out of 3720 tested combos for this specific game, places it in the lower half of the database, indicating that while playable, it is not a top-tier performer for achieving high refresh rates at maximum settings. The data reveals a system where the GPU is the primary driver of performance scaling, with the CPU providing a stable, if unspectacular, foundation that rarely becomes the bottleneck at the resolutions tested. The benchmark results show a clear hierarchy of performance dictated by both resolution and graphical preset, offering a nuanced picture of what users can expect from this hardware configuration in a physics-heavy, visually complex environment.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 2608 out of 3720 tested combinations (roughly the 30th percentile) for Control is a direct reflection of its mid-range positioning. This isn't a pairing designed to dominate the leaderboards; instead, it sits in a crowded field where it must rely on efficient scaling to deliver a satisfactory experience. The individual components' standings corroborate this. The Core i5-9400's average benchmark score places it at the 47th percentile among all CPUs, while the RX 7600's score puts it at the 57th percentile among all GPUs. The combination of a slightly above-average GPU with a slightly below-average CPU results in a final ranking that is lower than either component's individual percentile, suggesting that the CPU's limitations are more pronounced in this particular title's workload, or that the combination is not perfectly balanced for Control's specific demands.

Looking at the nearest rivals for the CPU, the i5-9400's performance is tightly clustered. Its average score of 2254 is within 0.4% of the Intel Core i7-1068NG7, Intel Core i7-10710U, AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500, and Intel Core i3-10305. This indicates that in synthetic multi-threaded tests, the i5-9400 is effectively interchangeable with these other processors, offering no significant advantage or disadvantage in raw compute power. For the GPU, the RX 7600's nearest rivals—the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM, AMD Radeon Pro 560X, AMD Radeon 680M, and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti—are all within 0.7% of its average score. This tight grouping reinforces its position as a solid mid-range performer, but one that is not head and shoulders above its immediate competition in raw benchmark terms. However, the actual in-game FPS data will show how these synthetic similarities translate to real-world performance in Control.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7600 is unequivocally the performance centerpiece of this combo in Control, as evidenced by the FPS scaling across different settings. The GPU's specifications—8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth—are sufficient for the game's textures and effects at the tested resolutions. The chip, based on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, has a base clock of 1720 MHz and a boost clock of 2655 MHz, with a game clock of 2250 MHz. This headroom between base and boost clocks allows the card to dynamically adjust its performance, and the data shows it scaling effectively when graphical load is reduced. The GPU's 2048 shading units and 64 ROPs are the key processing elements that handle the pixel and shader workload, and their performance is directly reflected in the measured FPS.

The GPU's role is most clearly defined by the impact of settings changes. At 1080p, moving from Ultra to Low presets results in a jump from 65 FPS to 118 FPS, a massive 81% increase. This demonstrates that the RX 7600 is not fully saturated at lower settings, and its performance is being limited by other factors, likely the CPU. Conversely, at 4K, the same settings change yields a more modest improvement from 33 FPS to 60 FPS, an 82% increase in raw frame rate, but the absolute numbers show the GPU is working much harder. The fact that the 4K Ultra preset yields only 33 FPS indicates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at this resolution, fully utilizing its compute and memory resources. The 8 GB VRAM capacity also plays a role here; at 4K with Ultra textures, the card is likely approaching its memory limit, which can impact frame pacing and minimum FPS, though the data shows an average of 33 FPS for this setting.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-9400 provides a stable but performance-capping foundation for the RX 7600 in Control. With 6 cores and 6 threads operating at a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz, the processor offers a modest level of multi-threading capability. The 9 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support with 42.7 GB/s of bandwidth are adequate for feeding the GPU, but the CPU's processing power is not sufficient to keep up with the GPU at lower resolutions and settings. This is a classic scenario where a mid-range CPU limits the maximum achievable frame rate, particularly when the GPU has spare capacity.

The CPU's limiting role is most evident at 1080p with Low settings, where the combo achieves 118 FPS. This is a high frame rate, but the data suggests the CPU is the ceiling. The GPU could likely render more frames, but the i5-9400 cannot issue draw calls and process game logic fast enough to sustain a higher output. The benchmark results for the CPU, such as a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 6629, place it in a performance tier that is adequate for 60 FPS gaming in most titles but struggles to push beyond 100+ FPS in CPU-intensive scenarios. In Control, which has a complex physics engine, the CPU's 6-thread limitation is a tangible constraint. The percentile rank of 47 for the CPU versus 57 for the GPU highlights this imbalance. The CPU is the weaker link in this pairing, and while it doesn't make the experience unplayable, it prevents the combo from achieving the full potential of the RX 7600 at lower resolutions.

FAQ

Q: What is the best case scenario for this combo in terms of frame rate?

A: The highest average frame rate recorded across all tests is 118 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with the Low preset.

Q: How much of a performance drop is seen when moving from 1080p to 4K on the High preset?

A: At 1920x1080 High, the average FPS is 75. At 3840x2160 High, the average FPS drops to 38. This represents a 49% reduction in frame rate.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more likely to be the bottleneck at 4K resolution?

A: At 3840x2160, the GPU is the clear bottleneck. The average FPS at 4K Ultra is a mere 33 FPS, which is a very low frame rate. This indicates the RX 7600 is being fully utilized and is unable to render the frame fast enough, regardless of the CPU's performance.

Q: Does the combo maintain a playable frame rate at 1440p with medium settings?

A: Yes, the data shows an average of 64 FPS at 2560x1440 with Medium settings. The minimum FPS recorded for this configuration is 54, suggesting it is generally smooth but may have brief dips.

Q: How does the performance at 1080p Ultra compare to 1080p Medium?

A: At 1080p Ultra, the average FPS is 65. At 1080p Medium, the average FPS is 84. This is a 19 FPS difference, or an approximate 29% performance increase when dropping from Ultra to Medium.

Q: What is the lowest average FPS recorded for this combo in Control?

A: The lowest average FPS recorded is 33, which occurs at 3840x2160 resolution with the Ultra preset.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS data across the three tested resolutions paints a clear picture of how the system scales and where the bottleneck lies. At 1080p, the combo is capable of high frame rates, with the Low preset hitting 118 FPS and even the Ultra preset achieving a respectable 65 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 1080p shows a 53 FPS drop, indicating that while the GPU is being stressed more, it still has enough headroom to provide a playable experience. This resolution is where the CPU's limitations are most apparent, as the system is unable to push past the 118 FPS mark even at the lowest settings, suggesting a hard cap imposed by the processor.

Moving to 1440p, the performance drops are significant. The Low preset yields 89 FPS, which is a 25% decrease from 1080p. The High preset drops to 56 FPS, and Ultra falls to 49 FPS. The scaling here is more linear, with the GPU starting to become the more dominant limiting factor. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 40 FPS, which is proportionally similar to 1080p, but the absolute numbers are lower. At 4K, the system struggles. The Low preset manages 60 FPS, but Medium drops to 43 FPS, High to 38 FPS, and Ultra to a barely playable 33 FPS. The massive drop from 1440p Low (89 FPS) to 4K Low (60 FPS) is a 33% reduction, highlighting the immense pixel count increase. At this resolution, the GPU is unequivocally the bottleneck, as the CPU's frame rate cap is far above what the GPU can deliver. The data shows a smooth transition from CPU-limited at 1080p to GPU-limited at 4K, with 1440p serving as the balance point.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend heavily on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For players with a 1080p 60Hz monitor, the High preset is the clear choice, delivering 75 FPS with a significant visual upgrade over Medium. The Ultra preset, at 65 FPS, is also viable, but the 10 FPS difference may not justify the extra graphical load for most users. For those seeking maximum smoothness on a 144Hz display, the Medium preset, at 84 FPS, offers a good balance, though it still falls short of 100 FPS. The Low preset, at 118 FPS, is the only way to approach high refresh rates, but it comes at a substantial visual cost.

At 1440p, the Medium preset is the sweet spot. It provides an average of 64 FPS, which is right at the threshold for smooth gameplay on a 60Hz monitor, and the minimum FPS of 54 indicates that it holds up reasonably well under stress. The High preset, at 56 FPS, is playable but leaves less headroom for demanding scenes. The Ultra preset, at 49 FPS, is not recommended for a consistent experience, as it dips below the 60 FPS target. For 4K gaming, the situation is more constrained. The Low preset, at 60 FPS, is the only option that consistently hits the 60 FPS target, but it requires sacrificing most visual fidelity. The Medium preset, at 43 FPS, is playable but not ideal, and the High and Ultra presets should be avoided for a fluid experience. Overall, the data suggests that for a "best experience," users should target 1080p High or 1440p Medium, depending on their monitor's native resolution and refresh rate.

Measured FPS Breakdown

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: Average FPS 118. This is the highest frame rate recorded for the entire combo and represents the CPU's performance ceiling in this game.
• Medium: Average FPS 84, with a minimum of 71 FPS and a maximum of 97 FPS. This is a stable, high-performance setting.
• High: Average FPS 75. A solid 60+ FPS experience with improved visual quality.
• Ultra: Average FPS 65. This is a playable 60+ FPS experience, but it is the lowest of the 1080p presets and shows the GPU is beginning to work harder.

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: Average FPS 89. This is a significant drop from 1080p, showing the impact of the increased resolution.
• Medium: Average FPS 64, with a minimum of 54 FPS and a maximum of 73 FPS. This is the recommended preset for 1440p, as it balances visual quality with a playable frame rate.
• High: Average FPS 56. This is a playable but less consistent frame rate, with dips below 60 FPS likely.
• Ultra: Average FPS 49. This is a demanding preset that pushes the GPU hard, resulting in a sub-60 FPS experience.

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: Average FPS 60. This is the only 4K preset that achieves a 60 FPS average, but it requires the lowest visual quality.
• Medium: Average FPS 43, with a minimum of 36 FPS and a maximum of 49 FPS. This shows the GPU struggling to maintain smooth frame pacing at 4K.
• High: Average FPS 38. This is a low frame rate that indicates the GPU is the primary bottleneck.
• Ultra: Average FPS 33. This is the lowest performance tier, and it is not recommended for a playable experience, as the frame rate dips below 30 FPS in intense moments.