Control

Control, Remedy’s 2019 action-adventure, presents a demanding workload that stresses both the CPU and GPU depending on the resolution and preset selected. The data for the Intel Core i5-9400 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 combination shows a system that is capable of smooth 1080p play but begins to struggle as resolution and graphical fidelity increase. The measured frames per second (FPS) across the twelve tested configurations reveal a clear hierarchy where the GPU becomes the primary limiting factor at higher resolutions, while the processor maintains a consistent baseline.

Resolution Scaling

The impact of resolution on average FPS is substantial and follows an expected pattern, though the magnitude of the drop is particularly steep between 1440p and 4K. At the High preset, the system delivers 65.5 FPS at 1920x1080, which drops to 51.0 FPS at 2560x1440, a reduction of approximately 22%. Moving to 3840x2160, the average falls to 37.7 FPS, a further 26% decline from the 1440p result. This indicates that the RTX 2060’s memory bandwidth and compute resources are being saturated as pixel count increases, making the GPU the definitive bottleneck at 4K.

The scaling pattern is even more pronounced when examining the Low preset. At 1080p, the system achieves 108.3 FPS, which is a very playable figure. At 1440p, this drops to 84.0 FPS, a 22% decrease, and at 4K it falls to 57.1 FPS, another 32% drop. The fact that the 4K Low result is nearly identical to the 1440p High result (57.1 vs. 51.0 FPS) suggests that the GPU is the limiting component in both scenarios, as reducing graphical settings at 4K does not yield a proportional increase in performance compared to lowering resolution at the same settings.

The Ultra preset shows the steepest scaling curve, with the system dropping from 61.4 FPS at 1080p to 43.4 FPS at 1440p (a 29% reduction) and then to 32.3 FPS at 4K (a 26% reduction). This consistent degradation indicates that the RTX 2060’s 6 GB of VRAM and 192-bit memory interface are overwhelmed by the combination of high-resolution textures and advanced effects. The data shows that the i5-9400 is not the primary constraint in these scenarios, as the FPS drops are directly correlated with the increasing pixel workload rather than CPU-bound frame pacing issues.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-9400 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 ranks at position 1307 out of 1636 tested combos for Control. This places the system in the lower 20% of all configurations, which is a significant indicator of its overall performance ceiling in this specific title. The rank reflects that while the CPU is a capable six-core processor, it is paired with a GPU that, while competent, is outclassed by many modern alternatives that offer higher memory capacities and faster compute throughput.

The CPU itself sits at the 50th percentile among all tested processors, with an average benchmark score of 2305. Its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks are the Intel Core i3-10305 and Intel Core i3-1125G4, which score 2300 and 2299 respectively, showing a negligible 0.2% difference. The Intel Xeon E-2134 is also close, with a 0.4% higher score. This indicates that the i5-9400’s compute performance is solid for its generation, but it does not provide any exceptional advantage that would boost the combo ranking in a GPU-intensive game like Control.

The GPU’s standalone performance is more telling. The RTX 2060 ranks at the 58th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 16074. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 7600S, which is 0.5% faster, and the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M and Pro 5700, which are 1.7% faster. The AMD Radeon Pro W5500 is 1.8% slower. This mid-pack positioning for the GPU, combined with the CPU’s mid-range standing, explains why the combo rank is relatively low; the system is balanced but not exceptional, and it lacks the high-end GPU muscle required to push Control’s most demanding settings.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 is built on the Turing architecture with a TU106 chip, fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC. It features 1920 shading units, 120 texture mapping units, and 48 raster output units, along with 30 RT cores and 240 tensor cores. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1365 MHz and a boost clock of 1680 MHz, with memory clocked at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). Its 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus provides 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is a critical factor in Control’s performance at high resolutions.

The benchmark data shows that the GPU’s memory capacity and bandwidth are the primary differentiators between presets. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra settings is 46.9 FPS (108.3 vs. 61.4), which indicates that the GPU has enough headroom to handle the extra load from higher-quality textures and effects. However, at 4K, the gap narrows to 24.8 FPS (57.1 vs. 32.3), suggesting that the GPU is hitting a memory bandwidth wall where the additional detail from Ultra settings cannot be processed efficiently. The pixel rate of 80.64 GPixel/s and texture rate of 201.6 GTexel/s are adequate for 1080p but become strained at 4K, as evidenced by the sub-40 FPS averages on High and Medium presets.

The GPU’s FP32 performance of 6.451 TFLOPS is a modest figure by modern standards, and the 160 W TDP indicates a power-efficient design. The presence of RT cores and tensor cores suggests that the GPU can handle ray tracing and DLSS, but the measured data in this pack does not include those features, so their impact on Control’s performance cannot be assessed here. The GPU’s 58th percentile ranking among all GPUs confirms that it is a mid-range part that excels at 1080p but falls short of delivering a consistently smooth experience at higher resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system shows a wide range of performance based on settings. The Low preset delivers 108.3 FPS, which is well above the threshold for high-refresh-rate monitors. The Medium preset drops to 79.2 FPS, still a comfortable figure for most displays. The High preset yields 65.5 FPS, which is playable but shows a significant cost for the visual improvements over Medium. The Ultra preset is the most demanding, producing 61.4 FPS, which is only a 4.1 FPS reduction from High, indicating that the extra settings in Ultra are not particularly taxing at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance scales down predictably. The Low preset maintains 84.0 FPS, which is respectable for 1440p gaming. The Medium preset falls to 58.6 FPS, which is borderline for smooth gameplay on a 60 Hz display. The High preset drops to 51.0 FPS, and the Ultra preset reaches 43.4 FPS. These numbers suggest that 1440p is the practical limit for this combo if the user wants to play at High settings with a consistent frame rate, as the Ultra preset falls below the 45 FPS threshold that many consider the minimum for a playable experience.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles across all presets. The Low preset is the only one that achieves a playable average, with 57.1 FPS. The Medium preset drops to 39.2 FPS, which is below the 40 FPS threshold for smooth motion. The High preset is at 37.7 FPS, and the Ultra preset is at 32.3 FPS. These results clearly indicate that 4K is not a viable resolution for this combination unless the user is willing to accept significant compromises in visual quality, and even then, the Low preset is the only option that approaches a stable frame rate.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this CPU-GPU combo in Control?

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 is the optimal resolution, with all presets achieving at least 61.4 FPS. At 2560x1440, only the Low preset stays above 60 FPS, while High and Ultra fall below 52 FPS.

Q: How does the RTX 2060’s memory configuration affect 4K performance?

A: The 6 GB VRAM and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for 4K, as evidenced by the 32.3 FPS average at Ultra settings. The GPU’s 192-bit memory bus becomes a bottleneck, limiting the frame rate even when the CPU is not fully utilized.

Q: Is the Core i5-9400 a limiting factor in this game?

A: The CPU’s 50th percentile ranking and 6-core, 6-thread configuration suggest it is not the primary bottleneck. The FPS drops from 1080p to 4K are consistent with GPU limitations, and the CPU’s benchmark scores are within 0.6% of its nearest rivals.

Q: What is the performance difference between the Low and Ultra presets at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, Low delivers 108.3 FPS while Ultra delivers 61.4 FPS, a difference of 46.9 FPS. This shows that the GPU has ample headroom at this resolution to handle the increased graphical load.

Q: Can this system maintain 60 FPS at 1440p?

A: Only at the Low preset, which achieves 84.0 FPS. Medium drops to 58.6 FPS, High to 51.0 FPS, and Ultra to 43.4 FPS, so 60 FPS at 1440p is only possible with reduced settings.

Q: How does the combo rank compare to other tested systems?

A: The combo ranks 1307 out of 1636, placing it in the lower 20% of all configurations. This is due to the GPU’s mid-range performance (58th percentile) rather than the CPU, which is at the 50th percentile.

Settings Recommendations

For a balanced experience that prioritizes frame rate stability, the Medium preset at 1920x1080 is the recommended starting point, as it delivers 79.2 FPS while providing a significant visual upgrade over Low. Users with high-refresh-rate monitors can drop to Low for 108.3 FPS, but the visual fidelity loss is noticeable. The High preset at 1080p is also viable at 65.5 FPS, but the 14.3 FPS cost over Medium is substantial for marginal visual gains.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset is the only reliable option for smooth gameplay, offering 84.0 FPS. The Medium preset at 58.6 FPS is playable on a 60 Hz display but may exhibit occasional stutters. The High and Ultra presets are not recommended at this resolution due to their sub-52 FPS averages. For 4K, the data indicates that only the Low preset is acceptable at 57.1 FPS, and even then, the experience may feel less fluid than at lower resolutions. The Ultra preset at 4K is effectively unplayable at 32.3 FPS, so users should avoid it unless they are prioritizing visual quality over performance.