Control

# Control with Intel Core i5-9400 + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB

The pairing of Intel's six-core Coffee Lake CPU from 2018 with NVIDIA's newest Blackwell architecture GPU creates a fascinating generational mix for Control, a 2019 action-adventure title that stresses both ray tracing and traditional rasterization. Benchmark data reveals a system that delivers playable frame rates across all tested configurations, yet the performance hierarchy between resolutions and settings tells a story of a GPU that is clearly the dominant partner, with the aging CPU occasionally lurking as a potential bottleneck at lower resolutions.

FAQ

Q: What is the best average frame rate this combo achieves at 1080p?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 161 at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This drops to 102 at High settings and 88 at Ultra settings, showing a substantial 73 FPS spread between the lowest and highest quality presets at this resolution.

Q: How does the RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB perform relative to its nearest GPU rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score is 4901, placing it 0.1% behind the AMD FirePro W5130M (4904) and 0.2% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 (4893). It also sits 0.6% behind both the AMD Radeon R7 M265 (4929) and AMD Radeon R7 M360 (4931).

Q: What is the CPU's percentile ranking among all tested processors?

A: The Intel Core i5-9400 sits at the 47th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 2254. Its closest rival, the Intel Core i7-1068NG7, scores 2259, just 0.2% higher.

Q: Does the system maintain 60+ FPS at 4K resolution?

A: Only with settings adjustments. At 3840x2160, Low settings yield 82 FPS average, while Medium produces 58 FPS (with a minimum of 50 FPS). High settings drop to 52 FPS, and Ultra falls to 45 FPS, meaning only the Low preset clears the 60 FPS threshold at 4K.

Q: What is the frame time variance like at Medium settings across resolutions?

A: The data shows a consistent pattern: at 1080p Medium, the average is 114 FPS with a range of 97-132 FPS; at 1440p Medium, the average is 87 FPS with a range of 74-100 FPS; at 4K Medium, the average is 58 FPS with a range of 50-67 FPS. The minimum-to-maximum spread remains roughly 30-35% of the average across all three resolutions.

*Q: How does this combo rank among all tested system configurations for Control?*

A: The combination ranks 1094th out of 2888 total tested combos, placing it in the upper-middle portion of the database for this specific game.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB is the undisputed performance driver in this configuration. Built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with a 5 nm process at TSMC, the GPU packs 4608 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 48 raster operations pipelines. Its boost clock reaches 2572 MHz, with a base clock of 2407 MHz. The memory subsystem consists of 8 GB of GDDR7 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth — a figure that becomes particularly relevant in Control, a game known for its physics-heavy environments and particle effects.

The GPU's compute capabilities are substantial: 23.70 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and an equal 23.70 TFLOPS for FP16 (1:1 ratio). It also includes 36 ray tracing cores and 144 tensor cores, which are directly relevant to Control's implementation of real-time ray tracing for reflections and indirect lighting. The pixel rate of 123.5 GPixel/s and texture rate of 370.4 GTexel/s provide the raw throughput needed to sustain high resolution rendering.

However, the GPU's benchmark profile presents an interesting contradiction. Its PassMark G3D score of 21981 is robust, yet its overall percentile ranking sits at just 29th among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 4901 that places it nearly identical to much older, lower-end parts like the GTS 450 and FirePro W5130M. This suggests that while the RTX 5060 Ti excels in modern, feature-rich workloads like those found in Control, its performance in legacy or compute-limited synthetic tests may not reflect its true gaming capability.

In Control specifically, the 8 GB VRAM capacity proves sufficient across all tested settings, as no out-of-memory-related stutters appear in the measured data. The GPU's 448 GB/s memory bandwidth supports the game's texture streaming and physics calculations without evident bottlenecks, even at 4K Ultra where the average FPS of 45 suggests the GPU is working at its limits.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear and consistent scaling pattern as resolution increases from 1080p to 4K. At High settings, the average frame rate drops from 102 FPS at 1920x1080 to 77 FPS at 2560x1440, then further to 52 FPS at 3840x2160. This represents a 24.5% performance loss when moving from 1080p to 1440p, and an additional 32.5% loss when moving from 1440p to 4K.

The Low settings preset shows the steepest absolute drop: 161 FPS at 1080p falls to 122 FPS at 1440p, then to 82 FPS at 4K — a cumulative 49% reduction from 1080p to 4K. This pattern indicates that at lower quality settings, where the GPU is less burdened by shading and texture work, the system becomes increasingly constrained by other factors as resolution rises.

Medium settings exhibit the most linear scaling behavior. The progression from 114 FPS (1080p) to 87 FPS (1440p) to 58 FPS (4K) shows a nearly perfect geometric progression, with each resolution step costing roughly 24% of the previous frame rate. This consistency suggests a balanced workload distribution where the GPU remains the primary limiting component throughout.

Ultra settings, by contrast, show the smallest absolute differences: 88 FPS at 1080p, 67 FPS at 1440p, and 45 FPS at 4K. The 1080p-to-1440p drop of 21 FPS is nearly identical to the 1440p-to-4K drop of 22 FPS, indicating that at maximum quality, the GPU is so heavily loaded that resolution scaling becomes nearly linear.

The data strongly suggests that the GPU is the limiting component at 4K across all settings, given the consistent frame rate reductions. However, at 1080p Low, where the system achieves 161 FPS, the Intel Core i5-9400's six cores and six threads may begin to constrain performance, as this frame rate approaches levels where CPU draw-call processing typically becomes a factor.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its most impressive results. Low settings produce an average of 161 FPS, which is exceptionally high for Control. Medium settings yield 114 FPS average with a minimum of 97 FPS and maximum of 132 FPS, providing a smooth experience with no drops below the 90 FPS threshold. High settings average 102 FPS, while Ultra settings still maintain an average of 88 FPS. The 1080p data shows that even at maximum quality, the system never dips below 88 FPS average, making this resolution entirely playable regardless of settings preference.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance remains strong but begins to show the GPU's workload. Low settings achieve 122 FPS average, which is still excellent for 1440p gaming. Medium settings produce 87 FPS average with a minimum of 74 FPS and maximum of 100 FPS, keeping the experience above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. High settings average 77 FPS, while Ultra settings fall to 67 FPS average. All 1440p presets maintain averages above 60 FPS, indicating that this resolution is fully viable for this combination.

At 3840x2160, the system's limitations become apparent. Low settings deliver 82 FPS average, which is the only 4K preset that exceeds 60 FPS. Medium settings average 58 FPS with a minimum of 50 FPS and maximum of 67 FPS, meaning the experience fluctuates between playable and marginal depending on scene complexity. High settings drop to 52 FPS average, and Ultra settings fall to 45 FPS average. For 4K gaming, only the Low preset provides a consistently fluid experience, while Medium may be acceptable for players who tolerate occasional drops below 60 FPS.

The minimum FPS data, available only for Medium settings, shows that the lowest recorded frame rates are 97 FPS at 1080p, 74 FPS at 1440p, and 50 FPS at 4K. These minimums are approximately 15-17% below the respective averages, indicating moderate frame time variance that should not cause noticeable stuttering at 1080p or 1440p, but may be slightly distracting at 4K.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-9400 provides six physical cores and six threads, with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. This Coffee Lake Refresh processor, built on Intel's 14 nm process, features 9 MB of shared L3 cache, with 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core. Its memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s over a dual-channel DDR4 interface, combined with PCIe Gen 3 connectivity providing 16 CPU lanes, represents a mid-range specification from the 2018 era.

In synthetic benchmarks, the i5-9400 achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 6629 and a single-core score of 935. Its Geekbench scores are 5141 (multi-core) and 1389 (single-core). The CPU's average benchmark score of 2254 places it at the 47th percentile among all CPUs, with its nearest rival, the Intel Core i7-1068NG7, scoring 2259 — a mere 0.2% difference. Other close competitors include the Core i7-10710U (2248, 0.3% higher) and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 (2246, 0.4% higher).

In Control, the CPU's role appears secondary to the GPU across most tested scenarios. The evidence for this comes from the scaling pattern: at 1080p Low, the system achieves 161 FPS, which is likely approaching the point where the i5-9400's six threads could limit frame rate. However, the lack of minimum FPS data for Low settings makes this difficult to confirm definitively. The fact that 1080p Ultra still averages 88 FPS suggests that even at high quality settings, the CPU can feed the GPU adequately at 1080p.

The more telling indicator comes from the 4K data. At 4K Ultra, the system averages 45 FPS, which is 43 FPS lower than at 1080p Ultra. This substantial drop is almost entirely attributable to GPU load, as the CPU's workload does not increase significantly with resolution. The i5-9400's six cores without hyper-threading are sufficient for Control's multi-threaded rendering tasks, but the data suggests that at very high frame rates (above 120 FPS), the CPU may become a limiting factor.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For players with 1080p displays, the High preset at 102 FPS average offers the best balance of visual quality and performance. The jump from High to Ultra costs 14 FPS (from 102 to 88), which is a 13.7% performance penalty for what is typically a marginal visual improvement in Control. The Medium preset at 114 FPS provides additional headroom for players with high-refresh-rate monitors, but the 97 FPS minimum indicates that drops below 100 FPS are possible during intense scenes.

At 1440p, the High preset at 77 FPS average is the recommended choice for most players. It maintains a comfortable margin above 60 FPS while providing good visual fidelity. The Ultra preset at 67 FPS is viable for players who prioritize graphics over frame rate, but the closer proximity to the 60 FPS threshold means that demanding scenes may occasionally dip below smooth gameplay levels. The Medium preset at 87 FPS offers the safest experience for competitive play or for users sensitive to frame rate fluctuations.

For 4K displays, the recommendation becomes more nuanced. The Low preset at 82 FPS average is the only option that provides a consistently smooth experience, though it requires significant visual compromises. The Medium preset at 58 FPS average is a viable alternative for players who prefer higher quality settings and can tolerate occasional drops to 50 FPS in heavy scenes. The High and Ultra presets, at 52 and 45 FPS respectively, are only suitable for players who prioritize visual fidelity over gameplay smoothness and do not mind sub-60 FPS experiences.

The data suggests that the Medium preset offers the most predictable performance across all resolutions, as it is the only setting with recorded minimum and maximum FPS values. This transparency about frame time variance makes Medium the most reliable choice for benchmarking or for players who require consistent performance.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-9400 + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB combination ranks 1094th out of 2888 tested combos for Control, placing it in the 62nd percentile of all tested system configurations. This ranking indicates that while the combo is capable of delivering playable performance across most settings and resolutions, a significant portion of tested systems outperform it.

The CPU's position in the broader processor landscape provides context for this ranking. At the 47th percentile among all CPUs, the i5-9400 is a middle-of-the-pack processor. Its nearest rivals — the Core i7-1068NG7, Core i7-10710U, and Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 — all score within 0.4% of the i5-9400, indicating that this performance tier is densely populated with similarly capable processors.

The GPU's 29th percentile ranking among all GPUs is notably lower than the CPU's 47th percentile, suggesting that the RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB is the weaker link in this pairing relative to their respective product categories. This is somewhat surprising given the GPU's modern architecture and impressive compute specifications, but the synthetic benchmark data places it in company with significantly older and less capable graphics cards.

The combo's rank of 1094 out of 2888 suggests that for Control specifically, this system delivers above-average performance compared to all tested configurations. The game's 2019 release date means that it is not exceptionally demanding by current standards, allowing this mid-range CPU and GPU combination to perform admirably. However, the ranking also implies that roughly 62% of tested systems achieve better performance in this title, likely due to more powerful CPUs, GPUs, or both.

The generational mismatch between the 2018-era CPU and the 2025-era GPU is partially mitigated by Control's engine, which appears to scale well with GPU resources while placing moderate demands on the CPU. This allows the RTX 5060 Ti to demonstrate its strengths in ray tracing and high-resolution rendering, even when paired with a processor from a previous hardware generation.