Control

Control with the Intel Core i5-9400 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D places in the 279th position out of 2,888 tested combinations, putting it in the top 10% of all configs. That rank reflects a pairing where a last-generation six-core CPU meets a flagship 50-series GPU, and the measured frames show the GPU doing almost all the heavy lifting. The data indicates this is a very strong combo for Control, though the CPU does cap performance at lower resolutions where the graphics card could otherwise run even faster.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 279 out of 2,888 tested combinations places it firmly in the upper echelon of all recorded systems. That is a strong result, but not a top-tier one, which makes sense given the CPU’s age relative to the GPU. The i5-9400 sits at the 47th percentile among all CPUs tested, meaning it is outclassed by more than half of the processors in the database. Meanwhile, the RTX 5090 D sits at the 92nd percentile among all GPUs, indicating it is near the top of the graphics stack. When you pair a mid-pack CPU with a top-decile GPU, the CPU becomes the limiting factor in many scenarios. The data supports this: at 1920x1080, the gap between Low and Ultra settings is only 32 FPS (162 vs 130), while at 3840x2160, the same settings gap is 46 FPS (129 vs 83). That widening spread at higher resolutions is classic GPU-bound behavior, while the narrower spread at 1080p suggests the CPU is holding the GPU back from fully stretching its legs.

The nearest CPU rivals in the database show how close the i5-9400 is to other mid-range parts. It scores 2,254 on average, nearly identical to the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 (2,259, -0.2%), the Intel Core i7-10710U (2,248, +0.3%), the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 (2,246, +0.4%), and the Intel Core i3-10305 (2,264, -0.4%). All four rivals are within a fraction of a percent of the i5-9400, which means swapping to any of these would produce nearly identical frame rates in Control. The GPU’s nearest rivals, on the other hand, are all over the map: the AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT (76,904, +1.1%), the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT (78,940, -1.6%), the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB (79,396, -2.1%), and the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB (79,605, -2.4%). The RTX 5090 D’s average score of 77,712 is effectively tied with these parts, which is notable because the Tesla P100s are datacenter cards, not gaming GPUs, yet they land within 2.4% in raw compute benchmarks.

GPU Role

The RTX 5090 D is the dominant component in this pairing, and its specifications make that clear. It packs 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus, delivering 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth. That memory configuration is overkill for Control, a game from 2019 that was not designed with such massive frame buffers in mind, but it ensures there is no possibility of a VRAM bottleneck at any resolution or setting. The GPU’s boost clock of 2407 MHz (base 2017 MHz) and its 104.8 TFLOPS of FP32 compute are far beyond what Control’s engine can fully utilize, which is why the measured FPS numbers are so high even at 4K. The 32 GB frame buffer means texture streaming and asset loading will never hit a wall, even with Ultra settings that might otherwise stress smaller memory pools.

The GPU’s benchmark results reinforce its top-tier status. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 14,326; in Geekbench OpenCL, it hits 310,674; and in Geekbench Vulkan, it reaches 376,915. The Passmark suite shows a G3D score of 44,065 and a GPU compute score of 28,396. These numbers place the card in the 92nd percentile of all GPUs, which aligns with the measured FPS in Control. At 3840x2160 Ultra, the combo still manages 83 FPS average, which is well above playable for most users. At 1920x1080 Low, it hits 162 FPS, and the only reason it does not go higher is the CPU, not the GPU. The fact that the 5090 D’s nearest rivals include mobile GPUs and datacenter accelerators suggests that its raw compute is comparable to a wide range of high-end parts, but its gaming-specific features and drivers are what push Control’s frame rates to these levels.

FAQ

Q: Is the RTX 5090 D overkill for Control?

A: Yes, based on the data. The GPU scores in the 92nd percentile of all tested GPUs, and Control’s highest measured average FPS is 162 at 1080p Low, which is far from the card’s ceiling. The 32 GB of GDDR7 memory and 104.8 TFLOPS of compute are not fully utilized by a 2019 game like Control.

Q: Does the i5-9400 bottleneck the RTX 5090 D in this game?

A: The data suggests yes, especially at lower resolutions. At 1920x1080, the average FPS only ranges from 130 (Ultra) to 162 (Low), a 32 FPS spread. At 3840x2160, the spread is 46 FPS (83 to 129), which indicates the GPU is being fed more work at 4K, while at 1080p the CPU limits the frame rate.

Q: What is the best resolution to play Control with this combo?

A: The data shows 2560x1440 as a sweet spot. At High settings, it delivers 125 FPS average, which is close to the 1080p High result of 137 FPS, but with significantly more detail. At 4K High, it drops to 96 FPS, which is still smooth but requires more GPU headroom.

Q: How does the RTX 5090 D compare to its nearest GPU rivals in raw benchmarks?

A: The 5090 D’s average benchmark score is 77,712. The AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT scores 76,904 (+1.1%), the RX 6850M XT scores 78,940 (-1.6%), the Tesla P100 12 GB scores 79,396 (-2.1%), and the Tesla P100 16 GB scores 79,605 (-2.4%). All are within a few percent of each other.

Q: Can this combo handle 4K Ultra settings?

A: Yes, but with a caveat. The measured average FPS at 3840x2160 Ultra is 83, which is above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth play. The minimum FPS is not listed for that setting, but the Medium preset shows a min of 92 FPS, so Ultra likely stays above 60 FPS.

Q: Is the i5-9400 a weak link in this system?

A: The CPU’s 47th percentile ranking and six cores with six threads indicate it is an older mid-range part. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 6,629 and single-core score of 935 show it is outclassed by modern CPUs, but in Control, it still delivers playable frame rates at all tested settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the combo delivers 129 FPS average on Low, 108 FPS on Medium, 96 FPS on High, and 83 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset has the only recorded min and max values at this resolution: 92 min and 124 max. That 92 FPS min means even the lowest frame dips stay above 60 FPS, so 4K is viable across all settings. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is 46 FPS, which shows the GPU is scaling well with the increased load. Moving to 2560x1440, the averages jump to 147 FPS on Low, 130 FPS on Medium, 125 FPS on High, and 119 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset again shows the only min/max data: 110 min and 149 max. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1440p narrows to 28 FPS, indicating the CPU is starting to limit the GPU’s output. At 1920x1080, the averages are 162 FPS on Low, 142 FPS on Medium, 137 FPS on High, and 130 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset records a min of 121 and max of 164. The 32 FPS spread between Low and Ultra at 1080p is the smallest of all three resolutions, confirming the CPU is the primary constraint here.

The data reveals a clear pattern: as resolution increases, the GPU becomes more the bottleneck, and the frame rate drops more noticeably between settings. At 4K, Ultra is 14% slower than High (83 vs 96), while at 1080p, Ultra is only 5% slower than High (130 vs 137). This is because at 1080p, the CPU cannot feed the GPU enough frames to matter, so the settings have less impact. The Medium preset at each resolution provides the only min/max data, and in all three cases, the min FPS is well above 60: 92 at 4K, 110 at 1440p, and 121 at 1080p. This indicates that even in the most demanding moments, the combo maintains smooth performance.

Settings Recommendations

For players targeting 60 FPS or higher, every setting and resolution combination in the measured data meets that goal. The lowest average FPS is 83 at 4K Ultra, which still clears 60 FPS comfortably. However, the best experience depends on the display. At 3840x2160, the High preset (96 FPS) offers a better balance than Ultra (83 FPS) because the visual difference between High and Ultra is often minimal in Control, while the 13 FPS gain is measurable. At 2560x1440, the High preset (125 FPS) is the sweet spot, delivering near-120 FPS performance without the 6 FPS drop to Ultra (119 FPS). At 1920x1080, the High preset (137 FPS) provides a smooth experience, but the Medium preset (142 FPS) is nearly identical in performance and may look similar depending on the specific settings toggled. The Low preset at any resolution is not recommended because the FPS gains are modest—at 1080p, Low (162) is only 25 FPS faster than High (137)—while the visual quality loss is significant.

The data suggests that High settings are the optimal choice across all resolutions. At 4K, High delivers 96 FPS, which is 13 FPS faster than Ultra. At 1440p, High delivers 125 FPS, which is 6 FPS faster than Ultra. At 1080p, High delivers 137 FPS, which is 7 FPS faster than Ultra. The Medium preset is a fallback for those who want extra headroom, but the min FPS data shows that even High would likely stay above 60 FPS at all times, given that Medium min FPS values are 92 at 4K, 110 at 1440p, and 121 at 1080p. Since High is more demanding than Medium, its min FPS would be lower but still comfortably above 60.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-9400 is a six-core, six-thread processor from the Coffee Lake refresh generation, with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. It has 9 MB of shared L3 cache and supports DDR4 memory on a dual-channel bus with 42.7 GB/s of bandwidth. Its benchmark scores are modest by modern standards: Cinebench R23 multi-core is 6,629 and single-core is 935, while Geekbench multi-core is 5,141 and single-core is 1,389. The 47th percentile ranking puts it in the middle of the pack, and its nearest rivals are all within 0.4% of its average score of 2,254. In Control, the CPU’s role is to feed the RTX 5090 D with draw calls and physics updates, and the data shows it does this adequately but not exceptionally.

The measured FPS at 1080p demonstrates the CPU’s limitation. At Low settings, the average is 162 FPS, which is the highest of any resolution. If the CPU were stronger, the GPU could push this number higher, but the six threads are saturated by Control’s engine. At 4K, the CPU has less impact because the GPU is the bottleneck, and the frame rates drop to 129 FPS on Low. The difference between 1080p Low (162) and 4K Low (129) is 33 FPS, which is entirely due to the GPU workload at higher resolution. The CPU’s boost clock of 4.10 GHz helps in single-threaded scenarios, but Control is not particularly well-optimized for multi-threading, which is why the six-core part performs similarly to the four-core rivals listed in the nearestRivals data. The i5-9400’s 65 W TDP and 14 nm process node are dated, but for a game like Control, it still provides enough performance to keep the GPU well-fed at 1440p and above.