Control

Control is an action-adventure title from 2019 that stresses both GPU and CPU depending on resolution. The data here comes from a measured configuration pairing an Intel Core i9-14900K with an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D, and it reveals a system that is overwhelmingly GPU-bound at higher resolutions but begins to show CPU limitations at 1080p. Benchmark results indicate that this combination ranks 5th out of 3720 tested combos in this game, placing it in the top percentile for overall performance. The measured FPS rows show a wide spread between Low and Ultra settings, and the scaling behavior across 1080p, 1440p, and 4K provides clear guidance on how to configure the game for different display targets.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and consistent, which points to the GPU as the primary limiting component at higher resolutions. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 298 FPS at 1920x1080 to 225 FPS at 2560x1440, a reduction of 73 FPS, and then further to 152 FPS at 3840x2160. That is a total drop of 146 FPS from 1080p to 4K, or roughly a 49% decrease. The data shows that the GPU is still capable of pushing well over 150 FPS even at 4K on Low, so the scaling is not collapsing, but the trend is unmistakable.

At High settings, the pattern is similar but with slightly smaller absolute drops. The average goes from 188 FPS at 1080p to 142 FPS at 1440p, then to 96 FPS at 4K. This represents a 92 FPS difference between the lowest and highest resolution tested. Medium settings show a comparable trajectory: 211 FPS at 1080p, 160 FPS at 1440p, and 108 FPS at 4K. Ultra settings follow the same curve with 163 FPS, 124 FPS, and 83 FPS respectively. Notably, the percentage drop from 1440p to 4K is fairly consistent across all settings, hovering around 32-33%, which indicates that the RTX 5090 D is scaling predictably with pixel count.

The fact that 1080p Low produces 298 FPS while 4K Low produces 152 FPS tells you that the GPU has headroom at lower resolutions. However, the gap between 1080p and 1440p at Low settings is 73 FPS, while the gap between 1440p and 4K is also 73 FPS. This linear scaling suggests that the game is not hitting a hard CPU wall at 1080p, but rather that the GPU is still doing most of the work. If the CPU were the bottleneck at 1080p, you would expect the FPS to plateau or show diminishing returns as resolution decreases. Instead, the numbers continue to climb, meaning the i9-14900K is keeping up even at high frame rates.

The takeaway from the resolution scaling is that this system is balanced for 1440p and 4K gaming. At 4K Ultra, the average of 83 FPS is still playable, and at 1440p Ultra, the 124 FPS average is smooth. The 1080p numbers are exceptionally high, but they are less relevant for a GPU of this class, since most users pairing an RTX 5090 D with a 14900K will target higher resolutions or refresh rates. The data shows that the GPU is the limiting factor at 4K, while the CPU becomes more relevant at 1080p, though it does not yet bottleneck the system to a noticeable degree.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded in the measured data?

A: The highest average FPS is 298, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: How does the 4K Ultra performance compare to 1080p Low performance?

A: The 4K Ultra average is 83 FPS, while 1080p Low averages 298 FPS. This is a difference of 215 FPS, showing that the most demanding preset at the highest resolution is roughly 72% slower than the lightest preset at the lowest resolution.

Q: Is the RTX 5090 D or the i9-14900K the bottleneck at 1440p Medium?

A: At 2560x1440 Medium, the average FPS is 160, with a minimum of 136 and a maximum of 184. Given that the GPU scales well from 1080p to 4K, the data suggests the GPU is still the primary driver at this resolution, since the frame rate remains high and consistent.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for 4K Medium settings?

A: The minimum FPS for 3840x2160 Medium is 92, with an average of 108 and a maximum of 124.

Q: How does the combo rank overall in Control?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900K with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D ranks 5th out of 3720 tested combinations in this game.

Q: Is there a significant difference between High and Ultra at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, High averages 188 FPS, while Ultra averages 163 FPS. The difference is 25 FPS, which is about 15% lower on Ultra, indicating that Ultra settings have a noticeable but not dramatic performance cost.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience per the measured rows, Medium settings offer the most balanced combination of visual quality and frame rate across all resolutions. At 4K, Medium produces an average of 108 FPS with a minimum of 92 FPS, which is comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. High settings at 4K drop to 96 FPS average, which is still playable but leaves less headroom for dips. Ultra at 4K falls to 83 FPS, which is acceptable but not ideal for high-refresh-rate displays.

At 1440p, Medium delivers 160 FPS average with a minimum of 136 FPS, making it the sweet spot for competitive or fast-paced play. High settings at 1440p average 142 FPS, which is still very smooth, while Ultra averages 124 FPS. The data shows that Medium is the best choice for 1440p if you want to guarantee no drops below 130 FPS. For 1080p, Medium averages 211 FPS with a minimum of 180 FPS, which is excellent for 144Hz or 165Hz monitors. Low settings at 1080p push to 298 FPS, but that is only useful for extreme refresh rates and sacrifices too much visual fidelity.

The recommendation is to use Medium settings for 4K and 1440p, as it provides the highest minimum FPS relative to the average. The minimum FPS is only recorded for Medium settings in the data, which shows 92 FPS at 4K, 136 FPS at 1440p, and 180 FPS at 1080p. These minimums are all within 10-15% of the averages, indicating that Medium settings produce stable frame pacing. High and Ultra settings do not have recorded minimums, so their stability is less certain. Given that the RTX 5090 D is a top-tier GPU, Medium settings may seem conservative, but the data shows that the performance headroom is better spent on higher resolutions or refresh rates rather than pushing Ultra presets.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured FPS values are as follows: Low settings average 298 FPS, Medium averages 211 FPS with a minimum of 180 and a maximum of 243, High averages 188 FPS, and Ultra averages 163 FPS. This shows a clear progression where each step up in settings costs roughly 20-25 FPS, with the largest drop occurring between Low and Medium at 87 FPS. The difference between Medium and High is 23 FPS, and between High and Ultra is 25 FPS menu. The minimum FPS for Medium is 180, which is still higher than the average for Ultra, meaning that even the dips on Medium are faster than the average on the highest preset.

At 2560x1440, the numbers are lower but maintain the same ordering. Low averages 225 FPS, Medium averages 160 FPS with a minimum of 136 and a maximum of 184, High averages 142 FPS, and Ultra averages 124 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 65 FPS, from Medium to High is 18 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 18 FPS. The minimum FPS at Medium is 136, which is close to the Ultra average of 124, so Medium provides a significant stability advantage over Ultra at this resolution. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p is roughly 24-25% lower across all settings, which is consistent with the increase in pixel count.

At 3840x2160, the measured values are: Low averages 152 FPS, Medium averages 108 FPS with a minimum of 92 and a maximum of 124, High averages 96 FPS, and Ultra averages 83 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 44 FPS, from Medium to High is 12 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 13 FPS. The minimum FPS at Medium is 92, which is above the Ultra average of 83, so Medium is the safest choice for maintaining a high frame rate at 4K. The scaling from 1440p to 4K is roughly 32-33% lower across all settings, which is slightly steeper than the 1080p to 1440p drop, indicating that the GPU is being pushed harder at 4K.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with a GB202 chip manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It packs 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die, with a transistor density of 122.9M per mm². The GPU has 21760 shading units, 680 texture mapping units, and 176 raster output units, along with 170 ray tracing cores and 680 tensor cores. These specifications translate to a pixel rate of 423.6 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 1,636.8 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance rated at 104.8 TFLOPS.

The memory subsystem is substantial: 32 GB of GDDR7 on a 512-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 1.79 TB/s. The memory clock runs at 1750 MHz, which equates to 28 Gbps effective. This large memory pool and high bandwidth are crucial for Control, a game that features complex environments and physics-based destruction. The data shows that the GPU is able to maintain high frame rates even at 4K Ultra, averaging 83 FPS, which suggests that the 32 GB frame buffer is not a limitation at these settingscars. The boost clock is 2407 MHz, with a base clock of 2017 MHz, and the GPU has a TDP of 575 W, requiring a 950 W suggested power supply.

In terms of benchmark scores, the RTX 5090 D achieves a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 14326, a Geekbench OpenCL score of 310674, and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 376915. Its Passmark G3D score is 44065, and its Passmark GPU Compute score is 28396. The GPU sits at the 92nd percentile against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 77712. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT, which is 1.1% faster, and the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT, which is 1.6% slower. This places the RTX 5090 D in a very tight performance band, but the measured FPS in Control shows it is more than capable of handling the game at high settings.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i9-14900K is a 14th generation Raptor Lake chip with 24 cores and 32 threads. It has a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 6.00 GHz, with a TDP of 125 W. The CPU supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus, and it has an integrated UHD Graphics 770 unit. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. It uses a 10 nm process at Intel with a die size of 257 mm².

In Control, the CPU's role is less prominent than the GPU's, but it still matters for high frame rates. The data shows that at 1080p Low, the system reaches 298 FPS, which is a high enough frame rate that the CPU could become a factor. However, the fact that the FPS continues to scale down as resolution increases suggests that the i9-14900K is not bottlenecking the GPU at any point. The CPU's benchmark scores are strong: it achieves a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 39399.5 and a single-core score of 2262.5. In Geekbench, it scores 21697 multicore and 2655 single-core. Its Passmark multithread score is 58674, and its single-thread score is 4697.

The i9-14900K ranks at the 95th percentile against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 79097. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-14900KF, which is 0.3% slower, and the AMD EPYC 7413, which is 1.2% slower. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is 1.7% faster. This places the CPU in a tight performance envelope with its competitors, but the measured FPS in Control indicates that the combination with the RTX 5090 D is effective. The high boost clock of 6.00 GHz helps with single-threaded performance, which is relevant for game logic and physics in Control. The 32 threads provide ample multi-threading capability for background tasks, but the game itself does not appear to be heavily multi-threaded based on the FPS scaling patterns.