Control

Control is a 2019 Action Adventure title that stresses both CPU and GPU depending on resolution and settings. The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and the AMD Radeon RX 7600 produces a measurable performance profile across 1080p, 1440p, and 4K, with average frame rates ranging from 33 FPS at 4K Ultra to 118 FPS at 1080p Low. The data reveals a system that is clearly GPU-limited at higher resolutions, while the 24-core processor provides ample headroom at lower settings. This analysis walks through the measured FPS rows, the role of each component, and how this pairing ranks among the 2,888 tested combinations in this game.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a consistent and predictable drop as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 75 FPS at 1080p, to 56 FPS at 1440p, and finally to 38 FPS at 4K. That represents a 25% reduction from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 32% reduction from 1440p to 4K. This steep decline indicates that the AMD Radeon RX 7600 is the limiting component at higher resolutions, as the GPU must render more pixels per frame without a corresponding increase in processing power.

Looking at Low settings, the scaling pattern is even more pronounced. At 1080p Low, the system delivers 118 FPS, which drops to 89 FPS at 1440p Low, and then to 60 FPS at 4K Low. The 1080p to 1440p drop is 24.6%, while the 1440p to 4K drop is 32.6%. The fact that 4K Low still manages 60 FPS, exactly matching the 1080p High result, suggests that the GPU is the primary bottleneck even when graphical features are minimized. The CPU, with its 24 cores and 24 threads, is not the constraint here; rather, the RX 7600’s 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 128-bit bus width become the deciding factor.

Medium settings show a similar trend, with average FPS of 84 at 1080p, 64 at 1440p, and 43 at 4K. The minimum FPS at Medium also scales: 71 at 1080p, 54 at 1440p, and 36 at 4K. This consistency across preset levels indicates that resolution scaling is uniform, with no sudden cliffs or anomalies. Ultra settings, meanwhile, produce the lowest numbers: 65 FPS at 1080p, 49 FPS at 1440p, and 33 FPS at 4K. The gap between 1080p Ultra and 4K Ultra is a 49% reduction, which is slightly less than the 50%+ drops seen on other presets, but still shows a clear GPU-bound scenario.

The implication of this scaling is straightforward: at 1080p, the system is balanced enough to push high frame rates, but at 4K, even Low settings barely hit 60 FPS. The data suggests that players targeting 4K will need to accept either Low settings for 60 FPS or Medium for 43 FPS, while High and Ultra fall below 40 FPS. For 1440p, the situation is more comfortable, with High at 56 FPS and Medium at 64 FPS, but Ultra still sits below 50 FPS. The limiting component is unambiguously the GPU, as the CPU’s performance metrics—such as a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51,731—far exceed what this game requires at any resolution.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7600 is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with a Navi 33 chip, manufactured on a 6 nm process. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU has 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units, with a boost clock of 2655 MHz and a game clock of 2250 MHz. These specifications directly influence the measured FPS in Control, particularly at higher resolutions where memory bandwidth and pixel throughput become critical.

At 4K, the RX 7600’s 288.0 GB/s bandwidth is insufficient to maintain high frame rates on demanding presets. The pixel rate of 169.9 GPixel/s and texture rate of 339.8 GTexel/s are adequate for 1080p, but at 4K, the GPU must process four times as many pixels, leading to the observed 33-60 FPS range depending on settings. The 8 GB VRAM capacity is also a factor; Control at 4K Ultra likely approaches or exceeds this limit, causing the GPU to manage memory more conservatively, which is reflected in the 33 FPS average.

The GPU’s benchmark scores place it in the 57th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 15,171. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM (deltaPct -0.2), AMD Radeon Pro 560X (deltaPct 0.6), AMD Radeon 680M (deltaPct -0.7), and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti (deltaPct 0.7). These deltas are all within 1%, meaning the RX 7600 performs nearly identically to these competitors in synthetic benchmarks. In Control, however, the measured FPS tells a more specific story: the GPU delivers playable frame rates at 1080p across all presets, but struggles at 4K, where only Low settings achieve 60 FPS.

The GPU’s 21.75 TFLOPS of FP32 compute is respectable for 1080p gaming, but the 128-bit memory bus is a known limitation for higher resolutions. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,310 reflects this mid-range positioning. In practice, this means that while the RX 7600 can handle 1080p Ultra at 65 FPS, it cannot sustain 4K Ultra at even 35 FPS. The GPU’s 57th percentile ranking underscores that this is not a high-end part, and the measured data in Control confirms that, with the 4K High result of 38 FPS being a clear indicator of its ceiling.

How This Combo Ranks

Among the 2,888 tested combos in Control, this pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and AMD Radeon RX 7600 ranks 2,028th. That places it in the lower third of all combinations, which is consistent with the GPU’s mid-range status. The CPU is a top-tier part—its 96th percentile ranking among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 84,003—but the GPU’s 57th percentile ranking drags the overall combo down. In a game like Control, where GPU load dominates at higher resolutions, the CPU’s strength cannot compensate for the GPU’s limitations.

The combo rank of 2,028 out of 2,888 means that approximately 70% of tested combinations deliver higher average FPS in this game. This is not surprising given that the RX 7600 is designed for 1080p gaming, not 4K. The CPU’s nearest rivals—Intel Core Ultra 9 285K (deltaPct 0.2), AMD EPYC 4584PX (deltaPct 1.1), AMD EPYC 9135 (deltaPct 1.2), and AMD EPYC 7F72 (deltaPct -1.3)—all have similar average benchmark scores, but none of them would change the GPU-bound nature of this combo. The rank reflects the combination’s overall capability, and the data shows that it is best suited for 1080p or moderate 1440p gaming.

Comparing to other combos, the measured FPS at 1080p High (75 FPS) and 1080p Ultra (65 FPS) are typical for a mid-range GPU paired with a high-end CPU. At 1440p, the results are more varied, with High at 56 FPS and Ultra at 49 FPS, which are playable but not exceptional. The 4K results, particularly Ultra at 33 FPS, are below the threshold for smooth gameplay. This ranking suggests that users seeking higher resolutions should pair the RX 7600 with a less powerful CPU to balance costs, or upgrade the GPU entirely, though such recommendations are beyond the scope of this data.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its best performance. Low settings produce an average of 118 FPS, which is the highest measured frame rate in the entire dataset. Medium settings yield 84 FPS with a minimum of 71 and a maximum of 97. High settings average 75 FPS, while Ultra drops to 65 FPS. All 1080p presets are above 60 FPS, indicating that the RX 7600 is well-suited for this resolution. The spread from Low to Ultra is 53 FPS, showing that graphical settings have a significant impact but never push the frame rate below playable levels.

At 2560x1440, performance drops noticeably. Low settings average 89 FPS, which is still smooth but 24.6% lower than 1080p Low. Medium settings average 64 FPS, with a minimum of 54 and a maximum of 73. High settings average 56 FPS, barely above the 60 FPS threshold, while Ultra averages 49 FPS. The 1440p results indicate that the GPU is starting to struggle, particularly at High and Ultra, where frame rates dip below 60 FPS. The minimum FPS of 54 at Medium suggests occasional stutters, but overall, 1440p is playable with adjusted settings.

At 3840x2160, the GPU’s limitations become stark. Low settings average 60 FPS, exactly at the playable threshold, but Medium drops to 43 FPS with a minimum of 36. High settings average 38 FPS, and Ultra averages 33 FPS. None of these higher presets achieve 60 FPS, and even Low settings barely reach it. The 4K results show a clear ceiling: the RX 7600 cannot handle Control at 4K with demanding settings. The minimum FPS of 36 at Medium indicates significant frame drops, which would be noticeable during gameplay.

The data also reveals a pattern where the gap between Low and Ultra widens as resolution increases. At 1080p, the difference is 53 FPS (118 vs 65). At 1440p, it narrows to 40 FPS (89 vs 49). At 4K, it narrows further to 27 FPS (60 vs 33). This indicates that at higher resolutions, the GPU becomes the bottleneck regardless of settings, and lowering graphical features provides diminishing returns. For instance, dropping from Ultra to Low at 4K only gains 27 FPS, whereas the same drop at 1080p gains 53 FPS.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, with a TDP of 125 W. The CPU’s cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. These specifications place it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 84,003.

In Control, the CPU’s role is secondary to the GPU, as evidenced by the resolution scaling data. At 1080p Low, where the GPU is less stressed, the CPU’s high single-thread performance—evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 7,303—allows the system to reach 118 FPS. However, at 4K, the CPU is idle relative to the GPU, as the frame rate is determined by the RX 7600’s pixel throughput. The CPU’s multi-core performance, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51,731, is far beyond what Control requires, as the game does not scale well beyond a few cores.

The CPU’s nearest rivals in terms of average benchmark score include the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K (deltaPct 0.2), AMD EPYC 4584PX (deltaPct 1.1), AMD EPYC 9135 (deltaPct 1.2), and AMD EPYC 7F72 (deltaPct -1.3). These deltas are minimal, indicating that the 290K Plus performs nearly identically to these processors in synthetic tests. In practice, for Control, any of these CPUs would yield similar results when paired with the RX 7600, because the GPU is the bottleneck. The CPU’s memory support for DDR5 and 115.2 GB/s bandwidth also helps, but again, this does not translate into higher FPS at 4K where the GPU is saturated.

The CPU’s 24 threads may help with background tasks or streaming, but the measured FPS data shows no evidence of CPU limitation. At 1080p Low, the 118 FPS result is likely near the GPU’s maximum, not the CPU’s. The conclusion is that the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is overkill for this game when paired with the RX 7600, but it provides a solid foundation for future GPU upgrades.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo achieves in Control?

A: The highest measured average is 118 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

Q: Can this combo run Control at 4K with playable frame rates?

A: Only at Low settings, which achieves 60 FPS average. Medium settings drop to 43 FPS, High to 38 FPS, and Ultra to 33 FPS.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RX 7600’s average benchmark score is 15,171, with a deltaPct of -0.2% against the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM, +0.6% against the AMD Radeon Pro 560X, -0.7% against the AMD Radeon 680M, and +0.7% against the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti.

Q: What is the combo’s rank among all tested combinations?

A: It ranks 2,028th out of 2,888 combos in Control.

Q: What settings are recommended for 1440p gaming?

A: Medium settings provide 64 FPS average with a minimum of 54 FPS, while High yields 56 FPS and Ultra 49 FPS. Medium is the only preset above 60 FPS.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck the GPU in this game?

A: No. The CPU’s 24 cores and 5.80 GHz boost clock are not the limiting factor; the GPU’s 8 GB memory and 128-bit bus are, as shown by the steep FPS drops at higher resolutions.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution. For 1920x1080, all presets deliver above 60 FPS, so players can choose Ultra for the best visual quality at 65 FPS, or Medium for 84 FPS with a higher safety margin. High settings at 75 FPS offer a balanced compromise. For 2560x1440, Medium settings are the best choice, as they are the only preset to exceed 60 FPS (64 FPS average, 54 FPS minimum). High settings at 56 FPS are playable but may dip below 60 FPS during intense scenes, while Ultra at 49 FPS is less desirable.

For 3840x2160, Low settings are the only option for a consistent 60 FPS experience. Medium settings at 43 FPS are borderline, with a minimum of 36 FPS, which could lead to noticeable stutters. High and Ultra settings are not recommended, as they fall to 38 and 33 FPS respectively, well below the smoothness threshold. If a player prioritizes visual fidelity over frame rate, 1440p Ultra at 49 FPS is the highest quality preset that remains somewhat fluid, but for the best experience per the measured data, 1080p Ultra at 65 FPS or 1440p Medium at 64 FPS are the sweet spots.

The data also suggests that lowering settings from Ultra to Medium provides a significant FPS boost at 1080p (65 to 84 FPS, a 29% increase) and 1440p (49 to 64 FPS, a 31% increase), but only a modest gain at 4K (33 to 43 FPS, a 30% increase). This indicates that Medium is the most efficient preset across all resolutions, offering a good balance between visual quality and performance. For players with VRR displays, 1440p High at 56 FPS might be acceptable, but the safest recommendation is 1080p Medium or 1440p Medium to ensure frame rates stay above 60 FPS.