Control

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 lands at rank 1607 out of 3720 tested combos for Control. That places this configuration in the upper-middle portion of the database, meaning it outperforms a clear majority of systems tested with this game, though it is not at the top tier. The ranking reflects a balanced pairing where the CPU's strong multi-threaded performance (it sits at the 77th percentile among all CPUs) complements the GPU's solid but not elite standing (61st percentile among all GPUs). In practical terms, this combo is positioned to handle Control comfortably at most common gaming resolutions, with the primary limitations appearing only at 4K with higher presets.

How This Combo Ranks

At rank 1607 out of 3720 combinations, this system sits in the 57th percentile of all tested PC configurations for Control. That is a respectable position, indicating the hardware duo delivers better-than-average performance for this title. The Ryzen 5 8400F contributes meaningfully to this standing, with its multi-core benchmark scores proving robust. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 20851 and PassMark multi-thread score of 24389 show a processor capable of feeding the GPU without bottlenecking in most scenarios. The RTX 3070, with a PassMark G3D score of 22214, provides the graphical muscle. The combination of a CPU at the 77th percentile and a GPU at the 61st percentile results in a system that ranks above the median for Control, which is a demanding title with heavy physics and particle effects.

The ranking becomes more meaningful when compared to the nearest rival components. The CPU's closest competitor, the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F, scores 24964 on average, just 0.2% lower than the 8400F's 25005. This means swapping to that chip would yield nearly identical performance in CPU-bound scenarios. The Intel Core i7-11850H and i7-13620H are similarly close, with deltas of 0.3% and 0.4% respectively. On the GPU side, the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT scores 17083, only 0.7% below the RTX 3070's 17208, making it a near-equivalent alternative. This ranking data suggests the combo is well-matched, with neither component dramatically outperforming the other relative to their respective peer groups.

CPU and GPU Roles

The division of labor between the Ryzen 5 8400F and the RTX 3070 shifts depending on resolution and preset. At 1920x1080, the CPU plays a more substantial role, as the GPU can render frames quickly enough that the processor's ability to feed it becomes relevant. The data shows a large jump from Low to Ultra settings at 1080p, with average FPS dropping from 158 to 87. This 71 FPS spread indicates that while the GPU is the primary constraint at higher presets, the CPU's strong single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2943) keeps frame pacing consistent even at lower settings where the GPU has headroom.

Moving to 2560x1440, the GPU begins to dominate more clearly. The scaling from Low to Ultra shows a tighter range: 120 to 66 FPS, a 54 FPS difference. At this resolution, the RTX 3070's 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth become more important, as the higher pixel count demands more from the memory subsystem. The CPU's role diminishes slightly, though its 12 threads and 16 MB of shared L3 cache still prevent any stuttering in Control's physics-heavy combat sequences. The medium preset at 1440p, with average FPS of 85 and a minimum of 72, demonstrates that the system has enough CPU headroom to maintain playable frame times even when the GPU is under moderate load.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is almost entirely the limiting factor. The average FPS at Ultra is 44, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold, while Low settings reach 81 FPS. The CPU's contribution here is minimal, as the RTX 3070's 5888 shading units and 184 texture mapping units are fully saturated. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 4K is steep, with High settings at 51 FPS and Medium at 57 FPS. This pattern confirms that for 4K gaming, the GPU's raw compute (20.31 TFLOPS FP32) is the bottleneck, and the Ryzen 5 8400F has ample capability to keep up, as evidenced by its 3DMark max threads score of 6165.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers strong performance across all presets. Low settings produce an average of 158 FPS, which is far beyond any refresh rate that would be playable. Medium settings average 112 FPS, with a minimum of 96 and maximum of 129, indicating very stable frame delivery. High settings drop to an average of 100 FPS, still excellent for competitive play. Ultra settings average 87 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold and provides a smooth experience even in Control's most intense scenes, such as the Astral Plane sequences with heavy particle effects.

At 2560x1440, the performance remains strong but shows the expected decline. Low settings average 120 FPS, providing a high-refresh experience. Medium settings average 85 FPS, with a minimum of 72 and maximum of 98, showing good consistency. High settings average 76 FPS, which is comfortable for most players. Ultra settings average 66 FPS, staying above the 60 FPS playable mark but with less headroom. The minimum frame rates at this resolution are not listed for most presets, but the Medium preset's minimum of 72 suggests the system maintains decent frame pacing even when the GPU is taxed.

At 3840x2160, the picture changes significantly. Low settings average 81 FPS, which is playable and smooth. Medium settings average 57 FPS, with a minimum of 49 and maximum of 66. This is borderline, dipping below the 60 FPS threshold on average and dropping to 49 FPS at worst, which could cause perceptible stutter in fast-paced combat. High settings average 51 FPS, and Ultra settings average 44 FPS. Neither of these presets meets the playable threshold. The data clearly indicates that 4K is only viable at Low settings for this combo, unless a player is willing to tolerate frame rates below 60 FPS.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F is the closest match, with an average benchmark score of 24964 versus the 8400F's 25005, a delta of only 0.2%. In gaming workloads, this difference is negligible, so a system with the 7500F would behave nearly identically in Control. The Intel Core i7-11850H and i7-13620H are also within 0.4% of the 8400F's score, meaning laptops or desktops with those processors would show similar CPU-limited performance. The AMD EPYC 9474F is slightly faster at 25103, a 0.4% advantage, but it is a server chip and unlikely to appear in a gaming build.

On the GPU side, the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is the nearest rival, scoring 17083 versus the RTX 3070's 17208, a 0.7% difference. This means a system with the RX 7600 XT would produce nearly identical frame rates in Control, likely within 1-2 FPS at each preset and resolution. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 and AMD Radeon HD 7970M are older products with scores within 1.1% of the RTX 3070, but these are legacy parts that would not be recommended for new builds. The NVIDIA Tesla K40c is slightly faster at 17468, but it is a compute-oriented card without gaming drivers. For practical purposes, swapping the RTX 3070 for an RX 7600 XT would yield a system with very similar Control performance.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset is the best choice, delivering an average of 87 FPS. This is well above the 60 FPS threshold and provides the highest visual quality. The system has enough headroom that even the most demanding settings in Control, including ray tracing effects and high-resolution textures, remain playable. Players with 144Hz monitors will find this preset suitable, though they could drop to High settings at 100 FPS for a smoother experience if they prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity.

At 2560x1440, Ultra settings also work, averaging 66 FPS. This clears the 60 FPS threshold with a small margin, so players should expect occasional dips below 60 in heavy scenes, though the average remains playable. High settings at 76 FPS offer a safer margin and are recommended for those who want consistent performance. Medium settings at 85 FPS provide even more headroom, making this the best option for competitive or fast-paced play where frame consistency matters more than visual details.

At 3840x2160, only Low settings are viable, averaging 81 FPS. This preset avoids the frame drops seen at Medium (minimum of 49 FPS) and provides a smooth experience. High and Ultra settings average 51 and 44 FPS respectively, which are below the 60 FPS threshold and would result in a suboptimal experience. For 4K gaming, players should use Low settings and accept reduced visual quality, or consider lowering the resolution to 1440p to unlock higher presets.

The Verdict

This system can run Control, but the experience varies significantly by resolution. At 1920x1080, all presets are playable, with Ultra averaging 87 FPS. The verdict for this resolution is a clear yes, with room to spare for high-refresh-rate displays. At 2560x1440, all presets also clear the 60 FPS threshold, with Ultra at 66 FPS and High at 76 FPS. This is the sweet spot for this combo, offering a good balance of visual quality and performance. At 3840x2160, only Low settings are playable, averaging 81 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall below 60 FPS, so 4K gaming requires significant graphical compromises.

The data shows this is a capable 1080p and 1440p machine for Control, with 4K being a stretch. The Ryzen 5 8400F provides sufficient CPU performance to avoid bottlenecks, while the RTX 3070 handles the graphical load up to 1440p Ultra. For players with 4K displays, the recommendation is to use Low settings or consider a more powerful GPU. For everyone else, this combo delivers a smooth, high-quality Control experience without needing to tweak settings aggressively.