Control

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700X paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 delivers a definitive verdict for Control: this combination is overwhelmingly overpowered, clearing the 60 FPS threshold at every preset and every resolution tested. At 4K, the combo still manages to push Ultra settings to an average of 70 FPS, while at 1080p it exceeds 200 FPS on Low, making this a system that prioritizes maximum visual fidelity over raw frame rate headroom. The data indicates the primary bottleneck is not the hardware, but the game's own engine limits at lower resolutions, where the CPU and GPU are effectively coasting.

Best Settings per Resolution

The benchmark data shows that this hardware combination never once dips below the 60 FPS playable threshold, meaning the "best settings" are always the highest available preset: Ultra.

• 3840x2160 (4K): The most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, with an average of 70 FPS. This is the ceiling for visual quality, and it still maintains a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS target. The step down to High yields 73 FPS, showing that the Ultra preset costs only 3 FPS on average compared to High, making it the clear choice for 4K.
• 2560x1440 (1440p): The best settings are Ultra, with an average of 95 FPS. The jump from High (99 FPS) to Ultra (95 FPS) is negligible, and the system has ample headroom to run the game at maximum detail without approaching any performance concerns.
• 1920x1080 (1080p): The best settings are Ultra, with an average of 117 FPS. While lower presets yield significantly higher frame rates (Low reaches 211 FPS), the Ultra preset's 117 FPS average is already well above the 60 FPS threshold and provides a high-refresh-rate experience. There is no reason to lower settings for performance at this resolution.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The benchmark database places the CPU and GPU in specific performance tiers, and the nearest rivals indicate which other hardware would deliver a nearly identical experience in Control.

For the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X, the nearest rivals are extremely close, with performance deltas under 1%. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 is the closest match, with an average score of 35,802 versus the 7700X's 35,909, a delta of just 0.3%. Following closely are the Intel Core 7 250H (35,728, +0.5% delta) and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 (35,719, +0.5% delta). Finally, the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H (35,670, +0.7% delta) rounds out this group. In practical terms, a system built with any of these processors would produce frame rates within a rounding error of the 7700X in Control, assuming the GPU remains constant. The 7700X's 85th percentile ranking among all CPUs further confirms this is a high-tier part, but the rivals show that the top-end is crowded.

For the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080, the closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER, which has an average score of 54,209, a delta of just 0.1% from the RTX 4080's 54,247. This indicates that the SUPER variant is essentially a factory-overclocked version, delivering statistically identical performance. The other rivals are slightly faster in raw compute, including the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X (54,828, -1.1% delta), the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB (55,698, -2.6% delta), and the AMD Radeon 8060S (55,757, -2.7% delta). While these AMD cards score higher on average benchmarks, the deltas are small; in a real-world game like Control, the resultant FPS difference would be minimal, likely just a few frames. The RTX 4080's 86th percentile ranking among all GPUs places it in the same performance conversation as these alternatives, meaning users upgrading from one to another should not expect a transformative change in Control.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a full picture of scaling across resolutions and settings. The dataset includes average, minimum, and maximum FPS for Medium presets, but only averages for Low, High, and Ultra.

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: Average 125 FPS.
• Medium: Average 97 FPS, with a minimum of 83 FPS and a maximum of 112 FPS.
• High: Average 73 FPS.
• Ultra: Average 70 FPS.

The scaling from Low to Ultra at 4K shows a 55 FPS drop (from 125 to 70 FPS), indicating a moderate performance cost for the highest settings. The Medium preset's min FPS of 83 is notably higher than the High preset's average of 73, showing that the step from Medium to High is the most punishing.

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: Average 170 FPS.
• Medium: Average 132 FPS, with a minimum of 112 FPS and a maximum of 152 FPS.
• High: Average 99 FPS.
• Ultra: Average 95 FPS.

At 1440p, the frame rates are exceptionally high. The delta between Low and Ultra is 75 FPS (170 to 95 FPS), showing a wider spread than at 4K. The High and Ultra presets are nearly identical, with only a 4 FPS difference, suggesting the Ultra preset's additional effects are not particularly taxing on this hardware.

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: Average 211 FPS.
• Medium: Average 164 FPS, with a minimum of 139 FPS and a maximum of 188 FPS.
• High: Average 123 FPS.
• Ultra: Average 117 FPS.

The 1080p results show the system is heavily GPU-limited at lower settings, with Low hitting 211 FPS. The scaling from Medium to High is a 41 FPS drop, while the step from High to Ultra is only 6 FPS. The minimum FPS on Medium (139 FPS) is still higher than the average FPS on Ultra (117 FPS), reinforcing that this combo has enormous headroom at 1080p.

The Verdict

Can this PC run Control? The data answers with a resounding yes. The verdict by resolution is clear: this combination is not just playable at all tested settings, it is overkill.

• 3840x2160: The Ultra preset is fully playable with an average of 70 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS threshold. All four settings (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) are marked as playable. The minimum FPS recorded for the Medium preset (83 FPS) suggests that even in demanding scenes, the system is unlikely to drop below 60 FPS on any preset.
• 2560x1440: The Ultra preset is the best choice, with an average of 95 FPS. Every setting from Low to Ultra is playable, and the system has enough headroom to maintain high refresh rates on a 144Hz monitor.
• 1920x1080: The Ultra preset achieves an average of 117 FPS, making it the recommended setting. While Low settings can hit 211 FPS, the Ultra preset's performance is more than sufficient for a smooth, high-fidelity experience.

The only potential caveat is the lack of min/max data for the Ultra preset, so the lowest frame rate experienced at that setting is unknown. However, given the substantial margin between the average FPS and the playable threshold, and the min FPS data from the Medium preset, it is reasonable to conclude the system holds 60 FPS comfortably across all scenarios.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Control at 4K with the highest settings?

A: Yes. The data shows the Ultra preset at 3840x2160 achieves an average of 70 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: What is the best preset for a 144Hz monitor at 1440p?

A: The Ultra preset at 2560x1440 is recommended, as it delivers an average of 95 FPS, which is well-suited for a 144Hz display, though it will not fully saturate the refresh rate.

Q: How much faster is the Low preset compared to Ultra at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset averages 211 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 117 FPS. This represents a 94 FPS difference, or roughly 80% higher frame rate on Low.

Q: Is there a significant difference between the High and Ultra presets at 4K?

A: No. At 3840x2160, the High preset averages 73 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 70 FPS. The performance cost of Ultra over High is only 3 FPS.

Q: What is the lowest recorded frame rate for this combo?

A: The lowest min FPS recorded in the data is 83 FPS, which occurs at the Medium preset at 3840x2160. This is still well above the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Does the system ever drop below 60 FPS in the tested configurations?

A: No. All recorded average and minimum FPS values across all resolutions and settings are above the 60 FPS playable threshold.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific CPU and GPU combination ranks 530th out of 3,720 tested combinations in the database for Control. This places it in the top 14.2% of all tested systems, which is a strong showing, but it is not at the absolute top. Given that the average FPS at 4K Ultra is 70 FPS, the ranking suggests that a significant number of more powerful combinations (likely featuring higher-tier GPUs) achieve even higher frame rates. The ranking reflects the fact that while this combo is excellent for 1440p and 1080p gaming, and capable at 4K, it is not the ultimate 4K powerhouse. The 86th percentile GPU ranking and 85th percentile CPU ranking support this position: both components are well above average, but they are not the absolute fastest parts available. For the vast majority of users, this rank indicates a top-tier experience, but for those chasing maximum 4K frame rates, there is headroom for improvement.