Control

The Intel Core i3-12100F and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT combination delivers a broad range of performance in Control, but the playable envelope depends heavily on resolution. The data shows a clear pattern: 1080p and 1440p are solidly within reach, while 4K requires dropping to the Low preset to maintain a consistent 60 FPS. This analysis walks through the measured FPS data, compares the hardware to its nearest rivals, and provides concrete settings recommendations.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU and GPU in this pairing sit in specific performance tiers, and the benchmark data provides direct comparisons to nearby hardware. For the Intel Core i3-12100F, the nearest rivals by average benchmark score are the Intel Core 3 N355, the Intel Core i5-9500, the Intel Core 5 120UL, and the Intel Core i7-1250U. The i3-12100F has an average benchmark score of 13494, which is essentially identical to the Core 3 N355 (13492, 0% delta). The i5-9500 scores 13452, a 0.3% difference, meaning the i3-12100F is marginally faster. The Core 5 120UL scores 13594, putting it 0.7% ahead of the i3-12100F, while the Core i7-1250U trails by 1.1% with a score of 13351. In practical terms, any of these CPUs would deliver nearly indistinguishable performance in Control, as the differences are well within a single percentage point.

On the GPU side, the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT has an average benchmark score of 27425. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile (27435, 0% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 (27565, -0.5% delta), the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell (27135, 1.1% delta), and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 (27839, -1.5% delta). The RX 6700 XT is essentially tied with the RTX 4070 Mobile, and it sits within 1.5% of the other listed cards. This means that swapping the RX 6700 XT for any of these alternatives would yield very similar frame rates in Control, with the RTX 3090 being slightly faster (0.5%) and the Radeon Pro Vega 20 being 1.5% faster. The RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell is the only one of the group that is slower, by 1.1%.

CPU and GPU Roles

The measured FPS data across resolutions and presets reveals how the CPU and GPU split their workload in Control. At 1920x1080, the GPU is clearly the dominant factor, but the CPU still has headroom. The jump from Low (144.1 FPS) to Medium (99.2 FPS) is a 44.9 FPS drop, and from Medium to High (88 FPS) another 11.2 FPS drop. The Ultra preset (79.1 FPS) is only 8.9 FPS below High. This scaling indicates that as settings increase, the GPU becomes the bottleneck, but the i3-12100F is sufficient to push well beyond 60 FPS even at Ultra.

At 2560x1440, the GPU load increases substantially. Low settings yield 109.5 FPS, but Medium drops to 77.9 FPS, a 31.6 FPS reduction. High comes in at 68.3 FPS, and Ultra falls to 58.6 FPS, just below the 60 FPS threshold. The pattern shows that the GPU is now the limiting factor at higher presets, as the CPU is no longer able to compensate for the added pixel count.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is overwhelmingly the constraint. Low settings produce 69.4 FPS, but Medium drops to 49.1 FPS, High to 46.7 FPS, and Ultra to 39.8 FPS. The difference between Low and Medium is 20.3 FPS, while the gap between Medium and High is only 2.4 FPS. This suggests that the GPU's memory bandwidth and compute resources are saturated, and the CPU has little influence on the outcome at this resolution. The data indicates that the RX 6700 XT is the primary driver of performance across all resolutions, with the i3-12100F providing adequate support at 1080p and 1440p, but the GPU's limits are reached at 4K.

FAQ

*Q: Can this PC run Control at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings?*

A: Yes. The measured average FPS at 1080p Ultra is 79.1 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS playable threshold. This is the most demanding preset tested at this resolution, and it clears the threshold comfortably.

Q: What is the best playable preset at 2560x1440?

A: High is the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS at 1440p, with an average of 68.3 FPS. Ultra falls to 58.6 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Is 3840x2160 playable with this hardware?

A: Yes, but only on the Low preset. The measured average FPS at 4K Low is 69.4 FPS. Medium (49.1 FPS), High (46.7 FPS), and Ultra (39.8 FPS) all fall below the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: How does the RX 6700 XT compare to the RTX 3090 in this game?

A: The RX 6700 XT has an average benchmark score of 27425, while the RTX 3090 scores 27565. The RTX 3090 is 0.5% faster, which is a negligible difference in real-world gameplay.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 1440p at High settings?

A: At 1080p High, the average FPS is 88. At 1440p High, the average FPS is 68.3. This represents a 19.7 FPS drop, or roughly 22.4% lower performance.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1920x1080?

A: At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 144.1. At 1080p Ultra, the average FPS is 79.1. The difference is 65 FPS, meaning Ultra delivers 45.1% of the Low preset's frame rate.

The Verdict

This PC can run Control, and the playable resolutions and presets are clearly defined by the data. At 1920x1080, all four tested presets — Low, Medium, High, and Ultra — clear the 60 FPS threshold. The highest playable setting is Ultra, with an average of 79.1 FPS. At 2560x1440, three presets are playable: Low (109.5 FPS), Medium (77.9 FPS), and High (68.3 FPS). Ultra falls short at 58.6 FPS. At 3840x2160, only Low is playable, with an average of 69.4 FPS. The verdict is straightforward: this combination is fully capable of running Control at 1080p and 1440p with high visual quality, while 4K requires significant settings compromises to maintain 60 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i3-12100F and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT combination ranks 1953 out of 3720 tested combos for Control. This places it in the lower-middle portion of the database. The rank reflects the CPU's modest multi-threaded performance and the GPU's mid-range positioning. The i3-12100F has a percentile rank of 68 among all CPUs, while the RX 6700 XT has a percentile rank of 72 among all GPUs. The combination's overall rank of 1953 suggests that while it is not a top-tier setup, it is far from the bottom, and the measured FPS data confirms that it delivers playable performance at common resolutions.

Best Settings per Resolution

For each resolution, the most demanding preset that maintains an average of at least 60 FPS is as follows:

• 3840x2160: Low is the only playable preset, with an average of 69.4 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall below 60 FPS.
• 2560x1440: High is the best playable preset, with an average of 68.3 FPS. Low (109.5 FPS) and Medium (77.9 FPS) are also playable, but High offers the highest visual quality while staying above the threshold.
• 1920x1080: Ultra is the best playable preset, with an average of 79.1 FPS. All other presets (Low, Medium, High) also exceed 60 FPS, but Ultra provides the maximum visual fidelity.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions and four settings presets, with average FPS values reported for each combination. Minimum and maximum FPS values are not available in the dataset.

3840x2160:

• Low: 69.4 FPS average
• Medium: 49.1 FPS average
• High: 46.7 FPS average
• Ultra: 39.8 FPS average

2560x1440:

• Low: 109.5 FPS average
• Medium: 77.9 FPS average
• High: 68.3 FPS average
• Ultra: 58.6 FPS average

1920x1080:

• Low: 144.1 FPS average
• Medium: 99.2 FPS average
• High: 88.0 FPS average
• Ultra: 79.1 FPS average

The data shows a consistent scaling pattern: each step up in settings reduces FPS, and each step up in resolution reduces FPS further. The largest single drop occurs between 1080p Low (144.1 FPS) and 1440p Low (109.5 FPS), a 34.6 FPS decrease. The smallest drop is between 4K Medium (49.1 FPS) and 4K High (46.7 FPS), a 2.4 FPS difference. This indicates that the GPU is heavily saturated at 4K, and settings changes have diminishing returns. At 1080p, the GPU has more headroom, and settings changes have a more pronounced effect on frame rate.