Control

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for Control with this Intel Core i5-10400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 combination covers three resolutions and four presets, yielding twelve distinct average frame rate readings. All figures are average FPS; the database does not include minimum or maximum frame rates for this game configuration.

At 3840x2160 (4K), the frame rate scales steeply with quality. The Low preset delivers 107.8 FPS on average, which is a strong starting point. Medium drops to 75.7 FPS, a 32.1 FPS reduction from Low. High comes in at 68.3 FPS, while Ultra falls to 59.9 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 47.9 FPS, meaning the highest preset costs roughly 44% of the Low preset's performance. Notably, Ultra is the only 4K preset that dips below the 60 FPS playable threshold.

At 2560x1440 (1440p), all presets clear the 60 FPS mark comfortably. Low averages 151.9 FPS, Medium 109.5 FPS, High 102.1 FPS, and Ultra 84.3 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 67.6 FPS. The difference between Medium and High is relatively modest at just 7.4 FPS, while the jump from High to Ultra costs 17.8 FPS. This suggests diminishing returns between Medium and High, but a more noticeable penalty for enabling Ultra.

At 1920x1080 (1080p), the combination shows its strongest results. Low reaches 170.2 FPS, Medium 148.4 FPS, High 133.3 FPS, and Ultra 114.3 FPS. Even the most demanding preset at this resolution remains far above the playable threshold. The total range from Low to Ultra is 55.9 FPS. Interestingly, the gap between Low and Medium at 1080p is only 21.8 FPS, whereas at 4K the same preset jump costs 32.1 FPS, indicating that resolution amplifies the cost of quality improvements.

Looking at resolution scaling across presets, the data reveals consistent patterns. For High settings, moving from 1080p to 1440p reduces average FPS from 133.3 to 102.1, a 31.2 FPS drop, and then to 68.3 at 4K, another 33.8 FPS drop. For Ultra, the progression goes from 114.3 at 1080p to 84.3 at 1440p to 59.9 at 4K, with each step costing roughly 30 FPS. Low settings show a similar trend: 170.2 at 1080p, 151.9 at 1440p, and 107.8 at 4K. The 1440p to 4K transition is consistently the more expensive step, particularly at Low where the drop is 44.1 FPS.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Control at 4K with the High preset?

A: Yes. The measured average FPS at 3840x2160 with High settings is 68.3, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold. The database lists High, Low, and Medium as playable settings at 4K.

Q: What is the highest quality preset that maintains 60 FPS at 1440p?

A: Ultra is playable at 2560x1440, with an average FPS of 84.3. All four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) are listed as playable at this resolution.

Q: Does the Ultra preset ever fail to hit 60 FPS?

A: Yes, but only at 3840x2160. The Ultra preset at 4K averages 59.9 FPS, just below the 60 FPS threshold. At both 1440p and 1080p, Ultra stays above 60 FPS with averages of 84.3 and 114.3 respectively.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 4K at the same settings?

A: The loss varies by preset. At Low, the drop is from 170.2 to 107.8 FPS, a 62.4 FPS reduction. At Medium, it goes from 148.4 to 75.7, a 72.7 FPS reduction. At High, the drop is from 133.3 to 68.3, a 65.0 FPS reduction. At Ultra, it falls from 114.3 to 59.9, a 54.4 FPS reduction.

Q: Which preset shows the smallest performance gap between Medium and High?

A: At 1440p, the difference between Medium (109.5 FPS) and High (102.1 FPS) is only 7.4 FPS. This is the smallest gap among all resolutions for that preset pair. At 1080p the gap is 15.1 FPS, and at 4K it is 7.4 FPS as well, though the 4K values are lower in absolute terms.

Q: Is the 60 FPS threshold met at every resolution and preset combination?

A: No. The only combination that falls short is 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, which averages 59.9 FPS. Every other combination across all three resolutions and all four presets exceeds 60 FPS.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data indicates that the GPU is the dominant performance determinant for Control, with the CPU playing a secondary but not negligible role. Evidence for this comes from how frame rates scale with resolution changes. When moving from 1080p to 1440p to 4K, the frame rate drops substantially at every preset. At High settings, the average FPS falls from 133.3 to 102.1 to 68.3. This pattern is typical of GPU-bound workloads, where increased pixel count directly taxes the graphics processor. If the CPU were the limiting factor, resolution changes would produce smaller frame rate differences because the CPU workload per frame remains largely unchanged.

The preset scaling within a single resolution further supports GPU dominance. At 1080p, Ultra averages 114.3 FPS while Low averages 170.2 FPS, a difference of 55.9 FPS. This quality-dependent variance is characteristic of GPU-limited scenarios, since higher presets increase shading, texture, and lighting workloads that primarily load the GPU. The Intel Core i5-10400F, with its six cores and twelve threads, appears sufficient to feed the RTX 5070 across these settings. The CPU's 3dmark single-thread score of 688 and cinebench R23 single-core score of 1451 suggest it can handle the game's per-frame logic without becoming a bottleneck at the tested resolutions.

However, the CPU still matters at lower resolutions. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 170.2 FPS, which is a high frame rate that requires the CPU to issue draw calls and update game state quickly. The fact that the frame rate still scales upward from 1440p to 1080p at Low settings (151.9 to 170.2) indicates the CPU is keeping pace even as the GPU workload shrinks. The CPU's passmark single-thread score of 2541 and passmark multithread score of 12115 place it in a position where it can sustain these frame rates without capping performance.

At 4K, the CPU's role diminishes further. The average FPS at Ultra is 59.9, which is close to the 60 FPS threshold. This near-boundary result is more likely tied to GPU throughput than CPU processing, as the RTX 5070's 30.87 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 672.0 GB/s memory bandwidth are being stressed by 4K Ultra workloads. The GPU's 82nd percentile ranking among all GPUs, compared to the CPU's 68th percentile among all CPUs, suggests the graphics card is the stronger component in this pairing.

The scaling between resolutions and presets also reveals that the GPU is the primary constraint at 4K. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is 47.9 FPS, while at 1080p it is 55.9 FPS. The smaller absolute gap at 4K indicates the GPU is approaching its ceiling, compressing the performance range across presets. In contrast, the larger gap at 1080p suggests the GPU has more headroom there, and the CPU is able to support the higher frame rates without becoming the limiting factor.

The Verdict

This PC can run Control, and in most configurations it runs it with significant headroom above the 60 FPS playable threshold. The verdict from the database is clear: at 1920x1080, all four presets are playable, with the best settings being Ultra at an average of 114.3 FPS. At 2560x1440, all four presets are also playable, with Ultra again being the best choice at 84.3 FPS average.

At 3840x2160, the situation is slightly more nuanced. The playable settings are High, Low, and Medium, with High being the best playable option at 68.3 FPS average. Ultra at 4K falls just short of the threshold at 59.9 FPS. This means the system can run Control at 4K, but users must accept High settings rather than Ultra to stay above 60 FPS. The margin at 4K High is 8.3 FPS, which is comfortable but not massive.

For users prioritizing frame rate over visual fidelity, the system offers substantial flexibility. At 1080p, even Ultra runs at 114.3 FPS, which is nearly double the playable threshold. At 1440p, Ultra at 84.3 FPS leaves 24.3 FPS of headroom. The only configuration that fails the 60 FPS test is 4K Ultra, and even that misses by only 0.1 FPS. In practical terms, the system is fully capable of running Control with high visual quality at any resolution, with the single caveat that 4K users should select High instead of Ultra.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the Intel Core i5-10400F, based on average benchmark scores, include the Intel Xeon 6756E, which scores 14163 with a delta of 0.2% from the CPU's avgBenchmarkScore of 14185. The AMD EPYC 7552 scores 14115, a 0.5% difference. On the other side, the Intel Core 7 160UL scores 14232, which is 0.3% higher, and the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C scores 14277, 0.6% higher. These CPUs would behave nearly identically to the i5-10400F in Control, with performance differences well under 1%. Users with any of these processors paired with an RTX 5070 would expect very similar FPS results to those recorded here.

For the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070, the nearest rivals by average benchmark score are the AMD Radeon Pro 580 at 40318 (0.1% lower than the GPU's 40377 avgBenchmarkScore), the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 at 40063 (0.8% lower), the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 at 40870 (1.2% higher), and the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile at 39568 (2.0% lower). These GPUs are all within a 2% performance band of the RTX 5070, so a system with any of these cards and the i5-10400F would produce frame rates very close to the measured values in this database. The tight clustering of these scores, with deltas ranging from -2.0% to +1.2%, suggests that game performance differences would be minor, likely a few FPS at most in the tested presets.

The combination of a near-identical CPU and near-identical GPU would replicate the overall system behavior. For example, swapping the RTX 5070 for an AMD Radeon Pro 5300 would likely yield average FPS within a few frames of the recorded numbers, given the 1.2% score difference. Similarly, using an Intel Core 7 160UL instead of the i5-10400F would produce nearly indistinguishable results, as the 0.3% CPU score delta is negligible.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-10400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 ranks 823rd out of 3720 tested combos in Control, placing it in the top 22% of all recorded systems. This rank reflects the overall capability of the pairing across the game's settings and resolutions. Given that the GPU ranks in the 82nd percentile among all GPUs and the CPU ranks in the 68th percentile among all CPUs, the combo's strong position is driven primarily by the graphics card.

The rank of 823 out of 3720 means there are 822 combinations that perform better in Control, but also 2897 combinations that perform worse. This places the system above the median by a wide margin. The high percentile of the GPU suggests that much of the competitive positioning comes from the RTX 5070's raw rendering power, while the CPU's moderate percentile means it is not raising the combo as much as the GPU does. Still, the combined result is a system that comfortably handles Control at high settings across all resolutions, with the sole exception of 4K Ultra.

The rank also implies that this combo outperforms a majority of tested systems, including many with newer or higher-tier CPUs paired with weaker GPUs. Control's apparent GPU-bound nature, as indicated by the resolution scaling data, means that the RTX 5070's strong benchmark scores (e.g., passmark_g3d of 29137, geekbench_vulkan of 178923) are the primary drivers of the combo's 823rd position. The CPU's contribution is sufficient to avoid dragging the rank down, but it is not the limiting factor in this pairing.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is High, with an average of 68.3 FPS. Low (107.8 FPS) and Medium (75.7 FPS) are also playable, but High offers the best visual quality among playable options. Ultra is not playable at 4K, as it averages 59.9 FPS.

At 2560x1440, Ultra is the best playable setting, averaging 84.3 FPS. This is the highest quality preset available, and it maintains a comfortable 24.3 FPS margin above the 60 FPS threshold. Lower presets are also playable, with Medium at 109.5 FPS, High at 102.1 FPS, and Low at 151.9 FPS, but Ultra provides the maximum fidelity without sacrificing playability.

At 1920x1080, Ultra is again the best playable setting, with an average of 114.3 FPS. This leaves 54.3 FPS of headroom, making it a safe choice for users who want maximum quality. The other presets, Medium at 148.4 FPS, High at 133.3 FPS, and Low at 170.2 FPS, are all playable, but Ultra is the clear recommendation for visual quality at this resolution. The database's verdict lists Ultra as the best setting for both 1440p and 1080p, with High as the best for 4K.