Control

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for Control on this hardware combination shows a clear performance hierarchy across resolutions and presets, with average frame rates declining as resolution increases and as graphical settings move from Low to Ultra.

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS spans from 122.1 on Low settings down to 65 on Ultra. The Medium preset delivers 84.8 average FPS, while High sits at 77.3. The gap between Low and Ultra is substantial: Ultra runs at roughly 53% of the Low preset's frame rate, which indicates the game's rendering load scales heavily with settings at this resolution. All four presets remain comfortably above the 60 FPS playability threshold, with Ultra being the only one where the margin is relatively thin at 5 FPS above the line.

Moving to 2560x1440, the averages drop across the board. Low settings produce 87.3 FPS, Medium yields 65.8, High falls to 57.3, and Ultra bottoms out at 48.1. The transition from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 costs roughly 28% of the frame rate at Low settings (from 122.1 to 87.3), a similar proportional drop is visible at Medium (from 84.8 to 65.8, about 22% lower). At High, the loss is more pronounced: 77.3 down to 57.3, a 26% reduction, while Ultra declines from 65 to 48.1, a 26% drop. Only Low and Medium clear the 60 FPS threshold at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the picture becomes much more constrained. Low settings average 59.5 FPS, which is just below the 60 FPS line. Medium falls to 42.8, High to 38.1, and Ultra to 33.5. The scaling from 2560x1440 to 3840x2160 is steep: Low loses 32% of its frame rate (87.3 to 59.5), Medium loses 35% (65.8 to 42.8), High loses 33% (57.3 to 38.1), and Ultra loses 30% (48.1 to 33.5). None of the presets at 4K reach the playable threshold, and even the lowest settings fall short by a small margin.

The database does not include minimum or maximum frame rate values for any resolution or preset, so the analysis relies solely on average FPS. That said, the averages themselves reveal a consistent pattern: the gap between Medium and High is smaller than the gap between Low and Medium at every resolution. For example, at 1920x1080 the difference between Low and Medium is 37.3 FPS, while between Medium and High it is only 7.5 FPS. This suggests diminishing returns from Medium upward, at least in terms of average frame rate.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark results indicate that the GPU is the dominant constraint for this game at all tested resolutions, but the CPU's influence becomes more visible at lower resolutions and lower presets. Control is an action adventure title with demanding visual effects, and the data shows that frame rates scale almost entirely with the graphics preset and resolution, which are GPU-bound variables.

At 1920x1080 Low, the average FPS of 122.1 suggests the CPU is still able to feed the GPU enough frames to reach a high rate, but the fact that increasing the preset to Ultra drops the average to 65 implies the graphics pipeline becomes the limiting factor as shading, textures, and effects load increase. The i5-11400F has 6 cores and 12 threads with a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, and its benchmark scores (for example, Cinebench R23 multicore at 14340 and single-core at 2024) place it in the 71st percentile among all CPUs in the database. This level of CPU performance is sufficient to keep the GPU busy at 1080p, but the measured FPS differences between presets are larger than what a purely CPU-bound scenario would produce.

At 2560x1440, the average FPS at Low is 87.3, which is still high enough that the CPU likely remains relevant, but the drop to 48.1 at Ultra points to the GPU struggling with the increased pixel count and settings. The RX 7600 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth, and its PassMark G3D score of 16634 places it in the 57th percentile among all GPUs. The combination of a mid-range CPU and a mid-range GPU means that neither component is severely mismatched, but the GPU's memory bandwidth and pixel rate (169.9 GPixel/s) become limiting factors as resolution climbs.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly the bottleneck. Even at Low settings, the average FPS is only 59.5, which is below the 60 FPS threshold. The CPU cannot compensate for the GPU's inability to render 4K at playable rates, and the frame rate differences between presets (59.5 Low, 42.8 Medium, 38.1 High, 33.5 Ultra) are entirely consistent with GPU-bound scaling. The CPU's role at 4K is reduced to feeding the GPU, and the data shows that the GPU runs out of headroom long before the CPU does.

The scaling between resolutions provides further evidence. From 1920x1080 to 2560x1440, the average FPS at Low drops by 34.8, and from 2560x1440 to 3840x2160 it drops by another 27.8. These reductions are larger than what would be expected if the CPU were the primary constraint, because the CPU's workload does not change as dramatically with resolution. The GPU, on the other hand, must process four times as many pixels at 4K compared to 1080p, and the measured numbers reflect that burden.

Best Settings per Resolution

For each resolution, the database records the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS average. At 1920x1080, all four presets qualify, and the best settings are Ultra, which delivers an average of 65 FPS. This is the highest quality preset available in the test, and it clears the playability threshold with a 5 FPS margin.

At 2560x1440, only Low and Medium presets remain at or above 60 FPS. The best settings are Medium, with an average of 65.8 FPS. High falls to 57.3, and Ultra drops to 48.1, both below the threshold. Medium provides a 5.8 FPS margin over the 60 FPS line, which is slightly more comfortable than the margin at 1080p Ultra.

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves an average of 60 FPS. Low comes closest at 59.5, but it still misses the threshold by 0.5 FPS. Medium is at 42.8, High at 38.1, and Ultra at 33.5. The database lists no playable settings for 4K, meaning the hardware cannot maintain a playable frame rate at this resolution under any preset.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Control at 1920x1080 with the highest settings?

A: Yes. At 1920x1080 Ultra, the average FPS is 65, which is above the 60 FPS playability threshold. All four presets at this resolution clear 60 FPS, with Low at 122.1, Medium at 84.8, and High at 77.3.

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

A: Medium is the best preset at 2560x1440, with an average FPS of 65.8. Low also qualifies at 87.3, but High (57.3) and Ultra (48.1) both fall below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Does 4K work with this hardware for Control?

A: No. At 3840x2160, even the Low preset averages 59.5 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS playability threshold. Medium averages 42.8, High 38.1, and Ultra 33.5, so no preset reaches the playable line.

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

A: The average FPS drops by roughly 22% to 28% depending on the preset. For example, Low goes from 122.1 to 87.3 (a 28% reduction), Medium from 84.8 to 65.8 (22%), High from 77.3 to 57.3 (26%), and Ultra from 65 to 48.1 (26%).

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more important for this game?

A: The GPU is the dominant factor. The frame rate scales strongly with resolution and preset, which are GPU-bound variables. At 4K, even the lowest preset cannot reach 60 FPS, indicating the GPU is the limiting component. The CPU's benchmark scores (71st percentile) are more than adequate for this game's demands.

Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded for this combination?

A: The highest average FPS is 122.1, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The lowest is 33.5, at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings.

The Verdict

The data shows that this hardware combination can run Control at playable frame rates, but only up to 2560x1440 and only with the right presets. At 1920x1080, every preset from Low to Ultra clears the 60 FPS threshold, with Ultra averaging 65 FPS. At 2560x1440, Low and Medium are playable, with Medium at 65.8 FPS being the highest quality option that still meets the playability line. High and Ultra at 1440p fall short, at 57.3 and 48.1 respectively.

At 3840x2160, the hardware does not meet the 60 FPS requirement under any preset. The closest result is Low at 59.5 FPS, which misses by a narrow margin. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall further behind, with averages of 42.8, 38.1, and 33.5. For 4K gaming with this game, the combination of the i5-11400F and RX 7600 is insufficient, and users would need to lower the resolution or accept frame rates below the playable threshold.

In practical terms, the system is best suited for 1080p gaming with high to ultra settings, or 1440p gaming with medium settings. The 1080p Ultra result of 65 FPS shows that the hardware has enough headroom for a smooth experience at the highest quality, while the 1440p Medium result of 65.8 FPS offers a balanced trade-off between visual fidelity and performance. For players who prioritize frame rate over image quality, 1080p Low at 122.1 FPS provides a very smooth experience, and 1440p Low at 87.3 remains well above the threshold.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-11400F and the AMD Radeon RX 7600 ranks 2542 out of 3720 tested combos in the database for Control. This places it in the lower-middle portion of the ranking, which is consistent with the measured frame rates: the hardware handles 1080p and 1440p well, but struggles at 4K.

The CPU itself ranks in the 71st percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 17177. Its nearest rivals in the database are the AMD EPYC 7H12 (0.3% higher score), the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U (0.6% higher), the Intel Core i5-12450H (0.4% lower), and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G (0.6% lower). These are all close matches, indicating the i5-11400F sits in a crowded performance band where no single rival is decisively faster or slower.

The GPU ranks in the 57th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 15171. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM (0.2% higher score), the AMD Radeon 680M (0.7% higher), the AMD Radeon Pro 560X (0.6% lower), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti (0.7% lower). The RX 7600 is essentially tied with these GPUs in aggregate benchmark performance, though the game-specific results for Control show its capabilities clearly: it can handle 1080p Ultra and 1440p Medium, but not 4K.

The combo rank of 2542 out of 3720 suggests that many other tested combinations outperform this one in Control, likely due to stronger GPUs or more balanced pairings. However, the rank also reflects that a significant portion of tested combos (about 32%) perform worse, so this setup is not at the bottom of the pile. The data indicates that for a mid-range desktop pairing, the i5-11400F and RX 7600 deliver dependable 1080p performance and acceptable 1440p performance in Control, but the 4K results are the clear limiting factor.