Control

The Intel Core i5-12400 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT delivers a consistently smooth experience in Control, with average frame rates that clear the 60 FPS threshold at every tested resolution and preset. The data shows a system that is heavily GPU-bound at higher resolutions, while the CPU keeps pace effortlessly at 1080p, resulting in a versatile configuration for this title.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that maintains an average of at least 60 FPS is High, producing an average of 66.5 FPS. While Ultra dips to 59.4 FPS, just under the playable threshold, High provides a comfortable margin while still delivering substantial visual quality over Medium and Low.

For 2560x1440, the data indicates that the Ultra preset is fully playable, achieving an average of 83.4 FPS. This is the optimal choice for this resolution, as it maxes out visual fidelity without sacrificing smoothness. Lower presets like High, Medium, and Low also clear 60 FPS, but they leave performance headroom on the table.

At 1920x1080, the system is capable of running the game at its maximum Ultra preset with an average of 113.7 FPS. This leaves significant headroom above the 60 FPS threshold, allowing for a very fluid experience even in demanding scenes. Lower settings push frame rates even higher, with Low reaching 211 FPS, but Ultra is the recommended setting for the best balance.

FAQ

*Q: Can this PC run Control at 4K resolution?*

A: Yes, the data shows it can run at 3840x2160 with the High preset averaging 66.5 FPS. The Ultra preset falls slightly short at 59.4 FPS, but High and Medium both remain above the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: What is the highest preset that stays above 60 FPS at 1440p?

A: The Ultra preset at 2560x1440 averages 83.4 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS playable threshold. All four tested presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) are playable at this resolution.

Q: How much performance is gained by lowering settings from Ultra to Low at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the average frame rate jumps from 113.7 FPS on Ultra to 211 FPS on Low. This represents a substantial increase, though Ultra already provides a highly smooth experience.

Q: Is the performance at 4K Ultra close to being playable?

A: The 3840x2160 Ultra preset averages 59.4 FPS, which is just 0.6 FPS below the 60 FPS playable threshold. It is very close, but technically it does not meet the playable standard.

Q: Does the system perform better at 1440p Ultra than at 4K High?

A: Yes. The 2560x1440 Ultra preset averages 83.4 FPS, which is significantly higher than the 66.5 FPS average at 3840x2160 High. The lower resolution allows for a higher preset and better overall smoothness.

Q: What is the single highest average frame rate recorded for this combination?

A: The highest average frame rate in the measured data is 211 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with the Low preset.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of scaling across resolutions and presets. At 1920x1080, the average frame rates are as follows: Low at 211 FPS, Medium at 148.2 FPS, High at 129.7 FPS, and Ultra at 113.7 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra shows a predictable decline, with the gap between Low and Medium being the largest at 62.8 FPS.

Moving to 2560x1440, the averages are Low at 157.2 FPS, Medium at 114 FPS, High at 97.7 FPS, and Ultra at 83.4 FPS. The relative performance drop from 1080p to 1440p is consistent across presets, with Ultra seeing a 30.3 FPS reduction. This indicates a strong GPU dependency.

At 3840x2160, the averages are Low at 103.8 FPS, Medium at 75.2 FPS, High at 66.5 FPS, and Ultra at 59.4 FPS. The jump from 1440p to 4K is more punishing, particularly on the High and Ultra presets, which see reductions of 31.2 FPS and 24.0 FPS, respectively. The data shows that 4K Ultra is the only configuration that fails to meet the 60 FPS threshold.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the Intel Core i5-12400, based on average benchmark scores, include the AMD EPYC 7643 with an average score of 18697 (a -0.1% delta), the Intel Core i7-1355U at 18730 (-0.3% delta), the AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 at 18811 (-0.7% delta), and the Intel Core i3-14100F at 18519 (0.9% delta). These CPUs exhibit nearly identical overall computational performance, so a system with any of these would likely produce very similar frame rates in Control, especially at higher resolutions where the GPU is the limiting factor.

For the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT, the closest performance matches are the AMD Radeon 660M with an average score of 13812 (-0.5% delta), the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile at 13821 (-0.5% delta), the AMD Radeon RX 570X at 13871 (-0.9% delta), and the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT at 13543 (1.5% delta). Despite the RX 7900 XT having a much higher raw specification sheet, its average benchmark score places it near these other GPUs. Consequently, a system using any of these alternatives would be expected to deliver broadly comparable frame rates in Control, though architectural differences could cause slight variations in specific scenes.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark results reveal a clear division of labor between the CPU and GPU in Control. At 1920x1080, the system achieves very high frame rates, with the Low preset hitting 211 FPS. This suggests the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU adequately, and the performance ceiling is primarily dictated by the GPU's rendering speed. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 1080p shows a 97.3 FPS range, which is substantial and points to the GPU being the primary bottleneck as settings increase.

At 2560x1440, the average frame rates for all presets remain high, but the GPU's workload increases. The Ultra preset drops to 83.4 FPS, indicating that the GPU is now under more stress. The CPU still appears to be sufficient, as the frame rate scaling between presets (157.2 FPS on Low to 83.4 FPS on Ultra) closely mirrors the pattern seen at 1080p, just at lower absolute values.

The GPU's dominance becomes most apparent at 3840x2160. Here, the average frame rates for High and Ultra drop to 66.5 FPS and 59.4 FPS, respectively, while Low remains at 103.8 FPS. The significant performance penalty at higher settings and resolution indicates that the Radeon RX 7900 XT is the decisive component. The Intel Core i5-12400, with its strong single-thread and multi-thread scores, is not the limiting factor in this title; the data shows that resolution and preset scaling are almost entirely attributable to the GPU's rendering load.

The Verdict

This configuration can run Control effectively across all tested resolutions, with the data confirming playability at the 60 FPS threshold for the vast majority of settings. At 1920x1080, all four presets—Low, Medium, High, and Ultra—are playable, with Ultra averaging 113.7 FPS. The system is more than capable of delivering a smooth experience at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the verdict is similarly positive. The Ultra preset averages 83.4 FPS, and every other preset also clears 60 FPS. This makes 1440p the sweet spot for this hardware, allowing for maximum visual settings without any performance concerns.

At 3840x2160, the system is playable on the Low, Medium, and High presets, with High averaging 66.5 FPS. The Ultra preset, at 59.4 FPS, is the only configuration that falls short of the 60 FPS playable threshold. While it is a near miss, the data suggests that High is the best setting for 4K gaming with this combination.

How This Combo Ranks

In the benchmark database, this specific combination of the Intel Core i5-12400 and AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT ranks 765th out of 3720 tested combinations for Control. This places it in the top 21% of all tested systems, indicating a strong performance level. The high ranking is likely attributable to the GPU's capability to handle high resolutions and presets, even though the CPU is a mid-range part. The combination's ability to maintain high frame rates at 1440p and playable frame rates at 4K cements its position as a well-balanced performer for this game.