Control

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for Control with the Intel Core i5-12400F and AMD Radeon RX 580 spans three resolutions and four quality presets. At 3840x2160, the combo delivers 20 FPS average on High, 32 FPS average on Low, 23 FPS average on Medium with a minimum of 19 FPS and a maximum of 26 FPS, and 18 FPS average on Ultra. These figures place the experience far below the 60 FPS playable threshold, with even the lowest preset struggling to maintain a fluid frame rate at 4K.

Moving to 2560x1440, the results improve but remain constrained. The High preset averages 30 FPS, while Low reaches 48 FPS. Medium lands at 34 FPS, with a recorded minimum of 29 FPS and a maximum of 39 FPS. Ultra drops to 26 FPS average. The scaling between Low and Ultra at this resolution is substantial, with a 22 FPS gap between the two extremes, indicating that the GPU is heavily taxed by the game's visual effects at higher settings.

At 1920x1080, the data shows a more viable range. Low settings produce 63 FPS average, crossing the 60 FPS threshold by a narrow margin. Medium averages 45 FPS, with a minimum of 38 FPS and a maximum of 51 FPS. High averages 40 FPS, and Ultra averages 35 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 18 FPS, which is a significant penalty for enabling additional visual features. The frame time consistency also degrades as settings rise, with the Medium preset showing a 13 FPS spread between minimum and maximum, suggesting noticeable stutter in demanding scenes.

Across all resolutions, the pattern is consistent: the RX 580's 8 GB GDDR5 memory and 256 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for the game's assets, but the Polaris architecture's raw throughput limits high-refresh operation. The 6.175 TFLOPS FP32 compute figure translates into playable performance only at the lowest preset on 1080p, with every other configuration falling short of the 60 FPS target.

How This Combo Ranks

The database places this specific CPU and GPU pairing at rank 3399 out of 3720 tested combos for Control. This puts the configuration in the bottom 9% of all tested systems, a position driven primarily by the GPU's age and the game's demanding effects pipeline. The rank reflects that while the CPU is competitive, the graphics card cannot sustain high frame rates at modern resolutions.

The CPU alone sits at the 73rd percentile among all processors, with an average benchmark score of 19039. This places the i5-12400F in the upper quarter of the database, showing that the processor is not the limiting factor for this game. The GPU, however, sits at the 53rd percentile among all graphics cards, with an average benchmark score of 12928. That middle-of-the-pack position, combined with Control's specific rendering demands, explains why the combo ranks so low in this particular title.

The ranking indicates that users with this hardware should expect a playable experience only at 1080p with the lowest quality preset. The 63 FPS average at that configuration is the sole entry point into the playable zone. Every other measured setting falls below 60 FPS, with 1440p and 4K results ranging from 18 to 48 FPS depending on quality. The data suggests that this is a system built for 1080p gaming from an earlier era, and Control's visual complexity pushes it to its limits.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the CPU's nearest rivals in the database, the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS delivers an average score of 19047, essentially identical to the i5-12400F with a delta of 0%. The Intel Core 3 201E scores 19056, which is 0.1% higher, while the Intel Core i5-1335U scores 18982, 0.3% lower. The AMD EPYC 7773X also scores 18979, another 0.3% lower. These processors would produce nearly indistinguishable frame rates in Control, since the game's CPU load is modest relative to the GPU bottleneck at the settings tested.

On the GPU side, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile scores 12940, just 0.1% below the RX 580's 12928 average. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER scores 12986, which is 0.4% higher, while the AMD Radeon 740M scores 12870, 0.5% lower. The AMD FirePro W5100 scores 12847, 0.6% lower. In practical terms, any of these graphics cards would produce nearly identical FPS numbers in Control at the same settings. The GTX 1660 SUPER might edge out the RX 580 by a frame or two, but the difference would not change the overall verdict: 1080p Low is the only playable configuration.

Users considering a swap within these rival groups should expect no meaningful change in Control's performance. The delta percentages are all within 0.6% of the baseline, which is well within measurement noise for real-time rendering. The bottleneck is the GPU's compute throughput, and all of these alternatives fall in the same performance envelope.

The Verdict

This PC can run Control, but only under a narrow set of conditions. The verdict by resolution is clear: at 3840x2160, no settings preset achieves 60 FPS, with the best case being Low at 32 FPS average. At 2560x1440, the same pattern holds, with Low reaching 48 FPS but still falling short of the playable threshold. Only at 1920x1080 does the system cross the line, and it does so exclusively on the Low preset with 63 FPS average.

The playable settings list for 1080p contains only "Low," and the best settings designation is also Low with an average FPS of 63. This means users must accept reduced visual quality, including lower texture filtering, simplified shadows, and reduced particle effects, to maintain a smooth experience. The Medium preset at 1080p drops to 45 FPS, which is noticeable stutter for action-oriented gameplay, and High and Ultra fall to 40 FPS and 35 FPS respectively.

For gamers who prioritize frame rate over visuals, the 1080p Low configuration is workable. The 63 FPS average provides a small cushion above 60, though minimum frame times are not recorded for that preset, so occasional dips cannot be ruled out. At 1440p and 4K, the system is not viable for Control, regardless of settings, as the highest average FPS recorded at those resolutions is 48 at 1440p Low.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Control at 60 FPS?

A: Yes, but only at 1920x1080 resolution with the Low preset, which delivers 63 FPS average. All other presets at 1080p, and all presets at 1440p and 4K, fall below 60 FPS.

Q: What is the best preset at 1080p for this combo?

A: The Low preset is the best and only playable option, achieving 63 FPS average. Medium drops to 45 FPS, High to 40 FPS, and Ultra to 35 FPS.

Q: How does the RX 580 compare to similar GPUs for this game?

A: The nearest GPU rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER, which scores 0.4% higher in average benchmark score. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile scores 0.1% lower, and the AMD Radeon 740M scores 0.5% lower. These differences would not meaningfully alter Control's FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this game?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor. The i5-12400F ranks at the 73rd percentile among all CPUs, while the RX 580 ranks at the 53rd percentile among all GPUs. The FPS scaling across resolutions follows GPU-bound patterns.

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 1440p with Medium settings?

A: The recorded average is 34 FPS, with a minimum of 29 FPS and a maximum of 39 FPS. This is below the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: Does the 8 GB VRAM on the RX 580 help at high resolutions?

A: The 8 GB GDDR5 memory is sufficient for Control's assets, but the GPU's 6.175 TFLOPS compute throughput limits performance. At 4K Ultra, the average is 18 FPS, indicating memory capacity is not the primary constraint.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS. The database shows no playable settings for this resolution, and the best recorded average is 32 FPS on Low. Users should avoid 4K entirely with this hardware for Control, as even the lowest quality preset produces a slideshow-like experience.

At 2560x1440, the situation is identical: no playable settings exist. The Low preset reaches 48 FPS average, which is the highest recorded value at this resolution, but it still falls 12 FPS short of the threshold. Medium averages 34 FPS, High averages 30 FPS, and Ultra averages 26 FPS.

At 1920x1080, the Low preset is the only option that clears 60 FPS, with an average of 63 FPS. This is the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS, and it is also the least demanding preset available. The next step up, Medium, drops to 45 FPS, which is a 29% reduction in frame rate. For users who want the best visual quality possible while maintaining playability, Low is the ceiling for this combo.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals a clear division of labor between the two components. The i5-12400F, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, provides ample processing power for Control's physics and AI systems. Its 73rd percentile ranking among all CPUs indicates it can handle the game's logic without becoming a bottleneck. The GPU, however, is the constraining factor at every resolution and preset combination.

The scaling between resolutions demonstrates this clearly. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 63 FPS. At 1440p Low, it drops to 48 FPS, a 24% reduction. At 4K Low, it falls to 32 FPS, another 33% reduction. This pattern is characteristic of a GPU-bound workload, where increasing pixel count directly impacts render time. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rate would remain flat across resolutions, which is not the case.

The preset scaling reinforces the GPU's dominant role. At 1080p, moving from Low to Medium costs 18 FPS, from Medium to High costs 5 FPS, and from High to Ultra costs another 5 FPS. The largest jump occurs when enabling the first tier of upgraded effects, which suggests the RX 580's shading units and texture units are saturated by the game's post-processing and lighting systems. The 2304 shading units and 144 texture mapping units are simply outmatched by Control's visual fidelity at anything above minimal settings.

For users considering upgrades, the data suggests that replacing the RX 580 would yield significant gains across all resolutions, while upgrading the CPU would provide minimal benefit for this specific title. The i5-12400F's 3dmark max threads score of 5912 and cinebench R23 multicore score of 12380 indicate it has headroom for more powerful graphics cards. The GPU's 53rd percentile ranking, combined with its end-of-life production status, positions it as the clear upgrade target for improved Control performance.