Control

Control is a demanding action-adventure title, and the recorded data for this specific hardware combination paints a clear picture of its limitations. The Intel Core i5-12600KF paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 delivers playable frame rates only under the most restrictive conditions, and even then, it barely crosses the 60 FPS threshold. The benchmark results indicate a system that is heavily constrained by the graphics card, with the CPU showing significant headroom that the GPU cannot exploit. This analysis will break down the measured performance across resolutions and settings, compare it to similar hardware, and determine exactly what this combo can achieve.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data reveals a consistent pattern: performance scales dramatically with resolution and preset, but the GTX 1650 acts as a hard ceiling. At 3840x2160 (4K), the results are strictly unplayable. The High preset averages 20.3 FPS, Low averages 29.5 FPS, Medium averages 18.5 FPS, and Ultra drops to 16 FPS. No setting at this resolution comes close to the 60 FPS target, and the spread between Low and High is only about 9 FPS, indicating the GPU is completely saturated.

Moving to 2560x1440 (1440p) shows improvement but still falls far short of playability. The Low preset reaches an average of 42.2 FPS, which is the best result at this resolution. High averages 27 FPS, Medium averages 29.4 FPS, and Ultra averages 23.6 FPS. Interestingly, Medium slightly outperforms High here, suggesting that the High preset may include specific effects that are disproportionately heavy on this GPU. The jump from 4K to 1440p yields roughly a 45% improvement in the Low preset (from 29.5 to 42.2 FPS), but this is still not enough to hit the 60 FPS mark.

At 1920x1080 (1080p), the data finally shows a playable configuration, but only just. The Low preset averages 57.9 FPS, which is remarkably close to the 60 FPS threshold but technically below it. High averages 38.4 FPS, Medium averages 41.1 FPS, and Ultra averages 28.8 FPS. The pattern here is notable: Medium outperforms High by about 7% (41.1 vs 38.4 FPS), which is a recurring anomaly across resolutions. The scaling from 1440p to 1080p is substantial, with the Low preset improving from 42.2 to 57.9 FPS, a 37% gain. However, even at 1080p, the GPU cannot maintain 60 FPS on any preset; the closest is Low at 57.9 FPS, which is just 2.1 FPS short of the target.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The database places this CPU and GPU in specific performance tiers based on their average benchmark scores. The Intel Core i5-12600KF has an average benchmark score of 27799, placing it in the 79th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are the Intel Core i9-10900K (scoring 27872, a delta of -0.3%), the AMD Ryzen 5 8500GE (scoring 27712, a delta of 0.3%), the AMD Ryzen 7 6800U (scoring 27887, a delta of -0.3%), and the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D (scoring 27896, a delta of -0.3%). These deltas are all within 0.3% of the i5-12600KF, meaning any of these CPUs would deliver essentially identical frame rates in this game when paired with the same GPU. The performance difference is negligible, so users with any of these processors should expect the same bottleneck behavior.

For the GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 has an average benchmark score of 7472, placing it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (scoring 7447, a delta of 0.3%), the Intel UHD Graphics 750 (scoring 7441, a delta of 0.4%), the AMD Radeon R7 350 (scoring 7425, a delta of 0.6%), and the Intel Arc A310 (scoring 7550, a delta of -1%). These deltas are similarly tiny, within 1% of the GTX 1650. In practical terms, swapping to any of these GPUs would result in nearly identical FPS numbers. The Intel Arc A310 is the only one with a negative delta (meaning it scores slightly higher), but the 1% difference is unlikely to be perceptible in gameplay.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data strongly indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor in this combination. The CPU has a benchmark score of 27799, which is in the 79th percentile, while the GPU sits at 7472, in the 40th percentile. This disparity is reflected in the FPS scaling. When resolution increases from 1080p to 1440p, the Low preset drops from 57.9 to 42.2 FPS, a 27% decline. From 1440p to 4K, it drops further to 29.5 FPS, another 30% decline. This consistent degradation as pixel count rises is a classic sign of GPU-bound performance; the CPU is not the bottleneck because it can feed frames faster than the GPU can render them.

The CPU's strength becomes more apparent when examining the benchmark scores. The i5-12600KF scores 23391 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 3302 in single-core, along with 12137 in Geekbench multi-core and 2157 in single-core. These are strong numbers for a desktop processor. In contrast, the GTX 1650's Passmark G3D score is 7880, which is modest. The GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is only 305, indicating very limited DirectX 12 performance. Control uses DirectX 12, and the GPU's score in that specific test suggests it will struggle with modern rendering features.

The anomaly where Medium outperforms High at 1080p and 1440p is telling. At 1080p, Medium is 41.1 FPS vs High's 38.4 FPS; at 1440p, Medium is 29.4 FPS vs High's 27 FPS. This suggests that the High preset introduces certain effects that are disproportionately expensive on the GTX 1650's architecture, possibly related to volumetric lighting or reflections. The CPU would be capable of handling these effects, but the GPU cannot process them efficiently. This further reinforces the GPU-bound nature of the system.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations, this specific setup ranks 3547 out of 3720 combos, placing it in the bottom 5% of all tested systems. This is a low rank, but it is expected given the GPU's 40th percentile performance. The rank reflects the overall capability of the combo across all games, and Control is a demanding title. The fact that the CPU is in the 79th percentile while the GPU is in the 40th percentile means the combo's rank is dragged down by the GPU. In games that are less GPU-intensive, this CPU could shine, but for Control, the GPU is the weak link.

The rank of 3547 out of 3720 means there are only 173 combos that perform worse. This is a bottom-tier result, and the measured FPS data confirms it. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 57.9 FPS, which is just below the 60 FPS threshold. This is the only configuration that is close to playable, and it is not even fully playable. The combo's rank is consistent with the idea that it is only suitable for older or less demanding games, not for a title like Control at higher settings.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Control at 1080p with the Low preset?

A: The measured data shows an average of 57.9 FPS at 1080p Low, which is 2.1 FPS below the 60 FPS threshold. It is close but not technically playable per the database's standard.

Q: What is the best average FPS this combo can achieve at 1440p?

A: The best result at 2560x1440 is the Low preset, with an average of 42.2 FPS. All other presets (High, Medium, Ultra) score below 30 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more responsible for the low frame rates?

A: The GPU is the clear bottleneck. The CPU's benchmark scores are in the 79th percentile, while the GPU is in the 40th percentile. The FPS drops significantly with resolution increases, indicating GPU saturation.

Q: How does the GTX 1650 compare to its nearest rival, the Intel Arc A310?

A: The GTX 1650 has an average benchmark score of 7472, while the Intel Arc A310 scores 7550, a delta of -1%. The Arc A310 is slightly faster, but the difference is negligible.

Q: Is there any preset at 4K that comes close to 60 FPS?

A: No. The highest average FPS at 3840x2160 is 29.5 on Low, and the lowest is 16 on Ultra. All 4K presets are far below playable.

Q: What does the combo's rank of 3547 out of 3720 indicate?

A: It indicates that this combo is in the bottom 5% of all tested hardware combinations in the database, meaning it is only suitable for undemanding games.

Best Settings per Resolution

Based on the measured data, no resolution and preset combination achieves the 60 FPS threshold. The closest is 1920x1080 with the Low preset, averaging 57.9 FPS. This is the most demanding preset that comes nearest to the target, but it still falls short. For 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 42.2 FPS, which is the best available, but it is not playable. For 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 29.5 FPS, which is the best available, but it is also not playable.

The database's verdictByResolution field confirms this: there are no playable settings at any resolution. The best settings per resolution, in terms of highest average FPS, are as follows: 1080p Low at 57.9 FPS, 1440p Low at 42.2 FPS, and 4K Low at 29.5 FPS. These are the only presets that offer any semblance of playability, and even then, none of them reach 60 FPS.

The Verdict

Can this PC run Control? The data says no, not at the 60 FPS threshold. The verdictByResolution field shows empty playable settings for all three resolutions, meaning no preset at any resolution achieves 60 FPS. The best-case scenario is 1080p Low at 57.9 FPS, which is 2.1 FPS short of the target. At 1440p and 4K, the best averages are 42.2 and 29.5 FPS respectively, both far below playable.

The system is fundamentally GPU-limited. The Intel Core i5-12600KF is a capable processor, but the GTX 1650 cannot keep up with Control's rendering demands. The measured FPS data shows a consistent pattern of the GPU being the bottleneck, with the CPU having significant headroom. If the user were to upgrade the GPU, the CPU could likely support much higher frame rates, but as configured, this combo is only suitable for running Control at very low settings and resolutions, and even then it fails to hit the 60 FPS target. The database's ranking of 3547 out of 3720 combos reinforces this conclusion, placing this system in the bottom tier for overall gaming performance.