Control

Intel Core i5-13400F paired with NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 delivers a mixed experience in Control, depending heavily on resolution and preset. At 1080p the combination produces playable frame rates across most settings, while 1440p narrows the options to low settings, and 4K falls short of the 60 FPS threshold entirely. The recorded data shows a clear pattern: this is a 1080p-oriented configuration for Control, with headroom to spare at the lowest preset and a near-miss at high settings.

How This Combo Ranks

The database places this specific CPU and GPU pairing at rank 3080 out of 3720 tested combinations for Control. That puts it in the lower portion of the overall distribution, roughly the 17th percentile of tested combos. In practical terms, most other systems tested will outperform this pairing in Control, but the rank alone does not tell the full story. The measured frame rates show that the combination still clears the 60 FPS playable threshold at multiple settings in 1080p, meaning the rank reflects headroom relative to other hardware rather than an inability to run the game.

The CPU itself sits at the 77th percentile among all processors in the database, indicating strong general processing capability. The GPU, however, lands at the 47th percentile among all graphics cards, which is closer to the median. That imbalance matters: the processor has more headroom than the graphics card, so in Control the GPU will be the limiting factor in most scenarios. The combo rank of 3080 out of 3720 aligns with the GPU’s mid-pack position, while the CPU’s higher percentile does little to lift the pairing because the game’s frame rates are constrained by graphics throughput.

CPU and GPU Roles

For Control, the recorded measurements show that scaling from 1080p to 1440p and then to 4K produces frame rate drops that are consistent with a GPU-bound workload. At high settings, the average frame rate falls from 61.7 FPS at 1080p to 45 FPS at 1440p, a reduction of roughly 27%. Moving from 1440p to 4K at high settings drops the average from 45 FPS to 29.5 FPS, another reduction of about 34%. These are large percentage declines that track with the increase in pixel count, indicating that the graphics card is doing the heavy lifting.

The CPU’s role becomes more apparent at lower presets and lower resolutions. At 1080p low settings, the combination reaches 96.4 FPS average, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold. At 1440p low, the average is 72.9 FPS. The jump from 1080p low to 1440p low costs about 24% of the frame rate, which is less severe than the drop seen at high settings. This suggests that at low presets, the CPU has enough headroom to keep feeding the GPU, and the frame rate is still largely determined by graphics load. At 4K low, the average falls to 48.7 FPS, a 33% drop from 1440p low, again pointing to GPU limits.

The data does not show any scenario where the CPU becomes the primary bottleneck in a way that caps frame rates below what the GPU can deliver. Across all resolutions and presets, the frame rate scales with resolution changes in a manner consistent with graphics-bound performance. The i5-13400F’s 10 cores and 16 threads, along with a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, provide sufficient processing power for Control’s demands. The GPU’s 8 GB of GDDR5 memory and 256-bit bus width are more likely to be the constraint, especially at higher resolutions where memory bandwidth and fill rate become critical.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combination delivers its best results. Low settings produce an average of 96.4 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS target. Medium settings average 70.2 FPS, still comfortably playable. High settings average 61.7 FPS, just barely clearing the threshold. Ultra settings drop to 54.8 FPS average, which falls short of 60 FPS. The progression from low to ultra is consistent, with each preset tier costing roughly 15 to 20 FPS. The gap between medium and high is about 8.5 FPS, while the gap between high and ultra is about 7 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates drop noticeably. Low settings average 72.9 FPS, which clears the threshold by a healthy margin. Medium settings average 51.9 FPS, which is below 60 FPS and not considered playable according to the database’s threshold. High settings average 45 FPS, and Ultra settings average 41.6 FPS. The step from low to medium costs about 21 FPS, which is a steep drop. From medium to high the loss is about 7 FPS, and from high to ultra it is about 3.4 FPS. The diminishing returns at higher presets suggest that the GPU is struggling to maintain performance as settings increase.

At 3840x2160, none of the presets reach the 60 FPS threshold. Low settings average 48.7 FPS, medium averages 35 FPS, high averages 29.5 FPS, and ultra averages 26 FPS. The gap between low and medium is about 13.7 FPS, while the gap between medium and high is about 5.5 FPS. High to ultra costs only 3.5 FPS. Even at the lowest settings, 4K resolution demands more from the GTX 1070 than it can deliver for smooth gameplay. The minimum and maximum frame rates are not recorded in the database, so the analysis relies on average values, which are sufficient to determine playability.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU’s nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS, the Intel Core 5 120, the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D, and the AMD Ryzen 7 6800H. The Ryzen 9 6900HS has an average score nearly identical to the i5-13400F, with a difference of zero percent in the recorded data. The Intel Core 5 120 and the Ryzen 5 5600X3D both score about 0.3% lower, while the Ryzen 7 6800H scores about 0.4% higher. These differences are negligible in real-world gaming, so swapping the i5-13400F for any of these processors would result in essentially the same CPU performance in Control. The 10-core, 16-thread configuration of the i5-13400F is well matched to these alternatives in terms of overall throughput.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals are the AMD FirePro W5000, the NVIDIA Quadro M2000M, the NVIDIA Tesla M10, and the NVIDIA Tesla C2070. The FirePro W5000 scores about 0.2% lower than the GTX 1070, the Quadro M2000M scores about 0.5% lower, the Tesla M10 scores about 0.6% higher, and the Tesla C2070 scores about 0.7% higher. These are all workstation or professional cards rather than gaming-focused hardware, but the benchmark scores indicate that their raw graphics performance is comparable to the GTX 1070. In Control, a system with any of these GPUs would produce frame rates similar to the ones recorded for the GTX 1070, meaning the same resolution and preset limitations would apply. None of these alternatives would lift the combination into playable 4K territory, and 1440p would still be limited to low settings.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Control at 1080p?

A: Yes. The measured data shows playable frame rates at low, medium, and high settings. Low averages 96.4 FPS, medium averages 70.2 FPS, and high averages 61.7 FPS. Ultra settings average 54.8 FPS, which falls below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: What is the best preset at 1440p for this combination?

A: Only low settings reach 60 FPS or higher at 1440p, with an average of 72.9 FPS. Medium settings average 51.9 FPS, which is below the playable threshold.

Q: Is 4K playable with this hardware?

A: No. At 4K, the highest recorded average is 48.7 FPS at low settings. High settings average 29.5 FPS, and ultra averages 26 FPS. None of the presets reach 60 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU compare to similar processors?

A: The Intel Core i5-13400F has an average benchmark score of 25292. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS, scores 25284, a difference of zero percent. The Intel Core 5 120 and AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D score 0.3% lower, while the AMD Ryzen 7 6800H scores 0.4% higher. These differences are minor.

Q: How does the GPU compare to similar graphics cards?

A: The GTX 1070 has an average benchmark score of 9780. The AMD FirePro W5000 scores 0.2% lower, the NVIDIA Quadro M2000M scores 0.5% lower, the NVIDIA Tesla M10 scores 0.6% higher, and the NVIDIA Tesla C2070 scores 0.7% higher. These are all within a small margin.

Q: What resolution and preset combination gives the highest frame rate?

A: The highest recorded average is 96.4 FPS at 1920x1080 with low settings. This is the only preset and resolution combination that approaches 100 FPS in the recorded data.

The Verdict

The database shows that this PC can run Control, but the experience depends heavily on the display resolution. At 1920x1080, the combination is playable at high, medium, and low settings, with high settings averaging 61.7 FPS, just above the 60 FPS threshold. Ultra settings fall short at 54.8 FPS, so they are not recommended for a consistently smooth experience. At 2560x1440, only low settings clear 60 FPS, with an average of 72.9 FPS. Medium, high, and ultra all stay below the threshold. At 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS, with the best result being 48.7 FPS at low settings.

For a player targeting 60 FPS, the safe choices are 1080p with high settings or lower, and 1440p with low settings only. The GPU’s age and mid-pack position among all graphics cards explain why 4K is out of reach. The CPU’s strong performance relative to other processors does not compensate for the GPU’s limits in this title. The verdict is clear: this combination is a 1080p machine for Control, with a single playable option at 1440p and no viable options at 4K.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is high, with an average of 61.7 FPS. Medium also qualifies at 70.2 FPS, and low at 96.4 FPS, but high is the highest preset that meets the threshold. Ultra does not qualify, as it averages 54.8 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the only preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is low, with an average of 72.9 FPS. Medium, high, and ultra all fall below the threshold, so low is the recommended setting for a playable experience at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, there is no preset that reaches 60 FPS. The database records no playable settings for this resolution, and the best average is 48.7 FPS at low settings, which still misses the threshold. Players using a 4K display would need to consider lower resolutions or different hardware for Control.