Control

The Intel Core i5-13400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 delivers a broad range of performance in Control, scaling from a smooth 1080p experience at max settings to a more constrained 4K situation where only the lowest preset remains fluid. The benchmark data, measured across three resolutions and four quality presets, shows this combination sits at rank 1502 out of 3720 tested configs for this title, placing it in the upper half of systems. The RTX 3070, which holds the 61st percentile among all GPUs, clearly drives the experience, while the i5-13400F, at the 77th percentile among CPUs, provides ample headroom to avoid bottlenecking at most settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system performs exceptionally well across the board. At Low settings, the average frame rate hits 157 FPS, which is more than double the 60 FPS playability threshold. Moving to Medium yields 115.1 FPS average, still a very high refresh rate experience. High settings produce 102.5 FPS average, and even at Ultra, the most demanding preset, the game maintains an 88.1 FPS average. None of these 1080p results dip near the playability line, indicating that the RTX 3070 is never significantly stressed at this resolution.

Stepping up to 2560x1440, the performance remains strong but the scaling becomes more apparent. Low settings deliver 120.7 FPS average, which is a 23% reduction from the 1080p Low result. Medium settings average 89 FPS, High settings average 78 FPS, and Ultra averages 65.5 FPS. The Ultra result is particularly noteworthy — it clears the 60 FPS threshold by only 5.5 frames, suggesting that this is the effective ceiling for a consistently smooth experience at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the demands of 4K become clear. Low settings still manage an 83.9 FPS average, which is playable and even comfortable. Medium settings drop to 57.5 FPS average, just below the 60 FPS target. High settings average 53.3 FPS, and Ultra falls to 45 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium at 4K is 26.4 FPS, indicating a steep performance cost for the first tier of quality improvements. The data shows that 4K Ultra is not viable for this hardware, and even Medium requires a compromise below the playable threshold.

The frame rate deltas across presets are consistent at each resolution. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 68.9 FPS, at 1440p it is 55.2 FPS, and at 4K it is 38.9 FPS. This shrinking delta indicates that at higher resolutions, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, and the relative cost of each quality setting diminishes as the absolute frame rates drop.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the CPU, the Intel Core i5-13400F has an average benchmark score of 25292, placing it just ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS, which scores 25284 with a delta of 0%. The Intel Core 5 120 scores 25362, which is 0.3% higher, and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D also scores 25365, also 0.3% higher. The AMD Ryzen 7 6800H scores 25201, which is 0.4% lower. For Control, any of these CPUs would deliver nearly identical frame pacing, as the game is not particularly CPU-intensive at higher resolutions. The choice between these processors would have negligible impact on the measured FPS.

On the GPU side, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 has an average benchmark score of 17208. The AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT scores 17083, a 0.7% deficit, which would translate to roughly 1-2 FPS difference in Control at the same settings. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 scores 17037, a 1% deficit, and the AMD Radeon HD 7970M scores 17019, a 1.1% deficit. The NVIDIA Tesla K40c scores 17468, which is 1.5% higher than the RTX 3070. In practice, the RX 7600 XT is the closest consumer alternative and would produce nearly identical results in this game. The other rivals listed are either older multi-GPU setups or professional cards, so their real-world gaming performance would not be directly comparable despite the similar aggregate scores.

The practical takeaway from the rival data is that the RTX 3070 sits in a narrow performance band. A 1% difference from the nearest competitor translates to less than 1 FPS at 4K Ultra and about 1.5 FPS at 1080p Low. This means that swapping the GPU for an RX 7600 XT would not change the verdict at any resolution — the playable settings would remain identical.

CPU and GPU Roles

The scaling between resolutions and presets clearly indicates that the GPU is the dominant component for Control. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 157 FPS, which drops to 120.7 FPS at 1440p Low and 83.9 FPS at 4K Low. This 73.1 FPS drop from 1080p to 4K at the same settings is a direct consequence of the GPU's rendering load increasing by a factor of four in pixel count. The CPU, with its 10 cores and 16 threads, does not show signs of limiting performance in this scenario.

The preset scaling reinforces the GPU-bound nature of the game. At 1080p, moving from Low to Ultra reduces the average FPS by 68.9 FPS, a 44% decrease. At 4K, the same preset change reduces the average from 83.9 to 45 FPS, a 46% decrease. The percentage impact of settings is nearly identical across resolutions, which suggests that the CPU is not becoming a bottleneck at lower resolutions — if it were, the percentage drop at 1080p would be smaller because the GPU would have more spare capacity.

However, the CPU's role becomes slightly more relevant at 1080p, where the high frame rates place more demand on the processor. At 1080p Low, the system produces 157 FPS, which is a demanding scenario for any CPU. The i5-13400F's single-thread score of 960 in 3DMark and its passmark single-thread score of 3634 indicate it has sufficient strength to handle this load. The data shows that at 1440p and 4K, the frame rates are lower, which reduces the CPU's influence, but at 1080p, the CPU is likely contributing to the ability to reach those high numbers.

For a game like Control, which features physics-based destruction and telekinetic combat, the CPU's 16 threads are beneficial for handling the game's simulation overhead. The passmark multithread score of 25032 and the Cinebench R23 multicore score of 22604 suggest robust multi-threaded performance, which prevents stutters during complex scenes. This is particularly relevant at 1440p Ultra, where the 65.5 FPS average indicates the system is balancing GPU load with CPU-side game logic.

The Verdict

The data confirms that this system can run Control with playable frame rates at most settings, with the clear exception of 4K at Medium and above. At 1920x1080, all four presets — Low, Medium, High, and Ultra — clear the 60 FPS threshold, with the lowest result being 88.1 FPS at Ultra. At 2560x1440, all four presets also maintain playable frame rates, with Ultra averaging 65.5 FPS. At 3840x2160, only Low settings achieve a playable average of 83.9 FPS; Medium drops to 57.5 FPS, High to 53.3 FPS, and Ultra to 45 FPS.

The verdict by resolution is straightforward: 1080p and 1440p are fully playable across the entire settings range, while 4K is limited to Low settings for a consistently smooth experience. The 65.5 FPS at 1440p Ultra is sufficient for most players, though those sensitive to frame dips may prefer High settings at 78 FPS for additional headroom. At 4K, the choice is binary: either play at Low settings and enjoy a solid 83.9 FPS, or drop below 60 FPS by selecting any higher preset.

The combo's overall rank of 1502 out of 3720 tested configurations places it in the 60th percentile of all systems tested for this game. This is a respectable position, indicating that the hardware is well-matched for a title from 2019 like Control, which does not have the extreme hardware demands of more recent releases.

Best Settings per Resolution

For the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS, the data provides a clear recommendation at each resolution.

At 1920x1080, the best settings are Ultra, with an average FPS of 88.1. This is the highest quality preset and it still provides a frame rate well above the playability threshold. There is no reason to drop below Ultra at this resolution, as even the most demanding settings leave significant performance headroom.

At 2560x1440, the best settings are also Ultra, with an average FPS of 65.5. This is above the 60 FPS threshold, but not by a large margin. Players who prefer a more stable frame rate might consider High settings at 78 FPS, but for those who prioritize visual quality, Ultra remains viable.

At 3840x2160, the best settings are Low, with an average FPS of 83.9. This is the only preset at 4K that clears the 60 FPS threshold. The jump to Medium drops the average to 57.5 FPS, which is below the playable target. Thus, 4K users must accept significant visual compromises to maintain smooth performance.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Control at 60 FPS on a 4K monitor?

A: Only at Low settings, which average 83.9 FPS. Medium settings average 57.5 FPS, just below the 60 FPS threshold, and High and Ultra fall further to 53.3 and 45 FPS respectively.

Q: What is the highest quality setting at 1440p that maintains 60 FPS?

A: Ultra settings average 65.5 FPS, making it the highest preset that stays above the playable threshold. High settings offer a higher average of 78 FPS for those who want more headroom.

Q: How does the RTX 3070 compare to its nearest GPU rival in this game?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT scores 0.7% lower in average benchmark score. For Control, this would translate to roughly a 0.5 FPS difference at 4K Ultra and about 1 FPS at 1080p Low, which is imperceptible in practice.

Q: Is the Intel Core i5-13400F a bottleneck for the RTX 3070 in Control?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the primary limiting factor. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 157 FPS, and the CPU's single-thread performance is sufficient to support that. At higher resolutions, frame rates drop due to GPU load, not CPU limits.

Q: What is the performance difference between 1080p and 4K at Medium settings?

A: At 1080p Medium, the average FPS is 115.1. At 4K Medium, it drops to 57.5 FPS. This represents a 57.6 FPS reduction, or a 50% decrease, due to the fourfold increase in pixel count.

Q: Does the system meet the 60 FPS target at 4K High settings?

A: No. The average FPS at 4K High is 53.3, which is 6.7 FPS below the playable threshold. Only Low settings at 4K achieve a playable average of 83.9 FPS.