Control

The Intel Core i5-14600KF paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER delivers exceptionally high frame rates in Control, clearing the 60 FPS threshold at every resolution and preset combination tested. The data shows this combo is not just playable but overwhelmingly capable, with the most demanding Ultra preset averaging 69 FPS at 4K, 102 FPS at 1440p, and 134 FPS at 1080p. This places the combination at rank 283 out of 3720 tested combos for this game, putting it in the top 7.6% of all configurations, a position consistent with the individual hardware percentiles: the CPU ranks in the 90th percentile, while the GPU sits in the 86th percentile.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU's nearest rivals, based on average benchmark scores, are remarkably close in performance, with deltas under one percent. The AMD Ryzen 9 7900 scores 49228, a mere 0.3% below the i5-14600KF's 49394 average. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G trails by 0.4% with a score of 49196, and the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 is 0.8% behind with 48995. On the other side, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 edges slightly ahead at 49796, a 0.8% advantage. In practical terms for Control, these differences are negligible; any of these processors would produce nearly identical frame rates, meaning the choice between them would not materially alter gameplay smoothness or the resolution at which the game remains playable.

On the GPU side, the RTX 4080 SUPER's nearest rival is its direct predecessor, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080, which scores 54247 against the SUPER's 54209, a delta of -0.1% that is effectively a tie. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X scores 54828, 1.1% higher, while the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB scores 55698, 2.7% higher, and the AMD Radeon 8060S scores 55757, 2.8% higher. These percentage differences are small enough that in a game like Control, the frame rate variance would likely be within a few FPS. The data indicates that systems built with these rival components would behave similarly in Control, though the RTX 4080 SUPER's 16 GB GDDR6X memory and 256-bit bus provide a specification foundation that the benchmark scores suggest is matched by the listed alternatives.

CPU and GPU Roles

The scaling between resolutions and presets reveals a clear pattern: this configuration is heavily GPU-bound at higher settings, with the CPU providing ample headroom. At 1080p, the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra presets is dramatic—245 FPS at Low versus 134 FPS at Ultra, a drop of 111 FPS or roughly 45%. This large delta indicates that at lower resolutions, the GPU is still the limiting factor, but the CPU is so strong that even the most demanding preset cannot push frame rates low enough to expose a CPU bottleneck. Moving to 1440p, the same pattern holds: Low runs at 185 FPS, while Ultra drops to 102 FPS. At 4K, the spread narrows slightly in percentage terms—125 FPS at Low versus 69 FPS at Ultra—but the absolute difference of 56 FPS still shows the GPU working harder as resolution increases.

The resolution scaling itself tells the story of GPU dominance. Across the same preset, dropping from 1440p to 1080p yields a 33% increase in frame rate at High settings (117 to 155 FPS), and a 32% increase at Ultra (102 to 134 FPS). Moving up from 1440p to 4K, frame rates fall by 33% at High (117 to 79 FPS) and by 32% at Ultra (102 to 69 FPS). This consistent ~33% shift per resolution step is the signature of a GPU-limited scenario, where the CPU's 14 cores and 20 threads are never the constraint. The CPU's single-core performance in Cinebench R23 (4594) and multi-core score (32544) are far beyond what Control demands, so the data suggests the CPU's role is to maintain stability without ever becoming the bottleneck, while the GPU's 52.22 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 736.3 GB/s of memory bandwidth determine the final frame rate.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, which averages 134 FPS. This is more than double the playable threshold, and the data shows that even the most visually intensive settings leave massive headroom. The Medium preset averages 174 FPS, while High runs at 155 FPS, and Low reaches 245 FPS, but Ultra is the clear recommendation since it delivers the full visual experience without sacrificing smoothness.

At 2560x1440, Ultra again is the best choice, averaging 102 FPS. The frame rate remains comfortably above 60 FPS, with a 70% margin over the threshold. High settings run at 117 FPS, Medium at 132 FPS, and Low at 185 FPS, but none of these lower presets are necessary to maintain playability. The Ultra preset at 1440p provides the highest fidelity with a frame rate that is still well within high-refresh-rate territory.

At 3840x2160, the story is slightly different but still positive. Ultra averages 69 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS threshold with a 15% margin. This is the only resolution where the margin narrows noticeably, but the game remains fully playable at maximum settings. High runs at 79 FPS, Medium at 89 FPS, and Low at 125 FPS, meaning that even if a user wanted extra headroom for demanding scenes, dropping to High yields a 14% frame rate increase. The data indicates that Ultra at 4K is viable, but users who prioritize frame rate stability over absolute fidelity might prefer High, which provides 79 FPS.

The Verdict

This PC can absolutely run Control, and it does so with exceptional performance across all tested configurations. The verdict data is unambiguous: every resolution and every preset tested—Low, Medium, High, and Ultra—averages above 60 FPS. At 1080p, the Ultra preset averages 134 FPS, meaning the system is not just playable but delivers a high-refresh-rate experience at maximum settings. At 1440p, Ultra averages 102 FPS, again clearing the threshold with room to spare. Even at 4K, the most demanding scenario, Ultra averages 69 FPS, which is 15% above the 60 FPS playable threshold.

The minimum frame rates recorded at Medium settings reinforce this verdict. At 4K Medium, the minimum observed is 76 FPS, which is still above 60 FPS even in the worst-case frames. At 1440p Medium, the minimum is 112 FPS, and at 1080p Medium it is 148 FPS. These minimums indicate that the system does not experience severe frame drops that would pull the experience below playable levels. The combination of high averages and solid minimums means that Control runs smoothly not just in typical scenes but also during intense combat or physics-heavy moments. Users can confidently select Ultra at any resolution, knowing that the system maintains playability.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Control at 4K with maximum settings?

A: Yes. The Ultra preset at 3840x2160 averages 69 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS playable threshold. The minimum FPS at Medium settings is 76 FPS, indicating stable performance.

Q: What is the best preset to use at 1440p?

A: The Ultra preset is recommended, as it averages 102 FPS at 2560x1440. This is the most demanding setting that still provides a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How does the frame rate scale between 1080p and 4K?

A: Across the same preset, dropping from 1440p to 1080p increases frame rates by roughly 33%, while moving from 1440p to 4K decreases them by roughly 32%. For example, High settings run at 155 FPS at 1080p, 117 FPS at 1440p, and 79 FPS at 4K.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the primary constraint. The consistent ~33% frame rate shift per resolution step, combined with the CPU's high percentile ranking (90th), shows that the i5-14600KF provides ample performance headroom.

Q: What are the minimum frame rates at Medium settings?

A: At 1080p Medium, the minimum is 148 FPS. At 1440p Medium, it is 112 FPS. At 4K Medium, it is 76 FPS. All minimums are above the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to other tested systems?

A: The Intel Core i5-14600KF and RTX 4080 SUPER combination ranks 283rd out of 3720 tested combos for Control, placing it in the top 7.6% of all configurations tested.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 283 out of 3720 places this system in the 92.4th percentile of all tested configurations for Control, meaning it outperforms roughly 92% of the combinations in the database. This high ranking is consistent with the individual component percentiles: the CPU is in the 90th percentile against all CPUs, and the GPU is in the 86th percentile against all GPUs. The combination of two top-decile components yields a system that is not merely adequate for Control but positioned among the elite performers.

The rank becomes more meaningful when considering the frame rate data. A rank of 283 means that 283 other combinations produced higher average frame rates across the test suite, but given that this system already achieves 69 FPS at 4K Ultra, those higher-ranked systems are likely pushing well beyond 100 FPS at 4K or maintaining ultra-high refresh rates at lower resolutions. The data shows that for the vast majority of users, this rank represents overkill for Control, since the game is fully playable at maximum settings on a standard 60 Hz 4K display or a high-refresh 1440p monitor. The ranking also implies that users with this combo have substantial headroom for future games or more demanding titles, as Control's performance is not stressing the hardware to its limits.