Control

The Intel Core i7-12700K and AMD Radeon RX 7700 combination delivers a thoroughly playable experience in Control, though the ceiling depends heavily on resolution. The combo ranks 1756th out of 3720 tested configurations, placing it in the upper half of results. At 1080p and 1440p, the system clears the 60 FPS threshold at every preset, including Ultra, while 4K gaming requires dropping to Low settings to stay smooth. Benchmark data confirms this is a capable pairing for the 2019 action-adventure title, with the CPU’s strong single-thread performance and the GPU’s RDNA 3.0 architecture working together effectively.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 1756 out of 3720 tested combinations places it in the 47th percentile of all tested PC configurations, meaning it outperforms roughly half of the systems in the database. This is a solid mid-tier result, neither a top-tier enthusiast setup nor a budget compromise. The CPU and GPU each contribute to this standing through their individual benchmark positions.

The Intel Core i7-12700K sits at the 84th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 35287. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-13600T (score 35305, delta -0.1%), the Intel Core i7-12700KF (score 35365, delta -0.2%), and the Intel Core i7-13700T (score 35403, delta -0.3%). These deltas are negligible, all within a fraction of a percent, indicating the 12700K performs essentially on par with its closest alternatives. The CPU’s 12 cores and 20 threads, with a 3.60 GHz base clock and 5.00 GHz boost clock, provide ample compute for Control’s physics-heavy gameplay.

The AMD Radeon RX 7700, meanwhile, sits at the 58th percentile among all GPUs, with an average score of 15852. Its nearest rivals paint a more mixed picture: the AMD Radeon R9 370X (score 15862, delta -0.1%) is a near-exact match, while the AMD Radeon RX 9060 (score 16014, delta -1%) and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti (score 16129, delta -1.7%) are slightly ahead. Conversely, the AMD Radeon Pro W5500 (score 15679, delta 1.1%) trails by a hair. The RX 7700’s 16 GB of GDDR6 memory and 256-bit bus provide ample bandwidth for Control’s textures, though its 58th percentile ranking suggests it is not a top-tier GPU in the broader database.

In game-specific results, the combo’s rank improves relative to its component percentiles, likely due to Control’s optimization and the CPU’s strong single-threaded performance. The data indicates that this pairing punches slightly above its component average weight, delivering frame rates that exceed what either part’s standalone percentile might suggest.

CPU and GPU Roles

Benchmark results show a clear pattern in how these components share the workload across resolutions. At 1920x1080, the GPU is the primary bottleneck. The average FPS at Low settings reaches 148, but drops to 93 at High and 81 at Ultra — a 45% reduction from Low to Ultra. This scaling indicates that the RX 7700 is the limiting factor at 1080p, as the CPU has ample headroom to feed frames. The 12-core i7-12700K with its 5.00 GHz boost clock is more than sufficient for Control’s logic and physics at this resolution, as evidenced by the high Low-settings frame rates.

At 2560x1440, the balance shifts slightly. Low settings yield 112 FPS, while Ultra still holds at 61 FPS — a 46% reduction. The GPU workload increases, but the CPU continues to keep pace. The fact that Ultra stays above 60 FPS at 1440p is a clear indicator that the i7-12700K has enough single-threaded performance to feed the GPU at this resolution. The CPU’s passmark single-thread score of 4013 and geekbench single-core score of 2308 support this conclusion, as Control is sensitive to single-thread performance.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the dominant constraint. Low settings produce 76 FPS, but Medium drops to 54 FPS and Ultra falls to 41 FPS — a 46% reduction from Low to Ultra. The CPU’s role diminishes as the GPU’s fillrate and shading capacity become the limiting factor. The RX 7700’s 236.1 GPixel/s pixel rate and 25.18 TFLOPS FP32 throughput are insufficient for 4K Ultra, but the CPU is not the culprit; the same CPU delivers 81 FPS at 1080p Ultra. The data shows that scaling from 1080p to 4K at the same settings results in a 49% FPS drop for Ultra (81 to 41), which is consistent with a GPU-bound scenario.

Across presets, the CPU’s influence is most visible at lower resolutions and lower settings. At 1080p Low, the 148 FPS result indicates the CPU can drive frame rates well beyond the 60 FPS threshold, while at 4K Ultra, the 41 FPS result shows the GPU is the sole determinant. For this game, the i7-12700K never becomes the limiting factor; the RX 7700’s capabilities define the playable ceiling.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Control at 1080p Ultra?

A: Yes. The measured FPS at 1920x1080 Ultra is 81 FPS average, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold with a comfortable margin.

Q: What is the best resolution for this setup?

A: The 2560x1440 Ultra preset delivers 61 FPS, which is exactly at the playable threshold. For a higher safety margin, 1920x1080 Ultra offers 81 FPS, while 2560x1440 High provides 71 FPS.

Q: Is the 4K experience playable?

A: Only at Low settings, where the average is 76 FPS. Medium settings drop to 54 FPS, which falls below the 60 FPS threshold, and Ultra averages 41 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU affect performance compared to the GPU?

A: The data shows the GPU is the primary bottleneck at all resolutions. At 1080p Low, the combo hits 148 FPS, but at 1080p Ultra it drops to 81 FPS, a 67 FPS reduction driven by GPU load. The CPU’s single-threaded score (4013 in passmark_single_thread) is sufficient to avoid bottlenecking.

Q: What is the worst-case frame rate scenario?

A: At 3840x2160 Ultra, the average is 42 FPS, with no minimum or maximum data provided. This is 30% below the playable threshold and the lowest measured average.

Q: Is the 16 GB GPU memory useful for Control?

A: While Control can use large textures, the benchmark data does not indicate memory capacity as a limiting factor. The GPU’s 16 GB GDDR6 with 624.1 GB/s bandwidth supports High and Ultra settings at 1440p, but the 4K results show compute limits rather than memory limits.

The Verdict

Yes, this PC can run Control, but the playable range is resolution-dependent. At 1920x1080, all four presets — Low, Medium, High, and Ultra — clear the 60 FPS threshold, with Ultra averaging 81 FPS. At 2560x1440, all presets also clear 60 FPS, with Ultra at 61 FPS being the most demanding playable option. At 3840x2160, only Low settings achieve a playable 76 FPS; Medium (54 FPS), High (48 FPS), and Ultra (41 FPS) all fall below the threshold. The verdictByResolution data confirms that 1080p and 1440p offer full preset freedom, while 4K requires reducing settings to Low. For 1440p gaming, this is an excellent fit; for 4K, the system is limited but still capable of a smooth experience at the lowest preset.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of performance across three resolutions and four settings.

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 76 FPS average (min/max not recorded)
• Medium: 54 FPS average, with a minimum of 46 and maximum of 62
• High: 48 FPS average (min/max not recorded)
• Ultra: 41 FPS average (min/max not recorded)

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 112 FPS average (min/max not recorded)
• Medium: 80 FPS average, with a minimum of 68 and maximum of 92
• High: 71 FPS average (min/max not recorded)
• Ultra: 61 FPS average (min/max not recorded)

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 148 FPS average (min/max not recorded)
• Medium: 105 FPS average, with a minimum of 89 and maximum of 121
• High: 93 FPS average (min/max not recorded)
• Ultra: 81 FPS average (min/max not recorded)

The min/max data for Medium settings shows the stability of the frame times. At 1080p Medium, the range from 89 to 121 FPS is a 32 FPS spread, indicating consistent performance. At 1440p Medium, the range is 68 to 92 FPS, a 24 FPS spread. At 4K Medium, the range is 46 to 62, a 16 FPS spread. The tighter spread at higher resolutions suggests heavy GPU load smooths out frame time variance, while lower resolutions allow the CPU to induce more variance.

Best Settings per Resolution

For each resolution, the best preset is the most demanding one that remains at or above 60 FPS, ensuring visual quality without sacrificing smoothness.

3840x2160: Low is the only playable preset, delivering 76 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall below 60 FPS, so Low is the best setting at this resolution.

2560x1440: Ultra is the best setting, with an average of 61 FPS. This barely clears the 60 FPS threshold, which is a razor-thin margin. High (71 FPS) and Medium (80 FPS) offer higher headroom but less visual fidelity, while Ultra provides the maximum preset quality at a playable frame rate.

1920x1080: Ultra is the best setting, with an average of 81 FPS. This is 35% above the playable threshold, providing a comfortable margin. Medium (105 FPS) and High (93 FPS) are also options for more headroom, but Ultra is the most demanding preset that clears 60 FPS.

The data shows a clear progression: at 1080p, Ultra is a safe choice; at 1440p, Ultra is just playable; at 4K, Low is the only option. Players seeking consistent performance above 60 FPS should prioritize 1080p Ultra or 1440p High, while 4K users must accept a lower preset.