Control

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Control at 1920x1080 with maximum settings?

A: Yes. At 1920x1080 with Ultra settings, the recorded average FPS is 71 frames per second, which is above the 60 FPS playable threshold. The database lists Ultra as a playable setting at this resolution.

Q: What is the best playable setting at 3840x2160?

A: At 4K, only Low settings remain playable. The average FPS at Low is 64.6, while Medium drops to 45.3, High falls to 42.7, and Ultra reaches only 39 FPS. The verdict table identifies Low as the best settings option at this resolution.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core i7-13700K has an average benchmark score of 46881. The AMD Ryzen 9 5900 scores 46971, which is 0.2% higher. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 scores 47022 (0.3% higher). The AMD Ryzen 9 7845HX scores 46654 (0.5% lower), and the Intel Xeon w3-2535 scores 46653 (0.5% lower). The differences are all within one percent.

Q: Where does the RTX 2070 SUPER rank among all tested GPUs?

A: The GPU sits at the 65th percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its average benchmark score is 20282. The nearest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M, scores 20480, which is 1% higher. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile scores 20534 (1.2% higher), the Intel Arc B570 scores 20556 (1.3% higher), and the Intel Arc A750 scores 20582 (1.5% higher).

Q: Is there a large performance gap between Low and Ultra settings at 2560x1440?

A: Yes. At 1440p, Low settings produce 100.2 FPS average, while Ultra drops to 52.7 FPS. That is a difference of 47.5 FPS, nearly halving the frame rate. Medium lands at 72.2 FPS and High at 63.5 FPS.

Q: What is the combo rank for this CPU and GPU pairing in Control?

A: The combination ranks 2144 out of 3720 tested combos for this game. It places in the upper portion of the database, meaning a majority of tested systems outperform it, but it still clears the playable threshold at multiple settings and resolutions.

CPU and GPU Roles

The recorded data for Control shows a clear pattern where the GPU is the dominant factor at higher resolutions, while the CPU becomes more relevant at lower resolutions. At 3840x2160, the frame rate drops sharply as settings increase. Low settings deliver 64.6 FPS, but Medium falls to 45.3 FPS, a reduction of 19.3 FPS. High drops further to 42.7 FPS, and Ultra reaches only 39 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 4K is a 25.6 FPS loss. This steep decline indicates that the rendering workload at 4K is heavily dependent on the graphics processor, and the RTX 2070 SUPER cannot maintain playable frame rates beyond Low settings.

At 2560x1440, the picture improves considerably. Low settings yield 100.2 FPS, Medium produces 72.2 FPS, and High reaches 63.5 FPS. Ultra falls to 52.7 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold. The transition from Low to Ultra at 1440p costs 47.5 FPS. The relative drop between consecutive settings is not uniform: Medium loses 28 FPS from Low, High loses 8.7 FPS from Medium, and Ultra loses 10.8 FPS from High. This suggests that the GPU is still the primary constraint, but the CPU has enough headroom to keep frame rates higher than at 4K.

At 1920x1080, the system performs best. Low settings produce 128.8 FPS, Medium reaches 95.1 FPS, High delivers 79.5 FPS, and Ultra stays at 71 FPS. Every preset clears the 60 FPS threshold. The drop from Low to Ultra is 57.8 FPS, but even the worst case remains comfortably playable. The scaling across resolutions shows that the RTX 2070 SUPER is the limiting factor in this pairing. At 1080p, the i7-13700K can feed the GPU adequately, and the frame rates are high enough that CPU overhead is not visibly limiting. At 4K, the GPU saturates and the CPU has little influence on the outcome.

The data indicates that the i7-13700K has ample compute capacity for Control. The CPU's benchmark results, including a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 30745 and a PassMark multithread score of 45887, place it well above what this game needs. Control is not a heavily threaded title in these measurements, so the CPU role is mostly about maintaining minimum frame stability at lower resolutions. At 1080p and 1440p, the CPU keeps up with the GPU's output without bottlenecking. At 4K, the GPU is the clear bottleneck, and the CPU's performance is largely irrelevant to the final frame rate.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the recorded average FPS values are as follows: Low settings produce 64.6 FPS, Medium produces 45.3 FPS, High produces 42.7 FPS, and Ultra produces 39 FPS. No minimum or maximum FPS values are recorded for any resolution. The only playable setting at 4K is Low, and it clears the 60 FPS threshold by a margin of 4.6 FPS.

At 2560x1440, Low settings deliver 100.2 FPS, Medium delivers 72.2 FPS, High delivers 63.5 FPS, and Ultra delivers 52.7 FPS. Three of the four settings are playable: Low, Medium, and High. Ultra falls 7.3 FPS short of the playable threshold. The difference between Low and Ultra is 47.5 FPS, which shows the significant cost of maximum quality at this resolution.

At 1920x1080, all settings are playable. Low settings reach 128.8 FPS, Medium reaches 95.1 FPS, High reaches 79.5 FPS, and Ultra reaches 71 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 57.8 FPS. Even the most demanding preset maintains an 11 FPS margin above the 60 FPS playable threshold. The 1080p results demonstrate that this combination has substantial headroom for high refresh rate displays if the user selects Medium or Low settings.

The progression across resolutions is consistent. At each resolution, Low is the fastest preset, followed by Medium, then High, then Ultra. The ordering never changes, and the relative gaps between presets are similar at 1440p and 4K. At 1080p, the gaps are larger in absolute terms because the baseline frame rate is much higher.

The Verdict

The database verdict is clear: this system can run Control, but the playable settings depend heavily on resolution. At 1920x1080, every preset is playable, with Ultra averaging 71 FPS. This is the only resolution where the user can enable maximum quality and stay above 60 FPS. At 2560x1440, High is the best playable setting at 63.5 FPS. Medium is also playable at 72.2 FPS, and Low is playable at 100.2 FPS. Ultra is not playable at 1440p, falling to 52.7 FPS.

At 3840x2160, only Low is playable, averaging 64.6 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall below the 60 FPS threshold, with values of 45.3, 42.7, and 39 FPS respectively. The verdict table confirms that 4K users must accept Low settings to maintain smooth gameplay. The system is therefore suitable for 1080p and 1440p gaming with appropriate settings, and it can handle 4K only at the lowest quality preset.

The margin at the playable boundary is worth noting. At 1440p High, the average is 63.5 FPS, which is only 3.5 FPS above the threshold. This leaves little room for demanding scenes that could cause dips below 60 FPS. At 4K Low, the margin is 4.6 FPS, similarly tight. At 1080p Ultra, the margin is 11 FPS, which is more comfortable. Users seeking consistent frame rates should consider Medium at 1440p (72.2 FPS) or Medium at 1080p (95.1 FPS) for additional headroom.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Low, with an average FPS of 64.6. Medium, High, and Ultra all fail to meet the threshold. Users at 4K should select Low settings for playable performance.

At 2560x1440, the most demanding playable preset is High, with an average FPS of 63.5. Medium and Low are also playable, with 72.2 and 100.2 FPS respectively. Ultra is not viable at 52.7 FPS. Users who want the best visual quality at 1440p should use High, but those who prefer a safety margin can choose Medium.

At 1920x1080, the most demanding playable preset is Ultra, with an average FPS of 71. All presets are playable at this resolution. Users can enable maximum settings without falling below the 60 FPS threshold, and the 11 FPS margin provides reasonable confidence for typical gameplay.

The recommended settings per resolution are therefore Low at 4K, High at 1440p, and Ultra at 1080p. These represent the highest quality options that remain playable according to the recorded data.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i7-13700K and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER ranks 2144 out of 3720 tested combos in Control. This places the system in the 57.6th percentile of all tested combinations, meaning roughly 42% of tested systems perform worse and roughly 58% perform better. The rank reflects the GPU's mid-range position in the database, as the RTX 2070 SUPER sits at the 65th percentile among all GPUs, while the CPU sits at the 89th percentile among all CPUs.

The disparity between the CPU's high percentile and the GPU's lower percentile explains the overall combo rank. The i7-13700K is a strong processor by database metrics, but Control's performance in these measurements is heavily influenced by the GPU. The RTX 2070 SUPER, while capable at 1080p and 1440p, limits the system at 4K and prevents higher preset selections. The combo rank is therefore more representative of the GPU's performance tier than the CPU's.

Within the context of Control specifically, the rank of 2144 out of 3720 indicates that many systems with newer or higher-tier GPUs will outperform this pairing. However, the system still achieves playable frame rates at all tested resolutions with appropriate settings, which is the primary criterion for most users.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the CPU are all within one percent of its average benchmark score. The AMD Ryzen 9 5900 scores 46971, which is 0.2% higher than the i7-13700K's 46881. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 scores 47022, 0.3% higher. The AMD Ryzen 9 7845HX scores 46654, 0.5% lower, and the Intel Xeon w3-2535 scores 46653, 0.5% lower. In practical terms, any of these processors would deliver nearly identical performance in CPU-bound scenarios. For Control, where the GPU is the main constraint, swapping the CPU for any of these alternatives would have a negligible effect on the measured FPS.

The nearest rivals for the GPU are similarly close. The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M scores 20480, which is 1% higher than the RTX 2070 SUPER's 20282. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile scores 20534, 1.2% higher. The Intel Arc B570 scores 20556, 1.3% higher, and the Intel Arc A750 scores 20582, 1.5% higher. These differences mean that a system with any of these GPUs would produce frame rates within a small margin of the RTX 2070 SUPER in Control. The RTX 3070 Mobile is a laptop part, so its desktop equivalent would likely perform better, but the database places it in the same performance neighborhood.

Users considering alternative hardware should expect similar gameplay experiences with any of these CPU or GPU options. The frame rates in Control would shift by only one or two FPS, which is within measurement variance and unlikely to change the playable settings at any resolution. The i7-13700K and RTX 2070 SUPER pairing is well balanced for this game, with the GPU as the limiting factor. Choosing a faster GPU would improve performance more than choosing a faster CPU, but the closest rivals in the database do not offer a meaningful upgrade without moving to a higher performance tier altogether.