Control

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for this combination shows a clear pattern: the Intel Core i7-14700F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 580 can only deliver a consistently playable experience at 1080p with the lowest preset. At every higher resolution or more demanding setting, the average frame rate falls below the 60 FPS threshold.

At 1920x1080, the results are as follows: Low settings produce an average of 62.7 FPS, which is the only preset that clears the 60 FPS mark. Medium settings drop to 45.7 FPS, High settings yield 38.4 FPS, and Ultra settings bottom out at 35.8 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is substantial, a drop of 17 FPS, which suggests the GPU is heavily loaded by even modest quality increases at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, the situation worsens significantly. Low settings average 48.8 FPS, which is playable in a loose sense but below the 60 FPS target. Medium settings fall to 34.1 FPS, High settings reach 29.5 FPS, and Ultra settings manage only 28.4 FPS. The drop from 1080p Low to 1440p Low is 13.9 FPS, indicating that the resolution increase imposes a heavy cost on the RX 580.

At 3840x2160, the combination is essentially unplayable. Low settings average 34.9 FPS, which is the best result at this resolution. Medium settings drop to 21.1 FPS, High settings fall to 20.4 FPS, and Ultra settings produce a dismal 16.2 FPS. None of these figures approach the 60 FPS threshold, and even the Low preset result is below what most players would consider acceptable for a fast-paced action game.

Across all resolutions, the scaling from Ultra to Low is consistent: lowering settings improves frame rates by roughly a factor of two at 1080p and 1440p, while at 4K the improvement is less pronounced due to the pixel fill rate limits of the RX 580. The data shows no min or max FPS values recorded, so the averages represent the only available metric for assessing stability.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Control at 60 FPS on a 1080p monitor?

A: Yes, but only with Low settings. The recorded average at 1920x1080 with Low settings is 62.7 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS threshold. Every other preset at this resolution falls short, with Medium at 45.7 FPS, High at 38.4 FPS, and Ultra at 35.8 FPS.

Q: What is the best preset for 1440p gaming with this combo?

A: None of the tested presets reach 60 FPS at 2560x1440. The best result is Low settings at 48.8 FPS, followed by Medium at 34.1 FPS, High at 29.5 FPS, and Ultra at 28.4 FPS. Players with a 1440p monitor would need to accept frame rates well below the target or lower the resolution.

Q: Is 4K gaming possible with the RX 580 and i7-14700F?

A: Technically possible, but not advisable. At 3840x2160, the highest average FPS is 34.9 with Low settings. Medium drops to 21.1 FPS, High to 20.4 FPS, and Ultra to 16.2 FPS. These results are far below the 60 FPS threshold and indicate a poor experience at this resolution.

Q: How does the RX 580 compare to its nearest rivals in terms of overall GPU performance?

A: The RX 580 sits at the 53rd percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its average benchmark score is 12928. The nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile with a score of 12940, which is 0.1% faster. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER scores 12986, 0.4% faster, while the AMD Radeon 740M scores 12870, 0.5% slower, and the AMD FirePro W5100 scores 12847, 0.6% slower. These are very close margins, so performance differences among these cards are minimal.

Q: What about the CPU's standing in the database?

A: The Intel Core i7-14700F ranks in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 53620. Its nearest rival, the Intel Xeon 6505P, scores 53701, which is 0.2% higher. The Intel Xeon Phi 7290 scores 53469 (0.3% lower), the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X scores 53288 (0.6% lower), and the AMD EPYC 7313P scores 53206 (0.8% lower). This places the CPU well above the GPU in relative performance.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor for this game at 1080p?

A: The GPU is clearly the bottleneck at 1080p. The CPU is far more powerful relative to its peers, ranking in the 91st percentile, while the GPU sits at the 53rd percentile. The large frame rate drops when moving from Low to Medium settings indicate that the RX 580's rendering capabilities, not the CPU's processing power, determine the playable preset.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data from this combination shows a lopsided balance between the Intel Core i7-14700F and the AMD Radeon RX 580. The CPU is a high-end desktop part with 20 cores and 28 threads, ranking in the 91st percentile of all CPUs tested in the database. The GPU, by contrast, is an older Polaris architecture card that ranks in the 53rd percentile of all GPUs. This disparity means the RX 580 is the overwhelming bottleneck in Control.

At 1920x1080, the scaling between presets reveals the GPU's limitations. Low settings average 62.7 FPS, but Medium drops to 45.7 FPS, a 27% reduction. High settings fall further to 38.4 FPS, and Ultra reaches 35.8 FPS. Such steep penalties for each quality tier indicate that the graphics card is running near its maximum capacity even at the lowest settings. The CPU has ample headroom, as evidenced by its high benchmark scores, but the GPU cannot translate that headroom into higher frame rates.

At 2560x1440, the GPU's role becomes even more pronounced. The resolution increase from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings reduces the average from 62.7 FPS to 48.8 FPS, a 22% drop. This is a classic GPU-bound scenario, where the pixel fill rate and shading throughput of the RX 580 limit performance. The CPU's influence is negligible at this point, as it is not waiting on any data from the graphics card.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is completely overwhelmed. The best preset, Low, averages only 34.9 FPS, which is barely half of the 60 FPS target. The scaling from 1440p Low to 4K Low shows a further 28% drop. The RX 580's 256-bit memory bus and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for the pixel workload at 4K. The CPU's performance, while strong in synthetic benchmarks, cannot compensate for the GPU's architectural age.

The recorded data shows no min or max FPS values, but the averages alone tell a clear story: the RX 580 is the decisive component for this game across all resolutions. The i7-14700F provides more than enough processing power, but it is effectively idle while the GPU struggles to keep up.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database's ranking of tested CPU and GPU combinations for Control, this pairing ranks 3395 out of 3720 combinations. This places it in the bottom 9% of all tested systems, which is consistent with the measured frame rates. The RX 580's modest GPU benchmark score of 12928, combined with its 53rd percentile standing, drags down what would otherwise be a strong CPU contribution.

The CPU's high percentile (91st) does little to improve the overall ranking, since Control is a GPU-intensive title at the resolutions tested. The i7-14700F's nearest rivals, including the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X, show how much performance is available on the CPU side, but the GPU cannot leverage it. This is a classic mismatch: a top-tier processor paired with a mid-range graphics card from an older generation.

The ranking reflects the practical experience suggested by the FPS data. A combo ranked in the 3395th position out of 3720 is not expected to deliver high refresh rates or high-quality presets. The only playable scenario, 1080p Low at 62.7 FPS, is a low bar that barely clears the 60 FPS threshold.

The Verdict

Can this PC run Control? The answer depends entirely on the resolution and settings. According to the verdict data, the only playable configuration is 1920x1080 with Low settings, which produces an average of 62.7 FPS. This clears the 60 FPS threshold, but just barely, and leaves no headroom for demanding scenes or background tasks.

At 2560x1440, there are no playable settings. The best result, Low at 48.8 FPS, is below the 60 FPS target. Players with a 1440p monitor would need to accept a frame rate that is noticeably choppy in action sequences. The same applies to 3840x2160, where even the best preset, Low at 34.9 FPS, is far from smooth.

For a game like Control, which features fast-paced combat and physics-heavy environments, 60 FPS is a reasonable target. This combination only achieves that at the lowest possible quality on a 1080p display. If the player is willing to lower the resolution or accept sub-60 FPS performance, the game is technically playable, but the experience will be compromised.

The CPU and GPU both have known strengths: the i7-14700F is a top-tier processor with a high benchmark score, and the RX 580 is a capable 1080p card from its era. However, the GPU's age and the game's demands create a situation where the combo falls short of the 60 FPS goal everywhere except the most forgiving preset.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the best settings that stay at or above 60 FPS are Low, with an average of 62.7 FPS. This is the only preset that meets the threshold. Medium (45.7 FPS), High (38.4 FPS), and Ultra (35.8 FPS) all fall short, so players who prioritize smooth gameplay should stick with Low.

At 2560x1440, no preset reaches 60 FPS. The best available setting is Low at 48.8 FPS, but this does not meet the playable threshold. Medium (34.1 FPS), High (29.5 FPS), and Ultra (28.4 FPS) are progressively worse. Players at this resolution would need to consider lowering the resolution to 1080p or accepting a frame rate below 60.

At 3840x2160, the situation is similar: no preset reaches 60 FPS. Low settings average 34.9 FPS, which is the highest result, but it is still well below the threshold. Medium (21.1 FPS), High (20.4 FPS), and Ultra (16.2 FPS) are all unplayable by any reasonable standard.

For players with a 1080p monitor, the choice is simple: use Low settings for a playable experience. For those with higher-resolution displays, the data suggests that this combination is not suitable for Control at 60 FPS, and users should either upgrade the GPU or run the game at a lower resolution with Low settings.