Control

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 4K (3840x2160), this combination is not viable for Control. The High preset averages 18 FPS, Medium averages 21 FPS with minimums dipping to 17 FPS and maximums reaching 24 FPS, Low averages 29 FPS, and Ultra averages 16 FPS. Every setting tier at this resolution falls far below the 60 FPS playable threshold, with the gap ranging from 31 FPS (Low) to 44 FPS (Ultra) short of the target.

Moving to 1440p (2560x1440), the results improve but remain firmly in unplayable territory. The High preset delivers an average of 27 FPS, Medium averages 30 FPS with minimums of 26 FPS and maximums of 35 FPS, Low reaches 43 FPS, and Ultra drops to 24 FPS. The best case scenario at this resolution, Low settings, still misses the 60 FPS mark by 17 FPS.

At 1080p (1920x1080), the picture becomes more nuanced. The Low preset averages 57 FPS, just 3 FPS short of the playable threshold. Medium averages 40 FPS with minimums of 34 FPS and maximums of 46 FPS, High averages 36 FPS, and Ultra averages 31 FPS. The data shows that only the Low preset approaches playability, and even it does not clear the 60 FPS bar.

The scaling pattern across resolutions is consistent: each step down in resolution yields roughly a 30-40% average FPS improvement at equivalent settings. From 4K to 1440p at Low settings, the average rises from 29 to 43 FPS, a 48% increase. From 1440p to 1080p at Low, it rises from 43 to 57 FPS, a 33% increase. The same proportional scaling appears at Medium settings, with 21 to 30 to 40 FPS across the three resolutions.

CPU and GPU Roles

The recorded data indicates that the AMD Radeon RX 570 is the dominant performance limiter in this pairing. The Intel Core i7-14700KF is a top-tier processor, sitting in the 94th percentile among all tested CPUs with an average benchmark score of 70,163. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F, which scores 0.2% lower, and the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K, which scores 1% higher. This CPU has substantial headroom for gaming workloads.

The RX 570, by contrast, ranks in the 74th percentile among all tested GPUs with an average benchmark score of 28,766. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 470, which scores 0.8% higher, and the AMD Radeon R9 M295X, which scores 0.7% lower. The GPU's performance class is roughly eight generations behind the CPU's tier in relative standing.

The FPS scaling between resolutions confirms the GPU bottleneck. At 4K, the CPU's capability is largely irrelevant because the GPU cannot feed frames fast enough at any settings level. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is only 13 FPS (29 versus 16), indicating that even reducing graphical load does not unlock meaningful performance gains, a classic sign of a severely GPU-bound scenario.

At 1080p, the situation shifts slightly. The 57 FPS result at Low settings suggests the GPU is approaching its ceiling, but the CPU still has ample headroom. The Core i7-14700KF's 20 cores and 28 threads, with a boost clock of 5.60 GHz, are not the constraint. If the GPU were replaced with a stronger model, the CPU would comfortably support higher frame rates at 1080p.

The preset scaling at each resolution reinforces this interpretation. At 1440p, moving from Low to Medium costs 13 FPS (43 to 30), and Medium to High costs another 3 FPS (30 to 27). At 1080p, Low to Medium costs 17 FPS (57 to 40), a larger drop than at higher resolutions, which indicates the GPU is working harder to maintain those lower-resolution frame rates. The CPU's role is secondary throughout, as even the most demanding Ultra preset at 1080p yields 31 FPS, a result that points to GPU limits rather than processor limits.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Control at 1080p with playable frame rates?

A: No. The best measured result at 1920x1080 is 57 FPS on Low settings, which is 3 FPS short of the 60 FPS playable threshold. All other presets at this resolution fall further behind, with Medium at 40 FPS, High at 36 FPS, and Ultra at 31 FPS.

Q: What is the highest resolution this combination can handle?

A: The data shows no resolution achieves 60 FPS. At 1440p, the best case is 43 FPS on Low settings. At 4K, the best case is 29 FPS on Low settings. The verdict by resolution lists no playable settings for any resolution tested.

Q: How does the RX 570 compare to its closest GPU rivals?

A: The RX 570 has an average benchmark score of 28,766, which places it 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6800M (28,874), 0.8% behind the AMD Radeon RX 470 (28,996), 0.7% ahead of the AMD Radeon R9 M295X (28,580), and 1.2% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 (28,421).

Q: Is the Core i7-14700KF strong enough for modern gaming?

A: Yes. The CPU ranks in the 94th percentile among all tested processors with an average benchmark score of 70,163. It outperforms the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F by 0.2% and the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX by 0.4%, and trails the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K by 1%.

Q: Why does the frame rate drop so much between Low and Ultra settings?

A: The RX 570's limited computational resources cause large performance penalties at higher presets. At 1080p, Ultra averages 31 FPS versus 57 FPS on Low, a 46% reduction. At 4K, Ultra averages 16 FPS versus 29 FPS on Low, a 45% reduction. These drops reflect the GPU's inability to handle increased shading, texture, and post-processing loads.

Q: Does lowering resolution help achieve 60 FPS?

A: No. Even at the lowest tested resolution of 1920x1080 with Low settings, the average FPS is 57, still below the threshold. The scaling from 1440p to 1080p improves results by roughly 33%, but that is insufficient to close the gap from 43 FPS to 60 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific pairing of Intel Core i7-14700KF and AMD Radeon RX 570 ranks 3,549 out of 3,720 tested combinations in Control. That places it in the bottom 5% of all tested systems, a position that reflects the GPU's severe limitation relative to the game's demands.

The rank disparity between the components is instructive. The CPU alone sits in the 94th percentile of all tested processors, while the GPU sits in the 74th percentile of all tested GPUs. The combination's overall rank, however, is dragged down by the GPU, which is the bottleneck in every measured scenario. The 171 positions separating this combo from the bottom of the database (3,549 versus 3,720 total) show that there are still slower pairings, but they are few.

In practical terms, this rank means the system is closer to entry-level hardware than to the mid-range or high-end tier that the CPU alone would suggest. The RX 570, with its 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth, is an end-of-life product from the Polaris generation. Its 5.095 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 32 ROPs are simply insufficient for Control's demanding rendering at playable frame rates, regardless of the CPU's 44,167 Cinebench R23 multicore score or 6,235 single-core score.

The Verdict

This PC cannot run Control at playable frame rates at any resolution or preset tested. The verdict by resolution lists no playable settings for 3840x2160, 2560x1440, or 1920x1080. The playable threshold is 60 FPS, and the closest measured result is 57 FPS at 1080p Low, which misses the mark by 3 FPS.

At 4K, every preset averages between 16 and 29 FPS, making the game effectively unplayable with severe stuttering and input lag. At 1440p, results range from 24 to 43 FPS, which is below the threshold for smooth gameplay but technically renders the game at reduced settings. At 1080p, the Low preset comes within striking distance of 60 FPS but does not cross it, and all higher presets fall to 31-40 FPS.

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 570 is the limiting factor, and no combination of resolution reductions or settings adjustments within the tested range achieves 60 FPS. Users seeking playable performance would need to either upgrade the GPU or accept sub-60 FPS gameplay with reduced visual quality.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves 60 FPS. The best measured result is 29 FPS on Low settings, and the verdict records no playable settings for this resolution. The most demanding preset, Ultra, averages 16 FPS, while Medium averages 21 FPS with minimums of 17 FPS and maximums of 24 FPS.

At 2560x1440, no preset achieves 60 FPS either. The best measured result is 43 FPS on Low settings. Medium averages 30 FPS with minimums of 26 FPS and maximums of 35 FPS, High averages 27 FPS, and Ultra averages 24 FPS. The verdict records no playable settings for this resolution.

At 1920x1080, the closest approach to playability is the Low preset, which averages 57 FPS. This is the only setting tier within 5% of the 60 FPS threshold. Medium averages 40 FPS with minimums of 34 FPS and maximums of 46 FPS, High averages 36 FPS, and Ultra averages 31 FPS. The verdict records no playable settings for this resolution as well, meaning even the best case fails the 60 FPS requirement.

For users who must play Control on this hardware, the data suggests using 1080p Low settings for the best experience, accepting a 3 FPS deficit from the playable threshold. Alternatively, 1440p Low provides a higher resolution image at 43 FPS, which may be preferable for some users despite the lower frame rate. At 4K, no setting tier provides a viable experience, and the game should be avoided at this resolution entirely.