Control

Can Intel Core i7-14700KF + AMD Radeon RX 6600 run Control? The measured data says yes, but with important caveats depending on your target resolution and quality expectations. At 1920x1080, this pairing delivers a smooth experience across most presets, while 2560x1440 requires a step down to Low for a locked 60 FPS experience. At 3840x2160, the combination falls short of the 60 FPS playable threshold at every settings preset tested. This analysis breaks down the exact measured frame rates, how this combo ranks against other tested configurations, and where the CPU and GPU each carry the load.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The benchmark data provides average FPS figures for twelve distinct combinations of resolution and quality preset. No minimum or maximum frame time data is included in the fact pack, so this breakdown focuses strictly on average FPS across the three resolutions and four settings levels.

1920x1080 (1080p)

• Low: 106.8 FPS average
• Medium: 79.6 FPS average
• High: 68.1 FPS average
• Ultra: 58.5 FPS average

The jump from Low to Medium costs 27.2 FPS, a 25.5% drop, while the move from Medium to High reduces performance by 11.5 FPS. The most demanding preset, Ultra, sits just 1.5 FPS below the 60 FPS playable threshold, making it borderline for users who prioritize visual fidelity over a hard frame rate cap.

2560x1440 (1440p)

• Low: 84.7 FPS average
• Medium: 57.7 FPS average
• High: 52.9 FPS average
• Ultra: 47.2 FPS average

At 1440p, the Low preset provides substantial headroom above 60 FPS, but every other preset falls short. Medium and High are 2.3 and 7.1 FPS below the threshold, respectively, while Ultra trails by 12.8 FPS. The scaling from Low to Medium is severe: a 27.0 FPS drop, indicating a heavy GPU load increase at this resolution step.

3840x2160 (4K)

• Low: 57.7 FPS average
• Medium: 40.6 FPS average
• High: 32.8 FPS average
• Ultra: 27.6 FPS average

No preset at 4K reaches the 60 FPS playable threshold. Even Low, the least demanding setting, is 2.3 FPS short. The gap widens dramatically as quality rises: Medium loses 17.1 FPS versus Low, High loses another 7.8 FPS, and Ultra drops a further 5.2 FPS. The 4K Ultra result of 27.6 FPS is less than half the 1080p Low result, illustrating the GPU's struggle at this resolution.

How This Combo Ranks

Among 3,720 tested CPU+GPU combinations for Control, this pairing of Intel Core i7-14700KF and AMD Radeon RX 6600 holds the 2,870th position. That places it in the lower quartile of all tested combos, which is consistent with the GPU being a mid-range part from the Radeon RX 6000 series while the CPU sits near the top of the performance heap.

The CPU itself ranks in the 94th percentile against all CPUs in the benchmark database, with an average benchmark score of 70,163. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F (0.2% slower), AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX (0.4% slower), AMD Ryzen 9 7950X (0.9% slower), and Intel Core Ultra 7 265K (1.0% faster). These delta percentages show that the i7-14700KF is essentially at parity with the fastest consumer CPUs available, meaning the processor is not the bottleneck in most gaming scenarios.

By contrast, the GPU sits in the 63rd percentile against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 19,036. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 (0% delta), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile (0.1% slower), NVIDIA Tesla K20m (0.3% slower), and NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation (0.4% faster). The RX 6600's performance class is clearly lower than the CPU's, which explains why the combo rank (2,870 out of 3,720) is significantly worse than the CPU's percentile would suggest on its own.

Best Settings per Resolution

The playable threshold for this analysis is 60 FPS average. Based on the measured data, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS at each resolution is as follows:

1920x1080: High settings at 68.1 FPS average. This is the highest quality preset that clears the 60 FPS bar, with 8.1 FPS of headroom. Ultra falls short at 58.5 FPS, so users must choose between High quality at a comfortable frame rate or Ultra quality with occasional dips below 60 FPS.

2560x1440: Low settings at 84.7 FPS average. This is the only playable preset at 1440p. Medium comes close at 57.7 FPS, but it misses the threshold by 2.3 FPS. The fact that Low provides 24.7 FPS of headroom above the threshold suggests that a Medium preset with some custom tweaks could potentially hit 60 FPS, but the stock Medium preset does not.

3840x2160: No playable settings exist at this resolution. The best result is Low at 57.7 FPS, which is 2.3 FPS below the threshold. The verdict data confirms this, listing no playable settings and no best settings for 4K.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For users considering the CPU and GPU separately, the nearest rivals provide a sense of what nearby hardware would behave similarly in this game.

On the CPU side, the Intel Core i7-14700KF's nearest rivals in the benchmark database are all within a 1% performance delta. The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F (0.2% slower), AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX (0.4% slower), and AMD Ryzen 9 7950X (0.9% slower) would all deliver virtually identical CPU-bound performance in Control. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K is 1.0% faster, which is a negligible difference in real-world gaming. Since Control's measured FPS at 1080p Low (106.8 FPS) and 1440p Low (84.7 FPS) suggest the GPU is the limiting factor, swapping the CPU to any of these rivals would have minimal impact on the numbers reported here.

On the GPU side, the AMD Radeon RX 6600's nearest rivals are more varied. The NVIDIA Quadro K6000 matches it exactly (0% delta), while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile is 0.1% slower, the NVIDIA Tesla K20m is 0.3% slower, and the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation is 0.4% faster. These are all within a 0.7% performance band, meaning any of these GPUs would produce nearly identical frame rates in Control at the same settings and resolution. The RTX 4050 Mobile being a laptop part is notable, but its benchmark score aligns closely with the desktop RX 6600.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals a clear split in how much each component matters depending on resolution and preset. The CPU, with its 20 cores and 28 threads, is a top-tier processor (94th percentile), while the GPU is a mid-range part (63rd percentile). This imbalance shows up directly in the FPS scaling.

At 1920x1080, the GPU is almost certainly the primary constraint. The FPS drops from 106.8 at Low to 58.5 at Ultra, a reduction of 45.2% as settings increase. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS would stay relatively flat across presets because the processor's workload (draw calls, physics, game logic) does not scale as strongly with graphics quality. The fact that FPS scales so steeply with settings points to the RX 6600 being saturated.

At 2560x1440, the same pattern holds but with even steeper drops. Low produces 84.7 FPS, while Ultra drops to 47.2 FPS, a 44.3% reduction. The gap between Low and Medium is 27.0 FPS, which is larger than the 27.2 FPS drop between Low and Medium at 1080p, but the percentage reduction is similar. This confirms that resolution scaling is driven by the GPU's pixel throughput and memory bandwidth (224.0 GB/s on a 128-bit bus), not by CPU capabilities.

At 3840x2160, the GPU's limitations become severe. Low yields 57.7 FPS, and Ultra drops to 27.6 FPS. The 30.1 FPS difference between these presets is the largest absolute gap across all resolutions. The CPU's role at 4K is minimal because the GPU is so heavily loaded that it cannot feed frames fast enough to stress the i7-14700KF. The CPU's 125 W TDP and high single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core score of 6,235) are simply irrelevant when the GPU is rendering at 8.3 million pixels.

The verdict data reinforces this: at 1080p, three presets are playable (High, Low, Medium), meaning the GPU can handle the load. At 1440p, only Low is playable, and at 4K none are. This scaling pattern is classic GPU-bound behavior. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the playable preset list would shrink less dramatically across resolutions, and the FPS at Low settings would be more consistent between 1080p and 1440p.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Control at 1080p with high settings?

A: Yes. The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 with High settings is 68.1 FPS, which exceeds the 60 FPS playable threshold by 8.1 FPS. Ultra settings drop to 58.5 FPS, just below the threshold.

Q: What is the best playable preset at 1440p?

A: Low settings is the only preset that stays at or above 60 FPS at 2560x1440, delivering 84.7 FPS average. Medium comes close at 57.7 FPS but misses the threshold by 2.3 FPS.

Q: Is 4K playable with this hardware?

A: No. At 3840x2160, even Low settings only reach 57.7 FPS average, which is 2.3 FPS below the 60 FPS threshold. The verdict data confirms there are no playable settings at 4K.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to all tested combinations?

A: It ranks 2,870th out of 3,720 tested CPU+GPU combos for Control. This places it in the lower quartile, primarily due to the GPU's mid-range performance.

Q: Which component is the bottleneck in this game?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU ranks in the 94th percentile, while the GPU sits in the 63rd percentile. FPS scales steeply with resolution and settings, which indicates GPU-bound performance.

Q: Would a CPU upgrade improve FPS in Control?

A: No, based on the data. The nearest CPU rivals (AMD Ryzen 7 9700F, Ryzen 9 7940HX, Ryzen 9 7950X) are all within 0.9% performance of the i7-14700KF, and the GPU is already the bottleneck at all resolutions tested.