Control

Can Intel Core i7-14700KF + NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 run Control? The recorded data says no, not at the 60 FPS threshold the database uses for playability. This pairing produces a system that ranks near the bottom of all tested combinations, at position 3623 out of 3720. The CPU is a top-tier part, sitting in the 94th percentile of all processors, but the GTX 1650 is a 40th percentile GPU, and for Control the GPU becomes the absolute bottleneck. Across every resolution and preset tested, the average frame rate falls well short of 60 FPS, meaning this combo is not viable for smooth gameplay in this title. The following sections break down exactly what the measurements show.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The database contains 12 measured FPS points for this combo, covering four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) at three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, 3840x2160). The data only records average FPS; no minimum or maximum frame time values were captured for any configuration. All results are below the 60 FPS playable threshold, and most are far below.

At 1920x1080, the best case is the Low preset, which delivers an average of 56.4 FPS. That is the only result within striking distance of 60 FPS, but it still misses the mark. Moving up to Medium drops the average to 41.1 FPS, a loss of roughly 27% from Low. High settings produce 35.8 FPS, and Ultra falls to 29.6 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 1080p is a 26.8 FPS drop, meaning the GTX 1650 loses nearly half its frame rate when going from the lightest to the heaviest preset.

At 2560x1440, the situation worsens considerably. Low settings average 40.6 FPS, which is the only result above 40 FPS at this resolution. Medium drops to 28.5 FPS, High to 26.5 FPS, and Ultra to 21.5 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra here is 19.1 FPS. Compared to the same presets at 1080p, the resolution increase costs between 14 and 16 FPS depending on the preset, a clear sign that the GPU is running out of pixel throughput.

At 3840x2160, the combo is essentially unplayable by any standard. Low settings produce 31.2 FPS, Medium drops to 19.9 FPS, High to 19.7 FPS, and Ultra to 16.0 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 15.2 FPS. Notably, Medium and High are nearly identical at this resolution, with only a 0.2 FPS difference, suggesting that factors other than raw shading load, likely memory bandwidth or fill rate, are capping performance. The GTX 1650 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, and at 4K the demand on that memory system becomes severe.

The data shows a consistent pattern: every preset at every resolution falls below 60 FPS. The highest recorded average is 56.4 FPS at 1080p Low, and the lowest is 16.0 FPS at 4K Ultra. There is no configuration in the database where this combo reaches the playable threshold.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals in the database for the two components help contextualize where this combo sits. For the CPU, the Intel Core i7-14700KF has an average benchmark score of 70163. The closest alternative is the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F, which scores 69996, a delta of only 0.2% behind. The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX scores 69875, 0.4% behind, and the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X scores 69515, 0.9% behind. On the other side, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K scores 70879, which is 1% ahead of the 14700KF. These deltas are all within a couple of percentage points, meaning any of these CPUs would perform nearly identically in a CPU-bound scenario. For Control, however, the CPU is not the limiting factor, so swapping among these processors would change almost nothing in the measured FPS.

For the GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 has an average benchmark score of 7472. The nearest rivals are not modern gaming cards. The AMD Radeon HD 8850M scores 7447, 0.3% behind. The Intel UHD Graphics 750 scores 7441, 0.4% behind. The AMD Radeon R7 350 scores 7425, 0.6% behind. The Intel Arc A310 scores 7550, which is 1% ahead. These are all integrated or low-end discrete parts, and their deltas are tiny. In practice, any of these GPUs would produce frame rates in Control that are within a few percent of the GTX 1650, meaning they would all fail the 60 FPS test just as decisively. The GTX 1650 sits at the 40th percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals are all clustered at that same low performance tier.

Best Settings per Resolution

The database defines playability as an average of at least 60 FPS. For this combo, no setting at any resolution achieves that threshold. The verdict by resolution lists no playable settings for 1920x1080, 2560x1440, or 3840x2160, and the best settings field is null for all three.

The closest the combo comes to the threshold is 1080p Low, with an average of 56.4 FPS. That is 3.6 FPS short of playable. At 1440p, the best result is Low at 40.6 FPS, which is 19.4 FPS short. At 4K, the best result is Low at 31.2 FPS, which is 28.8 FPS short. There is no preset that stays at or above 60 FPS, so the practical recommendation from the data is that this combo cannot run Control smoothly at any resolution. Lowering to the Low preset at 1080p gets close, but still misses the mark. Users who accept sub-60 FPS gameplay could run 1080p Low, but the database does not classify that as playable.

FAQ

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

A: No. The highest average FPS at 1920x1080 is 56.4 FPS on Low settings, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall further, to 41.1, 35.8, and 29.6 FPS respectively.

Q: What is the best settings preset for this combo at 1440p?

A: The best recorded result at 2560x1440 is Low settings with an average of 40.6 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra produce 28.5, 26.5, and 21.5 FPS, all well below the playable threshold.

Q: How does the GTX 1650 compare to its nearest GPU rivals for this game?

A: The GTX 1650 has an average benchmark score of 7472. Its nearest rivals, the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (7447), Intel UHD Graphics 750 (7441), and AMD Radeon R7 350 (7425), are all within 0.6% behind. The Intel Arc A310 is 1% ahead at 7550. These deltas are so small that all of them would produce nearly identical, unplayable frame rates in Control.

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

A: The GPU is the limiting factor. The Intel Core i7-14700KF ranks in the 94th percentile of all CPUs, while the GTX 1650 ranks in the 40th percentile of GPUs. The FPS drops heavily as resolution increases, from a best of 56.4 FPS at 1080p Low down to 31.2 FPS at 4K Low, which indicates the graphics card cannot keep up with pixel output demands.

Q: What is the best average FPS this combo can achieve in Control?

A: The highest average FPS recorded across all 12 measurements is 56.4 FPS, which occurs at 1920x1080 with Low settings. No other preset and resolution combination comes within 15 FPS of that number.

Q: Does this combo rank high among tested systems for Control?

A: No. The combo ranks 3623 out of 3720 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom few percent of all systems in the database for this game.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data makes it clear that the GPU dominates the performance picture for Control with this pairing. The CPU, an Intel Core i7-14700KF, is a 20-core, 28-thread processor with a boost clock of 5.60 GHz and a 94th percentile ranking among all CPUs. It scores 44167 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 6235 in single-core, numbers that place it far above what a game like Control needs. The GPU, a GTX 1650, has 896 shading units, 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, and a 128-bit memory bus, and it ranks in the 40th percentile. That mismatch is visible in the scaling between resolutions.

Look at the Low preset across all three resolutions. At 1080p it averages 56.4 FPS. At 1440p it drops to 40.6 FPS, a 28% reduction. At 4K it falls to 31.2 FPS, another 23% reduction from 1440p. If the CPU were the bottleneck, these resolution changes would have little effect on frame rate, since the CPU workload is largely independent of pixel count. Instead, the frame rate drops sharply with every resolution increase, which is the signature of a GPU that is saturated at its fill rate and memory bandwidth limits.

The preset scaling reinforces this. At 1080p, going from Low to Ultra drops the frame rate from 56.4 to 29.6 FPS, a 47% loss. At 1440p, the same preset change drops from 40.6 to 21.5 FPS, a 47% loss as well. At 4K, Low to Ultra goes from 31.2 to 16.0 FPS, a 49% loss. The consistent percentage losses across resolutions indicate that the GPU is scaling with the rendering load in a predictable way, and the CPU has enough headroom to feed it without becoming the constraining factor. Even the weakest result, 16.0 FPS at 4K Ultra, is still a GPU-bound situation; a slower CPU would not change that number meaningfully.

For a user considering upgrades, the data points exclusively at the GPU as the part to replace. The CPU is more than adequate for this game and would pair well with a much stronger graphics card. The GTX 1650 is the reason this combo fails the 60 FPS threshold at every setting.

How This Combo Ranks

The overall ranking for this combo in Control is 3623 out of 3720 tested combinations. That places it in the bottom 2.6% of all systems in the database for this game. It is a very low ranking, and it aligns with the measured FPS data, which shows no configuration reaching the playable threshold.

The ranking reflects the severe GPU limitation. A combo with a high-end CPU and a low-end GPU will often perform worse than a balanced mid-range pairing, and that is exactly what the data shows here. The 14700KF is a 94th percentile CPU, but it cannot compensate for a 40th percentile GPU in a game that is heavily graphics-bound. The nearest CPU rivals, such as the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F or the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K, would rank nearly identically if paired with the same GTX 1650, because the delta in CPU performance is only 0.2% to 1%. The GPU is the anchor.

For Control specifically, this combo is effectively a demonstration of how much a weak GPU can hold back a strong platform. The rank of 3623 out of 3720 is a clear signal that users should not expect playable performance at any resolution. The only path to a better result is a different GPU, since the CPU has ample headroom. The database records no other tested combos with this exact pairing, but the percentile data for each component makes the outcome predictable: any GPU with a higher percentile than the GTX 1650 would improve the frame rates substantially, while any CPU change within the nearest rival group would not move the needle.