Control

The Intel Core i9-14900K paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 delivers a highly capable Control experience, with the data showing playable performance at every resolution tested, though the margin of comfort varies dramatically. At 4K, the combo lands exactly on the 60 FPS threshold at High settings, making it the upper bound for smooth play, while at 1440p and 1080p, the system has enough headroom to run the game at its Ultra preset with average frame rates well above the playable threshold. The benchmark results indicate that this configuration is firmly in the upper echelon of tested combos, ranking 1071st out of 3720 total combinations, which places it in the 71st percentile of all tested systems.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions (3840x2160, 2560x1440, and 1920x1080) and four settings presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra), with min and max values only provided for the Medium preset at each resolution. Starting at 4K, the system produces an average of 94 FPS on Low settings, which drops to 67 FPS on Medium with a minimum of 57 FPS and a maximum of 77 FPS. High settings at 4K yield exactly 60 FPS on average, while Ultra falls below the playable threshold at 52 FPS. The lack of min/max data for Low, High, and Ultra presets at this resolution means the stability profile is only partially characterized, but the Medium preset’s 57 FPS floor suggests that occasional dips below 60 are possible even at Medium.

At 2560x1440, the performance scales significantly upward. Low settings produce an average of 140 FPS, Medium delivers 99 FPS with a range of 84 to 114 FPS, High reaches 88 FPS, and Ultra maintains a solid 77 FPS average. The Medium preset’s minimum of 84 FPS indicates that even the most demanding moments at 1440p stay comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold. This resolution represents the sweet spot for the combo, where even the most demanding preset remains playable with a substantial margin.

At 1920x1080, the system shows its strongest performance. Low settings hit 185 FPS average, Medium delivers 131 FPS with a minimum of 111 FPS and a maximum of 151 FPS, High achieves 117 FPS, and Ultra still manages 101 FPS on average. The data reveals that at 1080p, the RTX 3080 is never the limiting factor, as even the Ultra preset maintains triple-digit frame rates. The scaling from 4K to 1080p shows a roughly 1.9x improvement in average FPS at Ultra settings (52 to 101 FPS), indicating that resolution scaling follows a predictable pattern for this combination.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark data reveals a clear division of labor between the Intel Core i9-14900K and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 depending on resolution. At 3840x2160, the GPU is the dominant constraint, as evidenced by the steep drop in frame rates when moving from Low to Ultra settings (94 FPS to 52 FPS, a 45% reduction). The CPU’s 24 cores and 32 threads, which score 39399.5 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 58674 in Passmark multithread, provide ample headroom that is unlikely to be taxed at 4K, where pixel throughput is the primary bottleneck.

At 2560x1440, the balance shifts slightly toward a more even distribution of work. The performance gap between Low and Ultra narrows to 45% (140 FPS to 77 FPS), suggesting that while the GPU still carries most of the load, the CPU is beginning to contribute more meaningfully to frame generation. The i9-14900K’s single-thread performance, evidenced by its 2262.5 Cinebench R23 single-core score and 4697 Passmark single-thread score, positions it well to feed the GPU at this resolution, where draw calls and physics calculations become more prominent.

At 1920x1080, the CPU’s role becomes more significant, though the GPU still dominates. The scaling from Low to Ultra (185 FPS to 101 FPS) shows a 45% reduction, identical to the 1440p scaling, which indicates that the RTX 3080 remains the primary limiter even at lower resolutions. However, the absolute frame rates (101 FPS at Ultra) suggest that neither component is being fully saturated, as the combination produces results that exceed what either component could achieve independently. The data indicates that the i9-14900K’s high boost clock of 6.00 GHz and substantial cache hierarchy (36 MB shared L3) prevent CPU bottlenecking across all tested configurations.

Best Settings per Resolution

The verdict data identifies the most demanding preset that maintains at least 60 FPS average at each resolution. At 3840x2160, the best playable setting is High, which delivers exactly 60 FPS on average. This is a borderline result, as the absence of min/max data for High settings means the actual frame time consistency is unknown, but the average meets the playable threshold. Ultra at 4K falls short at 52 FPS, making it unsuitable for smooth gameplay despite being technically runnable.

At 2560x1440, the system can handle Ultra settings with an average of 77 FPS. This provides a 28% margin above the 60 FPS threshold, giving reasonable headroom for demanding scenes. The Medium preset’s minimum of 84 FPS at this resolution suggests that even the most intensive sequences under Ultra would likely stay above 60, though the data does not include min/max values for Ultra to confirm this. The choice of Ultra at 1440p represents the best visual quality without sacrificing playability.

At 1920x1080, Ultra settings deliver 101 FPS on average, which is nearly 1.7x the playable threshold. This gives substantial room for frame rate drops without dipping below 60 FPS, making it the clear recommendation for 1080p. The Medium preset’s minimum of 111 FPS at this resolution is higher than the Ultra average, suggesting that even the most demanding scenes at Ultra are unlikely to approach the playability boundary. For users prioritizing maximum visual fidelity, 1080p Ultra is the optimal configuration, while 1440p Ultra offers a strong balance of resolution and quality.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank data places this configuration at 1071st out of 3720 tested combinations, which corresponds to the 71st percentile of all systems evaluated for Control. This ranking indicates that the i9-14900K + RTX 3080 pairing outperforms roughly 71% of tested combinations, placing it in the upper third of systems. The CPU alone sits in the 95th percentile among all tested CPUs, while the GPU ranks in the 68th percentile among all tested GPUs, showing that the processor is relatively stronger than the graphics card within this pairing.

The discrepancy between CPU and GPU percentiles (95 vs 68) suggests that the system’s overall rank is constrained by the GPU rather than the CPU. In Control, which appears to be GPU-bound at higher resolutions based on the FPS scaling data, the RTX 3080’s 68th percentile standing is likely the limiting factor for the combo’s 71st percentile rank. The i9-14900K’s exceptional CPU performance, with an average benchmark score of 79097, provides more headroom than the RTX 3080 can utilize in most scenarios, meaning that upgrading the GPU would yield more tangible FPS improvements than upgrading the CPU.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rival data for the CPU shows several processors with nearly identical average scores. The Intel Core i9-14900KF leads with an average score of 79371, which is 0.3% higher than the i9-14900K’s 79097, making it a drop-in equivalent for this pairing. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus scores 79574 (0.6% higher), and the AMD EPYC 7413 scores 80041 (1.2% higher), while the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 scores 77740 (1.7% lower). All four rivals fall within a 3% performance band, meaning any of these CPUs would produce nearly identical frame rates in Control when paired with the RTX 3080.

On the GPU side, the nearest rivals are surprisingly close in average benchmark scores but represent very different hardware tiers. The NVIDIA P106-100 scores 23249 (0.3% higher than the RTX 3080’s 23172), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 scores 23250 (0.3% higher), the AMD Radeon RX 6600M scores 23273 (0.4% higher), and the AMD Radeon R9 M290X scores 23276 (0.4% higher). These delta values are all within 0.5%, indicating that the RTX 3080’s average benchmark performance is nearly indistinguishable from these alternatives. However, the RTX 3080’s specific architecture features, including 8704 shading units and 68 RT cores, may produce different real-world results in Control compared to these rivals, which the benchmark data does not capture.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest playable setting at 4K resolution?

A: The data indicates that High settings at 3840x2160 produce an average of 60 FPS, which meets the playable threshold. Ultra settings at this resolution fall below at 52 FPS, so High is the maximum playable preset at 4K.

Q: Can this system run Control at 1440p with Ultra settings?

A: Yes, the measured FPS data shows an average of 77 FPS at 2560x1440 with Ultra settings, which is 28% above the 60 FPS playable threshold. The Medium preset at this resolution has a minimum of 84 FPS, suggesting Ultra should maintain playable frame rates.

Q: How does the RTX 3080 compare to its closest GPU rivals?

A: The RTX 3080 has an average benchmark score of 23172, while its nearest rivals score between 23249 and 23276, representing deltas of -0.3% to -0.4%. This means the RTX 3080 performs within 0.5% of these alternatives in synthetic benchmarks.

Q: What is the performance difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, Low settings produce 185 FPS average while Ultra produces 101 FPS average, representing a 45% reduction in frame rate when moving from the lowest to the highest quality preset.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more important for this game at 4K?

A: The data shows that at 3840x2160, frame rates drop from 94 FPS at Low to 52 FPS at Ultra, a 45% reduction, indicating the GPU is the primary bottleneck. The i9-14900K’s 95th percentile CPU ranking versus the RTX 3080’s 68th percentile GPU ranking supports this conclusion.

Q: What is the combo’s overall ranking among all tested systems?

A: The combo ranks 1071st out of 3720 total tested combinations for Control, placing it in the 71st percentile. This indicates the system outperforms 71% of tested configurations while being outperformed by 29%.