Control

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured data for Control shows a predictable but revealing FPS curve as resolution climbs. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo delivers 179.8 FPS, which is a strong baseline that indicates the CPU is doing substantial work. Moving to 2560x1440 Low, the average drops to 135.9 FPS — a 24% reduction from 1080p. At 3840x2160 Low, the average falls to 90.9 FPS, representing a 49% drop from the 1080p figure. This scaling pattern is steep, suggesting that even at Low settings, the GPU is becoming the primary bottleneck as pixel count increases.

When examining High settings, the trend continues but with a different slope. At 1080p High, the system produces 117.2 FPS. At 1440p High, that number falls to 88.8 FPS, a 24% decrease. At 4K High, the average is 56.6 FPS, which is 52% lower than 1080p High. The consistency of these percentage drops across Low and High settings implies that the rendering workload scales almost linearly with resolution, which is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect the FPS to remain relatively flat when resolution increases, since the CPU workload per frame would not change much. The data does not show that pattern.

Ultra settings amplify the effect. From 100.7 FPS at 1080p Ultra to 77.8 FPS at 1440p Ultra, the drop is 23%. At 4K Ultra, the average is 53.7 FPS, a 47% reduction from 1080p. The 4K Ultra result is barely above the 53.7 FPS threshold, and it is the only measured configuration that falls below 60 FPS at 4K. This suggests that the RX 9070's 16 GB of VRAM and 644.6 GB/s memory bandwidth are sufficient for most settings, but the sheer shading load at 4K Ultra — 3584 shading units running at a boost clock of 2520 MHz — is what drives the frame rate down. The GPU's FP32 throughput of 36.13 TFLOPS is being fully utilized at this extreme.

The data implies that at 1080p, there might be some headroom where the CPU could still keep up, but at 4K, the GPU is unequivocally the limiting component. The FPS drops are too large to attribute to CPU limitations. The Ryzen 5 8400F, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, can feed frames fast enough at lower resolutions, but the GPU's rendering pipeline becomes the constraint as resolution scales.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

For players targeting 60 FPS as a baseline, the measured data shows that 4K High is the only 4K preset that comes close, with 56.6 FPS. It falls short of 60, but it is serviceable. 4K Medium delivers 64.8 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS bar with some margin. 4K Ultra is the most demanding at 53.7 FPS, and 4K Low is the least demanding at 90.9 FPS. Given that the Ultra preset only costs 7.3 FPS compared to High at 4K (53.7 vs 56.6), the visual fidelity gain from High to Ultra might not be worth the performance loss for strict 60 FPS gamers.

At 2560x1440, the situation is more comfortable. High delivers 88.8 FPS, Medium hits 99.6 FPS, and Low reaches 135.9 FPS. Even Ultra at 77.8 FPS provides a smooth experience well above 60 FPS. The 1440p High preset is a sweet spot: it offers 88.8 FPS, which is 14% faster than the 4K Medium result, and it likely provides most of the visual features that players expect. Moving from High to Ultra at 1440p costs 11 FPS (from 88.8 to 77.8), which is a 12% penalty for what is typically a marginal visual improvement.

At 1920x1080, every preset is playable. Low hits 179.8 FPS, Medium 128.8 FPS, High 117.2 FPS, and Ultra 100.7 FPS. The gap between Medium and High is only 9.6 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is 16.5 FPS. This suggests that High offers the best balance of visual quality and frame rate at 1080p, since the jump to Ultra yields diminishing returns at a higher cost. For competitive play, Low at 179.8 FPS would be the choice, but for a game like Control, where atmosphere and effects matter, High is the recommended preset.

The data indicates that the most efficient configuration across all resolutions is High, as it maintains a consistent frame rate that is only 20-25% below the Low preset, while providing significantly better visuals. Medium is a fallback for 4K if 60 FPS is a hard requirement, and Ultra should be reserved for users with high refresh rate 1080p monitors who can tolerate the 100.7 FPS average.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 4 architecture, with a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. Its L3 cache is 16 MB shared, and it supports DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU scores 20851 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2943 in single-core. These numbers place it in the 82nd percentile of all CPUs, which is respectable for a mainstream desktop part.

In Control, the CPU's role appears to be secondary to the GPU at higher resolutions, but at 1080p Low, the 179.8 FPS result suggests that the CPU is capable of driving high frame rates. The single-core performance, evidenced by the 3dmark single-thread score of 951, is sufficient to avoid bottlenecking in a game that is not heavily threaded. Control is known for its physics-heavy environments, but the data shows that even at 1080p with Low settings, the CPU can sustain nearly 180 FPS, which is well beyond what most displays can show.

The CPU's nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 7 2700X, has an average benchmark score of 25057, which is nearly identical to the 8400F's 25064 (a delta of 0%). This means that for CPU-bound tasks, the 8400F performs on par with a much older 8-core part. In Control, this parity suggests that the game does not heavily rely on the extra cores of the 2700X, and the 8400F's higher clock speeds (4.70 GHz boost) are more relevant. The 3dmark 16-thread score of 6091 indicates that the 12 threads are being utilized, but the game's frame rate at 4K is not limited by this.

The fact that the FPS drops from 1080p to 4K are consistent across all settings (around 50% reduction) implies that the CPU is not the primary constraint. If the CPU were struggling, we would see a plateau in FPS at higher resolutions, where the same CPU-bound frame time would limit the output regardless of GPU load. The data does not show this plateau; instead, FPS scales with resolution, which is characteristic of a GPU-bound pipeline. The CPU's 6 cores are likely enough to handle Control's simulation and draw call overhead, leaving the GPU to do the heavy lifting.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and the AMD Radeon RX 9070 ranks 535th out of 1636 tested combos in Control, putting it in the 67th percentile (since 535/1636 is roughly the top 33%, meaning it ranks better than 67% of all combos). This is a solid mid-to-upper tier position, but it is not at the very top, which suggests that there are many other systems that deliver higher frame rates in this game.

The GPU's average benchmark score is 34780, and its nearest rival is the NVIDIA A2 with a score of 34866 (a delta of -0.2%). The RX 9070 is slightly behind the A2 in raw compute, but in Control, the 4K High result of 56.6 FPS indicates that the GPU is performing as expected for its class. The GPU's percentile of 79 means it outperforms 79% of all GPUs, which is strong, but the combo rank of 535 suggests that the CPU is not holding the GPU back in a way that would push the combo into the top 10%.

Compared to other combos with similar GPUs, the 8400F's 82nd percentile CPU rank is lower than the GPU's 79th percentile, meaning the CPU is marginally weaker relative to its peers than the GPU is. However, in Control, the measured FPS at 1080p Low (179.8) is very high, indicating that the CPU is not the limiting factor at lower resolutions. At 4K Ultra (53.7 FPS), the GPU is clearly the constraint, so the combo's rank is likely determined by GPU performance rather than CPU performance.

The rank of 535 out of 1636 puts this combo in the top third of all tested systems. This is a reasonable position for a mid-range CPU paired with a high-end GPU. The data does not indicate any anomalous behavior; the FPS numbers are consistent with what the hardware specs would predict. The combo is not a top-tier performer, but it is capable of delivering a smooth experience at 1440p and playable frame rates at 4K with adjusted settings.

FAQ

Q: At 4K resolution, which settings preset delivers the highest average FPS?

A: The Low preset at 3840x2160 delivers the highest average FPS at 90.9 FPS, followed by Medium at 64.8 FPS, High at 56.6 FPS, and Ultra at 53.7 FPS.

Q: What is the FPS difference between 1080p and 4K at High settings?

A: At High settings, the average FPS drops from 117.2 at 1920x1080 to 56.6 at 3840x2160, a reduction of 60.6 FPS or approximately 52%.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor at 1440p Medium?

A: At 2560x1440 Medium, the average FPS is 99.6. The consistent scaling pattern across resolutions indicates the GPU is the primary bottleneck, as FPS drops proportionally with pixel count.

Q: Does the combo reach 60 FPS at 4K Ultra?

A: No. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 53.7, which is below the 60 FPS threshold. The 4K High preset at 56.6 FPS also falls short, but 4K Medium at 64.8 FPS exceeds it.

Q: How does the Ryzen 5 8400F compare to its nearest rival in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Ryzen 5 8400F has an average benchmark score of 25064, which is nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen 7 2700X's 25057, a delta of 0%. The Ryzen 5 7500F scores 24993, a 0.3% difference.

Q: What is the combo's overall rank among tested systems in Control?

A: The combo ranks 535th out of 1636 tested combos, placing it in the top third of all systems tested for this game.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS values are as follows: Low settings produce 179.8 FPS, Medium settings produce 128.8 FPS, High settings produce 117.2 FPS, and Ultra settings produce 100.7 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 79.1 FPS, with each incremental setting step costing roughly 11-13 FPS except for the jump from Low to Medium, which costs 51 FPS. This indicates that Low is a special mode that reduces rendering workload significantly, while Medium, High, and Ultra are progressively more expensive.

At 2560x1440, the FPS values are: Low at 135.9, Medium at 99.6, High at 88.8, and Ultra at 77.8. The gap between Low and Medium is 36.3 FPS, while the gap between Medium and High is 10.8 FPS, and the gap between High and Ultra is 11.0 FPS. The pattern is consistent, with Low being the outlier and the other three settings showing a steady degradation.

At 3840x2160, the FPS values are: Low at 90.9, Medium at 64.8, High at 56.6, and Ultra at 53.7. The gap between Low and Medium is 26.1 FPS, between Medium and High is 8.2 FPS, and between High and Ultra is 2.9 FPS. The diminishing returns from High to Ultra are most pronounced at 4K, where the GPU is heavily loaded and the visual difference between these two presets is small relative to the performance cost.

Across all resolutions, the Low preset provides a significant FPS boost over Medium, ranging from 40% at 1080p (179.8 vs 128.8) to 40% at 4K (90.9 vs 64.8). The High to Ultra transition is always the smallest absolute drop, but the percentage loss is consistent at around 14-15% across resolutions. The data shows that the game scales predictably with both resolution and settings, with no anomalies or unexpected spikes.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Radeon RX 9070 is a RDNA 4.0 architecture GPU with 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 644.6 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock is 1330 MHz, with a boost clock of 2520 MHz and a game clock of 2070 MHz. The GPU has 3584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 128 ROPs, with 56 ray tracing cores. Its FP32 performance is 36.13 TFLOPS, and it supports DirectX 12 Ultimate.

In Control, the VRAM capacity of 16 GB is more than sufficient for 4K textures, as evidenced by the fact that the 4K Ultra preset at 53.7 FPS does not show signs of memory thrashing. The memory bandwidth of 644.6 GB/s is also adequate, given that the FPS drops from 1080p to 4K are linear and not sudden, which would indicate a bandwidth bottleneck. The GPU's 128 ROPs produce a pixel rate of 322.6 GPixel/s, which is critical for 4K rendering; the 4K High result of 56.6 FPS aligns with what this pixel rate would suggest.

The GPU's boost clock of 2520 MHz is high, and the game clock of 2070 MHz is the sustained frequency that the card maintains under load. The fact that 4K Ultra only produces 53.7 FPS indicates that the shading units are fully saturated at this resolution. The nearest GPU rival, the NVIDIA A2, has a similar average benchmark score (34866 vs 34780), but in Control, the RX 9070's performance is consistent with its class. The GPU's 79th percentile ranking means it outperforms most GPUs, but the 4K Ultra result below 60 FPS shows that even a high-end card struggles with the most demanding settings at 4K.

The GPU's TDP of 220 W and suggested PSU of 550 W are not directly relevant to FPS, but they indicate that the card has ample power headroom. The 2x 8-pin power connectors ensure stable power delivery, which is important for maintaining the boost clock during extended gaming sessions. The data does not show any thermal throttling effects, as the FPS numbers are consistent with the hardware specs.