Control

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER delivers a compelling 1440p and 4K experience in Control, with the GPU clearly acting as the primary performance driver at higher resolutions. Benchmark data shows this combination achieves a top-tier ranking, placing 283rd out of 3720 tested combos, which puts it in the top 8% of all configurations. The RTX 4080 SUPER’s 16 GB of VRAM and high memory bandwidth prove sufficient for Control’s demands, while the Ryzen 5 8400F’s six Zen 4 cores provide enough headroom to avoid bottlenecking at lower resolutions where frame rates exceed 200 FPS.

FAQ

Q: What is the combo’s overall ranking in Control compared to other tested combinations?

A: This configuration ranks 283rd out of 3720 tested combos, placing it in the top 7.6% of all systems tested for this game. That percentile placement reflects a very strong overall performance, though not the absolute top tier.

Q: How does the RTX 4080 SUPER compare to its nearest rival, the RTX 4080, in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 54209, which is 0.1% lower than the RTX 4080’s average score of 54247. In practical terms, this means the two GPUs perform nearly identically in synthetic tests, with the SUPER variant offering a negligible difference.

Q: What is the maximum average FPS achievable at 1080p with this setup?

A: At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combination achieves an average of 245 FPS. This is the highest recorded average across all tested resolutions and settings, indicating the CPU can push very high frame rates when the GPU is not heavily taxed.

Q: How much VRAM does the RTX 4080 SUPER have, and is it sufficient for Control?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER features 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 736.3 GB/s of bandwidth. This capacity is more than adequate for Control, even at 4K Ultra settings, as the game does not appear to exceed this limit based on the measured performance.

Q: What is the Ryzen 5 8400F’s single-threaded performance relative to its multi-threaded performance?

A: The CPU scores 2943 in Cinebench R23 single-core and 20851 in multi-core, giving a multi-to-single ratio of roughly 7.1x. This indicates strong single-thread performance that is well-suited for gaming, while the 12 threads handle multi-threaded workloads effectively.

Q: Does the data show any significant frame drops at 1440p Medium settings?

A: At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the average FPS is 132, with a minimum of 112 and a maximum of 152. The 20 FPS spread between minimum and maximum indicates some frame time variance, but the average remains well above playable thresholds.

Q: How does the CPU’s benchmark percentile compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Ryzen 5 8400F sits at the 77th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 25005. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F, scores 24964, a difference of just 0.2%, making them effectively equal in synthetic performance.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER is the dominant component in this pairing, and the measured FPS data in Control clearly reflects its capabilities. Built on the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD103 chip, this GPU operates at a base clock of 2295 MHz and a boost clock of 2550 MHz, with memory running at 1438 MHz (23 Gbps effective). These clock speeds, combined with 10240 shading units and 320 texture mapping units, allow the card to deliver a texture rate of 816.0 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 285.6 GPixel/s. The 52.22 TFLOPS of FP32 compute power is substantial, and the 80 RT cores provide dedicated hardware for ray tracing workloads, though Control’s standard rasterization performance is the focus of these measurements.

Memory configuration plays a critical role in high-resolution gaming. The 16 GB of GDDR6X VRAM on a 256-bit bus yields 736.3 GB/s of bandwidth, which is a key factor in maintaining consistent frame rates at 4K. At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the combo averages 69 FPS, while dropping to High settings raises that to 79 FPS. The fact that the Ultra and High presets show only a 10 FPS difference suggests that the GPU is not memory-bandwidth limited; instead, the gap likely comes from compute-heavy effects. At 4K Low settings, the average jumps to 125 FPS, demonstrating that the GPU has ample headroom when shader complexity is reduced. The 320W TDP and triple-slot cooler design are consistent with a high-end card that sustains these clocks under load, and the PCIe 4.0 x16 interface provides sufficient bandwidth for the 16 GB frame buffer.

The GPU’s benchmark scores reinforce its position. With a Passmark G3D score of 34245 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 260075, it ranks at the 86th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the RTX 4080, scores 54247 in the average benchmark, just 0.1% higher, indicating that the SUPER variant offers essentially identical rasterization performance in synthetic tests. Interestingly, the AMD Radeon 8060S scores 55757, which is 2.8% higher, but this does not translate to better real-world performance in Control based on the measured FPS data. The RTX 4080 SUPER’s 16 GB VRAM is a significant advantage over cards with less memory, as Control’s high-resolution textures and effects can consume substantial VRAM, though the data does not indicate any memory-related stutters or drops.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER achieves a rank of 283 out of 3720 tested combos in Control. This places the system in the top 7.6% of all configurations tested, which is an impressive result for a mid-range CPU paired with a high-end GPU. The ranking reflects the game’s heavy reliance on GPU performance; at 4K resolution, the CPU’s role diminishes, allowing the RTX 4080 SUPER to shine. However, it is not the absolute best combo possible—those would feature top-tier CPUs like the Ryzen 9 or Core i9 series, which would provide marginal gains at 1080p where the CPU matters more.

Breaking down the ranking, the 283rd position out of 3720 means that 3437 other combos scored lower. This is a strong showing, but it also indicates that there are 282 configurations that outperform this one, likely due to faster CPUs that can better feed the GPU at lower resolutions. The Ryzen 5 8400F’s 77th percentile among all CPUs (average benchmark score 25005) is respectable, but it is not in the top tier. Its nearest rival, the Ryzen 5 7500F, scores 24964 (0.2% lower), and the Intel Core i7-13620H scores 24911 (0.4% lower), showing that the 8400F is competitive with other mid-range options. The AMD EPYC 9474F scores 25103, which is 0.4% higher, but that is a server-class chip not relevant to gaming.

In the context of Control specifically, the combo’s rank is driven by the GPU’s ability to maintain high frame rates across all resolutions. At 1080p, the average FPS ranges from 134 (Ultra) to 245 (Low), which are excellent numbers. At 1440p, the range is 102 (Ultra) to 185 (Low), and at 4K, it drops to 69 (Ultra) to 125 (Low). These figures place the combo well above the median for all tested systems, and the 283rd rank reflects that. The data suggests that if a user were to pair this GPU with a faster CPU, such as a Ryzen 7 or 9, the 1080p Low result might improve beyond 245 FPS, potentially pushing the rank higher, but the current configuration is already well-balanced for most gaming scenarios.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive look at how this combo performs across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the lowest tested resolution, the average FPS is 245 on Low settings, 174 on Medium, 155 on High, and 134 on Ultra. The Medium preset includes minimum and maximum values of 148 and 200 FPS, respectively, showing a 52 FPS range that indicates some frame time variability, but the average remains smooth. The jump from Low to Medium is 71 FPS (245 to 174), which is a significant drop, suggesting that Medium settings introduce effects that heavily tax the GPU. From Medium to High, the drop is 19 FPS (174 to 155), and from High to Ultra, it is 21 FPS (155 to 134). This scaling shows that each settings tier has a measurable impact, with the largest single-step drop occurring between Low and Medium.

At 2560x1440, the performance scales down predictably. Low settings average 185 FPS, Medium averages 132 FPS (with a minimum of 112 and maximum of 152), High averages 117 FPS, and Ultra averages 102 FPS. The difference between Low and Medium is 53 FPS, which is proportionally similar to the 1080p drop. However, the gap between High and Ultra narrows to just 15 FPS (117 to 102), indicating that Ultra settings at 1440p are not significantly more demanding than High. The Medium preset’s 40 FPS spread between minimum and maximum (112 to 152) is the largest recorded across all resolutions, suggesting that 1440p Medium is where the system experiences the most frame time variance, though it remains playable.

At 3840x2160, the highest resolution, the GPU is clearly the limiting factor. Low settings average 125 FPS, Medium averages 89 FPS (with a minimum of 76 and maximum of 102), High averages 79 FPS, and Ultra averages 69 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 36 FPS, which is the smallest absolute drop across all resolutions, but the percentage drop is similar. From Medium to High, the drop is 10 FPS, and from High to Ultra, it is another 10 FPS. The Ultra preset’s 69 FPS average is still above 60 FPS, making it playable, but it is the only configuration where the average dips below 70 FPS. The 4K Medium preset shows a 26 FPS range (76 to 102), which is tighter than the 1440p Medium range, indicating that at higher resolutions, the GPU’s workload is more consistent.

Comparing the same settings across resolutions, 1080p High (155 FPS) drops to 1440p High (117 FPS), a 24.5% reduction, and then to 4K High (79 FPS), a 32.5% reduction from 1440p. This scaling shows that the GPU’s performance degrades more steeply as resolution increases, which is expected given the fixed memory bandwidth and compute resources. The Low preset shows a similar trend: 245 FPS at 1080p, 185 FPS at 1440p (24.5% drop), and 125 FPS at 4K (32.4% drop). This consistent scaling across settings indicates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at all resolutions, with the CPU providing sufficient headroom.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K reveals important insights about the limiting component in this system. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 245 at 1080p to 185 at 1440p (a 24.5% decrease), and then to 125 at 4K (a 32.4% decrease from 1440p). This means that moving from 1080p to 4K Low settings results in a 49% reduction in average FPS (245 to 125). The scaling is not linear; the drop from 1440p to 4K is steeper than from 1080p to 1440p, which is typical for GPU-bound scenarios because the pixel count increases by 2.25x from 1080p to 4K, while the GPU’s fill rate and bandwidth are fixed.

At Medium settings, the scaling follows a similar pattern: 174 FPS at 1080p, 132 FPS at 1440p (24.1% drop), and 89 FPS at 4K (32.6% drop). The total reduction from 1080p to 4K Medium is 48.9% (174 to 89). For High settings, the numbers are 155 FPS at 1080p, 117 FPS at 1440p (24.5% drop), and 79 FPS at 4K (32.5% drop), for a total reduction of 49%. Ultra settings show 134 FPS at 1080p, 102 FPS at 1440p (23.9% drop), and 69 FPS at 4K (32.4% drop), a total reduction of 48.5%. The consistency of these percentages—hovering around 24% for the 1080p-to-1440p step and 32% for the 1440p-to-4K step—strongly indicates that the GPU is the sole limiting factor. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the scaling would show a smaller drop at 4K because the GPU would be underutilized at lower resolutions.

The pixel count increase from 1080p (2.07 million pixels) to 1440p (3.69 million pixels) is 78%, yet the FPS drop is only 24%. This suggests that Control’s rendering is not purely fill-rate limited; other factors like shader complexity and memory latency play a role. From 1440p to 4K (8.29 million pixels), the pixel count increases by 125%, but the FPS drop is 32%, which is proportionally less severe. This non-linear scaling is typical for modern GPUs that have ample bandwidth and compute resources. The fact that the FPS halves from 1080p Low (245) to 4K Low (125) while the pixel count quadruples indicates that the GPU is efficiently utilizing its resources, but it also confirms that the RTX 4080 SUPER is the bottleneck at all resolutions tested. The Ryzen 5 8400F’s 6 cores and 12 threads are not limiting performance, as evidenced by the consistent scaling patterns.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F plays a supporting role in this combo, and the data shows it is more than sufficient for Control. This CPU features 6 cores and 12 threads based on the Zen 4 architecture, with a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. It has a 65W TDP and is built on TSMC’s 4 nm process, with 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is limited to DDR5 in dual-channel mode, providing 83.2 GB/s of bandwidth, which is adequate for gaming workloads.

In synthetic benchmarks, the 8400F scores 20851 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2943 in single-core, placing it at the 77th percentile among all CPUs. Its average benchmark score of 25005 is nearly identical to the Ryzen 5 7500F (24964, 0.2% higher for the 8400F), making them effectively interchangeable in gaming. The 3DMark results show a single-thread score of 951 and a max-thread score of 6165, with 16-thread and 8-thread scores of 6091 and 5275, respectively. These numbers indicate that the CPU scales well with thread count, but for Control, which is not heavily multi-threaded, the single-thread performance is what matters most.

Control’s engine benefits from strong single-core performance, and the 8400F’s 2943 Cinebench R23 single-core score ensures that the game’s main thread does not become a bottleneck. At 1080p Low settings, the combo achieves 245 FPS, which is a frame rate where CPU limitations often appear. The fact that the FPS scales consistently from 1080p to 4K suggests that the CPU is not the limiting factor even at the lowest resolution. If the CPU were too slow, we would expect the 1080p Low result to plateau or show inconsistent scaling when compared to 1440p or 4K. Instead, the GPU’s workload dictates the frame rate, confirming that the 8400F has ample headroom.

The CPU’s 12 threads provide enough parallelism for background tasks and any multi-threaded game features, such as physics or AI, though Control does not heavily utilize them. The 16 MB of L3 cache is sufficient for the game’s data sets, and the dual-channel DDR5 memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s is more than adequate. The 8400F’s release date of 2024-03-31 and its $170 launch MSRP position it as a budget-friendly option, but its performance in this combo is far from budget-tier. The nearest rivals, including the Ryzen 5 7500F (0.2% higher score) and the Intel Core i7-13620H (0.4% lower score), show that the 8400F is competitive with other mid-range CPUs, but none of these would significantly alter the Control results because the GPU dominates performance. In summary, the Ryzen 5 8400F is a capable partner for the RTX 4080 SUPER, providing sufficient CPU power to avoid bottlenecking at any resolution or settings preset tested.