Control

The Intel Core i3-12100F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT delivers a playable but inconsistent experience in Control, ranking in the 74th percentile of tested combinations. The data indicates a system that excels at 1080p, struggles to maintain fluidity at 4K, and is heavily constrained by the graphics card at higher resolutions. While the CPU provides ample headroom for the game’s physics and logic, the GPU becomes the definitive bottleneck as resolution and settings scale upward, resulting in a configuration best suited for 1080p and light 1440p gaming.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Control?*

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 is the only resolution where all settings presets achieve playable frame rates. The average FPS ranges from 67.1 at Ultra to 118.9 at Low, making 1080p the primary target for this hardware.

Q: How does the combo rank among all tested systems?

A: This configuration ranks 1212 out of 1636 tested combos. This places it in the lower-mid tier of systems, indicating that while it is functional, it is not a top performer for demanding titles like Control.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor at 4K?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor at 4K. The average FPS drops from 118.9 at 1080p Low to 58.9 at 4K Low, a reduction of 60 FPS, while the CPU’s single-thread performance remains constant. This indicates the graphics card cannot keep up with the pixel throughput demands.

Q: What settings preset provides the highest frame rate at 1080p?

A: The Low preset provides the highest average frame rate at 1920x1080, hitting 118.9 FPS. This is significantly higher than the High preset’s 73.8 FPS, showing a 45.1 FPS gain from reducing graphical fidelity.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rival in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core i3-12100F has an average benchmark score of 13516, which is 0.1% higher than the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX’s score of 13534. It also outperforms the Intel Core i7-7700K by 1.8%, which scores 13280.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between High and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the High preset averages 58.7 FPS, while the Ultra preset drops to 48.4 FPS. This represents a 10.3 FPS decrease, showing that the extra graphical features of Ultra come at a measurable performance cost.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i3-12100F is a 4-core, 8-thread processor based on the Alder Lake architecture, with a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. Its L3 cache is 12 MB shared, and it supports dual-channel DDR4 and DDR5 memory. Benchmark results show a strong single-thread score of 893 in 3dmark_single_thread and 1681 in cinebench_r23_singlecore, which is critical for game logic and frame pacing.

In Control, the CPU’s role appears secondary to the GPU at higher resolutions. The measured FPS data shows that at 1080p Low, the system achieves 118.9 FPS, but at 4K Low, it drops to 58.9 FPS. This 60 FPS drop occurs despite the CPU’s capabilities remaining unchanged, indicating that the processor is not the bottleneck in this scenario. The CPU’s 3dmark_4_threads score of 2859 and 3dmark_max_threads score of 4023 suggest it has sufficient headroom for the game’s threading demands.

The CPU’s percentile ranking of 72 against all CPUs places it above average, with an average benchmark score of 13516. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX, scores 13534, which is only 0.1% higher, showing that the i3-12100F delivers competitive processing power for its class. This performance is sufficient to feed the RX 5700 XT at 1080p, but the data suggests that at 4K, the GPU’s limitations dominate the overall frame rate.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT is built on the RDNA 1.0 architecture with a 7 nm process and features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s. Its boost clock is 1905 MHz, with a game clock of 1755 MHz, and it has 2560 shading units. The GPU’s compute power is rated at 9.754 TFLOPS FP32, which is a significant factor in rendering Control’s complex environments.

The GPU’s role in this combo is dominant, particularly at higher resolutions. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 31.5, which is below playable thresholds, while at 1080p Low, it reaches 118.9 FPS. This scaling shows that the RX 5700 XT’s pixel throughput is the limiting factor at 4K, as the CPU cannot compensate for the GPU’s inability to process the increased resolution load. The GPU’s percentile ranking of 68 against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 24731, places it in the mid-range tier.

The GPU’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile, scores 24763, which is 0.1% higher, while the Intel Arc A350M scores 24647, 0.3% lower. This indicates the RX 5700 XT is a capable mid-range card, but its performance in Control at 4K is insufficient for smooth gameplay. The data shows that the GPU’s memory bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s and 8 GB VRAM are adequate for 1080p and 1440p, but the 4K results suggest a need for more compute power.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 1212 out of 1636 tested combinations in Control, placing it in the lower 26% of systems. This ranking is reflective of the hardware’s mid-range nature, with the CPU at the 72nd percentile and the GPU at the 68th percentile. The data suggests that this system is not optimized for high-end 4K gaming, but it holds its own at 1080p.

This rank of 1212 indicates that while the system is functional, it is outperformed by a majority of tested combos. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 13516 is competitive, but the GPU’s average score of 24731 is less so, dragging the overall combo down. The combination’s performance in Control is consistent with its hardware profile, showing that the GPU is the primary constraint in demanding scenarios.

The ranking also reflects the balance of the components. The CPU is not a bottleneck, as evidenced by its strong single-thread scores, but the GPU’s limitations become apparent at higher resolutions. This results in a system that is better suited for 1080p gaming, where it can achieve high frame rates, rather than 4K, where it falls short.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K clearly demonstrates the GPU bottleneck. At Low settings, the system averages 118.9 FPS at 1080p, drops to 85.7 FPS at 1440p, and further drops to 58.9 FPS at 4K. This represents a 60 FPS decrease from 1080p to 4K, showing that the GPU’s rendering capabilities are stretched thin at higher pixel counts.

At High settings, the scaling is similar: 73.8 FPS at 1080p, 58.7 FPS at 1440p, and 39 FPS at 4K. The 34.8 FPS drop from 1080p to 4K indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor, as the CPU’s performance is unchanged across resolutions. The data suggests that 1440p is a viable middle ground, with High settings achieving 58.7 FPS, which is playable, but 4K is not recommended.

The resolution scaling also highlights the GPU’s compute limits. At 4K Ultra, the system only achieves 31.5 FPS, which is below the threshold for smooth gameplay. This is consistent with the GPU’s 9.754 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is insufficient for the demands of Control at 4K with high graphical settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers the best performance across all settings. The Low preset averages 118.9 FPS, Medium averages 85.1 FPS, High averages 73.8 FPS, and Ultra averages 67.1 FPS. This shows that the system is well-suited for 1080p gaming, with even the Ultra preset maintaining a playable frame rate.

At 2560x1440, performance drops but remains mostly playable. The Low preset averages 85.7 FPS, Medium averages 64.2 FPS, High averages 58.7 FPS, and Ultra averages 48.4 FPS. The data indicates that 1440p is a viable option for High settings, but Ultra settings may result in noticeable stutter.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles significantly. The Low preset averages 58.9 FPS, Medium averages 40.5 FPS, High averages 39 FPS, and Ultra averages 31.5 FPS. These numbers show that 4K gaming is not recommended, as even Low settings barely reach 60 FPS, and higher presets fall below acceptable levels.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal experience for this combo is at 1920x1080 with the High preset. This setting averages 73.8 FPS, which provides a smooth and visually detailed experience without the performance penalty of Ultra. The Ultra preset, at 67.1 FPS, offers diminishing returns for the extra graphical features.

For 1440p, the High preset is recommended, averaging 58.7 FPS. This is a playable frame rate, though users may need to accept some graphical compromises. The Medium preset, at 64.2 FPS, is also a viable option for those prioritizing performance over visual fidelity.

4K is not recommended for this system. Even the Low preset, at 58.9 FPS, is borderline, and higher settings fall below 40 FPS. The data suggests that users with 4K displays should reduce resolution or upgrade the GPU to achieve a better experience. The Low preset at 1080p, at 118.9 FPS, is best for competitive play or high-refresh-rate monitors, but the High preset offers a better balance of quality and performance.