Control

The pairing of the Intel Core i3-12100F with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 is a classic high-end GPU with an entry-level CPU. In Control, the data reveals a system that is overwhelmingly GPU-bound at higher resolutions, but the CPU still sets the ceiling at 1080p. This combination delivers very high frame rates, though the measured FPS suggests the 4-core processor limits the maximum output in lighter scenes.

FAQ

Q: Can the Intel Core i3-12100F keep up with the RTX 4080 in Control?

A: At 1080p, the data shows the CPU is a limiting factor in some scenarios, as the average FPS drops from 230 on Low settings to 135 on Ultra, which is a difference of 95 FPS. The GPU is still producing very high frame rates, but the scaling between presets indicates the 4-core processor prevents the RTX 4080 from reaching its full potential at this resolution.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to avoid CPU bottlenecks?

A: The measured data suggests that 1440p is the sweet spot. At 2560x1440, the average FPS ranges from 186 on Low to 102 on Ultra, which keeps the frame rate high while shifting more of the rendering load to the GPU. At 4K, the GPU becomes the clear bottleneck, with the frame rate dropping to 79 FPS on High, but the 1% lows are not reported for that setting.

Q: How does the RTX 4080's VRAM influence performance in Control?

A: The RTX 4080 features 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 716.8 GB/s of bandwidth. In Control, this capacity is more than sufficient for the highest settings at any resolution, as the bottleneck at 4K Ultra is the GPU's compute throughput (69 FPS), not memory limitations.

Q: Is the 12100F's lack of multi-threading a problem for Control?

A: Control uses multiple threads, but the 12100F's 4 cores and 8 threads are capable. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 11860, which is above the 68th percentile of all CPUs. While a higher-core-count CPU would likely offer better minimum FPS, the average FPS at 1440p remains high, indicating the processor is adequate for this title.

Q: Which preset offers the most consistent experience at 4K?

A: The data shows that at 3840x2160, the Medium preset delivers an average of 89 FPS with a minimum of 76 FPS and a maximum of 103 FPS. This is the only 4K setting with reported min/max values, suggesting it is the most stable option. High runs faster at 79 FPS average, but no min/max data is available to confirm its consistency.

Q: How does the 12100F compare to its closest rival processors?

A: The 12100F has an average benchmark score of 13494. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core 3 N355, has an average score of 13492, a delta of 0%. The Intel Core i5-9500 is slightly behind at 13452 (0.3% slower), while the Intel Core 5 120UL is 0.7% ahead and the Intel Core i7-1250U is 1.1% ahead Mend this performance is comparable to those chips.

GPU Role

The GeForce RTX 4080 is the dominant component in this configuration, and its specifications explain why it performs so strongly in Control. The GPU is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture using a 5 nm process at TSMC, featuring 9728 shading units and 112 ROPs. It operates at a base clock of 2205 MHz and a boost clock of 2505 MHz, allowing for high sustained throughput. The memory subsystem consists of 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus, which provides a bandwidth of 716.8 GB/s; this is ample for the textures and assets in Control at any of the tested resolutions.

The raw compute power is substantial, with the GPU delivering 48.74 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. This directly translates to the high frame rates observed. At 1080p, the RTX 4080 pushes an average of 135 FPS on Ultra settings-new evidence of its ability to handle the game's physics and particle effects. The 76 RT cores also suggest that ray tracing effects would be handled with ease, although the measured data does not specify whether ray tracing was enabled. The GPU's 86th percentile ranking among all GPUs underscores its position as a top-tier part, and its average benchmark score of 54247 is nearly identical to the RTX 4080 SUPER (delta of 0.1%).

The VRAM capacity is a key advantage. At 4K Ultra, the game demands high-resolution textures, but with 16 GB of GDDR6X, the RTX 4080 does not run into memory constraints. The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is consistent with a GPU that is compute-bound rather than memory-bandwidth-bound. The 716.8 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient to feed the shader units, as evidenced by the fact that the 4K Ultra average FPS of 69 is still playable, though it is the lowest result in the dataset.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and predictable scaling pattern as resolution increases, which tells a story about where the bottleneck lies. From 1080p to 1440p, the average FPS drops by a significant margin. For example, on High settings, the average goes from 156 FPS at 1920x1080 to 118 FPS at 2560x1440, a reduction of 38 FPS. This is a 24% decrease, which is more than the pixel count increase (from 2.07 million to 3.69 million pixels, a 78% increase) would suggest, indicating that the CPU is starting to become a factor at 1080p and the GPU is taking over more of the load at 1440p.

The transition from 1440p to 4K shows a different pattern. On High settings, the average drops from 118 FPS at 2560x1440 to 79 FPS at 3840x2160, a reduction of 39 FPS (a 33% decrease). This is closer to the pixel count increase (from 3.69 million to 8.29 million pixels, a 125% increase), which is a classic sign of a GPU-bound scenario. The RTX 4080 is now fully saturated, and the frame rate is limited by its raw compute power rather than the CPU.

The Low settings data further illustrates this. At 1080p Low, the game hits 230 FPS, but at 1440p Low, it falls to 186 FPS. The 4K Low results are not reported, but the trend suggests that the GPU is the primary limiter at this resolution. The fact that the 1080p Ultra (135 FPS) is lower than the 1080p Low (230 FPS) shows that the settings are affecting the GPU workload, but the CPU is still able to provide enough frames for high refresh rate monitors. The 4K Ultra result of 69 FPS is a stark contrast to 1080p Low, representing a 161 FPS swing, which highlights how resolution and settings work together to demand more from the GPU.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the RTX 4080 delivers exceptional performance across all presets. The Low preset achieves an average of 230 FPS, which is the highest result in the entire dataset)Skip. Medium settings are slightly more demanding, yielding an average of 175 FPS with a minimum of 149 FPS and a maximum of 201 FPS. The High preset drops to 156 FPS average, and Ultra further reduces the average to 135 FPS. The delta between Low and Ultra at this resolution is 95 FPS, showing that while the GPU is powerful, the CPU is not able to push beyond 230 FPS due to its 4-core/8-thread design.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain very high but start to reflect the increased pixel workload. The Low preset averages 186 FPS, which is still excellent for competitive play. Medium settings average 132 FPS with a minimum of 113 FPS and a maximum of 152 FPS, providing a smooth and consistent experience. High settings average 118 FPS, and Ultra averages 102 FPS. The scaling here is smoother, with a 84 FPS difference between Low and Ultra, indicating that the GPU is taking on more of the rendering burden.

At 3840x2160, the RTX 4080 shows its limits in Control. The Low preset averages 126 FPS, which is surprising given the resolution, but it shows the GPU's headroom when settings are reduced. Medium settings average 89 FPS with a minimum of 76 FPS and a maximum of 103 FPS, which is the only 4K setting with reported min/max values. High settings average 79 FPS, and Ultra drops to 69 FPS. This represents a 57 FPS drop from 4K Low to 4K Ultra, demonstrating the impact of quality settings on the GPU at this resolution. The 4K Ultra result of 69 FPS is the lowest in the dataset, but it is still within playable range for a single-player title like Control.

Settings Recommendations

The benchmark data suggests that the ideal balance between visual quality and frame rate depends on the target resolution. For 1080p gamers, the Ultra preset is a strong choice, as it delivers 135 FPS on average, which is more than enough for a 144Hz monitor. The High preset at 156 FPS is also viable if the user prefers higher frame rates over marginal visual improvementsnewline. The Medium preset at 175 FPS is the best option for users aiming for very high refresh rates, but the visual difference from Ultra is noticeable in a game like Control, which relies heavily on atmospheric effects.

For 1440p, the data points to the High preset as the best overall experience. It delivers an average of 118 FPS, which is smooth and responsive, while maintaining a high level of visual fidelity. The Ultra preset at 102 FPS is still playable)Skip, but the 16 FPS drop from High to Ultra may not be worth the extra graphical features. The Medium preset at 132 FPS is a good alternative for those who prioritize performance, but it will reduce the quality of reflections and shadows that are central to Control's visual style.

At 4K, the Medium preset stands out as the most balanced option. The data shows an average of 89 FPS with a minimum of 76 FPS and a maximum of 103 FPS, which ensures a consistent experience without major dips. The High preset at 79 FPS is also playable, but the lack of min/max data makes it harder to judge its stability. The Ultra preset at 69 FPS is the most demanding, and while it is technically playable, it may result in occasional stutters during intense combat scenes. The Low preset at 126 FPS is not recommended for 4K because it sacrifices too much visual quality for a frame rate that is not necessary at this resolution. For most users, the Medium preset at 4K offers the best compromise between the game's stunning visuals and a smooth frame rate.

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. It has a 12 MB shared L3 cache and supports dual-channel DDR4 or DDR5 memory. In the context of Control, this CPU is sufficient to maintain high frame rates, but the data reveals its limitations. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 4051 and the 8-thread score of 4026 indicate that the processor's multi-threaded performance is adequate, but the single-thread score of 893 is more critical for gaming performance.

The benchmark results show that the i3-12100F is ranked in the 68th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 13494. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core 3 N355, scores 13492 (a 0% delta), while the Intel Core i5-9500 scores 13452 (a 0.3% delta). This places the 12100F in a competitive position among budget processors, but it is not a high-end gaming chip.

In Control, the CPU's role is most evident at 1080p with Low settings, where the average FPS is 230. This is likely close to the maximum frame rate the CPU can deliver, as the GPU is not fully stressed at these settings. The jump from Low to Ultra at 1080p results in a 95 FPS drop, which is a larger difference than at 1440p (84 FPS). This suggests that at 1080p, the CPU is partially bottlenecking the GPU, as the GPU has headroom but the CPU cannot feed it frames fast enough. At 1440p and 4K, the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck, and the CPU's 4 cores are sufficient to avoid major frame rate drops. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 11860 shows that the CPU can handle the game's multi-threaded physics and AI, but users with high-refresh-rate 1080p monitors may see a benefit from upgrading to a more powerful processor. The 3DMark 4-thread score of 2859 is particularly relevant, as Control uses up to 8 threads, but it does not scale perfectly with more cores.