Control

Control, the 2019 action-adventure title, presents an interesting stress test for the Intel Core i3-12100F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090. This combination of a 4-core processor with a flagship 24 GB GPU creates a unique bottleneck profile that is clearly visible in the measured frame rates across different resolutions and settings. The data shows a system that is capable of very high performance but is consistently limited by its CPU, particularly at lower resolutions where the GPU has less work to do.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals the classic signature of a CPU-bound configuration. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo achieves an average of 232.9 FPS. When the resolution is increased to 2560x1440, the average drops to 209 FPS, a reduction of 23.9 FPS. Moving up to 3840x2160, the average falls further to 139.3 FPS, which is a substantial 93.6 FPS drop from the 1080p result. This pattern indicates that at 1080p, the processor is the primary limiting factor; the RTX 4090 is not being fully utilized because the i3-12100F cannot feed it frames fast enough.

The scaling behavior changes significantly when we look at the Ultra preset. At 1920x1080 Ultra, the average is 152.9 FPS. At 2560x1440 Ultra, the average is 113.8 FPS, and at 3840x2160 Ultra, it drops to 77.8 FPS. The relative drop from 1080p to 4K is steeper for Ultra settings (a 75.1 FPS difference) than for Low settings. This is because the Ultra preset increases the GPU load substantially, making the graphics card the more dominant bottleneck at higher resolutions. The data suggests that while the CPU limits raw frame generation at lower settings, the GPU's rendering workload becomes the deciding factor when pushing the highest visual quality. The result is a system where the frame rate is less sensitive to resolution changes at low settings, but more sensitive at high settings.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the database of tested combinations, this specific pairing of the i3-12100F and RTX 4090 holds a rank of 49 out of 1636 combos for Control. This places it in the top 3% of all tested systems, which is a remarkably strong showing for a processor that is positioned as a budget entry-level part. The high rank is largely attributable to the immense power of the RTX 4090, which is in the 91st percentile of all GPUs and has an average benchmark score of 66473. The GPU is clearly capable of delivering high frame rates in this title, even when paired with a less powerful CPU.

However, the rank also underscores the imbalance of the pairing. The i3-12100F has a percentile ranking of 72 against all CPUs, indicating it is a competent processor but far from the top tier. Its average benchmark score of 13516 places it in the company of rivals like the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX, which has an average score of 13534 and a deltaPct of -0.1, and the Intel Core i7-7700K, which has a score of 13280 and a deltaPct of 1.8. This means that in synthetic tests, the i3-12100F performs almost identically to a high-end workstation chip from a previous generation and a legendary quad-core from the past. The data indicates that the combo ranks highly not because of the CPU’s strength, but because the GPU's raw power is so overwhelming that it can compensate for the processor's limitations in most scenarios.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average frame rate this combo achieves in Control?

A: The highest measured average frame rate is 232.9 FPS, which is achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with the Low settings preset.

Q: How does the CPU's performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core i3-12100F has an average benchmark score of 13516. This puts it 0.1% ahead of the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX (score 13534), 0.4% behind the Intel Core i7-1250U (score 13462), 0.6% behind the Intel Core i3-10105 (score 13430), and 1.8% behind the Intel Core i7-7700K (score 13280).

Q: Is the frame rate consistent between 1440p and 4K at High settings?

A: No, the frame rate drops notably. At 2560x1440 High, the average is 132.4 FPS, while at 3840x2160 High, it falls to 90.8 FPS. This is a decrease of 41.6 FPS, indicating that the GPU is becoming more of a bottleneck at 4K.

Q: Which component is more likely to limit performance at 1080p?

A: The benchmark data suggests the CPU is the limiting factor at 1080p. The jump from Low (232.9 FPS) to Medium (196.6 FPS) at 1080p is only a 36.3 FPS difference, and even the jump to High (171.4 FPS) shows a smaller performance penalty than what is seen at higher resolutions, implying the processor cannot take full advantage of the GPU's headroom.

Q: What is the performance difference between the Low and Ultra presets at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, the Low preset achieves an average of 139.3 FPS, while the Ultra preset achieves 77.8 FPS. This represents a 61.5 FPS reduction in performance when moving to the highest quality settings.

Q: Does this CPU have a high single-thread performance?

A: Yes, for a quad-core part. It scores 1681 in Cinebench R23 single-core and 2224 in Geekbench single-core. Its 3DMark single-thread score is 893, which is lower than its multi-threaded scores, but the Cinebench and Geekbench numbers indicate solid single-core capability.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a full picture of performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the average frame rates are 232.9 FPS for Low, 196.6 FPS for Medium, 171.4 FPS for High, and 152.9 FPS for Ultra. This shows a clear progression where each increase in settings costs a significant number of frames, but even the most demanding preset remains well above the 144 Hz refresh rate threshold.

At 2560x1440, the averages are 209 FPS for Low, 148.6 FPS for Medium, 132.4 FPS for High, and 113.8 FPS for Ultra. The drop from Low to Medium here is a substantial 60.4 FPS, which is much larger than the 36.3 FPS drop seen at 1080p. This suggests that at 1440p, the GPU's workload is starting to have a more pronounced effect. At 3840x2160, the averages are 139.3 FPS for Low, 97.7 FPS for Medium, 90.8 FPS for High, and 77.8 FPS for Ultra. The difference between Medium and High at 4K narrows to just 6.9 FPS, indicating that the GPU is heavily loaded in both cases.

The full dataset reveals that the system is most consistent at 1080p, where the CPU bottleneck creates a more uniform frame rate across settings. At 4K, the GPU becomes the primary constraint, and the frame rates become more dependent on the specific workload of each preset.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i3-12100F is a 4-core, 8-thread processor based on the Alder Lake architecture. It has a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz, with a 12 MB shared L3 cache. Its benchmark scores are respectable but not exceptional. In Cinebench R23, it scores 11912 in multi-core and 1681 in single-core. Its 3DMark scores show a scaling pattern from 1659 for 2 threads to 4026 for 8 threads, indicating that it scales well up to its physical and logical core count but has a hard limit at 8 threads.

In Control, the game's engine appears to be well-optimized for multi-threading, but the 4-core limit of the i3-12100F is still a bottleneck. The data shows that at 1080p Low, the combo hits 232.9 FPS, which is likely near the maximum frame generation rate the CPU can sustain. The fact that the RTX 4090, which is in the 91st percentile of all GPUs, cannot push the frame rate higher at this resolution is direct evidence of the CPU's limitation. The processor's strong single-core performance, as evidenced by its 1681 point Cinebench R23 score, helps in maintaining high minimum frame rates, but its limited core count prevents it from fully releasing the GPU's potential in less demanding scenes.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution. For 1920x1080, the High preset at 171.4 FPS offers the best balance of visual fidelity and performance, as it remains well above the 144 FPS mark while providing a significant visual upgrade over Medium. The Ultra preset at 152.9 FPS is also viable for high-refresh-rate monitors, but the 18.5 FPS cost over High is steep for the marginal visual gains.

For 2560x1440, the High preset at 132.4 FPS is the best choice for a smooth experience on a 120 Hz or 144 Hz monitor. The Medium preset at 148.6 FPS is also excellent for those who prefer maximum frame rates, but the jump to High yields a more substantial visual improvement. The Ultra preset at 113.8 FPS is still playable but may not be ideal for competitive play.

At 3840x2160, the situation changes. The High preset at 90.8 FPS is the recommended setting for a 4K 60 Hz display, as it offers a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS target. The Medium preset at 97.7 FPS is also a strong option, providing even more headroom. The Ultra preset at 77.8 FPS is playable but requires a VRR display to feel smooth. The Low preset at 139.3 FPS is not recommended at this resolution, as the visual quality reduction is too severe for the frame rate gain. In summary, the data shows that High settings provide the most consistently good experience across all three resolutions.