Control

The Intel Core i5-10400F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT in Control delivers a performance profile that hinges on resolution and settings. At 1080p Low, the combination achieves 118.4 FPS, but this drops to 33.3 FPS at 4K Ultra. The data reveals a system where the CPU provides a solid foundation for high frame rates at lower resolutions, while the GPU becomes the dominant constraint as pixel count and graphical fidelity increase.

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

The Intel Core i5-10400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Comet Lake architecture, built on a 14 nm process. Its base clock is 2.90 GHz with a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. This configuration places it in the 73rd percentile among all CPUs, indicating it has sufficient compute headroom for most gaming workloads. In synthetic tests, the processor shows a balanced scaling profile: a single-thread score of 688 in 3dmark_single_thread and 1350 in 3dmark_2_threads, rising to 3929 in 3dmark_8_threads and 4735 in 3dmark_max_threads. This suggests that while the chip can leverage additional threads, its performance is not overly dependent on them—a trait that aligns with gaming scenarios where single-core efficiency often matters more.

In Control, the CPU’s impact is most visible at lower resolutions where the GPU is not saturated. At 1080p Low, the combo produces 118.4 FPS, which is nearly double the 64.8 FPS seen at 1080p Ultra. This scaling from Low to Ultra at 1080p is a 83.9% reduction in frame rate, but the absolute numbers indicate the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU adequately at this resolution. The 3dmark_16_threads score of 4748 is nearly identical to the max-threads score of 4735, implying that the processor’s 12 threads are fully utilized in multi-threaded workloads, yet the gaming performance is not bottlenecked by a lack of thread count.

The CPU’s nearest rivals in the benchmark database—such as the AMD EPYC 7552 (deltaPct 0.4) and Intel Core i5-8500 (deltaPct -1.1)—show a near-parity in average benchmark scores, with the i5-10400F sitting between them. This indicates that for Control, the CPU’s role is to provide consistent frame pacing without becoming a limiting factor. The passmark_single_thread score of 2541 and cinebench_r23_singlecore score of 1453 further reinforce that the processor’s per-core performance is adequate for the game’s logic and physics calculations, which are typically single-threaded. As resolution increases to 1440p and 4K, the CPU’s relative influence diminishes, as evidenced by the FPS deltas being driven primarily by GPU load.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT is a RDNA 2.0 architecture GPU with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock is 1968 MHz with a boost clock of 2589 MHz and a game clock of 2359 MHz. The card features 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units, along with 32 ray tracing cores. This hardware configuration places the GPU in the 71st percentile among all GPUs, with a passmark_g3d score of 16461. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti (deltaPct 0.1) and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 (deltaPct -0.9), showing that the RX 6600 XT sits in a competitive mid-range tier.

In Control, the GPU’s role is most pronounced at higher resolutions and settings. At 4K Ultra, the combo yields 33.3 FPS, while at 4K Low, it achieves 58 FPS—a 74.2% improvement. This scaling demonstrates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at 4K, as the game’s visual effects and texture loads heavily tax the 8 GB VRAM and the 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 4K Medium result of 43.7 FPS and 4K High result of 39 FPS further illustrate a linear degradation as settings increase, with the GPU struggling to maintain playable frame rates beyond Low at this resolution.

At 1440p, the GPU begins to show more balanced behavior. The 1440p Low result of 89.9 FPS is notably higher than the 1440p High result of 54.1 FPS, indicating that the GPU’s compute capabilities (10.60 TFLOPS FP32) and pixel rate (165.7 GPixel/s) are sufficient for lower settings but become saturated as shadows, reflections, and post-processing effects are enabled. The 1440p Ultra score of 50 FPS is exactly 25% lower than the 1440p High score, suggesting a predictable scaling curve. The GPU’s 8 GB memory capacity is adequate for 1440p, but the 128-bit bus width limits texture throughput, which is why the FPS drops disproportionately from Low to Ultra compared to the CPU-bound scenarios at 1080p.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: What is the maximum average frame rate achievable with this combo in Control?

A: The highest recorded average FPS is 118.4 at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only setting combination that exceeds 100 FPS, with the next closest being 89.9 FPS at 2560x1440 Low.

Q: How does the CPU’s multi-threaded performance compare to its single-threaded performance?

A: The 3dmark_max_threads score of 4735 is 6.9 times higher than the 3dmark_single_thread score of 688, while the cinebench_r23_multicore score of 10297 is 7.1 times higher than the cinebench_r23_singlecore score of 1453. This indicates strong scaling across its 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: At which resolution and settings does the combo fail to maintain 60 FPS?

A: At 4K, all settings except Low (58 FPS) fall below 60 FPS, with High at 39 FPS, Medium at 43.7 FPS, and Ultra at 33.3 FPS. At 1440p, Ultra (50 FPS) also drops below 60 FPS, while High (54.1 FPS) is marginally below.

Q: What is the GPU’s exact memory bandwidth, and how does it affect performance?

A: The GPU has a memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s from 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus. This bandwidth is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p, but the 4K Ultra FPS of 33.3 suggests the bandwidth becomes a limiting factor at higher resolutions.

Q: How does the CPU rank relative to its nearest rival in terms of average benchmark score?

A: The CPU’s avgBenchmarkScore is 14168, which is 0.4% higher than the AMD EPYC 7552 (14115) and 1.1% higher than the Intel Core i5-8500 (14332), but 0.8% lower than the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C (14277).

Q: What is the GPU’s percentile ranking, and what does it imply for Control?

A: The GPU ranks in the 71st percentile among all GPUs. This indicates it is above average, which aligns with its ability to achieve 75.5 FPS at 1080p High but struggle at 4K Ultra (33.3 FPS), suggesting it is a mid-range part that handles mainstream resolutions well.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo of the Intel Core i5-10400F and AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT ranks 1203 out of 1636 tested combinations in Control. This places it in the 26.5th percentile of all combos, meaning that 73.5% of tested configurations perform better in this specific game. This ranking is notably lower than what the individual component percentiles (CPU 73rd, GPU 71st) might suggest, indicating a mismatch or an area where the combination underperforms relative to its parts.

The rank disparity can be attributed to the game’s demands. Control is a visually intensive title that leverages the GPU heavily, and the RX 6600 XT’s 71st percentile ranking does not translate into top-tier performance due to its 8 GB VRAM and 128-bit bus. At 4K, the combo’s FPS drops below 40 on High and Ultra settings, which is a significant drawback for a game that often targets higher resolutions. The CPU, despite being in the 73rd percentile, cannot compensate for the GPU’s limitations at higher settings, as evidenced by the 1080p Low to 4K Ultra FPS drop from 118.4 to 33.3.

In the context of the database, this ranking suggests that while the combo is competent for 1080p gaming—where it achieves 75.5 FPS on High—it falls short for enthusiasts seeking 4K experiences. The combo’s position at 1203 out of 1636 reflects a configuration that is best suited for 1080p and moderate 1440p gaming, rather than high-end 4K play. The data shows a clear inflection point: at 1440p Ultra, the FPS is 50, which is playable but not smooth, and at 4K Ultra, the 33.3 FPS is borderline unplayable for a fast-paced action-adventure game.

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

The performance scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a classic GPU-bound pattern. At Low settings, the FPS drops from 118.4 at 1080p to 89.9 at 1440p (a 24.1% reduction) and then to 58 at 4K (a 35.5% reduction from 1440p). This consistent decline across resolutions indicates that the GPU is the limiting component, as the CPU’s workload remains relatively constant regardless of resolution.

At High settings, the scaling is steeper: 75.5 FPS at 1080p, 54.1 FPS at 1440p (a 28.3% drop), and 39 FPS at 4K (a 27.9% drop from 1440p). The 4K High result of 39 FPS is 48.3% lower than the 1080p High result, highlighting that the GPU’s 8 GB VRAM and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for the texture and shading demands at 4K. This is further evidenced by the Medium settings, where the FPS goes from 81.6 at 1080p to 65.3 at 1440p (a 20% drop) and then to 43.7 at 4K (a 33.1% drop from 1440p).

The Ultra settings show the most dramatic scaling: 64.8 FPS at 1080p, 50 FPS at 1440p (a 22.8% drop), and 33.3 FPS at 4K (a 33.4% drop from 1440p). The fact that the 4K Ultra FPS is only 51.4% of the 1080p Ultra FPS confirms that the GPU is saturated at high resolutions. The CPU’s role is relegated to feeding the GPU; at 1080p, the CPU can deliver up to 118.4 FPS, but the GPU’s limits cap performance at 64.8 FPS on Ultra. This indicates that for Control, the RX 6600 XT is the bottleneck at all resolutions above 1080p Low, and even at 1080p Ultra, the GPU’s architectural constraints—such as its 128-bit memory bus—prevent it from fully utilizing the CPU’s potential. The data suggests that to achieve higher frame rates at 4K, a GPU with more VRAM and bandwidth would be necessary, while the CPU has ample headroom for this title.