Control

The Intel Core i5-10400F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 7600 delivers a distinctly GPU-bound experience in Control, with performance scaling that closely tracks the graphics load across resolutions. The measured frames per second data reveals a system where the CPU’s six cores and twelve threads provide a stable foundation, but the Radeon RX 7600’s 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and RDNA 3.0 architecture determine the final output, particularly as pixel counts rise.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate progression from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 shows a predictable and steep decline, characteristic of a title that relies heavily on rasterization and memory bandwidth. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo produces an average of 118 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 drops that figure to 89 FPS, a reduction of approximately 24.6%. The jump to 3840x2160 yields 60 FPS, which is another 32.6% decline from the 1440p result. This pattern indicates that the scaling is nearly linear with the increase in pixel count, a hallmark of GPU-limited performance.

When examining the High preset, the same trend appears but with lower absolute numbers. The 1080p High average is 75 FPS, which falls to 56 FPS at 1440p (a 25.3% drop) and then to 38 FPS at 4K (a 32.1% drop). The consistency of these percentage drops across settings strongly suggests that the limiting factor is the GPU’s fill rate and memory subsystem, not the processor. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect the gap between 1080p and 1440p to be much smaller than the gap between 1440p and 4K, since the CPU workload remains relatively constant while the GPU work scales with resolution.

The data further supports this conclusion when looking at the Medium preset’s minimum FPS values. At 1920x1080 Medium, the minimum is 71 FPS, while at 2560x1440 Medium it is 54 FPS, and at 3840x2160 Medium it is 36 FPS. These floor values decline in near-perfect proportion to the average FPS, indicating that even the worst-case rendering moments are constrained by the same GPU resource limits. The Intel Core i5-10400F, with its 12 MB of shared L3 cache and boost clock of 4.30 GHz, clearly has enough headroom to feed the Radeon RX 7600 at all tested resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

In the grand scheme of tested hardware combinations for Control, this pairing sits at rank 2608 out of 3720 total combos. This places it in the 30th percentile of all tested systems, meaning that roughly 70% of the tested configurations deliver higher average frame rates. This rank is primarily driven by the GPU’s position in the market, as the Radeon RX 7600’s average benchmark score of 15171 places it at the 57th percentile among all GPUs, but its performance in this specific game is moderated by the CPU’s capabilities.

The CPU itself, the Intel Core i5-10400F, ranks at the 68th percentile among all processors, with an average benchmark score of 14185. This suggests the processor is a relatively strong component, but its pairing with a mid-range GPU in a demanding title like Control results in a combined rank that is lower than either component’s individual percentile. The data shows that the combo rank is not simply an average of the two components; rather, it reflects the fact that the GPU becomes the dominant constraint in this game. For context, the CPU’s nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 6756E (0.2% higher score) and the AMD EPYC 7552 (0.5% higher score), while the GPU’s nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM, which scores 0.2% lower. These small deltas indicate that the components are precisely positioned in their respective performance tiers.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7600 is the primary driver of the measured results in Control. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus provides a bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s, which is a critical resource for a game that features heavy particle effects and destructible environments. The benchmark data shows that the GPU’s 2048 shading units and 64 ROPs are fully utilized, as evidenced by the steep FPS drops at higher resolutions. The boost clock of 2655 MHz is the ceiling for the GPU’s compute throughput, and the fact that the 1080p Low setting reaches 118 FPS suggests that the card can push beyond its base clock of 1720 MHz when the workload is light enough.

However, the GPU’s memory capacity becomes a potential concern at 4K. The Ultra preset at 3840x2160 yields an average of 33 FPS, which is the lowest measured value. This is likely due to the combination of the 8 GB frame buffer being stressed by high-resolution textures and the relatively narrow 128-bit memory bus. The 4K Low setting achieves 60 FPS, indicating that the card can handle 4K output when texture quality is reduced, but the gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is 27 FPS, which is a larger absolute difference than at any other resolution. This suggests that the GPU is not just compute-limited but also memory-bandwidth-limited at the highest settings.

The GPU’s compute performance is reflected in its PassMark G3D score of 16634, which is 9.6% higher than its average benchmark score of 15171, indicating that it performs slightly better in this specific workload than across all tests. The texture rate of 339.8 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 169.9 GPixel/s are the theoretical limits that explain why the frame rate drops by roughly 50% when moving from 1080p to 4K on the same settings preset.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides clear guidance on optimal settings for different display resolutions. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset offers the best balance, delivering an average of 84 FPS with a minimum of 71 FPS. This ensures smooth gameplay with minimal risk of stutter. The High preset at 1080p drops to 75 FPS, which is still playable, but the 9 FPS gain from High to Medium is more significant than the visual improvement from Medium to High in a game like Control that has subtle texture detail differences.

For 2560x1440 users, the Medium preset is again the recommended choice, with an average of 64 FPS and a minimum of 54 FPS. High at 1440p produces 56 FPS, which is borderline for a fast-paced action game, while Low at 89 FPS sacrifices too much visual fidelity for the 25 FPS gain. The 1440p Medium setting maintains a 54 FPS floor, which is acceptable for most scenarios.

At 3840x2160, the situation is more constrained. The Low preset is the only fully playable option, with an average of 60 FPS. Medium at 4K drops to 43 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold for smooth motion, and High is at 38 FPS. The Ultra preset at 33 FPS is not recommended for any serious gameplay. Users with 4K displays should accept the Low preset as the playable standard, or consider reducing the resolution to 1440p for higher quality settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete set of measured frame rates reveals the full performance envelope of this combo. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves 118 FPS average, Medium reaches 84 FPS (minimum 71, maximum 97), High is at 75 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 65 FPS. The 53 FPS spread between Low and Ultra at 1080p shows the GPU’s sensitivity to graphics settings.

Moving to 2560x1440, the Low preset yields 89 FPS, Medium produces 64 FPS (minimum 54, maximum 73), High is at 56 FPS, and Ultra is at 49 FPS. The spread shrinks to 40 FPS, indicating that resolution scaling compresses the differences between settings as the GPU becomes more saturated.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset returns 60 FPS, Medium is at 43 FPS (minimum 36, maximum 49), High is at 38 FPS, and Ultra is at 33 FPS. The spread narrows further to 27 FPS. This compression effect is a clear indicator of a fully utilized GPU, where even the lowest settings cannot escape the memory bandwidth limitation. The minimum FPS values for Medium settings across all resolutions (71 at 1080p, 54 at 1440p, 36 at 4K) show that frame pacing remains consistent, with no anomalous spikes or drops that would suggest CPU stuttering.

FAQ

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

A: The data indicates that 1920x1080 is the optimal resolution, with the Medium preset delivering an average of 84 FPS and a minimum of 71 FPS. This is the only resolution where all settings presets remain above 60 FPS average.

Q: Can this combo handle 4K gameplay?

A: At 3840x2160, only the Low preset achieves an average of 60 FPS. Medium drops to 43 FPS, High to 38 FPS, and Ultra to 33 FPS. 4K is playable only at the lowest settings.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its direct rivals?

A: The Intel Core i5-10400F has an average benchmark score of 14185, which is 0.2% higher than the Intel Xeon 6756E and 0.5% higher than the AMD EPYC 7552. It scores 0.3% lower than the Intel Core 7 160UL.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU the bottleneck in this game?

A: The resolution scaling data shows that the GPU is the limiting factor. Frame rates decline by approximately 25-33% for each resolution step up, which is consistent with GPU-bound rendering. The CPU’s 12 threads are sufficient for this title.

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

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 89 FPS while Ultra averages 49 FPS, a difference of 40 FPS. This is a larger absolute gap than at 4K, where the difference is 27 FPS.

Q: Does the GPU’s VRAM capacity affect performance?

A: The 8 GB GDDR6 frame buffer is likely a factor at 4K Ultra, which produces 33 FPS. The 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth may also limit high-resolution textures, as evidenced by the compressed frame rate spread at 3840x2160.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-10400F provides the computational backbone for this combo, and its specifications are well-matched to the Radeon RX 7600 for Control. With 6 cores and 12 threads based on the Comet Lake architecture, the CPU has a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. This is sufficient to keep the GPU fed, as evidenced by the fact that frame rates scale purely with resolution and settings, not with scene complexity that would trigger CPU bottlenecks.

The CPU’s cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, with a 12 MB shared L3 cache. This configuration provides the latency characteristics needed for the game’s physics and AI systems. The PassMark multithread score of 12115 and single-thread score of 2541 indicate a balanced processor, though its 68th percentile ranking among all CPUs shows it is not a high-end part. However, in Control, the CPU’s role is secondary, as the game’s rendering workload dominates.

The 3DMark results further contextualize the CPU’s capability. The 16-thread score of 4748 and max-thread score of 4735 show that the processor scales well up to its full thread count, while the single-thread score of 688 is modest in comparison. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 10283 and single-core score of 1451 demonstrate that the CPU can handle the game’s background tasks without becoming a constraint. Given that the GPU is the clear bottleneck in all measured scenarios, the CPU has ample headroom. Its 65 W TDP and dual-channel DDR4 memory support at 42.7 GB/s bandwidth are adequate for this workload, and the data confirms that no CPU-related frame drops occur, as the minimum FPS values are proportional to the averages across all settings and resolutions. The processor’s field is effectively limited to ensuring that the GPU receives a steady stream of draw calls, which it does without issue.