Control

The Intel Core i5-10400F and AMD Radeon RX 7700 combination delivers a highly capable 1080p and 1440p experience in Control, with the data showing a clear performance ceiling at 4K where only the Low preset remains fluid. The pairing places in the 1294th position out of 2888 tested combos, indicating a solid mid-to-upper tier standing for this 2019 action-adventure title.

FAQ

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

A: The data indicates 1920x1080 is the strongest choice, with average FPS ranging from 81 at Ultra to 148 at Low. At 2560x1440, the combo still performs well, with averages between 61 and 112 FPS depending on settings.

*Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Control?*

A: 4K is challenging for this pairing. The High preset delivers an average of 48 FPS, and Medium averages 54 FPS. Only the Low preset achieves a playable 76 FPS average at 3840x2160.

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

A: The i5-10400F has an average benchmark score of 14185. It sits within 0.6% of the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C (14277) and 0.5% of the AMD EPYC 7552 (14115), showing near-identical aggregate performance.

Q: What is the GPU's standing relative to other cards?

A: The RX 7700 has an average benchmark score of 15852, placing it 1.7% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti (16129) and 1% behind the AMD Radeon RX 9060 (16014). It is effectively tied with the AMD Radeon R9 370X (15862).

Q: Which settings preset offers the best balance of quality and performance at 1440p?

A: The Medium preset at 2560x1440 averages 80 FPS with a minimum of 68 FPS, providing a smooth experience while maintaining higher visual fidelity than the Low preset's 112 FPS average.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck the GPU in this game?

A: The CPU's 6 cores and 12 threads with a 4.30 GHz boost clock are sufficient for the data shown. The performance scaling from 1080p to 4K follows a GPU-bound pattern, suggesting the processor is not a limiting factor in these results.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-10400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor from the Comet Lake architecture, built on Intel's 14 nm process. It operates with a 2.90 GHz base clock and a 4.30 GHz boost clock, which are critical for maintaining consistent frame pacing in Control's physics-heavy combat sequences. The CPU's 12 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth provide adequate data throughput for the game's asset streaming.

The processor's synthetic benchmark results show a balanced profile. In Cinebench R23, it scores 10283 in multicore and 1451 in single-core tests. The Geekbench results are 6257 multicore and 1420 single-core. These numbers indicate that the i5-10400F has sufficient single-thread strength for Control's primary game logic, while the 12 threads handle background tasks and physics calculations without contention.

The CPU's position in the broader market is defined by its 68th percentile ranking against all CPUs. Its average benchmark score of 14185 puts it in a tight cluster with rivals: it is 0.2% ahead of the Intel Xeon 6756E (14163) and 0.5% ahead of the AMD EPYC 7552 (14115). Conversely, it trails the Intel Core 7 160UL by 0.3% (14232) and the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C by 0.6% (14277). This proximity to diverse competitors—from server-focused Xeons to low-power mobile chips—shows that the i5-10400F's raw compute is competitive, but its real-world gaming performance depends on the GPU pairing.

In Control, the CPU's role becomes apparent when examining the FPS scaling across resolutions. The jump from 93 FPS at 1080p High to 71 FPS at 1440p High (a 23.7% drop) is consistent with GPU-bound rendering, where the CPU is not the primary limiter. The processor's 3dmark scores reinforce this: it achieves 1350 in 2-thread tests and 4748 in 16-thread tests, showing scalable performance that adapts to the game's threading demands.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data across three resolutions and four presets provides a clear picture of optimal settings for this combo. At 3840x2160, the choice is constrained: High averages 48 FPS, Medium averages 54 FPS with a minimum of 46, and Ultra drops to 41 FPS. Only the Low preset, at 76 FPS average, reaches a consistently smooth threshold. For 4K users, Low is the only viable option, sacrificing visual quality for playability.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset emerges as the best compromise. It delivers an 80 FPS average with a minimum of 68 FPS and a maximum of 92 FPS, providing a stable experience that stays above the 60 FPS refresh rate common on 1440p monitors. The High preset at 71 FPS average is also acceptable, but the tighter frame pacing of Medium (68 min vs. no min data for High) makes it the safer choice. The Low preset's 112 FPS average is excessive for most displays and loses too much visual detail.

For 1920x1080, the High preset at 93 FPS average is the recommended starting point, as it balances fidelity with performance. The Ultra preset at 81 FPS average is also playable for those prioritizing maximum visual quality. The Medium preset at 105 FPS average (89 min, 121 max) offers the best experience for high-refresh-rate 1080p monitors, providing a wide FPS range that can adapt to demanding scenes. The Low preset at 148 FPS is unnecessary for most users, as the visual degradation outweighs the marginal benefit above 100 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-10400F and AMD Radeon RX 7700 ranks 1294th out of 2888 tested combos in Control, placing it in the 55.2nd percentile of all pairings. This rank reflects a system that is firmly in the upper half of tested configurations, though not at the top tier where high-end CPUs and GPUs dominate.

This ranking is consistent with the GPU's synthetic position. The RX 7700's average benchmark score of 15852 places it in the 58th percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals show a tight competitive band. The card is 1.7% behind the RTX 3060 Ti (16129), a popular previous-generation option, and 1% behind the RX 9060 (16014). It edges out the Radeon Pro W5500 by 1.1% (15679) and is virtually tied with the R9 370X (15862). This mid-pack GPU performance, when paired with a CPU in the 68th percentile, yields the observed mid-tier combo rank.

The data suggests that this combo is well-matched for Control at 1080p and 1440p, where the FPS results exceed 60 FPS on most presets. The 4K results, however, reveal the pairing's limits, as the GPU struggles to maintain high frame rates at that resolution. The combo's rank of 1294 indicates that many other configurations offer higher performance, but this pairing remains a competent choice for the game's supported resolutions and settings.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7700, built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with a 5 nm process, is the dominant component in this pairing for Control. Its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 624.1 GB/s of bandwidth, which is ample for the game's high-resolution textures and environmental effects. The GPU's 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 96 raster operation units deliver the raw processing power needed for the game's particle effects and physics-based destruction.

The GPU's clock speeds are significant: a 1900 MHz base clock, 2041 MHz game clock, and 2459 MHz boost clock. The boost clock is particularly relevant for sustained performance during intense combat sequences. The card's 25.18 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 393.4 GTexel/s texture rate allow it to handle the game's demanding rendering workloads at 1080p and 1440p.

The RX 7700's synthetic benchmarks show a mixed profile. Its 3dmark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2865 indicates solid DirectX 12 performance, which is relevant for Control's modern rendering pipeline. The Passmark G3D score of 20974 and G2D score of 1206 show strong overall graphics capability. However, the GPU's 58th percentile ranking against all GPUs suggests it is not a top-tier performer, which aligns with the 4K FPS results showing averages below 60 FPS on most presets.

The GPU's role in the FPS data is clear when comparing resolutions. The transition from 1080p to 1440p at High settings (93 to 71 FPS, a 23.7% drop) and from 1440p to 4K at High settings (71 to 48 FPS, a 32.4% drop) demonstrates the GPU's scaling limitations at higher resolutions. The 16 GB VRAM is not a constraint in these tests, but the GPU's compute power becomes the limiting factor at 4K.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the measured data shows a clear hierarchy of presets. The Low preset averages 76 FPS, providing the only smooth 4K experience. The Medium preset averages 54 FPS with a minimum of 46 and maximum of 62, which is playable but with noticeable frame dips. The High preset averages 48 FPS, and the Ultra preset drops to 41 FPS, both below the 60 FPS threshold for fluid gameplay.

At 2560x1440, performance improves significantly. The Low preset averages 112 FPS, offering headroom for high-refresh-rate displays. The Medium preset averages 80 FPS (68 min, 92 max), providing a stable experience. The High preset averages 71 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 61 FPS, both suitable for 60 Hz monitors.

At 1920x1080, the combo shows its strongest results. The Low preset averages 148 FPS, making it ideal for 144 Hz displays. The Medium preset averages 105 FPS (89 min, 121 max), offering a wide range that handles demanding scenes. The High preset averages 93 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 81 FPS, both providing smooth gameplay on standard 60 Hz monitors.

The data reveals a consistent pattern: the transition from Low to Medium yields a 29.7% FPS drop at 4K (76 to 54), a 28.6% drop at 1440p (112 to 80), and a 29.1% drop at 1080p (148 to 105). The step from Medium to High produces smaller drops of 11.1% at 4K, 11.3% at 1440p, and 11.4% at 1080p. The Ultra preset incurs further penalties, with the largest relative drop from High to Ultra occurring at 4K (48 to 41, a 14.6% decrease). These consistent scaling patterns indicate that the GPU's performance is the primary determinant of FPS across all tested configurations.