Control

The Intel Core i5-11400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 delivers a playable but constrained experience in Control, with benchmark data showing the GPU as the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions. The measured frame rates reveal a system that excels at 1080p but struggles to maintain smooth performance at 4K, particularly under maximum graphical loads.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and consistent across all settings, indicating a clear GPU-bound scenario. At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 59.4 FPS at 1920x1080 to 48.8 FPS at 2560x1440, a reduction of roughly 18%. The decline continues to 34.1 FPS at 3840x2160, representing a 43% total drop from the 1080p baseline. This pattern is typical of a graphics card hitting its memory bandwidth and shading limits as pixel count quadruples.

The Low settings curve tells a more revealing story. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 96 FPS, but this falls to 71.8 FPS at 1440p and further to 50.7 FPS at 4K. The fact that even the lowest preset cannot maintain 60 FPS at 4K strongly suggests the GTX 1070’s 8 GB frame buffer and 256-bit memory interface are being saturated, rather than the CPU holding things back. The scaling from Medium to High at 4K is nearly negligible—34.4 FPS versus 34.1 FPS—which indicates that the GPU is already at its ceiling regardless of modest settings changes.

The Ultra preset at 4K produces the lowest measured result at 28.2 FPS, which is below the threshold for comfortable play. The gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is 22.5 FPS, a 44% performance spread, showing that the game’s highest settings impose a massive load that this hardware cannot offset. Benchmark results indicate the limiting component is definitively the GPU, as the FPS degradation follows resolution scaling almost perfectly without sudden plateaus that would signal CPU limitations.

GPU Role

The GTX 1070 features 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 256.3 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock of 1506 MHz boosts to 1683 MHz, powering 1920 shading units and 64 ROPs. The card’s 6.463 TFLOPS of FP32 compute is modest by modern standards, and the data shows this ceiling being hit in Control’s particle-heavy environments.

At 4K Ultra, the 28.2 FPS result aligns with the card’s PassMark G3D score of 13498, which places it in the 51st percentile of all GPUs. The nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks—the NVIDIA Quadro K4200 (0.7% higher), GTX 880M (-1.3%), GTX 1650 SUPER (-1.4%), and Tesla K20Xm (-1.7%)—all fall within a narrow band, confirming that the GTX 1070 sits in a crowded mid-range tier. In Control, this translates to a card that can handle 1080p High at 59.4 FPS but cannot push past 60 FPS at that resolution on Ultra (53.9 FPS).

The GPU’s memory configuration deserves scrutiny. With 8 GB of VRAM, the card meets the game’s baseline needs, but the 256-bit bus and 256.3 GB/s bandwidth become limiting factors at 4K. The minimal FPS difference between Medium (34.4) and High (34.1) at 4K suggests texture streaming is not the bottleneck; rather, the shading throughput and pixel fill rate (107.7 GPixel/s) are maxed out. The card’s 202.0 GTexel/s texture rate also explains why higher settings with more detailed surfaces produce diminishing returns—the hardware simply cannot process additional geometry and effects at that resolution.

How This Combo Ranks

Among 1636 tested combinations in Control, this pairing ranks 1373rd, placing it in the bottom 16% of all configurations. This low percentile ranking is notable given that the individual components sit near the middle of their respective benchmark distributions—the CPU is in the 75th percentile of all processors, while the GPU is in the 51st percentile. The combination underperforms relative to its parts, which points to the GTX 1070 dragging down the overall result in this specific title.

The rank disparity makes sense when examining the CPU’s synthetic scores. The i5-11400F achieves a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 14372 and a single-core score of 2029, both respectable figures. However, Control’s engine appears to rely heavily on GPU compute for its physics and destruction effects, which the Pascal architecture handles inefficiently. The combo’s rank suggests that many pairings with weaker CPUs but stronger GPUs outperform this setup, reinforcing the GPU-bound analysis from the resolution scaling data.

The CPU’s nearest rivals in average benchmark score—the AMD Ryzen 7 5700U (0% delta), Intel Core i7-1260P (-0.2%), Intel Core Ultra 7 164U (-0.2%), and Intel Core i5-1240U (0.2%)—are all mobile or low-power parts, yet they score nearly identically. This indicates the i5-11400F’s desktop advantage does not translate into a meaningful gaming edge in this title, where the GPU is the decisive factor.

FAQ

*Q: Can this combo run Control at 60 FPS in any configuration?*

A: Yes, but only at 1080p. The Low preset achieves 96 FPS, Medium reaches 71.3 FPS, and High hits 59.4 FPS. At 1440p, only Low (71.8 FPS) exceeds 60 FPS, while High falls to 48.8 FPS.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 1440p gaming with this hardware?

A: The Low preset is the only option above 60 FPS, delivering 71.8 FPS. Medium drops to 54.7 FPS, which is still playable but below the 60 FPS target. High and Ultra produce 48.8 and 39.7 FPS respectively.

Q: How does the GTX 1070 compare to its closest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The GTX 1070 scores 13498 in PassMark G3D. The Quadro K4200 is 0.7% higher, while the GTX 880M, GTX 1650 SUPER, and Tesla K20Xm are 1.3%, 1.4%, and 1.7% lower respectively.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor at 1080p?

A: The data shows the GPU is the primary limiter even at 1080p. The 96 FPS at Low versus 53.9 FPS at Ultra (a 44% difference) indicates the graphics card cannot keep up with increasing settings, while the CPU’s 6 cores and 12 threads remain sufficient.

Q: What is the performance penalty for using Ultra settings at 4K?

A: Ultra at 3840x2160 yields 28.2 FPS, which is 22.5 FPS lower than Low settings at the same resolution (50.7 FPS). This represents a 44% reduction in performance.

Q: Does the 8 GB VRAM cause issues at higher resolutions?

A: The data suggests memory capacity is sufficient, but bandwidth is not. The 256.3 GB/s bandwidth on a 256-bit bus appears saturated at 4K, as evidenced by the minimal FPS difference between Medium (34.4) and High (34.1) presets.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo produces a wide spread of results. Low settings deliver 96 FPS, which drops to 71.3 FPS at Medium, 59.4 FPS at High, and 53.9 FPS at Ultra. The 42.1 FPS gap between Low and Ultra shows significant headroom at the lowest preset but diminishing returns as settings increase.

Moving to 2560x1440, the averages fall to 71.8 FPS (Low), 54.7 FPS (Medium), 48.8 FPS (High), and 39.7 FPS (Ultra). The Low-to-Ultra gap narrows to 32.1 FPS, indicating the GPU is becoming the dominant constraint. The drop from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings is 24.2 FPS, a 25% reduction.

At 3840x2160, the results compress further: 50.7 FPS (Low), 34.4 FPS (Medium), 34.1 FPS (High), and 28.2 FPS (Ultra). Notably, Medium and High produce nearly identical frame rates, differing by just 0.3 FPS. This plateau effect is a classic sign of the GPU’s shading units and memory bandwidth being fully utilized, regardless of minor settings adjustments. The Ultra preset at 4K is the only configuration that drops below 30 FPS, making it the least viable option for smooth gameplay.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-11400F provides six cores and twelve threads, with a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. Its 12 MB of shared L3 cache and 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth are adequate for gaming workloads. The CPU’s synthetic benchmarks show strong single-thread performance—a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2029 and a Geekbench single-core score of 1979—which is relevant for Control’s physics calculations.

However, the benchmark data indicates the CPU is not the limiting factor in this pairing. The FPS scaling across resolutions follows a GPU-bound pattern, with no sudden drop-offs that would suggest thread starvation or memory latency issues. The CPU’s multithreaded scores, including a Cinebench R23 multicore result of 14372 and a PassMark multithread score of 16908, place it well above the demands of this title.

The CPU’s 75th percentile ranking among all processors contrasts sharply with the combo’s 1373rd rank out of 1636, reinforcing that the GPU holds the system back. The nearest CPU rivals in average score—all within 0.2% of the i5-11400F—are lower-power mobile chips, yet they would likely produce similar results in Control when paired with the same GTX 1070. This suggests the CPU has ample headroom for this game, and upgrading the GPU would yield far more significant performance gains than any processor change.