Control

The Intel Core i5-11400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is a classic 1080p-oriented combination, and the measured data for Control confirms that positioning. The benchmark results show a system that can handle the game's action-adventure physics and particle effects at high frame rates, but only when the resolution and settings are kept within the GPU's comfort zone. The data indicates a clear hierarchy where 1080p is the primary target, 1440p is playable with compromises, and 4K is largely out of reach for smooth gameplay.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and tells a clear story about the limiting component in this system. At High settings, the average FPS falls from 60.4 at 1920x1080 to 45.9 at 2560x1440, and then plummets to 33 at 3840x2160. That is a 24% reduction from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 28% reduction from 1440p to 4K. The pattern is consistent across all settings presets, indicating that the GTX 1660 Ti is the primary bottleneck as pixel count increases.

The scaling behavior reveals that Control becomes heavily GPU-bound at higher resolutions. At Low settings, the system manages 90.3 FPS at 1080p, but this drops to 71 at 1440p and 44.4 at 4K. The 4K Low result is telling: even with the lowest graphical load, the GPU cannot maintain a 60 FPS target because the sheer number of pixels overwhelms the 6 GB VRAM buffer and the 192-bit memory bus. The data suggests that the i5-11400F has enough headroom to feed the GPU at 1080p, but the GTX 1660 Ti's compute throughput and memory bandwidth become the deciding factors as resolution rises.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-11400F provides a solid foundation for this game, with 6 cores and 12 threads running at a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. In synthetic benchmarks, the processor scores 868 in 3dmark_single_thread and 5652 in 3dmark_max_threads, placing it in the 75th percentile of all CPUs. This single-thread performance is adequate for Control's game logic and physics calculations, which are typically not heavily multi-threaded.

The CPU's 12 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for feeding the GPU at 1080p. The benchmark data shows that at 1920x1080 Low settings, the system achieves 90.3 FPS, which is close to the practical limit for a GTX 1660 Ti. The gap between the CPU's potential and the GPU's delivery is minimal at this resolution, but at 4K the CPU is clearly not the limiting factor; the GPU is. The i5-11400F's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 14372 and single-core score of 2029 indicate it has ample capacity for this workload, so users should not expect CPU-related stuttering in Control.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is the workhorse here, and its specifications directly explain the measured frame rates. With 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus providing 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth, and a boost clock of 1770 MHz, the GPU delivers 5.437 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. The 1536 shading units and 48 ROPs are responsible for the pixel throughput, clocked at 84.96 GPixel/s.

The GPU's 55th percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 13925, places it just slightly ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 570X (0.4% delta) and marginally behind the NVIDIA Tesla K10 (-0.7% delta). This mid-range positioning is reflected in the game data: at 1080p High settings, the GPU produces 60.4 FPS, which is exactly at the threshold for smooth play on a standard 60 Hz monitor. The 6 GB VRAM capacity is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p at most settings, but the 4K results suggest the memory bandwidth becomes saturated, as evidenced by the 4K Medium result of 31.3 FPS being lower than the 4K High result of 33 FPS, which is an anomaly likely due to driver-level optimizations or scene variations.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers playable performance across all settings. Low settings yield an average of 90.3 FPS, Medium drops to 66.8 FPS, High sits at 60.4 FPS, and Ultra falls to 51.6 FPS. The step from High to Ultra is a 14.6% reduction, which is a meaningful visual upgrade for a modest frame rate cost. For competitive or high-refresh-rate play, Low settings are the only option that breaks past the 90 FPS mark.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates become more constrained. Low settings achieve 71 FPS, which is still smooth, but Medium drops to 48.9 FPS and High to 45.9 FPS. Ultra is the weakest at 40.7 FPS. The difference between Medium and High at 1440p is only 6.1%, suggesting that the GPU is already struggling to maintain headroom, and users should expect to prioritize one or the other.

At 3840x2160, the data shows a system that is out of its depth. Low settings average 44.4 FPS, which is barely playable on a 40 Hz display, but High and Medium both fall below 35 FPS (33 and 31.3, respectively). Ultra is the worst at 27.3 FPS, which is essentially a slideshow for action gameplay. The 4K results are consistently below the 60 FPS target, and even the jump from Low to Medium costs 29.5% of the frame rate, indicating severe memory bandwidth limitations.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Control at 1080p with High settings?

A: Yes, the measured data shows an average of 60.4 FPS at 1920x1080 with High settings, which is exactly at the standard 60 Hz refresh rate threshold for smooth gameplay.

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

A: The data indicates 1920x1080 is the optimal resolution. At 1080p, the system achieves playable frame rates across all settings, whereas 2560x1440 only exceeds 60 FPS at Low settings, and 3840x2160 never reaches 60 FPS on any preset.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck at 4K?

A: The benchmark results clearly show the GPU is the limiting factor at 4K. The frame rates scale down consistently with resolution increases, and the CPU's 75th percentile ranking suggests it has ample headroom, while the GTX 1660 Ti's 6 GB VRAM and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for 3840x2160.

Q: How does the GTX 1660 Ti compare to its nearest rivals in raw performance?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score of 13925 is 0.4% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 570X and 0.8% higher than the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile. It is also 0.7% lower than the NVIDIA Tesla K10, indicating it sits squarely in the mid-range tier.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: The measured data shows a 38.7 FPS difference, with Low achieving 90.3 FPS and Ultra averaging 51.6 FPS. This represents a 43% reduction in performance for the maximum visual quality preset.

Q: Should I expect consistent frame times for a smooth experience?

A: The data only provides average FPS values, not frame time variance. However, the consistent scaling across settings and resolutions suggests the system is stable, but the low 4K averages (below 35 FPS) indicate that frame pacing could be inconsistent in that range.

Settings Recommendations

For the best balance of visual quality and smooth gameplay, the 1920x1080 High preset is the recommended starting point. At 60.4 FPS, it delivers exactly the standard target for most monitors, and the visual improvements over Medium (which runs at 66.8 FPS) are noticeable in lighting and texture detail. Users with a 60 Hz display should stick with High, as the extra 6.4 FPS from Medium is not worth the graphical downgrade.

For those with high-refresh-rate monitors (144 Hz or above), the Low preset at 1080p is the only viable option, as it achieves 90.3 FPS. This is still not enough for a 144 Hz panel, but it provides a more responsive experience than any other setting. At 2560x1440, the Low preset at 71 FPS is playable, but Medium at 48.9 FPS is the highest setting that maintains a consistent frame rate above 45 FPS. Users should avoid High and Ultra at 1440p unless they are willing to accept sub-50 FPS averages.

For 4K displays, the data suggests this hardware is not suitable for Control. The highest average across any preset is 44.4 FPS at Low, which is below the 60 FPS target and will result in a subpar experience. If forced to play at 3840x2160, Low settings are the only practical choice, but the overall recommendation is to drop the resolution to 2560x1440 or 1920x1080 to regain playable performance. The Ultra preset at any resolution is only recommended for 1080p users who prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate, with the 51.6 FPS result being the minimum acceptable threshold for action games.