Control

The Intel Core i5-12400 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 7700 delivers a solid 1080p and 1440p experience in Control, with the data showing that the sweet spot for this combination is the High preset at 2560x1440, where the average frame rate of 71 FPS balances visual fidelity with smoothness. This combo ranks in the 1294th position out of 2888 tested combinations, placing it in the upper half of all systems evaluated for this game, and the measured results indicate a system that can handle the game’s action without major sacrifices.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS rows provide a clear picture of how this hardware handles Control across different quality presets. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 148 FPS, which is far beyond what any display at that resolution likely needs, making it a waste of visual quality for most users. The Medium preset at 1080p averages 105 FPS with a minimum of 89 FPS and a maximum of 121 FPS, which is still exceptionally smooth and represents a significant visual upgrade over Low. High at 1080p drops to 93 FPS average, while Ultra sits at 81 FPS average. The data suggests that at 1080p, even Ultra is playable, but High offers a better balance if you want to keep headroom for demanding scenes.

Moving to 2560x1440, the picture changes. Low averages 112 FPS, Medium averages 80 FPS with a minimum of 68 FPS and a maximum of 92 FPS, High averages 71 FPS, and Ultra averages 61 FPS. The Medium preset at 1440p is the most compelling option for this resolution, as its 80 FPS average is well within the range of smooth gameplay, and the 68 FPS minimum ensures that even during intense action, the frame rate does not fall into uncomfortable territory. High at 1440p is also viable, but the 71 FPS average leaves less margin for drops, while Ultra at 61 FPS is borderline for a game that benefits from high responsiveness.

At 3840x2160, the results are more constrained. Low averages 76 FPS, Medium averages 54 FPS with a minimum of 46 FPS and a maximum of 62 FPS, High averages 48 FPS, and Ultra averages 41 FPS. For 4K, the only preset that provides a consistently smooth experience is Low, which hits 76 FPS average. Medium is technically playable with a 54 FPS average, but the 46 FPS minimum suggests that some scenes will feel less fluid. High and Ultra at 4K are better avoided if you prioritize frame pacing.

The optimal preset depends on your target resolution. For 1080p, High is the best recommendation because it offers a 93 FPS average and a clear visual improvement over Medium, while still leaving performance headroom. For 1440p, Medium is the standout choice, delivering 80 FPS average with a tight minimum of 68 FPS, which is the best balance of quality and smoothness at that resolution. For 4K, Low is the only preset that consistently stays above 60 FPS, making it the practical choice unless you are willing to accept lower frame rates for higher fidelity.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo of the Intel Core i5-12400 and AMD Radeon RX 7700 achieves a rank of 1294 out of 2888 tested combinations in Control. This places it in the 55th percentile of all systems, meaning it outperforms more than half of the tested hardware pairings but is not at the top tier. The data indicates that this is a mid-to-upper range setup for this specific game, capable of delivering playable frame rates at most resolutions but not dominating the leaderboard.

Looking at the individual components, the CPU’s performance relative to its peers helps contextualize this rank. The Intel Core i5-12400 has an average benchmark score of 18683, which places it in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 7643 with an average score of 18697 (a delta of -0.1%), the Intel Core i7-1355U with 18730 (delta -0.3%), the AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 with 18811 (delta -0.7%), and the Intel Core i3-14100F with 18519 (delta 0.9%). This means the i5-12400 is essentially on par with these processors, with performance differences of less than 1% in either direction. The CPU is not a bottleneck in this system; it provides consistent, competitive performance that is typical of a modern six-core part.

The GPU’s standing is more modest. The AMD Radeon RX 7700 has an average benchmark score of 15852, placing it in the 58th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R9 370X with a score of 15862 (delta -0.1%), the AMD Radeon RX 9060 with 16014 (delta -1%), the AMD Radeon Pro W5500 with 15679 (delta 1.1%), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti with 16129 (delta -1.7%). The RX 7700 is closely matched with these cards, with the RTX 3060 Ti being about 1.7% faster and the RX 9060 about 1% faster, while the Pro W5500 is about 1.1% slower. This places the RX 7700 in a competitive mid-range segment, though it is not a standout performer.

The combination rank of 1294 out of 2888 reflects a system where the CPU is slightly stronger relative to its peers than the GPU. The i5-12400 sits in the 72nd percentile, while the RX 7700 sits in the 58th percentile. This suggests that in Control, the GPU is the more limiting factor for achieving higher frame rates, particularly at higher resolutions and settings where the graphics card’s workload increases.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7700 is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 32 chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process by TSMC. It has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 624.1 GB/s. The memory clock runs at 2438 MHz, which translates to 19.5 Gbps effective. The GPU’s base clock is 1900 MHz, with a boost clock of 2459 MHz and a game clock of 2041 MHz. These specifications are directly relevant to Control’s performance, as the game’s visual effects and textures can place significant demands on memory bandwidth and raw compute.

The 16 GB VRAM capacity is generous for a game released in 2019, ensuring that texture loading and high-resolution assets do not cause memory-related stutters. The 624.1 GB/s bandwidth is also ample, which helps maintain consistent frame rates when the game’s physics and particle effects are active. The GPU’s 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 96 raster output units provide the raw throughput needed to render Control’s environments, while the 40 ray tracing cores offer hardware support for the game’s optional ray-traced reflections and lighting, though the measured FPS data does not specify whether ray tracing was enabled.

The RX 7700’s benchmark scores reinforce its role. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 2865, and in Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 106028. Passmark results show a G3D score of 20974 and a GPU compute score of 10963. These numbers indicate that the GPU is capable of handling modern workloads, but its performance in Control is ultimately constrained by the game’s engine and the settings chosen.

At 1080p, the GPU is not the primary bottleneck for most presets. The frame rates range from 81 FPS at Ultra to 148 FPS at Low, which suggests that the CPU can feed the GPU enough data to keep it busy. However, at 1440p and 4K, the GPU’s workload increases, and the frame rates drop accordingly. The transition from 1080p to 1440p and then to 4K shows a clear scaling pattern that highlights the GPU’s limits, especially at higher quality settings where the pixel fill rate and shading demands become more intensive.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions and four settings, providing a comprehensive view of performance. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves an average of 148 FPS, which is the highest frame rate in the entire dataset. Medium averages 105 FPS with a minimum of 89 FPS and a maximum of 121 FPS, showing a tight frame time distribution. High averages 93 FPS, and Ultra averages 81 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 67 FPS, indicating that the settings have a substantial impact on performance, but even the lowest result is well above the threshold for smooth gameplay.

At 2560x1440, Low averages 112 FPS, which is still very high. Medium averages 80 FPS with a minimum of 68 FPS and a maximum of 92 FPS. High averages 71 FPS, and Ultra averages 61 FPS. The drop from Low to Ultra at 1440p is 51 FPS, which is slightly less pronounced than at 1080p, suggesting that the GPU is starting to become more of a limiting factor. The Medium preset’s minimum of 68 FPS is notable, as it indicates that even in demanding scenes, the frame rate stays above 60 FPS, making it a reliable choice.

At 3840x2160, Low averages 76 FPS, which is the only 4K preset that exceeds 60 FPS. Medium averages 54 FPS with a minimum of 46 FPS and a maximum of 62 FPS, placing it in a playable but not ideal range. High averages 48 FPS, and Ultra averages 41 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is 35 FPS, which is the smallest gap across all resolutions, indicating that the GPU’s raw performance is the dominant factor at this resolution, and the settings have less relative impact.

The data shows a consistent pattern: as resolution increases, the average frame rates drop across all settings, and the gap between Low and Ultra narrows. At 1080p, the CPU is more capable of keeping the GPU fed, allowing for larger performance swings between presets. At 4K, the GPU is heavily loaded, and even reducing settings to Low only brings the frame rate to 76 FPS, which is still below the 1080p Low result of 148 FPS.

Resolution Scaling

The performance scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals which component is the limiting factor in this system. At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 148. Moving to 1440p Low, it drops to 112 FPS, a reduction of 36 FPS or roughly 24%. At 4K Low, it falls to 76 FPS, which is a further reduction of 36 FPS from 1440p, or about 32%. This scaling pattern is typical of a GPU-bound scenario, where the increased pixel count directly impacts the graphics card’s workload.

For the Medium preset, the scaling is similar. At 1080p, the average is 105 FPS. At 1440p, it drops to 80 FPS, a 25 FPS decrease or about 24%. At 4K, it falls to 54 FPS, a 26 FPS decrease from 1440p, or about 33%. The High preset shows 93 FPS at 1080p, 71 FPS at 1440p (a 22 FPS drop, or 24%), and 48 FPS at 4K (a 23 FPS drop, or 32%). The Ultra preset follows the same trend: 81 FPS at 1080p, 61 FPS at 1440p (a 20 FPS drop, or 25%), and 41 FPS at 4K (a 20 FPS drop, or 33%).

The consistent percentage drops of roughly 24% from 1080p to 1440p and 32-33% from 1440p to 4K indicate that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the frame rates would not scale as predictably with resolution, and the differences between 1080p and 4K would be smaller. The data strongly suggests that the RX 7700’s rendering capabilities are what determine the maximum frame rates, and that the i5-12400 provides sufficient CPU performance to avoid becoming a constraint until very high frame rates are achieved.

The scaling also shows that at 1080p, the CPU may start to play a larger role. The fact that Low at 1080p reaches 148 FPS while Medium only achieves 105 FPS suggests that the CPU can push high frame rates, but the GPU’s workload increases with settings, bringing the frame rate down. At 4K, even Low only reaches 76 FPS, which is well below the CPU’s potential output, confirming that the GPU is the limiting factor.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400 is a six-core, twelve-thread processor from the Alder Lake architecture, manufactured on a 10 nm process. Its base clock is 2.50 GHz, with a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. It has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU supports dual-channel DDR4 and DDR5 memory and has a 65 W TDP. Its benchmark scores show strong single-thread and multi-thread performance, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 15989 and a single-core score of 2257.

In Control, the CPU’s role is to handle the game’s physics, AI, and scene management, while the GPU renders the frames. The measured FPS data suggests that the i5-12400 is more than adequate for this task, as the frame rates at 1080p are high enough that the CPU is not the primary bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the 148 FPS average indicates that the CPU can drive the GPU to high frame rates, and the drop to 81 FPS at Ultra is more likely due to the GPU’s increased workload than any CPU limitation.

The CPU’s performance relative to its rivals reinforces this. The i5-12400’s average benchmark score of 18683 is within 1% of its nearest competitors, including the AMD EPYC 7643, Intel Core i7-1355U, AMD Ryzen AI 5 330, and Intel Core i3-14100F. This means that swapping the CPU for any of these would have a negligible impact on Control’s performance, as the delta is less than 1% in all cases. The CPU’s percentile rank of 72 indicates that it is better than the majority of CPUs on the market, providing solid computational power for gaming.

The 3DMark results for the CPU show that it scales well with thread count. The 16-thread score is 5873, the 8-thread score is 4745, the 4-thread score is 3012, and the single-thread score is 910. These results indicate that the CPU has good multi-core scaling, which is beneficial for games that can utilize more than a few threads. However, Control is not heavily multi-threaded, so the single-thread performance, which is solid but not exceptional, is more relevant. The single-thread score of 910 in 3DMark and 2257 in Cinebench R23 suggest that the CPU can handle the game’s main logic thread without causing frame rate drops.

The 6-core, 12-thread configuration also provides enough headroom for background tasks and streaming, ensuring that the game’s performance is not compromised by other processes. The 18 MB of L3 cache is sufficient for the game’s data, and the 4.40 GHz boost clock ensures that the CPU can respond quickly to demanding scenes. Overall, the data indicates that the i5-12400 is a capable partner for the RX 7700 in Control, providing enough CPU performance to let the GPU do its job, while the GPU is the component that determines the final frame rates at higher resolutions.