Control

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core i5-12400 is a 6-core, 12-thread processor from the Alder Lake-S family, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. It uses the Intel Socket 1700 platform, supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration, and carries an 18 MB shared L3 cache. Its 10 nm process node and 65 W TDP classify it as a mainstream desktop part, with a 77th percentile ranking among all CPUs based on its average benchmark score of 19,850.

In the context of Control, the CPU’s role becomes clearer when examining the frame rate progression across resolutions. At 1080p Low, the combo hits 193.8 FPS, which is the highest measured value in the dataset. This suggests the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU well at lower graphical loads. However, the jump from 1080p Low to 1080p Ultra drops the average to 107.8 FPS, a reduction of 86 FPS. That gap is primarily driven by the GPU struggling with higher settings, but the CPU’s 12 threads and 4.4 GHz boost still provide enough headroom to avoid becoming the primary bottleneck at 1080p.

The 3DMark single-thread score of 910 and multi-thread score of 5,890 indicate balanced performance. Cinebench R23 results reinforce this: 2,249 in single-core and 15,935 in multi-core. For a game like Control, which relies on both physics and AI computations, the Passmark physics score of 1,105 is particularly relevant. The data shows that this CPU’s performance is comparable to the Intel Core i7-9700, with a deltaPct of 0.1% (nearly identical average scores of 19,831 vs. 19,850). It is also 0.4% ahead of the Intel Core i5-11600K, which scores 19,771. This clustering suggests the i5-12400 sits in a well-trodden performance tier, neither dramatically exceeding nor falling behind its immediate rivals.

At 4K Ultra, the average FPS drops to 55.4, which is 38.4 FPS below the 1080p Ultra result. This scaling pattern indicates that the CPU is not the limiting factor at higher resolutions; instead, the GPU’s workload increases disproportionately. The CPU’s 6 cores and 12 threads are sufficient to maintain frame pacing, as evidenced by the 4K Low result of 101 FPS, which is still above 100 FPS despite the resolution increase.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture with the Navi 48 chip, fabricated on a 4 nm process by TSMC. It features 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 644.6 GB/s. The GPU’s base clock is 1660 MHz, with a boost clock of 2970 MHz and a game clock of 2400 MHz. Memory runs at 2518 MHz, effective 20.1 Gbps. With 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs, the card delivers 48.66 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and a pixel rate of 380.2 GPixel/s.

The GPU’s role in Control becomes evident when comparing settings at a fixed resolution. At 1080p, the spread from Low (193.8 FPS) to Ultra (107.8 FPS) is 86 FPS, showing that higher settings impose a significant load on the GPU’s shading and ROP throughput. At 1440p, the same settings spread is 67.4 FPS (147.5 to 80.1), and at 4K, it narrows to 45.6 FPS (101 to 55.4). This narrowing suggests that at higher resolutions, the GPU is consistently saturated, and the relative cost of each settings tier becomes less impactful in absolute FPS terms.

The VRAM capacity of 16 GB is substantial, and the bandwidth of 644.6 GB/s helps maintain texture streaming in a game like Control, which uses dense environments and physics objects. The GPU’s 82nd percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 39,647, places it well above most competitors. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro 575, scores 39,703, a deltaPct of -0.1%, meaning the RX 9070 XT is essentially tied with it. The NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile is 0.2% behind, and the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 is 0.6% behind with a score of 39,879.

At 4K Ultra, the average of 55.4 FPS is below the 60 FPS threshold, indicating that the GPU is the limiting component at this extreme setting. The 4K Medium result of 69.7 FPS suggests that dropping from Ultra to Medium recovers 14.3 FPS, which is a meaningful gain for a smoother experience. The GPU’s 128 ROPs and 256 TMUs are likely the key contributors to this behavior, as Control’s rendering relies heavily on pixel fill rate and texture sampling.

FAQ

Q: What is the maximum average FPS achievable with this CPU and GPU combo in Control?

A: The highest measured average is 193.8 FPS, achieved at 1080p with Low settings.

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

A: The Intel Core i5-12400 has an average benchmark score of 19,850, which is 0.1% higher than the Intel Core i7-9700 (19,831) and 0.4% higher than the Intel Core i5-11600K (19,771).

Q: At which resolution does the combo fail to maintain 60 FPS on Ultra settings?

A: At 3840x2160 (4K) with Ultra settings, the average FPS drops to 55.4, which is below the 60 FPS target.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and High settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Low settings yield 147.5 FPS, while High settings yield 92.7 FPS, a difference of 54.8 FPS.

Q: How does the GPU’s percentile rank compare to its average benchmark score?

A: The RX 9070 XT has an 82nd percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 39,647.

Q: What is the GPU’s VRAM size and memory bandwidth?

A: The GPU has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory with a bandwidth of 644.6 GB/s.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 394th out of 1,636 tested combinations in Control, placing it in the top 24% of all configurations. This ranking reflects a strong pairing, but not an elite one. The CPU’s 77th percentile and the GPU’s 82nd percentile individually are higher than the combo’s overall rank, suggesting that the pairing’s performance in Control is somewhat constrained by the game’s specific demands rather than raw component strength.

The rank implies that many other combinations—likely with higher-end CPUs or GPUs—achieve better frame rates in this title. However, the measured data shows that the combo is capable of exceeding 100 FPS at 1080p across all settings except Ultra (107.8 FPS is still above 100) and at 4K Low (101 FPS). The 1440p results are also strong, with only Ultra falling below 90 FPS (80.1). This suggests the combo is well-suited for high-refresh-rate 1080p and 1440p gaming, with 4K being playable at Medium or High settings.

The rank of 394 out of 1,636 is a relative measure, and the absolute FPS figures indicate that this combo outperforms the majority of configurations in the database. The deltaPct values for the CPU’s nearest rivals (all within 0.4%) show that the i5-12400 is in a tightly contested performance band, which may explain why the combo’s rank is not higher—many other CPUs in this tier produce similar results.

Settings Recommendations

For the best balance of visual quality and frame rate, the data points to High settings at 1440p as the sweet spot. At this configuration, the combo delivers 92.7 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold and close to 90 FPS, providing smooth gameplay without sacrificing much visual fidelity. The 1440p Medium setting offers 101.4 FPS, which is only 8.7 FPS higher, but High settings likely provide a more noticeable visual improvement.

At 1080p, High settings yield 121.3 FPS, which is excellent for high-refresh-rate monitors. Ultra at 1080p drops to 107.8 FPS, still above 100 FPS, so users with 120 Hz or 144 Hz displays can opt for Ultra if they prefer maximum quality. For 4K, High settings at 63.7 FPS are the best option for maintaining a playable frame rate, while Medium at 69.7 FPS offers a slightly higher margin of safety. Ultra at 4K (55.4 FPS) is only recommended for users who prioritize visuals over frame rate and can tolerate sub-60 FPS gameplay.

Low settings are generally unnecessary for this combo, as even 4K Low achieves 101 FPS. The data suggests that the GPU has enough headroom to run Medium or High at most resolutions, and the CPU can keep up without becoming a bottleneck.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1080p, the combo demonstrates its full range: Low settings average 193.8 FPS, Medium averages 136.4 FPS, High averages 121.3 FPS, and Ultra averages 107.8 FPS. This represents a spread of 86 FPS from Low to Ultra, with each settings tier costing between 13.5 and 57.4 FPS compared to the previous tier. The largest drop is from Low to Medium (57.4 FPS), while the smallest is from High to Ultra (13.5 FPS), indicating diminishing returns at the highest settings.

At 1440p, the results are 147.5 FPS (Low), 101.4 FPS (Medium), 92.7 FPS (High), and 80.1 FPS (Ultra). The spread narrows to 67.4 FPS, and the relative cost of each tier is more consistent. The drop from Low to Medium is 46.1 FPS, from Medium to High is 8.7 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 12.6 FPS.

At 4K, the averages are 101 FPS (Low), 69.7 FPS (Medium), 63.7 FPS (High), and 55.4 FPS (Ultra). The total spread is 45.6 FPS, and the largest drop is again from Low to Medium (31.3 FPS). The difference between Medium and High is 6 FPS, and between High and Ultra is 8.3 FPS. All 4K results are above 55 FPS, but only Low and Medium exceed 60 FPS.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is most pronounced at Low settings: 193.8 FPS at 1080p falls to 101 FPS at 4K, a reduction of 92.8 FPS (47.9%). At Medium settings, the drop is from 136.4 to 69.7 FPS, a reduction of 66.7 FPS (48.9%). High settings fall from 121.3 to 63.7 FPS, a reduction of 57.6 FPS (47.5%). Ultra settings drop from 107.8 to 55.4 FPS, a reduction of 52.4 FPS (48.6%).

The consistency of these percentages—hovering around 48% across all settings—indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting factor when moving from 1080p to 4K. The CPU’s performance remains relatively stable, as evidenced by the 4K Low result of 101 FPS, which is still more than double the 4K Ultra result. This suggests that the GPU’s pixel throughput and memory bandwidth become the bottlenecks at higher resolutions, while the CPU’s 6 cores and 12 threads are sufficient to handle the game’s logic and physics at any resolution.

The scaling pattern also reveals that the combo is not severely CPU-bound even at 1080p Low, since the FPS does not plateau at a CPU-limited value. The 193.8 FPS at 1080p Low is likely close to the GPU’s maximum output at that settings level, and the CPU can feed it without constraint. As resolution increases, the GPU’s workload grows, and the FPS drops proportionally, confirming that the RX 9070 XT is the dominant factor in this pairing for Control.