Control

Control, the 2019 action-adventure title, presents an interesting stress test for the Intel Core i5-12400 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti pairing. The measured data reveals a system that is heavily influenced by resolution and graphics settings, with the GPU clearly acting as the primary bottleneck at higher loads. This analysis walks through the measured FPS rows to explain how this specific combination behaves, where its strengths lie, and which settings offer the most playable experience.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is dramatic and tells a clear story about component balance. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves 136.2 FPS, but at 4K Low, that figure falls to 67.1 FPS—a reduction of roughly half. The trend continues across all settings. At High settings, the average frame rate drops from 83.3 FPS at 1920x1080 to 64.1 FPS at 2560x1440, and finally to 40.8 FPS at 3840x2160. This consistent scaling indicates that the GTX 1080 Ti is the limiting factor as pixel count rises, with the Core i5-12400 providing ample headroom even at lower resolutions.

The gap between 1440p and 4K is particularly telling. At Medium settings, 2560x1440 yields 73 FPS, while 3840x2160 drops to 49.7 FPS—a 23.3 FPS difference. This is a larger absolute drop than the 23 FPS difference between 1080p and 1440p at the same settings (96.1 to 73 FPS), suggesting that the GPU’s memory bandwidth and raw throughput are being saturated as resolution approaches 4K. The GTX 1080 Ti’s 484.4 GB/s bandwidth and 11 GB of GDDR5X memory are substantial, but Control’s visual effects at 4K push the architecture to its limits.

Notably, the scaling between Low and Ultra settings at each resolution shows that the GPU is almost always the dominant constraint. At 1080p, moving from Low to Ultra costs 62.8 FPS (136.2 to 73.4), which is a massive penalty. At 4K, the same settings change costs 27 FPS (67.1 to 40.1). The smaller absolute penalty at 4K does not mean the CPU is becoming a factor; rather, the GPU is already so burdened by pixel count that additional graphical effects have less relative impact. The data strongly suggests that for 4K gaming, this combo is GPU-bound across all presets.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400 brings six cores and twelve threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. Its benchmark scores position it as a solid mid-range performer, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 15935 and a single-core score of 2249. In the context of Control, which is not known for extreme CPU demands, this processor should rarely be the bottleneck. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 5873 and max-thread score of 5890 indicate that the CPU can handle substantial parallel workloads.

Given that the measured FPS scales almost linearly with resolution and settings, the data implies the i5-12400 is not struggling to feed the GPU. At 1080p Low, where CPU load is typically highest relative to GPU, the combo still hits 136.2 FPS. This suggests that even if the CPU were to limit performance in some scenarios, it would only be at frame rates well above 100 FPS, which is irrelevant for most displays. The processor’s 18 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel memory support (DDR4 and DDR5) provide sufficient bandwidth for game logic and draw calls.

The CPU’s performance relative to its nearest rivals is marginal. Its average benchmark score of 19850 is 0.1% higher than the Intel Core i7-9700 (19831) and 0.4% higher than the Intel Core i5-11600K (19771). It trails the Intel Core i7-8700 by 0.2% (19894) and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX by 0.4% (19928). These deltas are negligible in real-world gaming, reinforcing that the i5-12400 is not the limiting component in this pairing. The CPU’s 77th percentile ranking among all CPUs further confirms its adequacy for this game.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS rows provide clear guidance on which settings offer the best experience. At 1920x1080, High settings deliver 83.3 FPS, which is smooth for most players. Medium settings raise that to 96.1 FPS, offering a tangible improvement with likely minimal visual degradation. Ultra settings drop to 73.4 FPS, which is still playable but sacrifices 10 FPS compared to High. Low settings at 136.2 FPS are only useful for competitive play or extremely high refresh rate monitors, as the visual quality loss is substantial.

At 2560x1440, the recommendation shifts. High settings produce 64.1 FPS, which is adequate for a slower-paced action-adventure game. Medium settings provide 73 FPS, making it the sweet spot for 1440p—it offers a 13.9% improvement over High while likely retaining most visual fidelity. Ultra settings at 54 FPS are borderline, as the drop below 60 FPS may be noticeable. Low settings at 101 FPS are viable for players who prioritize frame rate over visuals, but they are not necessary for a good experience.

For 3840x2160, the options are constrained. High settings yield 40.8 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target. Medium settings improve to 49.7 FPS, and Low settings reach 67.1 FPS. Ultra settings at 40.1 FPS are the worst choice. For 4K, the data suggests that Low or Medium settings are the only reasonable options unless the player accepts sub-50 FPS performance. Medium at 4K offers a balanced 49.7 FPS, while Low at 67.1 FPS is the only preset that consistently stays above 60 FPS. Given the visual nature of Control, Medium at 1440p appears to be the best overall combination of performance and quality, but at 4K, Low is the pragmatic choice.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-12400 with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti ranks 957th out of 1636 tested combos for Control. This places it in the lower-middle portion of the database, which is unsurprising given the GPU’s age. The GTX 1080 Ti’s percentile ranking of 61 among all GPUs and its average benchmark score of 19402 indicate it is a capable but not top-tier card in the current landscape. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780, has an identical average score of 19405, while the AMD Radeon Pro 560X is only 0.1% behind at 19426.

The combo’s rank of 957 out of 1636 means there are many faster pairings, but it also outperforms a significant portion of the database. The GTX 1080 Ti’s 11.34 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 88 ROPs provide solid raw power, but newer architectures with more efficient designs and additional features like ray tracing (which this GPU lacks) push ahead in modern titles. In Control specifically, which was released in 2019 and can be demanding on GPU resources, this combo’s rank reflects its limitations at higher resolutions and settings, but it remains a viable option for 1080p and 1440p gaming.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is the dominant component in this pairing, and its specifications explain the measured results. The GPU features 3584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 88 ROPs, with a base clock of 1481 MHz and a boost clock of 1582 MHz. Its 11 GB of GDDR5X memory runs at 1376 MHz (11 Gbps effective) across a 352-bit bus, yielding 484.4 GB/s of bandwidth. These figures are impressive for a 2017 card, but they are now showing their age in demanding titles.

In Control, the GPU’s role is evident from the FPS scaling. At 1080p Low, the card can push 136.2 FPS, but this drops to 101 FPS at 1440p and 67.1 FPS at 4K. The pixel rate of 139.2 GPixel/s and texture rate of 354.4 GTexel/s are being fully utilized at higher resolutions. The GPU’s 16 nm process node from TSMC, with 11,800 million transistors on a 471 mm² die, produces a transistor density of 25.1M per mm²—a figure that is low compared to modern cards but was competitive at launch.

The GTX 1080 Ti’s average benchmark score of 19402 places it in the 61st percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals include the GTX 780 (19405, 0% delta) and the NVIDIA TITAN Xp (19184, 1.1% delta). These close scores suggest that, in synthetic benchmarks, the 1080 Ti performs similarly to older flagship cards, but in Control’s measured FPS, it shows its limitations at 4K. The GPU’s end-of-life production status and lack of ray tracing cores mean it cannot leverage newer features, but for rasterized games like Control, it remains a capable performer.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its best results. Low settings average 136.2 FPS, Medium 96.1 FPS, High 83.3 FPS, and Ultra 73.4 FPS. The 62.8 FPS gap between Low and Ultra is the largest of any resolution, indicating that the GPU is not fully stressed at 1080p and has headroom to render additional effects. These numbers suggest that 1080p is the resolution where this combo shines, with every preset except possibly Ultra staying comfortably above 60 FPS.

Moving to 2560x1440, the averages are 101 FPS on Low, 73 FPS on Medium, 64.1 FPS on High, and 54 FPS on Ultra. The drop from Low to Ultra is 47 FPS, smaller than at 1080p, because the GPU is now working harder to fill more pixels. High settings at 64.1 FPS are just above the 60 FPS threshold, while Ultra falls below it. Medium at 73 FPS offers the best balance, providing a smooth experience without a significant visual compromise.

At 3840x2160, the averages are 67.1 FPS on Low, 49.7 FPS on Medium, 40.8 FPS on High, and 40.1 FPS on Ultra. The difference between High and Ultra is a mere 0.7 FPS, showing that the GPU is completely saturated at 4K and additional settings have minimal impact. Low is the only preset that maintains 60+ FPS, while Medium and High are playable but not ideal. The 27 FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 4K, compared to 62.8 FPS at 1080p, underscores that the GPU is the sole bottleneck at this resolution.

Overall, the data paints a picture of a system that is well-matched for 1080p and 1440p gaming, with the GTX 1080 Ti providing strong performance when not overwhelmed by pixel count. At 4K, the user must make significant sacrifices in settings to achieve playable frame rates, and even then, the experience is not smooth. The Core i5-12400, with its strong single-thread and multi-thread scores, ensures that the GPU is always the limiting factor, which is the ideal scenario for understanding where the bottleneck lies in this combination.