Control

The Intel Core i5-12400 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER represents a balanced mid-range configuration for playing Control, a 2019 Action Adventure title. The measured data shows this combo delivers playable frame rates at 1080p, but struggles to maintain smooth performance at higher resolutions. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS across resolutions and settings, contextualizes the combo's performance rank among other tested configurations, and examines the specific roles of the CPU and GPU in shaping the gaming experience.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves an average of 91 FPS. Stepping up to 1440p Low drops the average to 69 FPS, a reduction of 22 FPS. At 4K Low, the average falls further to 46 FPS. This scaling indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting component, as the pixel count increase from 1080p to 4K quadruples the rendering workload, directly impacting the GTX 1660 SUPER's throughput.

The trend continues across all settings presets. At Medium settings, the average frame rate goes from 64 FPS at 1080p, down to 49 FPS at 1440p, and then to 33 FPS at 4K. The High preset shows similar behavior: 57 FPS at 1080p, 43 FPS at 1440p, and 29 FPS at 4K. The Ultra preset is the most demanding, with averages of 50 FPS at 1080p, 38 FPS at 1440p, and just 25 FPS at 4K. The consistent drop between resolutions suggests that the GTX 1660 SUPER's 6 GB of GDDR6 memory and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth are being saturated as resolution increases, with the 4K results falling below the 30 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay across most settings.

The delta between Low and Ultra settings also grows with resolution. At 1080p, the gap between Low (91 FPS) and Ultra (50 FPS) is 41 FPS. At 1440p, the gap narrows to 31 FPS (69 vs 38). At 4K, the gap is 21 FPS (46 vs 25). This narrowing delta indicates that at higher resolutions, the GPU is so heavily loaded that even reducing settings from Ultra to Low cannot fully compensate for the increased pixel count, confirming that the rendering pipeline is bottlenecked by the graphics card rather than the CPU.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's performance in Control places it at rank 3176 out of 3720 tested combinations. This positioning in the 85th percentile of all tested combos means that a significant majority of other CPU-GPU pairings deliver higher frame rates in this game. The data suggests that while the i5-12400 and GTX 1660 SUPER are competent components individually, their combined performance in Control is on the lower end of the spectrum.

The CPU's overall benchmark scores provide context for this ranking. The i5-12400 has a percentileVsAllCpus of 72, indicating it outperforms 72% of all CPUs in general benchmarks. However, its nearest rivals show a tight cluster of performance: the AMD EPYC 7643 scores 18697 (0.1% higher), the Intel Core i7-1355U scores 18730 (0.3% higher), and the AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 scores 18811 (0.7% higher). The Intel Core i3-14100F scores 18519, which is 0.9% lower. This indicates the i5-12400 is well-matched with its peers in synthetic tests, yet the low combo rank in Control suggests the GPU is holding back overall performance.

The GPU's percentileVsAllGpus is 53, meaning it sits just above the median for all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (0.4% higher score), AMD Radeon RX 580 (0.4% higher), and AMD Radeon 740M (0.9% higher), while the NVIDIA Tesla M2090 scores 0.7% lower. The GTX 1660 SUPER's mid-pack GPU standing, combined with the demanding nature of Control's rendering, explains why the combo ranks in the lower quartile of all tested configurations.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER is the decisive factor in this combo's Control performance. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1530 MHz with a boost clock of 1785 MHz, and its 6 GB of GDDR6 memory runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) across a 192-bit bus, yielding 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. These specifications position the card as a capable 1080p performer, which aligns with the measured results showing 50-91 FPS at 1920x1080 depending on settings.

At 1440p, the GPU's limitations become apparent. The average frame rates range from 38 FPS at Ultra to 69 FPS at Low. The 1440p resolution requires significantly more pixel throughput than 1080p, and the GTX 1660 SUPER's 5.027 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 85.68 GPixel/s pixel rate are insufficient to maintain high frame rates with demanding settings. The 4K results are worse, with averages between 25 and 46 FPS, indicating the card is overstretched at this resolution.

The GPU's memory subsystem is also a factor. With only 6 GB of VRAM, Control at higher resolutions and settings may push against this capacity limit. The 12 GB or 16 GB cards from later generations would have more headroom, but the GTX 1660 SUPER's memory size is adequate for 1080p and becomes a potential constraint at 1440p and above. The measured data shows a 33% drop from 1080p Medium (64 FPS) to 1440p Medium (49 FPS), which is steeper than the 25% drop from 1440p Medium to 4K Medium (33 FPS), suggesting the VRAM capacity is not the sole bottleneck but rather the overall compute and memory bandwidth limits.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution to play Control with this combo?*

A: The data shows 1920x1080 is the only resolution where all settings presets maintain an average above 50 FPS. At 2560x1440, only Low settings exceed 60 FPS (69 FPS average), while 3840x2160 results in averages below 50 FPS across all presets.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 1440p?

A: The average FPS drops consistently by roughly 20-25% depending on settings. For example, High settings drop from 57 FPS at 1080p to 43 FPS at 1440p, while Low settings drop from 91 FPS to 69 FPS.

*Q: Does the CPU or GPU bottleneck this combo in Control?*

A: The resolution scaling pattern indicates the GPU is the limiting factor. The i5-12400's 6 cores and 12 threads provide ample processing power, while the GTX 1660 SUPER's mid-range standing (53rd percentile among GPUs) is the primary constraint, especially at higher resolutions.

*Q: Is the GTX 1660 SUPER's 6 GB VRAM sufficient for Control?*

A: The measured data shows playable performance at 1080p and 1440p, but the 4K results with Medium settings (33 FPS average) and Ultra settings (25 FPS average) suggest the memory capacity and bandwidth are insufficient for high-fidelity 4K rendering.

Q: What is the combo's rank compared to all tested configurations?

A: This combo ranks 3176 out of 3720 tested combos in Control, placing it in the lower 15% of all pairings. This low rank is primarily due to the GPU's performance ceiling rather than the CPU.

Q: Which settings preset offers the best balance at 1080p?

A: Medium settings at 1080p provide a 64 FPS average with a minimum of 55 FPS and maximum of 74 FPS, offering smooth gameplay while maintaining visual quality above Low settings.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400 provides the computational foundation for this combo. With 6 cores and 12 threads, the CPU runs at a base clock of 2.50 GHz and boosts up to 4.40 GHz. Its 18 MB of shared L3 cache and per-core L2 cache of 1.25 MB support efficient data access for game logic and physics. The CPU's architecture, Alder Lake-S on Intel's 10 nm process, delivers strong single-threaded performance, as evidenced by its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2257.

In Control, which is an Action Adventure game with complex physics and destruction mechanics, the CPU's multi-threaded capabilities are relevant. The i5-12400's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 15989 and Geekbench multi-core score of 8564 indicate robust performance for handling the game's simulation workloads. However, the measured FPS data shows that the CPU is not the limiting factor, as the frame rates scale linearly with resolution, which is a GPU-bound characteristic.

The CPU's 72nd percentile ranking among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 18683, places it in the upper-mid range. Its nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 7643, scores nearly identically (18697, -0.1% delta), while the Intel Core i3-14100F scores 18519 (0.9% lower). This clustering suggests that the i5-12400's processing power is more than adequate for Control, and upgrading the GPU would yield greater FPS improvements than upgrading the CPU.

The CPU's 65 W TDP and support for both DDR4 and DDR5 memory (dual-channel) provide flexibility, but these factors do not directly influence the measured game performance. The 3DMark scores, including 5890 for max threads and 910 for single thread, further confirm the processor's balanced capabilities. In Control, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and handle game logic, and the data indicates it performs this role without becoming a bottleneck.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and desired frame rate. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset provides the best balance of visual quality and performance, with a 64 FPS average, a 55 FPS minimum, and a 74 FPS maximum. This preset ensures smooth gameplay without dropping below 60 FPS for most of the scene, making it the recommended choice for a consistent experience.

For users prioritizing maximum frame rates at 1080p, the Low preset delivers 91 FPS average, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold for competitive or high-refresh-rate play. However, the visual sacrifice may not be worth the 27 FPS gain over Medium. The High preset at 57 FPS average is marginally below the 60 FPS mark, which could result in occasional stutters on 60 Hz displays. The Ultra preset at 50 FPS average is playable but not ideal for fast-paced action sequences.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset is the only option that maintains an average above 60 FPS (69 FPS). The Medium preset offers 49 FPS average, which is acceptable for slower-paced gameplay but may feel less responsive in combat. High and Ultra presets at 43 and 38 FPS respectively are playable but require a tolerance for reduced smoothness. At 3840x2160, no settings preset achieves a 60 FPS average, with Low being the only option above 40 FPS (46 FPS). The Medium preset at 33 FPS with a 28 FPS minimum may cause noticeable frame drops, while Ultra at 25 FPS is generally not recommended for a playable experience.

The data suggests that 1080p Medium is the sweet spot for this combo, offering a 64 FPS average with minimal frame drops. For 1440p, Low settings are recommended to maintain fluidity, while 4K should be avoided unless the user is comfortable with sub-30 FPS performance.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of the combo's performance across all tested configurations. At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset yields an average of 25 FPS, the High preset 29 FPS, the Medium preset 33 FPS with a minimum of 28 and maximum of 38, and the Low preset 46 FPS. These results indicate that 4K gaming is only feasible with Low settings, and even then, the average falls below the 50 FPS mark.

At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset averages 38 FPS, High averages 43 FPS, Medium averages 49 FPS with a minimum of 41 and maximum of 56, and Low averages 69 FPS. The Medium preset's maximum of 56 FPS shows that the combo can occasionally reach near-60 FPS at this resolution, but the average stays below it. The Low preset at 69 FPS provides the only 1440p configuration that consistently exceeds 60 FPS.

At 1920x1080, the full range of performance is visible. The Ultra preset averages 50 FPS, High averages 57 FPS, Medium averages 64 FPS with a minimum of 55 and maximum of 74, and Low averages 91 FPS. The Medium preset's minimum of 55 FPS is particularly notable, as it indicates that even during demanding scenes, the frame rate stays above 50 FPS, making this the most reliable setting for a smooth experience. The Low preset at 91 FPS demonstrates the combo's capability to deliver high frame rates when visual fidelity is reduced, making it suitable for high-refresh-rate monitors. The progression from Ultra to Low at 1080p shows a 41 FPS improvement (from 50 to 91), which highlights the significant impact of settings on performance at this resolution.