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 based on the Alder Lake architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The CPU's cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. This configuration supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel layout.

In synthetic benchmarks, the i5-12400 demonstrates solid multi-threaded capability. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 15935 and single-core score of 2249 indicate a balanced processor that can handle both heavily threaded workloads and lighter, latency-sensitive tasks. The 3DMark results show scaling from 1692 in the 2-thread test to 5890 in the max-thread test, suggesting that the processor efficiently utilizes additional threads as they become available.

The CPU's percentile ranking places it at the 77th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 19850. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-9700 with an average score of 19831 and a delta of 0.1%, and the Intel Core i7-8700 with a score of 19894 and a delta of -0.2%. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX sits at 19928 with a -0.4% delta, while the Intel Core i5-11600K achieves 19771 with a 0.4% delta. These margins are exceptionally tight, with all four rivals within a single percentage point of the i5-12400's average score.

For Control, the CPU's role is primarily to feed the GPU with draw calls and physics calculations. The game's action-adventure genre typically involves complex scenes with destructible environments and particle effects, which can stress the CPU. The measured FPS data shows that at 1080p Low settings, the system achieves 158.8 FPS, which is well above typical display refresh rates. This high frame rate at low settings suggests that the CPU is not a bottleneck in this configuration, as the GPU has less work to do at lower settings.

The transition from Low to Medium settings at 1080p drops the average FPS from 158.8 to 113.1, a reduction of 45.7 FPS. This drop is larger than the difference between Medium and High, which goes from 113.1 to 103.8 FPS. The scaling pattern indicates that the CPU can maintain high frame rates even when the GPU is less stressed, and the limiting factor at higher settings becomes the GPU's rendering capability rather than the CPU's processing power.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 is built on the Ampere architecture using Samsung's 8 nm process, with a die size of 392 mm² and 17,400 million transistors. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1500 MHz with a boost clock of 1725 MHz, and its memory runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The card includes 5888 shading units, 184 texture mapping units, and 96 raster output units, along with 46 ray tracing cores and 184 tensor cores.

The RTX 3070's compute capabilities include 20.31 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and an equal 20.31 TFLOPS of FP16 performance. Its pixel rate is 165.6 GPixel/s and texture rate is 317.4 GTexel/s. The GPU has a 220 W TDP and requires a 550 W suggested power supply, connecting via PCIe 4.0 x16.

In the PassMark G3D benchmark, the RTX 3070 scores 22214, with a G2D score of 1001 and a compute score of 11195. Its overall average benchmark score is 28238, placing it at the 72nd percentile among all GPUs. The nearest rivals include the AMD FirePro S7150 at 28409 (-0.6% delta), AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT at 27985 (0.9% delta), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti at 27956 (1% delta), and AMD Radeon R9 M295X at 28541 (-1.1% delta).

For Control, the GPU's 8 GB VRAM is sufficient for the game's textures and effects at the tested resolutions. The measured FPS data shows that at 4K Ultra settings, the system achieves 46.9 FPS, which is the lowest result in the dataset. This indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting factor at high resolutions and settings. The 4K High setting reaches 50.1 FPS, while 4K Medium achieves 58.4 FPS, and 4K Low hits 79.5 FPS. The incremental improvements from lowering settings demonstrate that the GPU is heavily taxed at 4K, with each reduction in quality providing meaningful performance gains.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data reveals distinct scaling patterns across resolutions. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 103.8 at 1080p to 77 at 1440p, then to 50.1 at 4K. This represents a 25.8% reduction from 1080p to 1440p and a 51.7% reduction from 1080p to 4K. The scaling is consistent with a GPU-bound scenario, where increasing pixel count directly impacts rendering performance.

At Low settings, the pattern changes. The 1080p result of 158.8 FPS drops to 120.5 FPS at 1440p and 79.5 FPS at 4K. The percentage drops are 24.1% from 1080p to 1440p and 49.9% from 1080p to 4K. The similar percentage reductions across settings suggest that the GPU remains the bottleneck even at low settings, though the absolute frame rates are higher.

The Medium settings show a similar trend: 113.1 FPS at 1080p, 83.7 FPS at 1440p, and 58.4 FPS at 4K. The Ultra settings produce 85.9 FPS at 1080p, 63.9 FPS at 1440p, and 46.9 FPS at 4K. Across all settings, the 4K results are roughly half of the 1080p results, which aligns with the four-fold increase in pixel count. This consistent scaling indicates that the RTX 3070 is the limiting component throughout the resolution range, as the CPU's performance is sufficient to keep up even at lower resolutions where the GPU has less work.

The data also shows that the gap between settings narrows at higher resolutions. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 72.9 FPS (158.8 vs 85.9), while at 4K, the same comparison yields a 32.6 FPS difference (79.5 vs 46.9). This narrowing suggests that at 4K, the GPU's raw rendering capacity becomes the dominant factor, and settings adjustments have diminishing returns as the pixel count increases.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this CPU-GPU combo in Control?

A: The data shows that 1440p High settings achieve 77 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. At 1440p Ultra, the system still manages 63.9 FPS, making 1440p the sweet spot for balancing visual quality and performance.

Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Control?

A: At 4K High settings, the average FPS is 50.1, which is playable but below 60 FPS. Lowering to 4K Medium raises this to 58.4 FPS, while 4K Low achieves 79.5 FPS. The system can run 4K, but users may need to adjust settings for smoother frame rates.

Q: How does the RTX 3070 compare to its nearest rival in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The RTX 3070's average benchmark score is 28238, which is 0.9% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT's 27985 and 1% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti's 27956. It trails the AMD FirePro S7150 by 0.6% and the AMD Radeon R9 M295X by 1.1%.

Q: What is the CPU's performance relative to its nearest competitors?

A: The i5-12400's average score of 19850 is 0.1% higher than the Intel Core i7-9700's 19831 and 0.4% higher than the Intel Core i5-11600K's 19771. It trails the Intel Core i7-8700 by 0.2% and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX by 0.4%.

Q: Does lowering settings from Ultra to Low provide a larger FPS boost at 1080p or 4K?

A: At 1080p, the difference between Ultra and Low is 72.9 FPS (from 85.9 to 158.8), while at 4K, the same settings change yields a 32.6 FPS difference (from 46.9 to 79.5). The absolute FPS gain is larger at 1080p, but the relative improvement is similar.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the primary bottleneck in this configuration?

A: The resolution scaling data indicates the GPU is the limiting component. The FPS drops proportionally with pixel count across all settings, and the CPU's high performance at lower resolutions, such as 158.8 FPS at 1080p Low, suggests it is not holding back the system.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides clear guidance for optimizing the Control experience. At 1080p, all settings presets deliver playable frame rates, with Low at 158.8 FPS, Medium at 113.1 FPS, High at 103.8 FPS, and Ultra at 85.9 FPS. The Ultra preset still maintains a high frame rate, making it a viable choice for users with high-refresh-rate displays.

For 1440p, the High preset achieves 77 FPS, which is above the standard 60 FPS target. The Medium preset reaches 83.7 FPS, while Ultra produces 63.9 FPS, still playable but approaching the lower bound. The Low preset at 120.5 FPS offers a substantial margin for competitive play or high-refresh-rate monitors.

At 4K, the situation is more constrained. The Ultra preset drops to 46.9 FPS, which may be acceptable for slower-paced gameplay but is below ideal smoothness. The High preset at 50.1 FPS offers a slight improvement, while Medium at 58.4 FPS approaches the 60 FPS target. The Low preset at 79.5 FPS provides the smoothest experience but sacrifices visual fidelity.

The best experience per the measured rows depends on the user's resolution and preference. For 1080p, the Ultra preset at 85.9 FPS offers the highest quality without significant performance compromise. For 1440p, the High preset at 77 FPS balances visual quality and smoothness, while Medium at 83.7 FPS is a safer choice for maintaining higher frame rates. For 4K, the Medium preset at 58.4 FPS provides the best balance, as it is close to 60 FPS while retaining more visual detail than Low.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions and four settings presets, providing a complete picture of performance.

At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves 158.8 FPS average, which is the highest result in the dataset. The Medium preset reaches 113.1 FPS, while High produces 103.8 FPS. The Ultra preset at 85.9 FPS is the lowest 1080p result but still well above playable thresholds.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset delivers 120.5 FPS, maintaining high performance. The Medium preset achieves 83.7 FPS, while High reaches 77 FPS. The Ultra preset at 63.9 FPS is the lowest 1440p result but remains above 60 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset produces 79.5 FPS, which is the only 4K result above 60 FPS. The Medium preset reaches 58.4 FPS, while High achieves 50.1 FPS. The Ultra preset at 46.9 FPS is the lowest result across all resolutions and settings.

The data shows consistent behavior where each settings reduction provides a meaningful FPS increase. At 1080p, moving from Ultra to High adds 17.9 FPS, High to Medium adds 9.3 FPS, and Medium to Low adds 45.7 FPS. At 1440p, the increases are 13.1 FPS from Ultra to High, 6.7 FPS from High to Medium, and 36.8 FPS from Medium to Low. At 4K, the increases are 3.2 FPS from Ultra to High, 8.3 FPS from High to Medium, and 21.1 FPS from Medium to Low. The largest gains consistently come from dropping to Low settings, while the smallest gains come from reducing from High to Medium.