Control

The Intel Core i5-12400F and AMD Radeon RX 580 combination presents a study in contrasts for Control. The CPU is a modern 6-core, 12-thread Alder Lake part with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost of 4.40 GHz, placing it in the 73rd percentile of all CPUs. The GPU, however, is a Polaris 20 part from 2017, sitting in the 53rd percentile of all GPUs. The benchmark data reveals that the final frame rate is heavily dictated by this older graphics processor, though the CPU's capabilities set the ceiling for what is achievable.

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

The i5-12400F provides a robust foundation for Control. With 6 physical cores and 12 threads, it offers the multi-threading headroom that modern action-adventure titles often utilize for physics, AI, and streaming. Its base clock of 2.50 GHz and boost clock of 4.40 GHz are significant, with the high boost being particularly relevant for a game like Control that demands strong single-thread performance for game logic. The CPU's benchmark scores reinforce this capability; a 3dmark single-thread score of 909 and a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1680 indicate excellent per-core performance.

This CPU performance is more than sufficient for the frame rates observed. Looking at the measured data, the highest average FPS recorded for this combo is 63 at 1080p Low settings. The i5-12400F, with its 18 MB of shared L3 cache and 12 threads, is unlikely to be the bottleneck at these frame rates. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 12380 and Geekbench multicore score of 9472 show it can handle complex scenes with numerous entities. The processor sits comfortably in the 73rd percentile, and its nearest rivals, such as the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS and Intel Core i5-1335U, have essentially identical average benchmark scores (deltaPct of 0 and 0.3, respectively), confirming its position as a solid mid-range performer.

The data implies that the CPU's role here is to provide a stable, high-performance platform that never holds the GPU back. The bottleneck is clearly elsewhere. Even at the most demanding setting (4K Ultra), where the average FPS drops to 18, the CPU's thread utilization is not the limiting factor. The game's performance scaling from Low to Ultra settings shows a consistent pattern that points directly at the graphics card as the primary constraint. The CPU's 65 W TDP and 10 nm Intel process are efficient, but the performance headroom is vast; the GPU simply cannot produce enough frames to challenge the i5-12400F.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

*Q: Can this combo run Control at 1080p with playable frame rates?*

A: Yes, the data shows that at 1920x1080, the average FPS ranges from 35 on Ultra settings to 63 on Low settings. The Medium preset yields an average of 45 FPS with a minimum of 38 FPS, indicating that a smooth experience is possible at 1080p, particularly on Medium or High settings.

Q: How much of a performance drop is there from 1080p to 4K?

A: The drop is substantial. At High settings, the average FPS falls from 40 at 1080p to 30 at 1440p, and then to 20 at 4K. This represents a 50% decrease in average FPS from 1080p to 4K at High settings, highlighting the GPU's struggle with the increased pixel count.

Q: Is the Ultra preset viable at any resolution for this hardware?

A: The data indicates it is not a smooth experience. At 1080p Ultra, the average FPS is 35. At 1440p Ultra, it drops to 26, and at 4K Ultra, it falls to 18. These averages are below the threshold for a consistently fluid experience, especially at higher resolutions.

Q: Which preset provides the highest average FPS at 1440p?

A: The Low preset at 2560x1440 yields the highest average FPS of 48. The Medium preset follows at 34, High at 30, and Ultra at 26. The Low preset is the only one at 1440p that approaches a 60 FPS target.

Q: What is the difference in performance between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 63 FPS, while the Ultra preset delivers 35 FPS. This is a performance cost of 28 FPS, or approximately 44% fewer frames, for the visual upgrade from Low to Ultra.

Q: How does the GPU's standing compare to its close competitors?

A: The RX 580's average benchmark score of 12928 puts it in a tight race with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile, which has an average score of 12940, a deltaPct of -0.1. It is also very close to the GTX 1660 SUPER, which is only -0.4% behind, and the AMD Radeon 740M, which is 0.5% ahead.

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

The resolution scaling data leaves no room for doubt regarding the system's bottleneck. The performance degradation from 1080p to 4K is steep and consistent across all settings, which is a classic sign of a GPU-bound scenario. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 63 at 1080p to 48 at 1440p, and then to 32 at 4K. This is a significant 49% reduction in performance from 1080p to 4K.

The trend is similar for other presets. At Medium settings, the average FPS goes from 45 at 1080p to 34 at 1440p and 23 at 4K. At High settings, the numbers are 40, 30, and 20, respectively. The pattern is clear: each step up in resolution imposes a nearly linear penalty on frame rate. This behavior indicates that the rendering pipeline is saturated by the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth. The RX 580's 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 32 ROPs are being overwhelmed by the demands of rendering Control at higher resolutions.

While the CPU is powerful, its performance is not resolution-dependent. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect the frame rates at 1080p and 1440p to be similar, as the CPU's workload would not change significantly with resolution. Instead, the frame rates plummet, proving that the AMD Radeon RX 580 is the limiting component. The data suggests that to achieve higher frame rates, one must either lower the resolution or reduce the graphical settings to lessen the load on the GPU.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of this combo's capabilities in Control.

1920x1080:

• Low: Average 63 FPS.
• Medium: Average 45 FPS, with a minimum of 38 FPS and a maximum of 51 FPS.
• High: Average 40 FPS.
• Ultra: Average 35 FPS.

2560x1440:

• Low: Average 48 FPS.
• Medium: Average 34 FPS, with a minimum of 29 FPS and a maximum of 39 FPS.
• High: Average 30 FPS.
• Ultra: Average 26 FPS.

3840x2160:

• Low: Average 32 FPS.
• Medium: Average 23 FPS, with a minimum of 19 FPS and a maximum of 26 FPS.
• High: Average 20 FPS.
• Ultra: Average 18 FPS.

The data shows that 1080p is the only resolution where an average of 60 FPS is achievable, and only on the Low preset. The Medium preset at 1080p, with its 45 FPS average and 38 FPS minimum, offers the best balance of visual fidelity and smoothness for this resolution. At 1440p, even the Low preset's 48 FPS average is below a 60 FPS target, indicating the GPU is already struggling. The 4K results are uniformly low, with all presets failing to reach an average of 35 FPS, confirming that 4K is not a viable option for this hardware in this title.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 580 is the definitive bottleneck in this system. Its benchmark scores are moderate, with a Passmark G3D score of 8813 and a 3dmark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1005. The GPU's 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is a key specification for a texture-heavy game like Control. However, it appears to be insufficient for high-resolution play.

The GPU's clocks are 1257 MHz base and 1340 MHz boost. Its compute capabilities include 2304 shading units and a texture rate of 193.0 GTexel/s. While these numbers are respectable for its generation, the performance data suggests they are not enough for this title at higher settings. The GPU's 53rd percentile ranking and its close rivals, such as the GTX 1660 SUPER (deltaPct -0.4) and RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (deltaPct -0.1), place it in a performance class that is a few generations behind the current curve.

The implications for Control are clear. The game's physics and visual effects, which rely heavily on GPU compute, strain the RX 580. The FP32 performance of 6.175 TFLOPS is being fully utilized, as evidenced by the frame rate drops at higher resolutions. The 8 GB VRAM is likely sufficient for 1080p, but at 4K, the memory demands may be pushing the GPU to its limits, contributing to the low average FPS of 18-32. The data shows that the GPU's performance is the primary variable in the frame rate equation for this combo.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution.

For a 1080p display, the Medium preset is the recommended starting point. It provides an average of 45 FPS with a minimum of 38 FPS, which is a stable and playable experience. The High preset offers only 5 FPS less on average (40 FPS), which might be acceptable for some, but the Medium preset's consistency, as shown by its min/max range, suggests a smoother overall experience. The Low preset is the only way to get near 60 FPS (63 average), but the visual compromise is significant. Ultra is not recommended, as its 35 FPS average is below the comfort threshold.

For 1440p, the data suggests that the Low preset is the only viable option for a playable experience, yielding an average of 48 FPS. The Medium preset's 34 FPS average and 29 FPS minimum are likely to feel choppy in fast-paced combat. The High and Ultra presets, at 30 and 26 FPS respectively, are not recommended for a smooth experience.

At 4K, none of the presets offer a playable experience. The Low preset's 32 FPS average is the highest, but it still falls short of the 60 FPS target. The Medium preset has a minimum of 19 FPS, which is a jarring experience. Therefore, 4K should be avoided on this hardware. The recommendation is to prioritize resolution over settings, meaning it is better to play at 1080p Medium than at 1440p Low, if visual fidelity is desired.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The overall standing of this combination is poor. The combo rank for this specific hardware pairing in Control is 3399 out of 3720 tested combos. This puts it in the bottom 9% of all tested systems, a stark reflection of the GPU's limitations.

This ranking is surprising given the CPU's strength. The i5-12400F is a capable processor, but the RX 580 drags the entire system down to a rank that is near the bottom of the database. The data implies that in a game like Control, the GPU is so dominant in determining performance that a modern, high-performing CPU cannot compensate for an older, mid-range graphics card. The combo rank suggests that the vast majority of other tested hardware combinations, even those with weaker CPUs but stronger GPUs, will outperform this specific pairing.

This poor ranking is consistent with the measured FPS data. With an average FPS of 20 at 4K High and 35 at 1080p Ultra, the system is simply not competitive with the majority of others in the database. For a player looking to play Control, this combo would be a frustrating experience, requiring significant compromises in either resolution or settings to achieve a playable frame rate. The rank firmly establishes that the GPU is the anchor on this system's performance.