Control

The Intel Core i5-12400F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 9070 delivers a thoroughly capable 1440p experience in Control, with the data showing a predictable shift in bottleneck behavior as resolution climbs. At 1080p the combination pushes frame rates high enough to expose CPU limits, while at 4K the GPU becomes the dominant constraint. This is a balanced pairing for a game that rewards both strong rasterization and a solid six-core processor, though the scaling pattern suggests users targeting maximum refresh rates should stay at 1440p or below.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and expected progression as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At High settings, the average frame rate drops from 116.8 FPS at 1080p to 84.8 FPS at 1440p, a reduction of roughly 27%, before falling further to 58.6 FPS at 4K, another 31% drop from the 1440p figure. This scaling pattern indicates that the RX 9070 is the primary limiting component at 4K, as the pixel throughput demand outpaces what the GPU can deliver for a smooth 60 FPS experience at High settings.

The Low settings data reinforces this interpretation. At 1080p Low, the combo reaches 182.4 FPS, but at 1440p Low it still manages 140.2 FPS, and at 4K Low it drops to 93.7 FPS. The fact that 4K Low remains above 90 FPS while 4K High sits below 60 FPS shows that the GPU’s shading and memory resources are heavily taxed by the higher-quality presets, not just the resolution change. The gap between Low and Ultra at each resolution widens as resolution increases, from 84.4 FPS at 1080p to 45.3 FPS at 4K, which points to the GPU handling both resolution and settings load simultaneously.

For users with high-refresh 1080p or 1440p displays, the scaling data suggests this combo is well-suited. At 1440p Medium the average sits at 98.4 FPS, and at 1080p Medium it reaches 130.1 FPS, both comfortably above typical 60 Hz targets. The 4K Ultra figure of 48.4 FPS is the only preset where the experience falls below playable thresholds for most users, and even then, dropping to High recovers 10.2 FPS.

GPU Role

The Radeon RX 9070 brings 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 644.6 GB/s of bandwidth, which is substantial for a 2019 title that can be texture-heavy at high resolutions. The GPU’s boost clock of 2520 MHz and game clock of 2070 MHz are high for the RDNA 4.0 architecture, and the 3584 shading units provide the raw compute needed for Control’s physics-heavy combat sequences. The 128 ROPs and 224 TMUs help maintain pixel and texture throughput, and the pixel rate of 322.6 GPixel/s explains why the card handles 1440p High without issue.

The GPU’s benchmark standing shows it performs near the top of its class, with a percentileVsAllGpus of 79 and an average benchmark score of 34780. Its nearest rivals in synthetic tests include the NVIDIA A2 with a deltaPct of -0.2% and the NVIDIA Quadro GV100 at +0.3%, meaning the RX 9070 is statistically tied with those professional-grade cards in aggregate benchmarks. In Control specifically, the measured FPS indicates the GPU is the limiting factor at 4K, as the 58.6 FPS High average and 48.4 FPS Ultra average fall short of the 60 FPS target that the CPU could likely support based on its 1080p performance.

The 16 GB VRAM capacity is more than sufficient for Control, which was released in 2019 and does not exhibit the VRAM pressure seen in newer titles. The memory clock of 2518 MHz with 20.1 Gbps effective speed contributes to the 644.6 GB/s bandwidth, and this headroom means the card does not appear to be memory-constrained at any tested setting. The GPU’s TDP of 220 W and dual-slot design are relevant for builder considerations, but the performance data shows no thermal throttling indicators in the frame rate consistency across resolutions.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400F provides six physical cores and twelve threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. This Alder Lake-S processor has an 18 MB shared L3 cache, which is adequate for a game like Control that benefits from single-threaded responsiveness during scripted events. The CPU’s benchmark scores show solid multi-threaded performance, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 16518 and a single-core score of 2332, placing it in the 77th percentile among all CPUs.

In the measured FPS data, the CPU’s influence is most visible at 1080p, where the frame rates exceed 180 FPS on Low settings. That 182.4 FPS average is likely near the CPU’s practical limit for this game, as the GPU has more headroom at that resolution. The 1440p Low figure of 140.2 FPS and 4K Low of 93.7 FPS suggest the CPU can feed the GPU adequately even at lower graphical settings, since the frame rate scales more with resolution than with settings changes at those levels.

The CPU’s nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks include the Intel Core i7-8700K with a deltaPct of 0.1% and the AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS at -0.7%, indicating the 12400F is competitive with older high-end parts and newer mobile chips. For Control, the six-core configuration with twelve threads is sufficient, as the game does not appear to scale beyond that count based on the 1080p results. The 65 W TDP and dual-channel memory support are standard, but the boost clock of 4.40 GHz is what drives the single-thread performance that Control’s physics and AI routines rely on.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank in Control places this pairing at 543 out of 1636 total tested combinations, putting it in the upper third of all configurations. This rank reflects a balanced system that can handle the game’s demands without significant bottlenecks at most settings. The percentileVsAllCpus of 77 for the CPU and percentileVsAllGpus of 79 for the GPU indicate both components are above average in their respective categories, which translates to a stronger overall result than either part would achieve alone.

Compared to other tested combos, this pairing’s rank suggests it outperforms roughly two-thirds of all configurations tested in Control. The gap between the CPU’s and GPU’s benchmark percentiles is small, which explains why the combo avoids severe bottlenecking in either direction. The 1080p High result of 116.8 FPS and 1440p High of 84.8 FPS are competitive for a mid-range pairing, and the 4K Ultra result of 48.4 FPS is respectable for a game of this era, even if it falls short of smooth playability.

The rank also indicates that users with this combo should prioritize GPU upgrades for 4K play, as the CPU has more headroom at higher resolutions based on the scaling data. At 1080p, the CPU is the more likely constraint, so a faster processor would yield larger gains there. This balanced profile makes the combo versatile for different display configurations, but the data clearly shows 1440p as the sweet spot for high settings with this hardware.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers strong results across all presets. Low settings produce an average of 182.4 FPS, Medium reaches 130.1 FPS, High manages 116.8 FPS, and Ultra drops to 98 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 84.4 FPS, showing that the GPU has ample headroom at this resolution even with maxed-out settings. The 98 FPS Ultra figure is well above the 60 FPS threshold, making 1080p Ultra a fully playable option.

Moving to 2560x1440, the numbers remain solid. Low settings average 140.2 FPS, Medium hits 98.4 FPS, High reaches 84.8 FPS, and Ultra falls to 73.3 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p at each setting is roughly 23-27% for Low, Medium, and High, but Ultra sees a smaller 25% reduction, indicating the GPU is still managing the load effectively. The 73.3 FPS Ultra average is still comfortably above 60 FPS, so 1440p Ultra is a viable option for this combo.

At 3840x2160, the picture changes. Low settings average 93.7 FPS, Medium drops to 65.2 FPS, High falls to 58.6 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 48.4 FPS. The 4K High result is just below the 60 FPS target, and Ultra is clearly not playable for smooth gameplay. The gap between Medium and High at 4K is only 6.6 FPS, suggesting diminishing returns on quality settings. For 4K users, Medium settings offer the best balance at 65.2 FPS, while High requires a tolerance for sub-60 frame rates.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows 2560x1440 as the sweet spot, with High settings averaging 84.8 FPS and Ultra averaging 73.3 FPS, both well above the 60 FPS target. At 1080p the frame rates are higher but the CPU becomes more of a limiting factor, while 4K High drops to 58.6 FPS.

Q: Can this combo handle 4K Ultra in Control?

A: No, the measured average at 3840x2160 Ultra is 48.4 FPS, which falls short of smooth playability. Dropping to Medium at 4K raises the average to 65.2 FPS, which is playable, but Ultra is not recommended.

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

A: The Intel Core i5-12400F has an average benchmark score of 19221, which is 0.1% higher than the Intel Core i7-8700K and 0.3% higher than the Intel Core i5-1335U. It trails the AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS by 0.7% and leads the AMD EPYC 7773X by 1.3%.

Q: Does the GPU have enough VRAM for Control?

A: Yes, the 16 GB GDDR6 memory with 644.6 GB/s bandwidth is more than sufficient for Control, which was released in 2019. The data shows no evidence of memory-related performance drops even at 4K Ultra settings.

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

A: At 2560x1440, Low settings average 140.2 FPS while High settings average 84.8 FPS, a difference of 55.4 FPS. Medium sits between at 98.4 FPS, and Ultra drops to 73.3 FPS.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested configurations?

A: The combo ranks 543 out of 1636 total tested combinations in Control, placing it in the upper third. This rank reflects the balanced performance of the CPU’s 77th percentile and the GPU’s 79th percentile standings.