Control

Control, the 2019 action-adventure title, presents a demanding environment for hardware, and the pairing of the Intel Core i5-12400F with the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT yields a dataset that is revealing about both components. The measured frames per second (FPS) across resolutions and settings show a system that is capable of high refresh rate gaming at 1080p, very strong performance at 1440p, and playable 4K experiences, though with expected compromises at the highest settings. This analysis breaks down the measured data, interprets the performance relative to the tested combination pool, and provides guidance based strictly on the provided facts.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the benchmark database, this specific combination of components achieves a rank of 937 out of 3720 tested combos for Control. This places the Intel Core i5-12400F and AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT pairing in the top quartile of all tested systems, indicating a high level of overall capability for this specific game. The rank is a composite measure, reflecting that the system provides a strong balance between CPU and GPU throughput in Control's specific engine workload, which is a mix of physics-based destruction and particle effects.

The percentile data for the individual components helps contextualize this rank. The CPU, the Intel Core i5-12400F, sits at the 73rd percentile when compared to all tested CPUs, suggesting that its processing power is significantly above the average tested processor. Meanwhile, the GPU, the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT, sits at the 55th percentile relative to all tested GPUs, which is a more middling position. This disparity is interesting; it suggests that the combo's strong ranking is likely buoyed by the CPU's solid performance and the overall system balance, rather than the GPU being an outlier at the top of the charts. The data indicates that the i5-12400F provides a robust foundation that allows the RX 9070 XT to operate without being a primary bottleneck in most scenarios, which is a key factor for the high combo rank.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT is the primary driver of visual output in this combo, and its specifications are central to understanding the measured FPS. The GPU features 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a substantial memory bandwidth of 644.6 GB/s. This is a significant asset for Control, which is known for its detailed textures and complex visual effects, as it allows the card to handle high-resolution assets without running into memory capacity limitations. The base clock is listed at 1660 MHz, with a game clock of 2400 MHz and a boost clock of 2970 MHz, indicating a wide dynamic range for performance scaling under load.

The GPU's architecture, RDNA 4.0, includes 4096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 128 render output units. This configuration results in a peak FP32 throughput of 48.66 TFLOPS, which is the raw compute power available for shader operations. The measured FPS data shows that this power translates directly into playable frame rates. For instance, at 1080p with Low settings, the card pushes an average of 193 FPS, demonstrating a massive performance headroom. The GPU's 64 ray accelerators also provide dedicated hardware for ray-traced effects, though the measured data provided does not specify if ray tracing was enabled in the test runs. The benchmark results for the GPU itself, such as a Passmark G3D score of 26795, place it in a specific performance tier, but the in-game FPS is the most direct measure of its capabilities in Control.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and predictable scaling pattern as resolution increases, which is a key indicator of where the performance bottleneck lies. At 1080p, the system is heavily CPU-bound or at least not fully GPU-bound, as evidenced by the high frame rates. The average FPS for High settings at 1920x1080 is 122, but this drops to 92 at 2560x1440 and further to 62 at 3840x2160. This is a significant drop of 24.6% when moving from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 32.6% drop from 1440p to 4K.

This scaling pattern is classic for a system where the GPU becomes the increasingly dominant limiting factor at higher resolutions. The frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K is about 49%, which is substantial but not a perfect inverse of pixel count, indicating that the CPU is still contributing to overall performance at lower resolutions. At 4K, the workload shifts almost entirely to the GPU's pixel and shading throughput, and the RX 9070 XT's capabilities are the primary determinant of the final FPS. The data shows that at 4K Ultra, the system averages 54 FPS, suggesting that the GPU is working near its limit for this title at that resolution and settings combination. The scaling is consistent across all settings, confirming that resolution is the dominant factor in frame rate variance for this combo.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of performance across three resolutions and four quality presets. For 1920x1080, the system demonstrates its highest performance. At Low settings, it averages 193 FPS, which is exceptionally high. Medium settings yield an average of 137 FPS, with a minimum of 116 and a maximum of 157 FPS. High settings produce an average of 122 FPS, and Ultra settings average 106 FPS. All of these figures are well above the 60 FPS threshold, indicating that the combo can easily handle high-refresh-rate monitors at this resolution, even with the most demanding settings.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance remains strong but sees a noticeable reduction. Low settings average 146 FPS, which is still very high. Medium settings average 103 FPS, with a minimum of 88 and a maximum of 119 FPS. High settings average 92 FPS, and Ultra settings average 80 FPS. This resolution is widely considered the "sweet spot" for this combo, as it provides a significant visual upgrade over 1080p while still delivering frame rates that are smooth and responsive, with even Ultra settings staying above the 60 FPS target.

At 3840x2160, the system begins to show its limits. Low settings average 98 FPS, which is still very playable. Medium settings average 70 FPS, with a minimum of 59 and a maximum of 80 FPS, indicating that the system can maintain near-60 FPS performance with some headroom. High settings average 62 FPS, which is just at the edge of the 60 FPS target. Ultra settings average 54 FPS, which drops below the 60 FPS threshold, suggesting that maxing out the game at 4K will require some compromises or acceptance of a lower frame rate. The data shows a clear progression: the system is a high-refresh-rate champion at 1080p, a solid 60+ FPS performer at 1440p, and a 4K-capable machine only at lower settings.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings depend heavily on the user's target resolution and desired frame rate. For 1920x1080, the Ultra preset is the clear recommendation. The average of 106 FPS is substantially above the 60 FPS target and provides a high-quality visual experience without any meaningful performance penalty. There is no need to lower settings for performance reasons, as even the most demanding preset offers a high frame rate.

For 2560x1440, the Ultra preset is also recommended for users with 60Hz monitors, as the average of 80 FPS provides a comfortable margin. However, for users with high-refresh-rate displays (144Hz or higher), the High preset, with an average of 92 FPS, or even the Medium preset, with an average of 103 FPS, would be better choices to push frame rates higher. The data shows that the step from Ultra to High yields a 15% increase in average FPS, which could be the difference between a smooth experience and a slightly less fluid one on a 144Hz panel.

For 3840x2160, the recommendation is more nuanced. The High preset averages 62 FPS, which is just above the 60 FPS target, but the minimum FPS is not listed, so there is some risk of occasional dips. The Medium preset, with an average of 70 FPS and a minimum of 59 FPS, is the safest option for a locked 60 FPS experience. The Ultra preset, averaging 54 FPS, is not recommended for 60 FPS gaming, but could be used if a lower frame rate is acceptable or if the user has a variable refresh rate (VRR) monitor. The Low preset at 4K, averaging 98 FPS, is an option for those who prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity, but it would be a significant graphical downgrade. The data suggests that Medium is the most balanced choice for 4K, offering a good compromise between visual quality and performance consistency.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Alder Lake architecture. Its base clock is 2.50 GHz and it boosts up to 4.40 GHz. This combination of core count and clock speed provides a solid foundation for gaming. The CPU's benchmark scores, such as a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12380 and a single-core score of 1680, show that it has strong multi-threaded and single-threaded capabilities. The single-core performance is particularly important for games like Control, which can be sensitive to single-thread performance for game logic and physics.

In this combo, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with data and handle the game's simulation. The data suggests that the i5-12400F is sufficient for this task, especially at lower resolutions. The fact that the 1080p Low setting reaches 193 FPS indicates that the CPU is not a limiting factor in that scenario. However, as resolution increases and the GPU takes on more work, the CPU's relative importance diminishes. The CPU's 73rd percentile ranking versus all CPUs confirms that it is a capable processor, but the data also shows that it is not the strongest component in this pairing. The CPU's performance is adequate to prevent major bottlenecks, but the GPU is the primary determinant for overall frame rates at higher resolutions and settings, as evidenced by the resolution scaling data.

FAQ

Q: What is the overall performance rank of this CPU and GPU combo in Control?

A: The combination of the Intel Core i5-12400F and AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT ranks 937 out of 3720 tested combos for Control.

Q: How much faster is the system at 1080p High settings compared to 4K High settings?

A: The average FPS at 1920x1080 High is 122, while at 3840x2160 High it is 62. This represents a 49.2% reduction in average frame rate when moving from 1080p to 4K.

Q: What is the lowest average frame rate recorded for this combo in the measured data?

A: The lowest average frame rate is 54 FPS, which occurs at 3840x2160 resolution with Ultra settings.

Q: Does the data suggest the CPU or GPU is the primary bottleneck at 4K resolution?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the primary bottleneck at 4K, as the frame rate drops significantly with increased resolution, which is a characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario.

Q: What is the maximum average FPS the combo can achieve at 1440p?

A: The maximum average FPS at 2560x1440 is 146, which is achieved at Low settings.

Q: Is the system capable of maintaining an average of 60 FPS or higher at 4K with Medium settings?

A: Yes, at 3840x2160 with Medium settings, the combo averages 70 FPS, with a minimum of 59 FPS, indicating it can maintain near-60 FPS performance.