Control

Control is a demanding Action Adventure title that stresses both the CPU and GPU, and the combination of the Intel Core i5-12400F with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER produces a specific performance profile that is heavily dictated by resolution and settings. The benchmark data shows a system that is capable of smooth gameplay at 1080p but struggles to maintain playable frame rates at higher resolutions, clearly indicating where the primary bottleneck lies. The measured results provide a clear picture of a mid-range pairing navigating a graphically intense game, with the GTX 1660 SUPER's 6 GB of VRAM and Turing architecture playing a significant role in the outcomes.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drops from 1080p to 4K are substantial and reveal a system that is overwhelmingly GPU-limited in this title. At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 57 FPS at 1920x1080 to 43 FPS at 2560x1440, a reduction of 14 FPS. Moving to 3840x2160, the average drops further to 29 FPS, which is a 28 FPS loss compared to 1080p. This steep decline indicates that the GTX 1660 SUPER is the limiting component, as the rendering load increases exponentially with pixel count, and the GPU's compute and memory bandwidth are unable to keep pace.

The scaling pattern is consistent across all settings presets. At Low settings, the average frame rate goes from 91 FPS at 1080p to 69 FPS at 1440p, and then down to 46 FPS at 4K. Similarly, at Ultra settings, the performance drops from 50 FPS at 1080p to 38 FPS at 1440p, and finally to 25 FPS at 4K. The fact that even the Low preset cannot maintain a 60 FPS average at 4K strongly suggests that the resolution is the dominant factor, not the graphical complexity. The data implies that the CPU, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, has enough headroom to feed the GPU at lower resolutions, but the GPU's raw fill rate and pixel processing capabilities are exhausted as the resolution increases.

The percentage differences highlight this bottleneck clearly. The gap between 1080p and 1440p at High settings is a 24.5% performance loss, while the gap between 1440p and 4K is a 32.5% loss. This non-linear scaling is typical of a GPU that is hitting its memory bandwidth limits, as the 192-bit bus and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth are strained by the massive data requirements of 4K textures and shading. For a user looking to play at 4K, the data suggests that even the lowest settings will not provide a consistently smooth experience, as the 46 FPS average at Low is still below the 60 FPS target and likely to dip in intense scenes.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the database of tested hardware combinations for Control, this specific pairing of the i5-12400F and GTX 1660 SUPER ranks at 3176 out of 3720 combos. This places it in the lower percentile of tested systems, indicating that while it is functional, it is not a high-performance configuration for this particular game. The combo rank of 3176 reflects the GPU's limitations, as the GTX 1660 SUPER is an older, end-of-life product that was not designed for the heavy demands of modern action-adventure titles at high resolutions.

The GPU's percentile rank of 53 among all tested GPUs puts it slightly above the median, but this is a general metric across all games and workloads. In Control, which is known for its physics-heavy environments and complex rendering, the GPU's average benchmark score of 12986 is closely matched by its nearest rivals. The data shows the GTX 1660 SUPER is only 0.4% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile and 0.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 580, with a -0.7% delta compared to the NVIDIA Tesla M2090. This tight grouping suggests that in this game, the GTX 1660 SUPER performs as expected for its class, but it is not a standout performer.

The CPU, on the other hand, ranks in the 73rd percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 19039. The i5-12400F is a more capable component relative to the GPU, as its nearest rivals, such as the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS and Intel Core i5-1335U, have nearly identical average scores with deltas of 0% and 0.3%, respectively. This disparity in relative performance between the CPU and GPU indicates that the system's overall ranking is dragged down by the graphics card. The data implies that upgrading the GPU would yield a significant improvement in this game, while the CPU would likely not be a limiting factor until a much more powerful graphics card is installed.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal experience for this configuration is achieved at 1920x1080 with the Medium preset. The average frame rate of 64 FPS at this setting provides a smooth gameplay experience, with the minimum FPS of 55 and maximum of 74 indicating a relatively stable frame delivery. This setting balances visual quality with performance, avoiding the frame rate dips that occur at High and Ultra settings.

At 1080p, the High preset yields an average of 57 FPS, which is playable but leaves less headroom for demanding scenes. The Ultra preset drops to 50 FPS average, which is still technically playable but may feel less responsive in a fast-paced action game. The Low preset offers the highest average at 91 FPS, but this comes at a significant visual cost, making the game look dated. The data suggests that Medium is the sweet spot, as it provides a 60+ FPS average while maintaining a reasonable level of graphical fidelity.

For users who prioritize frame rate over visuals, the Low preset at 1080p is the only option that provides a significant buffer above 60 FPS. However, the Medium preset's minimum FPS of 55 suggests that it is the highest setting that can be consistently relied upon to stay near the 60 FPS target. At 1440p, the Medium preset drops to 49 FPS average, which is below the ideal threshold for smooth gameplay, indicating that users should stick to 1080p for the best experience with this hardware. The 4K results are consistently below 50 FPS even at Low settings, making this resolution impractical for this combination.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete dataset reveals a clear performance hierarchy across resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves an average of 91 FPS, the Medium preset averages 64 FPS with a min/max of 55/74, the High preset averages 57 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 50 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 41 FPS drop, demonstrating the significant impact of graphical settings on the GTX 1660 SUPER.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance decreases across the board. The Low preset averages 69 FPS, which is still playable, but the Medium preset drops to 49 FPS with a min/max of 41/56. The High preset averages 43 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 38 FPS. The data shows that at 1440p, only the Low preset maintains an average above 60 FPS, and even that is marginal.

At 3840x2160, the results are consistently below playable thresholds for most users. The Low preset averages 46 FPS, the Medium preset averages 33 FPS with a min/max of 28/38, the High preset averages 29 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 25 FPS. The minimum FPS of 28 at Medium 4K indicates that the game can dip into the low 20s during intense action, making the experience choppy and potentially frustrating. The data shows a clear pattern: the GTX 1660 SUPER is only suitable for 1080p gaming in Control, with 1440p being a stretch and 4K being impractical.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER is built on the Turing architecture and features 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 336.0 GB/s. The GPU has a base clock of 1530 MHz and a boost clock of 1785 MHz, with 1408 shading units and 48 ROPs. The pixel rate of 85.68 GPixel/s and texture rate of 157.1 GTexel/s are key metrics that explain the performance drop at higher resolutions, as the GPU simply cannot process pixels and textures fast enough to maintain high frame rates at 1440p and 4K.

The 6 GB VRAM capacity is a critical factor in Control. This game features detailed environments and high-resolution textures, and at 4K, the VRAM usage likely approaches or exceeds the 6 GB limit. This can lead to texture streaming issues and frame rate hitches, which are reflected in the low average FPS at 4K. The GDDR6 memory type is faster than older GDDR5, but the 192-bit bus width limits the total bandwidth compared to higher-end cards, which is a bottleneck in a game that requires significant memory throughput.

The GPU's benchmark scores, such as a Passmark G3D score of 12699 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1278, place it in the 53rd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals, including the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile and RX 580, show that it is a solid mid-range card, but not a high-end performer. The data implies that the GTX 1660 SUPER's role in this system is to provide playable performance at 1080p, but it is the clear limiting factor for higher resolutions. The lack of RT cores and tensor cores also means that any ray tracing features in Control would not be hardware-accelerated, further impacting performance in any applicable scenarios.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to play Control with this CPU and GPU combination?

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 is the only resolution where the system consistently achieves playable frame rates. At 1080p, the average FPS ranges from 50 at Ultra to 91 at Low, while at 1440p, the average drops below 70 FPS even at Low settings, and at 4K, the maximum average is only 46 FPS at Low.

Q: How does the GTX 1660 SUPER compare to its closest rivals in this game?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score is 12986, which is 0.4% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile and 0.4% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 580. It is 0.7% lower than the NVIDIA Tesla M2090, indicating a very tight performance group.

Q: Is the Intel Core i5-12400F a bottleneck for the GTX 1660 SUPER in Control?

A: The CPU ranks in the 73rd percentile, with an average benchmark score of 19039, which is much higher than the GPU's percentile rank of 53. The data suggests the CPU is not the limiting factor, as the performance drop from 1080p to 4K is steep, indicating the GPU is the primary constraint.

Q: What settings preset provides the best balance of visual quality and performance?

A: At 1080p, the Medium preset offers the best balance, with an average FPS of 64 and a minimum of 55. This is the highest setting that maintains an average above 60 FPS, while the High preset drops to 57 FPS and Ultra to 50 FPS.

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

A: No. The highest average FPS at 3840x2160 is 46 at Low settings, with the Medium preset averaging only 33 FPS and a minimum of 28 FPS. The Ultra preset averages just 25 FPS, making 4K gaming impractical.

Q: What is the GPU's memory configuration, and how does it affect performance?

A: The GTX 1660 SUPER has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 336.0 GB/s. This configuration is sufficient for 1080p, but the limited capacity and bandwidth likely contribute to the significant frame rate drops at 1440p and 4K.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400F is a 12th Gen Alder Lake processor with 6 cores and 12 threads, a base clock of 2.50 GHz, and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. It has a 65W TDP and features an 18 MB shared L3 cache. In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU scores 12380 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 1680 in single-core, with a Passmark multithread score of 19433. These results place it in the 73rd percentile of all CPUs, indicating a strong mid-range performer.

In the context of Control, the CPU's role is to handle the game's physics and AI calculations, which can be demanding in a game with destructible environments and telekinetic powers. The 6 cores and 12 threads provide ample processing power, and the high boost clock of 4.40 GHz ensures good single-threaded performance, which is important for game logic. The data shows that the CPU is not the limiting factor in this combination, as the frame rates scale almost entirely with resolution and settings, which are GPU-bound workloads.

The CPU's nearest rivals, such as the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS and Intel Core i5-1335U, have nearly identical average benchmark scores, with deltas of 0% and 0.3%, respectively. This indicates that the i5-12400F is a well-balanced processor that would not hold back a more powerful GPU in most games. However, in this specific test, the GTX 1660 SUPER is the bottleneck, and the CPU has significant headroom to spare. The data suggests that if a user were to upgrade the GPU, the i5-12400F would likely continue to provide solid performance without becoming a new bottleneck. The CPU's 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes also ensure that it can interface with modern graphics cards without bandwidth limitations, even though the GTX 1660 SUPER uses PCIe 3.0.