Control

The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT paired with the Intel Core i5-12600KF delivers a playable but constrained experience in Control, with performance scaling that clearly points to the GPU as the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions. At 1080p, the combo is capable of smooth frame rates, but the demanding nature of the game’s physics and particle effects becomes evident as resolution increases. This analysis breaks down the measured data to show exactly where this pairing excels and where it struggles.

Resolution Scaling

The benchmark data shows a sharp drop in performance as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160, which is a classic sign of GPU-bound rendering. At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 74.7 FPS at 1080p to 56.7 FPS at 1440p, a loss of 18 FPS. Moving to 4K, the average drops further to 38.8 FPS, which is a 35.9 FPS reduction from the 1080p figure. This steep decline indicates that the Radeon RX 5700 XT’s 8 GB frame buffer and 448.0 GB/s memory bandwidth are being saturated by the higher pixel counts.

The scaling pattern is consistent across all settings presets. At Low settings, the frame rate drops from 113.8 FPS at 1080p to 91.1 FPS at 1440p, then falls to 59.3 FPS at 4K. The relative drop from 1080p to 4K at Low is roughly 48%, while at High it is also around 48%, suggesting that the GPU’s compute units, not memory capacity alone, are the limiting factor. The i5-12600KF, with its 10 cores and 16 threads, is unlikely to be the constraint here, as its single-thread performance (3,309 in Cinebench R23) is more than sufficient for this title.

At 4K, the only preset that achieves an average above 60 FPS is Low, hitting 59.3 FPS. Medium and High presets fall to 40.1 FPS and 38.8 FPS respectively, while Ultra dips to 35.1 FPS. These numbers show that the GPU is rendering at near its maximum capacity at 4K, and any reduction in resolution yields disproportionate gains. For example, dropping from 4K Ultra to 1440p Ultra raises the average FPS by 14.1 points, from 35.1 to 49.2.

Settings Recommendations

For a smooth experience at 1920x1080, the data supports using High settings as the sweet spot. The 74.7 FPS average at High is well above the 60 FPS threshold, and it provides a substantial visual upgrade over the 113.8 FPS Low preset, which may strip out too many of the game’s atmospheric effects. Medium at 1080p offers 81.9 FPS, but the jump to High costs only 7.2 FPS, making it a worthwhile trade for better lighting and reflections.

At 2560x1440, the recommendation shifts to Medium, which delivers 60.6 FPS. High at this resolution drops to 56.7 FPS, which is playable but may introduce noticeable stutter in combat-heavy scenes. Low at 1440p yields 91.1 FPS, but the visual compromise is severe for a game that relies on its eerie atmosphere. Ultra at 1440p is not advisable, as the 49.2 FPS average falls below the desired smoothness threshold.

For 4K, the data suggests that only the Low preset is viable, with a 59.3 FPS average. Medium and High hover around 40 FPS, which is acceptable for slower exploration but will feel sluggish during firefights. Ultra at 35.1 FPS is only suitable for taking screenshots. The measured rows indicate that this GPU is best paired with a 1080p or 1440p monitor for Control.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12600KF plays a supporting role in this game, providing enough headroom that the GPU becomes the bottleneck. Its 10 cores and 16 threads, based on the Alder Lake architecture, offer strong multi-threaded performance, as evidenced by a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 23,444. However, Control is not a title that scales heavily with core count; instead, it benefits from high single-thread performance. The CPU’s boost clock of 4.90 GHz and single-core score of 3,309 in Cinebench R23 ensure that frame pacing remains consistent.

The benchmark results show that frame rates scale almost entirely with resolution and settings, not CPU load. For instance, at 1080p Low, the CPU is likely not the limiting factor, as the 113.8 FPS average is well within the capabilities of this processor. Even at 4K Ultra, where the average drops to 35.1 FPS, the CPU is not the cause; the GPU’s 9.754 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is maxed out. The i5-12600KF’s 20 MB of shared L3 cache and 1.25 MB L2 per core help reduce memory latency, which is beneficial for the game’s physics calculations, but the measured data does not indicate any CPU-induced frame drops.

This processor sits at the 84th percentile against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 27,827. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core i9-10900K, scores 27,829, showing a delta of 0%. This means the i5-12600KF is effectively on par with a previous-gen flagship, making it a non-issue for this game.

FAQ

*Q: Can this combo run Control at 60 FPS on a 4K monitor?*

A: Only at Low settings, where the average FPS is 59.3. Medium, High, and Ultra presets all fall below 41 FPS, so a 1440p display is recommended for higher quality.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 1080p gaming?

A: High settings provide the best balance, with a 74.7 FPS average. Medium offers 81.9 FPS, but the visual upgrade to High is worth the 7.2 FPS loss.

Q: Is the Intel Core i5-12600KF a bottleneck for the RX 5700 XT in this game?

A: No. The CPU’s single-thread score of 3,309 in Cinebench R23 and boost clock of 4.90 GHz are more than adequate. The frame rate drops from 1080p to 4K indicate the GPU is the limiting component.

Q: How does the RX 5700 XT compare to its nearest rival, the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile?

A: The RX 5700 XT has an average benchmark score of 24,731, which is 0.1% lower than the RTX A5000 Mobile’s 24,763. They are effectively identical in raw compute.

Q: Does lowering settings from Ultra to Low provide a significant FPS boost at 1440p?

A: Yes. The average FPS jumps from 49.2 at Ultra to 91.1 at Low, a gain of 41.9 FPS. This is the largest relative improvement among all settings at that resolution.

Q: What is the GPU’s memory configuration and does it affect performance?

A: The RX 5700 XT has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p, but the 4K results suggest the memory bandwidth is a contributing factor to the low frame rates.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT is the dominant component in this pairing, and its specifications explain the measured FPS. Built on the RDNA 1.0 architecture with a 7 nm process, it has 2,560 shading units and 64 ROPs. Its boost clock of 1905 MHz and game clock of 1755 MHz allow it to achieve a texture rate of 304.8 GTexel/s. These numbers translate to a strong 1080p performer, but the 4K results show the limits of its 9.754 TFLOPS FP32 throughput.

The GPU’s 8 GB of GDDR6 memory is a double-edged sword. At 1080p, the 113.8 FPS average at Low settings shows that the memory bandwidth is not a constraint. However, at 4K, the frame rate drops to 59.3 FPS at Low, and the high-resolution textures likely exceed the 8 GB capacity, causing the GPU to rely on slower memory access. The 256-bit bus and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth are decent for the era, but they are clearly insufficient for Ultra settings at 4K, which only manages 35.1 FPS.

In the benchmark hierarchy, this GPU sits at the 68th percentile against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 24,731. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile, scores 24,763, a 0.1% difference, while the Intel Arc A350M is 0.3% behind. This places the RX 5700 XT in the mid-range tier, which aligns with the measured FPS in Control: capable at 1080p, acceptable at 1440p with tweaks, and struggling at 4K.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its best results. Low settings produce an average of 113.8 FPS, which is smooth for any display. Medium follows at 81.9 FPS, offering a good balance. High drops to 74.7 FPS, while Ultra is the lowest at 65.4 FPS. All presets at 1080p clear the 60 FPS threshold, making this resolution the most comfortable for the hardware.

At 2560x1440, performance becomes more varied. Low settings hit 91.1 FPS, which is excellent. Medium maintains 60.6 FPS, just above the playable mark. High falls to 56.7 FPS, which may cause occasional dips in intense scenes. Ultra is the weakest at 49.2 FPS, indicating that the GPU’s shading units are reaching their limit.

At 3840x2160, the frame rates are marginal. Low presets achieve 59.3 FPS, which is technically playable but not ideal. Medium and High are nearly identical at 40.1 FPS and 38.8 FPS, respectively, showing that the GPU is bottlenecked by pixel fill rate. Ultra is the worst at 35.1 FPS, which is only suitable for slow, methodical play. The data confirms that 4K is not a viable option for this combination beyond the lowest settings. The combo ranks 1246 out of 1636 in the database for this game, reflecting its mid-range status.