Control

Control is a demanding action-adventure title that stresses both the CPU and GPU heavily, and the Intel Core i5-12600KF paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT delivers a strong, playable experience across all resolution tiers. The measured data shows a system that scales predictably with resolution and settings, making it a versatile choice for gamers who prioritize high frame rates at 1440p but can still handle 4K with some compromises. This analysis breaks down the performance characteristics, focusing on where the bottleneck lies and what the numbers mean for your actual gaming experience.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is significant, revealing a clear transition in system behavior. At 1920x1080 with High settings, the combo produces 113 FPS, which drops to 86 FPS at 2560x1440 and further to 58 FPS at 3840x2160. This represents a 24% decrease from 1080p to 1440p, and a 33% decrease from 1440p to 4K. The pattern is consistent across all settings, indicating that resolution scaling is largely uniform.

The data suggests that at 1080p, the system is not fully GPU-bound. The jump from 113 FPS at High settings to 179 FPS at Low settings indicates that the CPU has headroom to push more frames when the GPU workload is reduced. At 4K, however, the GPU becomes the dominant limiting factor. The difference between Low (92 FPS) and Ultra (50 FPS) at 4K shows that the RX 6800 XT is working much harder, and the CPU’s role diminishes as the pixel count increases.

Specifically, the 4K Low result of 92 FPS is notable because it is still higher than the 1440p Ultra result of 74 FPS. This implies that even at 4K, the GPU has enough raw power to deliver high frame rates when settings are lowered, but the Ultra preset at 4K (50 FPS) shows the ceiling of this combination. For players targeting 4K, the data indicates that Medium settings (65 FPS) are the realistic sweet spot for maintaining smooth gameplay, while High (58 FPS) and Ultra (50 FPS) will require a tolerance for lower frame rates.

The scaling from Medium to Ultra at each resolution shows a consistent cost. At 1080p, Medium is 127 FPS and Ultra is 98 FPS, a 23% drop. At 1440p, the drop is from 96 FPS to 74 FPS, a 23% drop as well. At 4K, Medium (65 FPS) to Ultra (50 FPS) is also a 23% reduction. This uniformity suggests that the performance impact of each settings tier is predictable, allowing for easy optimization based on your display's refresh rate.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT is the primary driver of frame rates in this pairing, especially at higher resolutions. Its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is ample for Control’s texture-heavy environments. The GPU’s boost clock of 2250 MHz, with a game clock of 2015 MHz, allows it to sustain high performance under load, as evidenced by the measured FPS.

The GPU’s 72 ray tracing cores and 4608 shading units contribute to its ability to handle the game's visual effects, though the measured data does not separate ray tracing performance. The 20.74 TFLOPS of FP32 compute power is substantial, and the benchmark results show that the card sits in the 85th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in the GPU benchmark data include the NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile (1.5% slower), Intel Arc A550M (2.5% faster), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti (3% faster), indicating that the RX 6800 XT is a high-end performer that trades blows with modern and previous generation flagships.

The VRAM capacity is a significant asset. At 4K Ultra, where textures are largest, the 16 GB buffer ensures that the GPU does not run into memory limitations, which could cause stuttering. The measured min FPS at 4K Medium is 55 FPS, and at 1440p Medium it is 82 FPS, showing that frame pacing remains stable even when the GPU is heavily tasked. The data suggests that the GPU’s memory subsystem is not a bottleneck in this game, allowing the core clocks to dictate performance.

The GPU’s power connectors (2x 8-pin) and 300 W TDP are consistent with its performance class, but the measured FPS shows that this power is translated into playable results. The card’s 128 ROPs and 288 TMUs provide high fill rates, which are critical for the game's particle effects and post-processing. The data indicates that the RX 6800 XT is well-suited for Control, offering a balance of raw compute and memory bandwidth that scales effectively across the tested resolutions.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Control at 4K smoothly?

A: Yes, but not at the highest settings. At 4K Medium, the average frame rate is 65 FPS with a minimum of 55 FPS, which is playable. At 4K High, the average drops to 58 FPS, and at Ultra it falls to 50 FPS. For a consistent 60 FPS experience, Medium settings are recommended.

Q: What is the best resolution for this setup?

A: The data shows that 2560x1440 is the sweet spot. At High settings, the average is 86 FPS, and at Ultra it is 74 FPS. This provides a high frame rate while maintaining visual fidelity, making it ideal for high refresh rate monitors.

Q: How does the CPU affect performance at 1080p?

A: The Core i5-12600KF has significant headroom at 1080p. The frame rate jumps from 113 FPS at High settings to 179 FPS at Low settings, indicating that the CPU can feed the GPU more data when the graphics load is reduced. The CPU is not a bottleneck at this resolution.

Q: Is the RX 6800 XT’s 16 GB VRAM enough for Control?

A: Yes, the 16 GB VRAM is more than sufficient. The measured data shows no signs of memory-related stuttering, even at 4K Ultra. The minimum frame rates at 4K Medium (55 FPS) and 1440p Medium (82 FPS) indicate stable performance without VRAM limitations.

Q: How does this combo compare to other systems tested?

A: In the overall combo ranking for Control, this configuration ranks 1183 out of 3720 tested combos. This places it in the top third of all systems, indicating that it is a strong performer for this game.

Q: What is the performance difference between Low and Ultra settings?

A: The difference is substantial. At 1080p, Low yields 179 FPS while Ultra yields 98 FPS, a 45% reduction. At 1440p, the drop is from 136 FPS to 74 FPS, a 46% reduction. At 4K, Low yields 92 FPS and Ultra yields 50 FPS, a 46% reduction. The settings have a consistent impact across resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a detailed look at performance across all resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the combo is capable of very high frame rates. With Low settings, the average is 179 FPS, which is excellent for competitive play. Medium settings yield 127 FPS (min 108, max 146), High settings yield 113 FPS, and Ultra settings yield 98 FPS. This shows that even at the highest settings, the system can push close to 100 FPS, making it ideal for 144Hz monitors.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain high but begin to show the GPU’s workload. Low settings produce 136 FPS, Medium settings produce 96 FPS (min 82, max 111), High settings produce 86 FPS, and Ultra settings produce 74 FPS. This resolution offers the best balance of visual quality and performance, with High settings providing a smooth 86 FPS average.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly the limiting factor. Low settings produce 92 FPS, which is still very playable. Medium settings produce 65 FPS (min 55, max 75), High settings produce 58 FPS, and Ultra settings produce 50 FPS. The data shows that 4K is feasible, but players will need to adjust settings to achieve their target frame rate. The min FPS data at Medium settings across all resolutions (1080p: 108, 1440p: 82, 4K: 55) indicates that frame pacing is stable, with no severe drops below the average.

The progression from Low to Ultra at each resolution follows a predictable pattern, with each step up in settings costing roughly 20-25% performance. This allows for precise tuning based on your hardware and display capabilities. The data also shows that the gap between 1080p and 1440p is smaller than the gap between 1440p and 4K, highlighting the exponential cost of 4K rendering.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations for Control, this specific pairing of the Intel Core i5-12600KF and AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT ranks 1183 out of 3720 combos. This places it in the 68th percentile of all tested systems, meaning it outperforms roughly two-thirds of the configurations in the database. This is a strong result, indicating that the combo is well-balanced for this game.

The ranking is influenced by both components. The CPU, with its 10 cores and 16 threads, has a benchmark score of 27,799, which puts it in the 79th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals in the CPU benchmark data include the Intel Core i9-10900K (0.3% slower), AMD Ryzen 5 8500GE (0.3% faster), and AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D (0.3% slower). This shows that the i5-12600KF is a high-end processor that competes with previous generation flagships.

The GPU, with a benchmark score of 48,477, sits in the 85th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile (1.5% slower), Intel Arc A550M (2.5% faster), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti (3% faster). The GPU’s high percentile ranking is a major contributor to the combo’s overall position. The data shows that the combo’s ranking in Control is slightly lower than the individual component percentiles might suggest, which could indicate that the game is more sensitive to one component than the other.

The combination of a 79th percentile CPU and an 85th percentile GPU results in a 68th percentile combo ranking for this specific game. This slight drop suggests that Control may not fully utilize the CPU’s capabilities, or that the GPU is the primary driver of the frame rates. The ranking confirms that this is a capable system for Control, but not the absolute top-tier configuration.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12600KF plays a supporting role in Control, particularly at higher resolutions. Its 10 cores (6 performance and 4 efficiency) and 16 threads provide ample processing power for the game’s logic and physics. The CPU’s boost clock of 4.90 GHz ensures that single-threaded tasks are handled quickly, which is important for game engines that rely on a main thread.

The CPU’s benchmark scores show strong multi-threaded performance. In Cinebench R23, it scores 23,391 in multi-core and 3,302 in single-core. Its 3DMark scores show scalability from 1,016 (single-thread) to 7,952 (max threads). This indicates that the CPU can handle both lightly and heavily threaded workloads, which is beneficial for a game like Control that uses multiple threads for various systems.

In the measured FPS data, the CPU’s role becomes less significant as resolution increases. At 1080p Low, where the GPU is less burdened, the CPU allows the frame rate to reach 179 FPS. At 4K Ultra, the frame rate drops to 50 FPS, which is almost entirely determined by the GPU’s rendering capabilities. The CPU is not the bottleneck at any resolution, as evidenced by the fact that frame rates scale smoothly with settings changes.

The CPU’s 20 MB of shared L3 cache and 1.25 MB per-core L2 cache help reduce memory latency, which can improve frame pacing. Its memory support for DDR4 and DDR5, with a dual-channel bus, provides flexibility for system builders. The data shows that the CPU’s performance is more than sufficient for this game, and it does not limit the GPU’s ability to deliver high frame rates.

The CPU’s market segment is Desktop, and its production status is Active, indicating it is a current product. Its launch MSRP was $264, which is a single data point for reference. The CPU’s 125 W TDP is moderate, and its socket LGA 1700 is current. The benchmarks show that the CPU’s average benchmark score of 27,799 is competitive with its rivals, making it a solid foundation for a gaming PC. In Control, the CPU’s role is to ensure that the GPU is fed with data, and the measured FPS confirms that it does this effectively without introducing stutters or frame drops.