Control

The Intel Core i5-12600KF paired with the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT delivers a robust performance profile in Control, with the data indicating a system that is well-balanced for high-refresh-rate 1440p gaming while remaining capable at 4K. The measured frame rates show a predictable scaling pattern across resolutions and settings, revealing a configuration where the GPU is the primary scaling agent until lower resolutions and higher frame rates expose CPU limitations. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS data, contextualizes the combo's standing among 3,720 tested combinations, and offers specific settings guidance based on the empirical rows.

Resolution Scaling

The transition from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 produces a significant frame rate reduction across all settings, with the magnitude of the drop indicating a GPU-bound scenario at higher pixel counts. At High settings, the average FPS falls from 110 at 1080p to 83 at 1440p (a 24.5% decrease) and further to 56 at 4K (a 49.1% decrease from 1080p). This scaling is consistent with the GPU rendering more pixels, and the RX 7800 XT's 16 GB of GDDR6 memory and 624.1 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient to handle the increased memory pressure without a disproportionate collapse.

However, the scaling pattern changes when examining Low settings. At Low, the average FPS goes from 174 at 1080p to 132 at 1440p (a 24.1% drop) and then to 89 at 4K (a 48.9% drop from 1080p). The similar percentage drops across High and Low settings suggest that the GPU is still the limiting factor even at Low, as the CPU does not become a bottleneck until frame rates approach the 174 FPS mark at 1080p. The data does not show a plateau at 1080p Low, which would indicate CPU saturation; instead, the smooth decline implies the RX 7800 XT is working at near full capacity.

The Ultra preset shows the steepest absolute decline, with averages of 96 FPS at 1080p, 72 FPS at 1440p, and 49 FPS at 4K. This 49% reduction from 1080p to 4K mirrors the other presets, reinforcing that resolution scaling is consistent and primarily driven by pixel throughput. The Medium preset, which is the only one with min/max FPS recorded, shows a similar trend: 124 FPS average at 1080p, 94 at 1440p, and 63 at 4K. The min FPS values (105 at 1080p, 80 at 1440p, 54 at 4K) indicate that frame pacing remains stable, with the 4K minimum of 54 FPS still being playable but close to the edge of a 60 FPS target.

The data suggests that at 1080p, the system is approaching a balance where the CPU's 10 cores and 16 threads can keep up, but the GPU is still the dominant constraint. At 4K, the GPU is unequivocally the limiting component, as the 49 FPS Ultra average shows. For users targeting 60 FPS, the 4K Medium preset (63 FPS average) is the viable option, while 1440p High (83 FPS) offers a comfortable margin above 60.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the database of 3,720 tested CPU-GPU combinations, this pairing holds a combo rank of 1,254 in Control. This places the configuration in the top third of all tested systems, which is a strong showing for a mid-range CPU paired with an upper-mid-range GPU. The percentile rank of the GPU alone is 51, meaning the RX 7800 XT performs better than 51% of all GPUs in the database, while the CPU has a percentile rank of 79. The combo's overall rank of 1,254 suggests that the CPU's higher percentile partially compensates for the GPU's average standing, though the game's frame rates are ultimately dictated by the GPU.

Comparing the CPU to its nearest rivals provides context for its contribution. The Intel Core i5-12600KF has an average benchmark score of 27,799, which is 0.3% lower than the Intel Core i9-10900K (27,872) and 0.3% higher than the AMD Ryzen 5 8500GE (27,712). It also trails the AMD Ryzen 7 6800U (27,887) and the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D (27,896) by 0.3%. These deltas are negligible, indicating that the i5-12600KF performs on par with these rivals in synthetic benchmarks, and in Control, the frame rate differences would be minimal.

For the GPU, the RX 7800 XT's average score of 11,627 is 0.5% below the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 (11,680) and 1.8% below the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT (11,842). However, it outperforms the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M (11,528) by 0.9% and the NVIDIA Tesla K20c (11,479) by 1.3%. These rival deltas are small, but they underscore that the RX 7800 XT sits in a crowded performance band. Given the combo rank of 1,254 out of 3,720, the data shows that this system is not an outlier in either direction; it is a solid, predictable performer that lands in the upper-middle tier of tested configurations.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides clear guidance for optimizing the experience in Control. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset delivers an average of 96 FPS, which is sufficient for high-refresh-rate monitors, but the High preset at 110 FPS offers a 14.6% improvement with likely minimal visual degradation. The Low preset hits 174 FPS, which is excessive for most displays and sacrifices visual fidelity for frame rates that exceed typical 144Hz panels. The Medium preset at 124 FPS strikes a balance, but High is the recommended choice for 1080p as it provides a comfortable margin above 100 FPS while maintaining better image quality.

At 2560x1440, the High preset averages 83 FPS, which is ideal for a 144Hz monitor with adaptive sync, as it stays well above the 60 FPS threshold and provides smooth gameplay. The Ultra preset drops to 72 FPS, which is still playable but begins to approach the point where fast-paced combat might feel less responsive. The Medium preset at 94 FPS is the best option for competitive play, but High is recommended for the best visual-to-performance ratio. The Low preset at 132 FPS is unnecessary for most users, as the visual downgrade is significant.

For 3840x2160, the data shows that the Medium preset is the only viable option for maintaining a 60 FPS average, with a measured 63 FPS. The High preset at 56 FPS is marginally below the 60 FPS target, and the Ultra preset at 49 FPS is not recommended for smooth gameplay. The Low preset at 89 FPS is an option for those prioritizing frame rate over visuals, but the Medium preset offers a better balance of image quality and performance. The min FPS of 54 at 4K Medium indicates occasional dips, but the average of 63 suggests that most of the experience will be fluid. Overall, High at 1080p, High at 1440p, and Medium at 4K are the optimal presets based on the measured rows.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The full dataset for this combo shows a clear progression of average FPS across resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves 174 FPS, Medium reaches 124 FPS (with a min of 105 and max of 142), High hits 110 FPS, and Ultra delivers 96 FPS. At 2560x1440, the averages are 132 FPS for Low, 94 FPS for Medium (min 80, max 108), 83 FPS for High, and 72 FPS for Ultra. At 3840x2160, the averages are 89 FPS for Low, 63 FPS for Medium (min 54, max 73), 56 FPS for High, and 49 FPS for Ultra.

The Medium preset is the only one with complete min/max data across all resolutions, allowing for an analysis of frame consistency. At 1080p, the range from 105 to 142 FPS shows a spread of 37 FPS, indicating some variance but no severe stutters. At 1440p, the range narrows to 80 to 108 FPS (a 28 FPS spread), suggesting better frame pacing. At 4K, the range is 54 to 73 FPS (a 19 FPS spread), which is the tightest of the three, implying that the GPU is consistently delivering frames without major spikes or drops. This trend suggests that at higher resolutions, the system becomes more stable as the GPU workload dominates and the CPU has ample headroom.

The delta between Low and Ultra presets is consistent across resolutions. At 1080p, the difference is 78 FPS (174 vs 96), at 1440p it is 60 FPS (132 vs 72), and at 4K it is 40 FPS (89 vs 49). This shrinking delta indicates that at higher resolutions, the GPU is less able to differentiate between presets because it is already near its limits. At 1080p, the GPU has more headroom, so lower presets yield significantly higher frame rates. The data shows that the High preset is always closer to Ultra than to Medium in terms of FPS, which is typical for games where Ultra adds marginal effects with a high performance cost.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT is the primary driver of performance in Control, as evidenced by the resolution scaling data. The GPU features 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 624.1 GB/s, which is ample for the game's textures and effects at 4K. The memory clock of 2438 MHz (19.5 Gbps effective) combined with the 256-bit bus ensures that memory bandwidth is not a bottleneck, even at the highest resolutions. The GPU's boost clock of 2430 MHz and game clock of 2124 MHz are relatively high, allowing for substantial compute throughput.

The RX 7800 XT's 3,840 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 96 ROPs provide a raw compute capability of 37.32 TFLOPS FP32, which is more than sufficient for a game released in 2019. The data shows that at 4K Ultra, the average FPS of 49 is the lowest measured, indicating that the GPU's pixel fill rate of 233.3 GPixel/s is being taxed. The texture rate of 583.2 GTexel/s also plays a role, as Control features complex environmental textures. The GPU's 60 ray tracing cores are present, but the measured data does not include ray tracing performance, so the analysis is limited to rasterization.

The GPU's percentile rank of 51 places it in the middle of the database, which aligns with the measured FPS being competitive but not exceptional. The nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660, has a similar average score (11,680 vs 11,627), yet the RX 7800 XT would likely outperform it in Control due to its modern architecture and higher VRAM capacity. The 16 GB VRAM is a notable advantage, as it prevents texture pop-in and stuttering at 4K, which is reflected in the stable min FPS of 54 at 4K Medium. The data shows that the GPU is the limiting factor at 4K, as the CPU has sufficient headroom to feed it, but at 1080p Low, the GPU's performance ceiling is still not fully reached.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12600KF contributes to the system's overall capability, but in Control, its role is secondary to the GPU. The CPU features 10 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, which provides strong single-threaded and multi-threaded performance. The 20 MB of shared L3 cache and 1.25 MB per-core L2 cache are sufficient for the game's physics and AI calculations, which are not extremely demanding by modern standards. The CPU's architecture is Alder Lake, using a 10 nm process, and it supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, though the measured data does not specify which type was used.

The CPU's benchmark scores indicate a well-rounded performer. In Cinebench R23, it scores 23,391 in multi-core and 3,302 in single-core, while in Geekbench, it scores 12,137 multi-core and 2,157 single-core. These scores place it in the 79th percentile of all CPUs, meaning it outperforms 79% of tested processors. In Control, the CPU's impact is most evident at 1080p Low, where the average FPS of 174 suggests that the CPU is keeping up with the GPU's output. If the CPU were a bottleneck, the frame rate would plateau around a certain value regardless of resolution, but the data shows a steady decline from 1080p to 4K, indicating that the GPU is the constraining factor.

The nearest rival comparisons for the CPU show that it performs nearly identically to the Intel Core i9-10900K and AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D, with deltas of 0.3% or less. This means that in Control, swapping the i5-12600KF for a Ryzen 7 5800X3D would result in a negligible FPS difference, as the game is not CPU-bound except at very high frame rates. The CPU's 16 threads are more than enough for Control, which likely uses fewer than 8 threads effectively. The data shows that at 4K, the CPU's role is minimal, as the GPU is fully saturated, and the CPU has ample time to prepare frames. At 1080p Low, the CPU's boost clock of 4.90 GHz helps maintain high FPS, but the 174 FPS average is still below the CPU's absolute limit, as evidenced by the lack of a plateau in the data.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to maintain 60 FPS in Control?*

A: At 2560x1440, the High preset averages 83 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 72 FPS, both above 60 FPS. At 3840x2160, the Medium preset averages 63 FPS, which is just above 60, making 1440p High the most comfortable choice.

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

A: The Intel Core i5-12600KF has an average benchmark score of 27,799, which is 0.3% lower than the Intel Core i9-10900K (27,872) and 0.3% higher than the AMD Ryzen 5 8500GE (27,712). It trails the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D (27,896) by 0.3%.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra settings at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 89 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 49 FPS, resulting in a 40 FPS difference. The Medium preset averages 63 FPS, providing a middle ground.

Q: Does the GPU show a significant bottleneck at 1080p?

A: The data shows that at 1920x1080 Low, the average FPS is 174, and at High it is 110. The lack of a frame rate plateau suggests the GPU is still the limiting factor, as the CPU has enough headroom to push higher FPS.

Q: What is the combo's rank among all tested systems?

A: This combo ranks 1,254 out of 3,720 tested combinations in Control, placing it in the top third. The GPU has a percentile rank of 51, while the CPU has a percentile rank of 79.

Q: Which preset is recommended for 1440p gaming with this system?

A: The High preset at 2560x1440 averages 83 FPS, which is ideal for a 144Hz monitor. The Medium preset offers 94 FPS for more competitive play, but High provides a better visual experience without sacrificing smoothness.