Control

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core i5-13400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process node. Its base clock is 2.50 GHz with a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, and it carries 20 MB of shared L3 cache alongside 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core. This configuration places the CPU in the 82nd percentile among all tested processors, with an average benchmark score of 25,236.

In the context of Control, the CPU's thread count and clock speeds matter for the game's physics simulation and object interaction logic. Control is an Action Adventure title where the protagonist manipulates objects and environments in real time, which places consistent demand on CPU cores rather than just one or two. The 16 threads help maintain frame pacing during scenes with multiple physics-enabled objects, especially when the player uses telekinetic abilities to throw debris or when destructible environments fragment into many pieces.

The nearest rivals in CPU benchmark performance highlight the i5-13400F's positioning. It scores 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i7-13620H and 0.5% ahead of both the AMD EPYC 9474F and AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340. The AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D sits 0.5% ahead of the i5-13400F. These deltas are small, meaning the i5-13400F delivers performance that is effectively on par with its immediate competitors in general-purpose benchmarks. For Control specifically, the single-thread performance is strong—evidenced by a 3DMark single-thread score of 960 and a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3,004—which helps with the game's main thread that handles player input and camera movement.

Looking at multi-threaded results, the i5-13400F achieves 21,279 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 7,307 in 3DMark max threads. These scores indicate that the CPU can sustain high throughput when all cores are active, which is relevant for Control's background processes like audio rendering and level streaming. However, the measured FPS data shows that at lower resolutions and settings, the frame rates exceed 120 FPS at 1080p Low, suggesting the CPU is not a bottleneck at those settings. At higher settings and resolutions, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, as evidenced by the sharp drop in FPS when moving from Low to Ultra settings at the same resolution.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 33 chip, manufactured on a 6 nm process by TSMC. It features 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s. The GPU has a base clock of 1980 MHz, a boost clock of 2755 MHz, and a game clock of 2470 MHz. Its 2,048 shading units and 64 ROPs deliver a pixel rate of 176.3 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 352.6 GTexel/s. The GPU's FP32 throughput is 22.57 TFLOPS.

In Control, the GPU's 16 GB VRAM is a notable asset. The game's environments feature complex textures and lighting effects, and the extra memory capacity allows for high-resolution texture packs without exceeding VRAM limits. The measured data shows that at 4K with High settings, the average FPS is 41, while at 4K with Low settings, it jumps to 61.5. This 20.5 FPS difference underscores how much the GPU's compute and memory bandwidth are taxed by the game's visual features at higher settings.

The RX 7600 XT ranks in the 63rd percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 20,146. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 7600, scores 20,258, which is 0.6% higher. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER scores 19,774, putting it 1.9% behind the RX 7600 XT, while the AMD Radeon RX 460 scores 20,088, just 0.3% behind. These close scores indicate that the RX 7600 XT sits in a competitive performance tier, though its 16 GB VRAM gives it an advantage in memory-heavy scenarios that these benchmark scores do not capture.

For Control, the GPU's ray tracing capabilities—32 RT cores—are present but not the primary factor in the measured FPS, as the data does not specify ray tracing settings. The rasterization performance is what drives the frame rates in the measured rows. At 1080p Ultra, the GPU delivers 70.1 FPS, which is playable but not high-refresh territory. At 1080p Low, it reaches 123.7 FPS, showing that the GPU can handle fast-paced action when visual fidelity is reduced.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data reveals how the RX 7600 XT scales across resolutions. At 1080p High, the average FPS is 76.1. Moving to 1440p High, it drops to 59.9, a reduction of 16.2 FPS (approximately 21%). At 4K High, the average FPS is 41, which is 35.1 FPS lower than 1080p High—a decline of about 46%. This scaling pattern indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting component at higher resolutions, as the pixel count increases dramatically and the GPU's compute resources are saturated.

The same pattern holds at Low settings. At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 123.7. At 1440p Low, it falls to 93.9, a drop of 29.8 FPS (about 24%). At 4K Low, the average FPS is 61.5, which is 62.2 FPS lower than 1080p Low—a decline of roughly 50%. The proportional drop from 1080p to 4K is similar across settings, which suggests that the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth are the limiting factors, rather than the CPU or game logic.

Comparing the settings at each resolution further illustrates the GPU's role. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 53.6 FPS (123.7 vs 70.1). At 1440p, the difference is 42.6 FPS (93.9 vs 51.3). At 4K, the difference narrows to 24.3 FPS (61.5 vs 37.2). The narrowing gap at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU is already near its limits even at Low settings in 4K, leaving less headroom for extra visual features. Conversely, at 1080p, the GPU has more spare capacity, so turning up settings from Low to Ultra costs a larger absolute FPS penalty.

The data also shows that Medium settings provide a middle ground. At 1080p Medium, the average FPS is 89.5, which is 34.2 FPS below Low and 19.4 FPS above Ultra. At 1440p Medium, it is 65.8 FPS, and at 4K Medium, it is 43.6 FPS. These numbers suggest that Medium settings are the sweet spot for maintaining playable frame rates across all resolutions, though the exact choice depends on the user's target frame rate and display capability.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Intel Core i5-13400F and AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT ranks 1,026 out of 1,636 tested combos in Control. This places it in the 63rd percentile of all tested combinations, meaning roughly 37% of combos perform better and 63% perform worse. The rank reflects the balanced nature of this pairing: the CPU is not holding back the GPU in most scenarios, but the GPU's mid-range positioning limits the combo's overall standing.

The CPU's 82nd percentile ranking among all CPUs indicates that the i5-13400F is a strong performer, but the GPU's 63rd percentile ranking drags the combo down. In Control, the GPU is the bottleneck at higher settings and resolutions, as shown by the FPS drops from 1080p to 4K. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 123.7 FPS, which is a high frame rate that many combos with weaker CPUs or stronger GPUs might not reach due to CPU limitations. However, at 4K Ultra, the combo drops to 37.2 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold that many users target.

Compared to other combos in the database, the i5-13400F + RX 7600 XT sits in the lower-middle portion of the rankings. The rank of 1,026 out of 1,636 suggests that there are many combos with faster GPUs that achieve significantly higher frame rates in Control, particularly at 1440p and 4K. The combo's strength is its consistency across settings—it never falls below 37.2 FPS even at the most demanding preset, and it exceeds 120 FPS at the least demanding preset. This makes it a versatile option for users who want to play at a variety of resolutions and settings without major adjustments.

The data also shows that the combo's performance is well-predicted by the individual component benchmarks. The CPU's average benchmark score of 25,236 and the GPU's average of 20,146 are both near the middle of their respective distributions, and the combo's rank reflects this balance. There is no evidence of a significant bottleneck or synergy issue—the results are consistent with what the component scores would suggest.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS data, the Medium preset offers the most balanced experience across all resolutions. At 1080p Medium, the average FPS is 89.5, which is smooth for most displays and well above the 60 FPS threshold. At 1440p Medium, the average FPS is 65.8, which remains comfortably playable on a 60 Hz monitor and acceptable on a 144 Hz display with adaptive sync. At 4K Medium, the average FPS is 43.6, which is below 60 FPS but still playable for a slower-paced Action Adventure game.

For users with a 1080p display, the High preset at 76.1 FPS is also a strong choice, as it provides better visual quality than Medium while staying above 60 FPS. The Ultra preset at 1080p yields 70.1 FPS, which is still playable, but the 6 FPS gain from High to Ultra may not justify the visual improvement for all users. At 1440p, the High preset at 59.9 FPS is right at the edge of 60 FPS, so Medium at 65.8 FPS is the safer recommendation for maintaining a consistent frame rate. At 4K, the Low preset at 61.5 FPS is the only measured setting that exceeds 60 FPS, making it the recommended choice for users who prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity on a 4K display.

The data suggests that the Ultra preset is not recommended for this combo at any resolution. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 37.2, which is likely to feel sluggish during fast-paced combat sequences. At 1440p Ultra, 51.3 FPS is borderline, and at 1080p Ultra, 70.1 FPS is acceptable but the visual difference from High is marginal. The Medium preset provides the best balance of visual quality and performance, with an average FPS of 89.5 at 1080p, 65.8 at 1440p, and 43.6 at 4K.

For users with a 60 Hz display, the Medium preset at 1440p (65.8 FPS) or High at 1080p (76.1 FPS) are the best options. For users with a 144 Hz display, Low at 1080p (123.7 FPS) is the only preset that approaches the refresh rate cap, though Medium at 89.5 FPS is still a reasonable choice. The key takeaway is that the combo performs best when visual settings are kept at Medium or below, especially at higher resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of the combo's performance in Control across three resolutions and four settings presets.

1080p (1920x1080):

• Low: 123.7 FPS average
• Medium: 89.5 FPS average
• High: 76.1 FPS average
• Ultra: 70.1 FPS average

At 1080p, the combo delivers playable frame rates at all settings. The jump from Low to Medium costs 34.2 FPS, while the jump from Medium to High costs 13.4 FPS, and from High to Ultra costs 6.0 FPS. The diminishing returns from High to Ultra suggest that users should stay at High unless they have a strong preference for the extra visual features.

1440p (2560x1440):

• Low: 93.9 FPS average
• Medium: 65.8 FPS average
• High: 59.9 FPS average
• Ultra: 51.3 FPS average

At 1440p, the combo remains playable at Low and Medium, but High dips below 60 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 28.1 FPS, from Medium to High is 5.9 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 8.6 FPS. The Medium preset at 65.8 FPS is the best choice for maintaining a 60 FPS experience, while Low at 93.9 FPS provides a high refresh rate option for users with 144 Hz displays.

4K (3840x2160):

• Low: 61.5 FPS average
• Medium: 43.6 FPS average
• High: 41.0 FPS average
• Ultra: 37.2 FPS average

At 4K, only the Low preset exceeds 60 FPS, and it does so narrowly at 61.5 FPS. The Medium preset at 43.6 FPS is the next best option, followed by High at 41.0 FPS and Ultra at 37.2 FPS. The differences between settings at 4K are smaller than at lower resolutions, with only a 24.3 FPS gap between Low and Ultra. This indicates that the GPU is heavily constrained at 4K, and users should not expect to run Ultra settings on this combo at this resolution.

Across all resolutions, the data shows a consistent pattern: lowering settings provides a larger FPS boost at lower resolutions. At 1080p, the Low-to-Ultra range spans 53.6 FPS, while at 4K, it spans only 24.3 FPS. This is because the GPU's pixel throughput becomes the dominant factor at 4K, leaving less headroom for settings-based performance gains. The combo's sweet spot is 1080p Medium or High, or 1440p Medium, where it delivers smooth frame rates without sacrificing too much visual quality.