Control

Resolution Scaling

The measured frame rates for this Intel Core i5-13400F + NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti combination in Control reveal a steep performance cliff as resolution increases, with the data pointing squarely at the GPU as the limiting component. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo produces 45.4 FPS average, but moving to 2560x1440 at the same settings drops that to 32.8 FPS, a reduction of roughly 28%. The climb to 3840x2160 at Low settings further compresses performance to 21.5 FPS, showing that the scaling penalty is consistent and severe across the resolution ladder.

This pattern intensifies when settings are raised. At High settings, the drop from 1080p (26.9 FPS) to 1440p (25.1 FPS) is only about 7%, but the fall to 4K (12.5 FPS) represents a 54% loss from the 1440p figure. The relatively small difference between 1080p and 1440p at High settings suggests that the GPU is already saturated by the workload at 1080p, so the additional pixel count at 1440p has diminishing marginal impact until the resolution jump to 4K overwhelms the memory bandwidth and shading capabilities.

The Ultra preset tells a similar story: 24.2 FPS at 1080p, 21.9 FPS at 1440p, and 13.1 FPS at 4K. The data indicates that between 1080p and 1440p, the frame rate degradation is modest across Medium, High, and Ultra settings, but the transition to 4K consistently halves or nearly halves the already low frame rates. This behavior is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario where the 4 GB memory capacity and 112.1 GB/s bandwidth become critical bottlenecks at higher resolutions, particularly with the more demanding preset levels.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the benchmark database, this combination sits at rank 1635 out of 1636 tested combos for Control. That places it in the bottom 0.1% of all tested configurations, meaning virtually every other CPU-GPU pairing in the database delivers higher average frame rates in this game. The single combo ranked below it represents the only configuration with worse measured performance.

The CPU itself is not the weak link in this pairing. The Intel Core i5-13400F sits in the 82nd percentile against all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 25236. It edges out the Intel Core i7-13620H by 0.1% and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D by 0.5% in aggregate CPU benchmarks, while trailing the AMD EPYC 9474F by 0.5%. These are marginal differences among closely matched processors, indicating that the i5-13400F is a solidly mid-to-upper-tier CPU on its own merits.

The GPU, however, anchors the combo's ranking. The GTX 1050 Ti sits in the 30th percentile against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 5316. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce 930A (0% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce 940M (0.4% ahead), and the AMD Radeon R7 240 (0.7% ahead), placing it in the lower tier of even entry-level graphics hardware. The combination of a strong CPU with a weak GPU produces a system that is heavily imbalanced for a game like Control, which demands substantial graphics throughput. The result is a combo rank that reflects the GPU's limitations rather than the CPU's capabilities.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti brings 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding 112.1 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock runs at 1291 MHz with a boost clock of 1392 MHz, and the memory operates at 1752 MHz (7 Gbps effective). The chip, built on the Pascal architecture at 14 nm, contains 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units. These specifications translate to a pixel rate of 44.54 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 66.82 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance rated at 2.138 TFLOPS.

In Control, these figures directly explain the measured frame rates. The 4 GB memory capacity is a known constraint, and the data shows that even at 1080p Low settings, the combo only reaches 45.4 FPS. At higher settings, the frame rates collapse further: 30.4 FPS at Medium, 26.9 FPS at High, and 24.2 FPS at Ultra at 1080p. The GPU's 75 W TDP and lack of power connectors underscore its entry-level positioning, and the benchmark results confirm that it cannot sustain playable frame rates for this title beyond the Low preset.

The GPU's nearest rivals in the database — the GeForce 930A, GeForce 940M, Radeon R7 240, and Radeon R7 M445 — are all similarly low-power, low-performance parts, with delta percentages ranging from -0.8% to 0.7%. This clustering reinforces that the GTX 1050 Ti is operating at the very bottom of the discrete GPU performance spectrum in 2023, and Control's demands simply exceed what this hardware can deliver at higher resolutions or quality settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its best results. Low settings produce 45.4 FPS average, which is the only preset that approaches a smooth experience. Medium settings drop to 30.4 FPS, High settings yield 26.9 FPS, and Ultra falls to 24.2 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 15 FPS, while the gap between Medium and High is only 3.5 FPS, and High to Ultra is 2.7 FPS — indicating diminishing returns as settings rise.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates compress further. Low settings average 32.8 FPS, High settings 25.1 FPS, Medium 23 FPS, and Ultra 21.9 FPS. Notably, the ordering shifts: High outperforms Medium at this resolution, which is an anomaly that may reflect differences in how specific rendering features interact with the GPU at higher pixel counts. The spread between the best and worst presets narrows to 10.9 FPS, compared to 21.2 FPS at 1080p.

At 3840x2160, all presets land in single digits or low twenties. Low settings average 21.5 FPS, Medium 14.3 FPS, Ultra 13.1 FPS, and High 12.5 FPS. The difference between Low and Medium is 7.2 FPS, while Medium to Ultra is only 1.2 FPS, and Ultra to High is 0.6 FPS. The data shows that at 4K, even the Low preset struggles to maintain 22 FPS, making this resolution effectively unplayable for this combination.

FAQ

Q: What is the best frame rate this combo can achieve in Control?

A: The highest measured average frame rate is 45.4 FPS, which occurs at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to other tested configurations?

A: It ranks 1635 out of 1636 tested combos in Control, placing it in the bottom percentile of all configurations tested.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The GPU is clearly the limiting component. The CPU sits in the 82nd percentile for all CPUs, while the GPU is in the 30th percentile for all GPUs, and frame rates degrade dramatically with resolution increases.

Q: What frame rate can be expected at 2560x1440 with High settings?

A: The measured average is 25.1 FPS at 2560x1440 with High settings, which is marginally lower than the 26.9 FPS at 1080p High.

Q: Does the Ultra preset provide playable performance at any resolution?

A: At 1080p Ultra, the average is 24.2 FPS; at 1440p Ultra, it drops to 21.9 FPS; and at 4K Ultra, it falls to 13.1 FPS. None of these are consistently smooth for gameplay.

Q: How does the GPU's memory bandwidth relate to performance?

A: The 112.1 GB/s bandwidth on a 128-bit bus with 4 GB GDDR5 is insufficient for higher resolutions, as evidenced by the steep frame rate drops when moving from 1080p to 1440p to 4K.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the only viable settings for this combo in Control are at 1920x1080 with the Low preset, which delivers 45.4 FPS. This is the sole configuration that approaches a smooth gameplay experience, though it still falls short of the 60 FPS target many players prefer. Dropping to Medium at 1080p reduces performance to 30.4 FPS, which is a 33% penalty for visual improvements that many players would find unacceptable given the already low baseline.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset at 32.8 FPS is the only option that remains above 30 FPS, but the visual quality trade-off from 1080p Low is questionable. The High preset at 1440p (25.1 FPS) and Medium at 1440p (23 FPS) are both below playable thresholds for most users. At 3840x2160, every preset falls below 22 FPS, making this resolution unsuitable for this hardware combination.

The data suggests that players should prioritize resolution over settings: 1080p Low produces 45.4 FPS, while 1440p Low yields 32.8 FPS and 4K Low only 21.5 FPS. If a player has a 1080p monitor, the Low preset is the only measured configuration that delivers acceptable performance. For those with higher-resolution displays, the recommendation is to run the game at 1080p with Low settings rather than attempting native resolution at reduced quality, as the frame rate penalty from resolution scaling is more severe than the penalty from settings changes within a given resolution.