Control

The Intel Core i5-13400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti delivers a robust 1440p and 1080p experience in Control, with performance scaling that clearly identifies the GPU as the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions. The data shows a processor with strong multi-threaded capacity and a graphics card with high-end compute resources, resulting in a combination that ranks in the 74th percentile of all tested combos for this title. This analysis breaks down the measured frame rates, the combo’s standing against other systems, and provides actionable settings guidance based strictly on the observed data.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a classic pattern of GPU-bound scaling as resolution increases. At 1920x1080 with High settings, the combo produces an average of 121.8 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 drops this to 93.6 FPS, and at 3840x2160, the average falls to 62.5 FPS. This represents a 23% reduction from 1080p to 1440p, and a 33% reduction from 1440p to 4K. The consistent decline indicates that the RTX 3080 Ti’s rendering pipeline is the limiting factor, rather than the CPU’s ability to feed frames.

The Low settings row confirms this diagnosis. At 1920x1080 Low, the system achieves 193.5 FPS, which is a 59% increase over the High preset at the same resolution. This substantial jump suggests that the CPU is capable of driving far more frames when the GPU workload is lightened. At 2560x1440 Low, the average is 145.8 FPS, and at 3840x2160 Low, it remains high at 97.2 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra settings widens with resolution: at 1080p, Ultra is 44% slower than Low, but at 4K, Ultra is 45% slower. This slight widening indicates that the GPU’s memory bandwidth and shading throughput are increasingly strained at higher pixel counts.

The data suggests that the i5-13400F is not a bottleneck in this title. Even at 1080p Low, where the GPU has the least work, the 193.5 FPS average is likely near the CPU’s practical limit for this game engine, but the processor’s 10 cores and 16 threads provide ample headroom. The RTX 3080 Ti, with its 12 GB of GDDR6X memory and 384-bit bus, handles the bandwidth demands of 4K, but the 53.1 FPS at Ultra shows that maximum quality settings at 4K will push the GPU to its limits. For players targeting 60 FPS, the 62.5 FPS at 4K High is marginal, while 1440p High provides a comfortable cushion.

How This Combo Ranks

According to the benchmark database, this specific combination of the Intel Core i5-13400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti ranks 415th out of 1636 tested combinations for Control. This places the system in the upper 25% of all configs, which is a strong showing for a mid-range CPU paired with a high-end GPU. The combo’s rank reflects the balance between the two components; the CPU’s performance percentile is 82, while the GPU sits at 83, indicating they are well-matched in this workload.

The processor’s nearest rivals provide context for its contribution. The i5-13400F’s average benchmark score is 25236, which is 0.1% higher than the Intel Core i7-13620H (25201) and 0.5% lower than the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D (25365). This places the CPU in a tight performance band with those alternatives. For the GPU, the RTX 3080 Ti’s average score of 41224 is 0.5% lower than the RTX 3090 (41441) and 1.1% lower than the RTX 5070 (41687). This indicates that the 3080 Ti is within striking distance of newer and higher-tier cards, making the overall combo competitive.

The rank of 415 out of 1636 suggests that while this system is not at the absolute top tier for Control, it outperforms the vast majority of tested setups. The data implies that the bottleneck is the GPU at higher resolutions, but the CPU’s strong single-thread performance (3dmark_single_thread score of 960) ensures that the system does not fall behind in CPU-heavy scenes. The combo is particularly effective at 1440p, where the 93.6 FPS High average and 103.9 FPS Medium average suggest a smooth experience with room for visual enhancements.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Control?

A: The data shows that 2560x1440 provides the best balance of visual fidelity and performance. At High settings, the average FPS is 93.6, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold, while 3840x2160 High averages only 62.5 FPS, leaving little headroom for demanding scenes.

Q: How does the CPU performance compare to its closest rivals?

A: The i5-13400F has an average benchmark score of 25236, which is 0.1% higher than the Intel Core i7-13620H and 0.5% lower than the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D. This indicates near-identical performance with those alternatives in synthetic tests.

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

A: The scaling from 1080p to 4K indicates the GPU is the primary limiter. At 1080p Low, the system hits 193.5 FPS, but at 4K Ultra, it drops to 53.1 FPS, a 73% reduction. The CPU’s high 1080p Low score shows it can feed frames faster than the GPU can render them at higher resolutions.

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

A: The combo ranks 415th out of 1636 tested combinations for Control, placing it in the upper 25% of all configs. This is a strong result given the mid-range processor and high-end graphics card.

Q: How much performance is lost by enabling Ultra settings?

A: At 1920x1080, Ultra averages 107.7 FPS compared to High’s 121.8 FPS, a 12% reduction. At 3840x2160, Ultra drops to 53.1 FPS from High’s 62.5 FPS, a 15% reduction, making Ultra at 4K challenging for smooth gameplay.

Q: Does the RTX 3080 Ti perform close to its immediate successor?

A: The RTX 3080 Ti’s average benchmark score is 41224, which is 1.1% lower than the RTX 5070’s 41687. The performance delta is minimal, indicating the older card remains highly competitive in this title.

Settings Recommendations

For a 60 FPS target at 3840x2160, the High preset is the optimal choice. The measured 62.5 FPS average provides a small but usable margin above 60 FPS, while the Ultra preset’s 53.1 FPS average falls short of a smooth experience. Players prioritizing frame rate over visual fidelity at 4K could drop to Medium, which yields 69.8 FPS, but the visual difference between Medium and High is often less noticeable than the performance gain.

At 2560x1440, the High preset is recommended for the best experience. The 93.6 FPS average offers a significant cushion for demanding action sequences, and the gap to Ultra’s 83.2 FPS is only 11%, making High the sweet spot for most users. For competitive play or high-refresh-rate monitors, the Low preset at 1440p delivers 145.8 FPS, which is ideal for 144 Hz displays, though it sacrifices visual quality.

At 1920x1080, the High preset’s 121.8 FPS average is sufficient for 120 Hz displays, while Ultra’s 107.7 FPS remains playable. The Low preset’s 193.5 FPS is overkill for most monitors but demonstrates the system’s headroom. Given the data, the High preset at 1080p offers the best balance, providing a 13% performance boost over Ultra with minimal visual compromise.

Measured FPS Breakdown

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 97.2 FPS average
• Medium: 69.8 FPS average
• High: 62.5 FPS average
• Ultra: 53.1 FPS average

At 4K, the jump from Low to Medium is a 28% performance drop, while High to Ultra is a 15% drop. The system cannot maintain 60 FPS at Ultra, making High the highest playable preset.

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 145.8 FPS average
• Medium: 103.9 FPS average
• High: 93.6 FPS average
• Ultra: 83.2 FPS average

The scaling at 1440p is more gradual, with a 29% drop from Low to Medium and an 11% drop from High to Ultra. All presets exceed 60 FPS, with Ultra remaining well above the threshold.

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 193.5 FPS average
• Medium: 135.4 FPS average
• High: 121.8 FPS average
• Ultra: 107.7 FPS average

At 1080p, the system is clearly GPU-bound at higher settings, but the Low preset’s 193.5 FPS shows the CPU’s capability. The 30% drop from Low to Medium indicates the GPU’s workload increases significantly with even modest settings.