Control

# Control with Intel Core i5-14400F + AMD Radeon RX 7600

This combination places the Intel Core i5-14400F with the AMD Radeon RX 7600 at rank 1131 out of 1636 tested combos in Control, putting it in the lower-middle tier of tested configurations. The CPU holds an 88th percentile ranking against all CPUs, while the GPU sits at a 63rd percentile against all GPUs — a notable asymmetry suggesting the graphics card, not the processor, is the primary constraint in this title. The data shows a system that can handle Control at 1080p with high settings comfortably, but struggles to maintain playable frame rates at 4K, particularly with higher quality presets.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 1131 out of 1636 tested combinations places it in the 31st percentile of all tested pairings for Control. This is a surprisingly low position given the individual component rankings — the i5-14400F outperforms 88% of all CPUs, and the RX 7600 outperforms 63% of all GPUs. The discrepancy suggests that Control's engine is particularly demanding on the GPU side, and the RX 7600's mid-tier positioning drags the overall combo ranking down despite the capable processor.

The GPU's nearest rivals in the benchmark database include the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT (scoring 0.6% higher), the AMD Radeon RX 460 (0.8% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile (1.3% lower), and the Intel Arc B570 (1.5% lower). These tight margins indicate that the RX 7600 sits in a crowded performance band where small architectural differences determine ranking positions. The RX 7600 XT's marginal lead is particularly telling — it suggests that the base RX 7600 is already extracting near-maximum performance from its silicon in this title.

For the CPU, the i5-14400F's nearest rivals show an essentially identical performance cluster: the Intel Core i7-12800H matches it exactly (0% delta), while the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 7645 trails by 0.2%, the AMD Ryzen 7 250 leads by 0.2%, and the Intel Core i7-13705H leads by 0.2%. This grouping of four rivals within a 0.4% band demonstrates that the i5-14400F's processing power is entirely sufficient for Control — the CPU is not the bottleneck in this configuration.

FAQ

Q: Is this combo capable of running Control at 60 FPS?

A: Yes, but only at 1080p with Low settings (117.8 FPS) or Medium settings (86.4 FPS). At 1440p, only the Low preset (91.6 FPS) exceeds 60 FPS, while at 4K, no preset achieves 60 FPS — the best is Low at 59.5 FPS.

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

A: The data shows 1080p as the sweet spot, with High settings delivering 72.9 FPS and even Ultra maintaining 67 FPS. At 1440p, High drops to 55 FPS, and at 4K, Ultra falls to 32.4 FPS.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from Low to Ultra settings?

A: At 1080p, Ultra delivers 67 FPS versus Low's 117.8 FPS — a 43% reduction. At 1440p, Ultra (48.8 FPS) is 47% slower than Low (91.6 FPS). At 4K, Ultra (32.4 FPS) is 46% slower than Low (59.5 FPS).

Q: Does the CPU hold back the GPU in this game?

A: Benchmark results indicate no. The i5-14400F's nearest rivals all score within 0.4% of each other, and the CPU ranks in the 88th percentile overall. The FPS scaling across resolutions points to the GPU as the limiting component.

Q: Can this combo handle 4K gaming in Control?

A: Barely, and only with reduced settings. Low settings at 4K produce 59.5 FPS, which is just under 60. Medium drops to 45 FPS, High to 38.3 FPS, and Ultra to 32.4 FPS. Playable 4K requires Low settings.

Q: How does the RX 7600 compare to its closest GPU rivals in overall benchmarks?

A: The RX 7600's average benchmark score is 20258. The RX 7600 XT leads by 0.6%, the RX 460 by 0.8%, while the RTX 3070 Mobile trails by 1.3% and the Intel Arc B570 by 1.5% — all within a tight 2.3% band.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-14400F brings 10 cores and 16 threads from the Raptor Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. This 10 nm processor from Intel's Core 14th Gen series supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory across a dual-channel bus, with 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU's single-thread performance is strong — evidenced by a Geekbench single-core score of 2333 and a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3093 — which matters for Control's game logic and physics calculations.

The multi-threaded results are equally robust: Cinebench R23 multi-core reaches 21914, and Geekbench multi-core hits 11209. These figures place the i5-14400F in the 88th percentile against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 32508. The nearest rival comparisons show virtually no separation — the i7-12800H matches exactly, the Ryzen 5 PRO 7645 is 0.2% behind, and both the Ryzen 7 250 and i7-13705H are 0.2% ahead. This clustering indicates that Control's CPU demands are comfortably met by any of these processors.

The data suggests the CPU is not the constraint in this combo. At 1080p, the FPS difference between Low (117.8) and Ultra (67) settings is driven by GPU workload, not CPU limits. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect smaller FPS deltas between settings presets, particularly at lower resolutions where the GPU has less work per frame. The consistent 40-50% FPS drops from Low to Ultra across all resolutions point to the GPU as the limiting factor.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1080p, the combo delivers its strongest performance. Low settings produce 117.8 FPS average, Medium drops to 86.4 FPS, High to 72.9 FPS, and Ultra to 67 FPS. The step from Low to Medium costs 31.4 FPS (27%), while the step from Medium to High costs 13.5 FPS (16%), and High to Ultra costs only 5.9 FPS (8%). This diminishing returns pattern suggests that the High preset is near the GPU's efficiency sweet spot at this resolution.

Moving to 1440p, the numbers shift downward substantially. Low averages 91.6 FPS, Medium 67.1 FPS, High 55 FPS, and Ultra 48.8 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 42.8 FPS (47%), slightly larger than the 43% drop at 1080p. Notably, the Medium preset at 1440p (67.1 FPS) nearly matches the Ultra preset at 1080p (67 FPS), illustrating how resolution scaling impacts the GPU more than settings changes at this tier.

At 4K, the combo struggles. Low settings average 59.5 FPS, Medium 45 FPS, High 38.3 FPS, and Ultra 32.4 FPS. The 4K Low result is particularly interesting — it falls just short of 60 FPS, suggesting that even the lowest quality settings push the RX 7600 to its limits at this resolution. The 4K Ultra figure of 32.4 FPS is barely above what would be considered a consistent 30 FPS console-style experience, indicating this combo is not suited for max-quality 4K play.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K reveals the GPU-bound nature of this configuration. At High settings, 1080p delivers 72.9 FPS, 1440p drops to 55 FPS (a 25% reduction), and 4K falls to 38.3 FPS (a 47% reduction from 1440p, 48% from 1080p). This scaling pattern is consistent with a GPU that has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth — sufficient for 1080p and decent 1440p, but insufficient for 4K's pixel throughput demands.

The Low settings scaling tells a similar story: 1080p at 117.8 FPS, 1440p at 91.6 FPS (22% drop), and 4K at 59.5 FPS (35% drop from 1440p). The larger percentage drop from 1440p to 4K compared to 1080p to 1440p suggests that the RX 7600 hits a memory bandwidth or fill-rate wall at 4K. The pixel rate of 169.9 GPixel/s and texture rate of 339.8 GTexel/s are competitive for 1440p but get overwhelmed at 3840x2160.

If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect the FPS to remain relatively flat as resolution increases, since the CPU workload per frame stays roughly constant. Instead, the data shows FPS dropping by roughly half from 1080p to 4K across all settings, confirming that the RX 7600's compute and memory resources are the binding constraint. The i5-14400F's boost clock of 4.70 GHz and strong single-thread performance ensure the CPU keeps pace even at 1080p Low where the GPU is producing 117.8 FPS.

Settings Recommendations

For 1080p gaming, the High preset at 72.9 FPS offers the best balance of visual quality and smoothness. The step up to Ultra costs only 5.9 FPS (8%) but delivers the maximum visual fidelity, so players with 60 Hz displays can comfortably choose Ultra at 67 FPS. The Medium preset at 86.4 FPS is viable for high-refresh-rate 1080p monitors, though the visual compromise may not justify the extra 13.5 FPS over High.

At 1440p, the Low preset at 91.6 FPS is the only option that comfortably exceeds 60 FPS. Medium at 67.1 FPS is playable but leaves little headroom for demanding scenes, while High at 55 FPS and Ultra at 48.8 FPS fall short of smooth gameplay. Players with 1440p displays should prioritize the Low or Medium presets to maintain responsive frame times.

For 4K, the data shows that only Low settings at 59.5 FPS approach playability. Medium at 45 FPS and High at 38.3 FPS would require adaptive sync technology to feel smooth, and Ultra at 32.4 FPS is best reserved for screenshot purposes or slow-paced exploration. The 4K Low result is remarkably close to the 60 FPS threshold, suggesting that minor tweaks — such as reducing shadow quality or draw distance while keeping other Low settings — could tip it over.

The overall recommendation is to target 1080p with High or Ultra settings for the best experience, or 1440p with Low settings if higher resolution is preferred. The combo's 8 GB VRAM capacity is adequate for 1080p and 1440p in this title, but the 128-bit memory bus becomes a limiting factor at 4K regardless of texture quality settings.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7600 is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 33 chip, manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1720 MHz, a game clock of 2250 MHz, and a boost clock of 2655 MHz, with memory running at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) across a 128-bit bus for 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 8 GB GDDR6 frame buffer is paired with 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 32 ray accelerators.

In overall GPU benchmarks, the RX 7600 scores an average of 20258, placing it in the 63rd percentile against all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are tightly clustered: the RX 7600 XT leads by 0.6%, the RX 460 by 0.8%, while the RTX 3070 Mobile trails by 1.3% and the Intel Arc B570 by 1.5%. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2310 and PassMark G3D score of 16634 provide additional context — this is a mid-range GPU that punches near the top of its class but cannot compete with higher-tier cards.

The measured FPS data in Control shows the RX 7600 delivering 117.8 FPS at 1080p Low, which drops to 32.4 FPS at 4K Ultra. This 3.6x reduction in performance across the resolution and settings spectrum is consistent with a GPU that has strong compute throughput — 21.75 TFLOPS FP32 — but limited memory bandwidth. The 288.0 GB/s bandwidth and 8 GB VRAM are adequate for 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K, the GPU must work significantly harder per frame, revealing the architectural limits of the 128-bit memory interface.

The 165 W TDP and PCIe 4.0 x8 interface are notable considerations. The x8 bus width, while sufficient for most gaming workloads, could theoretically limit data transfer in VRAM-constrained scenarios at 4K. However, the benchmark data does not show anomalous stuttering or frame drops that would indicate bus bandwidth issues — the FPS scaling is smooth and predictable across all presets, pointing to raw GPU compute and memory throughput as the primary determinants of performance in Control.