Control

# Control — Intel Core i5-14400F + NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER

The measured frame rates for this combination in Control show a system that is firmly GPU-limited at every resolution and preset tested. The GTX 1660 SUPER, with its 6 GB GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivers playable performance at 1080p but struggles to maintain smooth frame rates as resolution climbs. Data from twelve distinct configuration points reveals a consistent pattern: the GPU is the bottleneck, while the Core i5-14400F has ample headroom to feed frames. This analysis walks through the resolution scaling, ranking, component roles, and settings optimization based strictly on the measured results.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K is substantial and consistent across all quality presets, confirming the GPU as the limiting factor. At Low settings, the average FPS falls from 90.5 at 1920x1080 to 67.9 at 2560x1440 (a 25% reduction), then to 44.8 at 3840x2160 (another 34% reduction from 1440p). This steep decline tracks directly with pixel count increases, which is the signature of a GPU-bound scenario.

At High settings, the scaling is similar: 58.3 FPS at 1080p drops to 44.1 at 1440p (24% lower) and further to 31.6 at 4K (28% lower than 1440p). The Ultra preset tells the same story, with 49.3 FPS at 1080p falling to 37.3 at 1440p and 25 at 4K. Notably, the 4K Ultra result of 25 FPS is the lowest measured value in the entire dataset, indicating that this combination cannot handle maximum settings at 4K without significant compromise.

The scaling behavior also reveals that the CPU is not a limiting factor. If the i5-14400F were throttling performance, we would expect to see frame rates plateau or drop more sharply at lower resolutions where the CPU has to feed frames faster. Instead, the data shows smooth, predictable scaling from 1080p to 4K across every preset, which indicates the GTX 1660 SUPER's rendering throughput is the sole constraint. The 10-core, 16-thread processor with a 4.70 GHz boost clock is never the bottleneck, even at 1080p Low where the GPU is producing 90.5 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

This combination ranks 1432 out of 1636 tested combos in Control, placing it in the lower tier of systems. That rank reflects the GPU's age and class more than the CPU's capability. The GTX 1660 SUPER sits at the 55th percentile among all GPUs, while the i5-14400F boasts the 88th percentile among all CPUs. This disparity — a top-tier CPU paired with a mid-range GPU — explains why the combo lands in the bottom 12% of tested configurations.

The GPU's nearest rivals in aggregate benchmark scores provide context. The GTX 1660 SUPER scores 14286 on average, which is essentially tied with the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 (14314, deltaPct -0.2), Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics (14315, deltaPct -0.2), and AMD Radeon Vega 11 (14352, deltaPct -0.5). The AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT sits just ahead at 14389 (deltaPct -0.7). These are all entry-level or integrated-class GPUs, which underscores that the 1660 SUPER is positioned at the lower end of the performance spectrum in 2024.

The CPU, meanwhile, is in a completely different class. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-12800H (32513, deltaPct 0), AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 7645 (32446, deltaPct 0.2), AMD Ryzen 7 250 (32584, deltaPct -0.2), and Intel Core i7-13705H (32586, deltaPct -0.2). The i5-14400F's average benchmark score of 32508 places it squarely in mobile workstation and upper-midrange desktop territory, but in Control's measured FPS, that CPU strength is wasted because the GPU cannot translate it into higher frame rates.

GPU Role

The GTX 1660 SUPER is the defining component of this combo's performance in Control. Its 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus provides 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is adequate for 1080p gaming but becomes a limiting factor at higher resolutions where texture data exceeds the frame buffer's capacity. The measured results reflect this: at 1080p, all presets except Ultra achieve playable frame rates, but at 4K, even Low settings only reach 44.8 FPS.

The GPU's clock speeds — 1530 MHz base and 1785 MHz boost — are modest by modern standards, and its 1408 shading units deliver 5.027 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. This places it in the same performance neighborhood as the integrated and entry-level discrete GPUs listed as nearest rivals. The benchmark scores for the GPU are telling: passmark_g3d of 12699 and passmark_directx_12 of 50 indicate DX12 performance that is barely adequate for a demanding title like Control.

Control is a game that pushes GPU resources heavily, and the data shows the 1660 SUPER struggling at higher resolutions. The 4K Ultra result of 25 FPS suggests the GPU is overwhelmed, while the 4K Low result of 44.8 FPS indicates that even at minimal settings, the pixel throughput required at 3840x2160 exceeds the GPU's comfortable operating range. The 25 FPS at 4K Ultra is particularly telling — it is 20% lower than the 31.6 FPS at 4K High, showing that the Ultra preset's additional effects tax the GPU beyond what it can reasonably deliver.

FAQ

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

A: 1920x1080 is the only resolution where all presets reach playable frame rates. At 1080p, the lowest measured average is 49.3 FPS at Ultra, while Low, Medium, and High all exceed 58 FPS.

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

A: Barely, and only at Low settings. The 4K Low result is 44.8 FPS, which is playable but not smooth. At Medium (35.6 FPS), High (31.6 FPS), and Ultra (25 FPS), the frame rates drop below comfortable playability thresholds.

Q: How does this GPU compare to its nearest rivals in terms of benchmark scores?

A: The GTX 1660 SUPER scores 14286 on average, which is within 0.7% of the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT (14389) and essentially tied with the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 (14314) and Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics (14315).

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this combo?

A: The GPU is the clear bottleneck. The i5-14400F ranks in the 88th percentile among CPUs, while the GTX 1660 SUPER ranks in the 55th percentile among GPUs. The frame rate scaling pattern confirms GPU limitation.

Q: What is the performance difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, Low averages 90.5 FPS while Ultra averages 49.3 FPS, a difference of 41.2 FPS (approximately 45% lower performance at Ultra).

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

A: This combination ranks 1432 out of 1636 tested combos in Control, placing it in the bottom 12% of all tested configurations.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides clear guidance for optimal settings. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset delivers 68.2 FPS, which is a strong balance of visual quality and performance. High settings at 1080p achieve 58.3 FPS, still playable but closer to the edge of smoothness. Low settings at 1080p hit 90.5 FPS, which is excellent for competitive play but sacrifices visual fidelity.

For users prioritizing smoothness, 1080p Low is the best choice, delivering the highest measured frame rate in the entire dataset. For balanced quality, 1080p Medium (68.2 FPS) is the recommended preset, as it provides a comfortable margin above 60 FPS while maintaining reasonable visual detail. The 1080p High preset (58.3 FPS) is acceptable but sits below the 60 FPS threshold, which may result in perceptible stutter on standard 60 Hz displays.

At 2560x1440, the situation is more constrained. Low settings produce 67.9 FPS, which is playable, while Medium drops to 51.7 FPS and High to 44.1 FPS. The 1440p Ultra result of 37.3 FPS is not recommended for smooth gameplay. At 3840x2160, only Low settings (44.8 FPS) approach playability, and even that is below the ideal 60 FPS target. The data clearly indicates that this combo is best suited for 1080p gaming, with 1440p viable only at Low or Medium settings.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-14400F plays a supporting role in this combo, providing ample processing power that the GTX 1660 SUPER cannot fully utilize. With 10 cores and 16 threads, the CPU has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, which is more than sufficient for Control's demands. The 20 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 memory support ensure that the CPU can feed data to the GPU without becoming a bottleneck.

The CPU's benchmark scores confirm its strength. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 21914 and singlecore score of 3093 place it in the upper echelon of desktop processors. The Geekbench multicore score of 11209 and singlecore score of 2333 further reinforce this assessment. In comparison, the GPU's passmark_g3d score of 12699 is modest, and its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1278 is low, indicating that the GPU is the limiting component in every scenario.

The i5-14400F ranks in the 88th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 32508. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-12800H and AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 7645, both of which are capable processors. In Control specifically, the CPU's role is to maintain frame pacing and handle game logic, which it does effortlessly. The measured FPS data shows no signs of CPU limitation — even at 1080p Low with 90.5 FPS, the frame rate is constrained by the GPU's rendering capability, not the CPU's processing throughput. For users considering an upgrade, the CPU has significant headroom to support a more powerful GPU, but within this combo, the 1660 SUPER is the definitive performance ceiling.