Control

The Intel Core i5-14400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 delivers a compelling Control experience, but the data reveals a clear delineation: this is a 1440p-centric powerhouse that can stretch into 4K with adjustments, while 1080p performance is so high that the CPU becomes the primary constraint. The measured frame rates show a steep curve as resolution increases, indicating that the RTX 4070 is the dominant factor at higher pixel counts, while the i5-14400F’s strong single-threaded capabilities keep frame rates exceptionally high at lower resolutions.

Resolution Scaling

The transition from 1080p to 4K produces a dramatic shift in performance, characteristic of a system where the GPU is the bottleneck at higher resolutions. At Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 193 FPS at 1920x1080 to 146 FPS at 2560x1440, a 24% reduction, and then to 98 FPS at 3840x2160, a further 33% reduction from 1440p. This scaling pattern is steep and consistent, confirming that the RTX 4070’s rendering workload is the limiting factor as pixel count increases.

Moving to High settings reveals a similar trend, though the absolute numbers are lower. The average dips from 122 FPS at 1080p to 92 FPS at 1440p (a 25% drop), and then to 62 FPS at 4K (a 33% drop from 1440p). The consistent percentage drops between resolutions suggest a well-balanced scaling curve where the GPU’s compute and memory bandwidth are being fully utilized. The i5-14400F, with its 10 cores and 16 threads, does not appear to introduce a CPU-side bottleneck until the frame rates approach the 190 FPS mark at 1080p Low.

The most telling data point for resolution scaling is the Ultra preset. At 4K Ultra, the average frame rate falls to 54 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target that many users consider the baseline for smooth gameplay. This indicates that the RTX 4070’s 12 GB of GDDR6X memory and 504.2 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for the game, but the sheer pixel throughput required at 4K Ultra pushes the GPU to its limits. In contrast, the 1080p Ultra average of 106 FPS shows that the same settings are easily handled when the pixel count is reduced by 75%, leaving ample headroom for the CPU to feed frames.

The scaling from 1080p to 4K at Medium settings yields averages of 137, 104, and 70 FPS respectively. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 24%, and from 1440p to 4K is 33%, which mirrors the pattern seen at other presets. This uniformity across presets reinforces the conclusion that resolution, not settings, is the primary driver of performance variation. The data suggests that players targeting 4K should expect to use Low or Medium settings to maintain playable frame rates, while 1440p High is the sweet spot for visual fidelity and performance.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 is the undisputed performance driver in this configuration, with its specifications directly correlating to the measured results. The GPU’s boost clock of 2475 MHz and base clock of 1920 MHz provide the raw compute throughput needed to sustain high frame rates, while its 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus delivers 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth. This memory configuration is particularly relevant for Control, a game that features complex particle effects and destructible environments, which benefit from high bandwidth to avoid stuttering.

The GPU’s shading units (5888) and texture mapping units (184) are the workhorses for the game’s rendering, and the data shows they are fully utilized at 4K. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS of 54 is the lowest recorded, indicating the GPU is saturated. The RTX 4070’s 46 RT cores are also relevant, as Control features ray-traced reflections and shadows, though the measured FPS rows do not specify whether ray tracing is enabled. The presence of these cores supports the notion that the GPU is capable of handling such effects, but the raw rasterization performance is what drives the numbers seen here.

Comparing the RTX 4070 to its nearest rivals in the GPU benchmark database provides context for its performance. The GPU’s average benchmark score of 37648 places it 0.1% ahead of the NVIDIA Tesla P4 (37628) and 0.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 (37507). It trails the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile by 1.3% (38135) but leads the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 by 1.3% (37157). These marginal differences in synthetic benchmarks suggest that the RTX 4070’s real-world performance in Control is competitive with other high-end GPUs, and the measured FPS data confirms it is well-suited for this title.

The GPU’s 200 W TDP and dual-slot design are typical for this performance class, but more importantly, the data shows that the card’s power delivery is sufficient to maintain clock speeds under load. The fact that 4K High still achieves 62 FPS average indicates the GPU is not thermally throttling, which would show up as more erratic frame times. The 16-pin power connector and 550 W suggested PSU are standard, but the benchmark results are the true testament to the GPU’s capability. At 1080p, the RTX 4070 is so powerful that it pushes frame rates to 193 FPS on Low, which is where the CPU’s limits become visible.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to achieve 60+ FPS consistently?

A: The data shows that 2560x1440 with High settings delivers an average of 92 FPS, and even Ultra settings maintain 80 FPS. At 3840x2160, only Low (98 FPS) and Medium (70 FPS) presets exceed 60 FPS, while High (62 FPS) is borderline and Ultra (54 FPS) falls below the threshold.

Q: How does the i5-14400F compare to its closest CPU rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The i5-14400F’s average benchmark score of 32279 is 0.1% higher than the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U (32233) and 0.2% higher than the Intel Core i9-11900 (32226). It is 0.2% lower than the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS (32354) and 0.5% higher than the Intel Core i7-12800H (32121).

Q: Does the RTX 4070’s 12 GB VRAM become a limiting factor in Control?

A: The measured FPS data does not indicate a VRAM bottleneck. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 54, which is low but consistent with GPU compute limits rather than memory capacity issues, as the game runs at 62 FPS on High at the same resolution.

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

A: At 1920x1080, the average frame rate drops from 193 FPS on Low to 106 FPS on Ultra, a reduction of 45%. This shows that the Ultra preset imposes a significant rendering cost even at a resolution where the CPU is not the primary bottleneck.

Q: Is the RTX 4070’s performance in Control better or worse than its synthetic benchmark position suggests?

A: The GPU’s synthetic average score of 37648 is in the 81st percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rival, the RTX 4080 Mobile, is only 1.3% faster. In Control, the 4K Ultra result of 54 FPS aligns with this positioning, as it is a demanding title that stresses the GPU near its limits.

Q: How does the 1440p Medium preset compare to 4K Medium in terms of frame rate?

A: The 2560x1440 Medium preset averages 104 FPS with a minimum of 88 FPS, while the 3840x2160 Medium preset averages 70 FPS with a minimum of 59 FPS. The 4K result is 33% lower, but both remain above the 60 FPS playability threshold.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-14400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 is ranked 904 out of 3720 tested combinations for Control, placing it in the top 24.3% of all systems evaluated. This rank is indicative of a high-performing setup that excels in most scenarios, though it is not at the absolute top tier where 4K Ultra at 60 FPS is achievable. The rank reflects the balance between the CPU’s 83rd percentile standing among all processors and the GPU’s 81st percentile among all GPUs, showing a well-matched pairing.

The i5-14400F’s synthetic benchmarks support this ranking. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21645 and single-core score of 3055 demonstrate strong all-around capability, with a Geekbench multi-core score of 11268. These scores place it slightly above the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U in average performance (32279 vs 32233), which is relevant for a game like Control that relies on both single-threaded physics and multi-threaded asset streaming. The CPU’s 10 cores and 16 threads are more than sufficient to avoid bottlenecking the GPU at most settings.

The GPU’s PassMark G3D score of 26927 is a strong indicator of its DirectX 11 and 12 performance, which is directly applicable to Control. The GPU’s DirectX 12 score of 103 and DirectX 11 score of 244, while abstract, suggest that the hardware is well-optimized for modern APIs. The combo’s rank of 904 is respectable, but the data shows that the system is better suited for high-refresh-rate 1440p gaming than for 4K Ultra, where the 54 FPS average puts it in the lower half of performance expectations.

When compared to other combos, this system’s 1440p High result of 92 FPS is a standout, as it allows for smooth gameplay with high visual fidelity. The 4K Low result of 98 FPS is also notable, as it demonstrates that the system can handle 4K if the user is willing to compromise on settings. The rank of 904 out of 3720 means there are 903 combos that perform better, likely featuring higher-end GPUs like the RTX 4080 or 4090, but this pairing offers a strong balance of cost and performance without the need for extreme hardware.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data points to 2560x1440 with the High preset as the optimal configuration for this combo, delivering an average of 92 FPS. This preset provides a significant visual upgrade over Medium (104 FPS) while still maintaining a frame rate well above the 60 FPS threshold. The Ultra preset at 1440p drops to 80 FPS, which is still playable, but the 15% performance hit over High may not justify the marginal visual gains in a fast-paced action game like Control.

For users prioritizing maximum visual fidelity at 4K, the Medium preset is the safest recommendation, with an average of 70 FPS and a minimum of 59 FPS. The High preset at 4K averages 62 FPS, which is technically playable but leaves little headroom for demanding scenes, while Ultra at 54 FPS is likely to cause noticeable stuttering during intense combat. The Low preset at 4K (98 FPS) is viable for competitive play or for users who prioritize frame rate over graphics, but it sacrifices too much visual quality for most players.

At 1080p, the data shows that even the Ultra preset (106 FPS) is well above the 60 FPS target, making this resolution the best choice for users with high-refresh-rate monitors. The Medium preset at 137 FPS is a good middle ground, but the High preset at 122 FPS offers a better balance of quality and speed. The Low preset’s 193 FPS is excessive for most displays, suggesting that users with 144 Hz monitors can safely use High or Ultra without dropping below their refresh rate.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the performance scales predictably across presets. Low settings produce an average of 193 FPS, Medium reaches 137 FPS with a minimum of 116 and maximum of 157, High achieves 122 FPS, and Ultra drops to 106 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 87 FPS, highlighting the significant cost of high-end effects at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, the averages are 146 FPS on Low, 104 FPS on Medium (min 88, max 119), 92 FPS on High, and 80 FPS on Ultra. The scaling from 1080p is consistent, with roughly a 25% reduction in frame rate at each preset, confirming that the GPU is the primary limiting factor. The Medium preset’s minimum of 88 FPS ensures smooth gameplay even in demanding scenes.

At 3840x2160, the results show the GPU’s limits. Low settings average 98 FPS, Medium averages 70 FPS (min 59, max 80), High averages 62 FPS, and Ultra drops to 54 FPS. The Medium preset is the only one that consistently stays above 60 FPS, with its minimum of 59 FPS being a close call. The Ultra preset’s 54 FPS average is the weakest result in the dataset, indicating that this combo is not suited for 4K Ultra without additional hardware.