Control

# Control with Intel Core i5-14400F + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050

Control, the 2019 action-adventure from Remedy Entertainment, presents an interesting test for this mid-range pairing. The Intel Core i5-14400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 combination lands at rank 1756 out of 2888 tested combos in this game, placing it in the lower-middle portion of the database. This pairing's measured frame rates reveal a system that can handle 1080p gaming comfortably, but struggles when pushed to higher resolutions. The data suggests a GPU-bound scenario at 4K, while 1080p results hint at a more balanced workload between the ten-core CPU and the Blackwell-based graphics card.

FAQ

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

A: The measured data shows 1920x1080 provides the most playable experience, with average FPS ranging from 68 at Ultra settings to 124 at Low settings. At 2560x1440, averages drop to between 52 and 94 FPS depending on settings, while 3840x2160 only manages 35 to 63 FPS.

Q: How does the RTX 5050 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The RTX 5050's average benchmark score of 21035 places it within 1.6% of the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (20713) and within 0.6% of the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL (21153). It trails the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile (21379) by 1.6% and the AMD Radeon HD 8970M (21237) by 1%.

Q: What is the CPU's percentile ranking among all processors?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400F sits in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 32279. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U, scores 32233 (0.1% lower), while the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS scores 32354 (0.2% higher).

Q: Does the CPU or GPU bottleneck this system in Control?

A: The data indicates the GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher resolutions. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 124 FPS, but at 4K Low it drops to 63 FPS—a 49% reduction. This scaling pattern suggests the RTX 5050's 8 GB of VRAM and 320.0 GB/s bandwidth constrain performance as resolution increases.

Q: What settings produce the highest minimum FPS?

A: The only settings row with a reported minimum FPS is Medium across all resolutions. At 1920x1080 Medium, the minimum is 75 FPS with an average of 88 FPS. At 2560x1440 Medium, the minimum drops to 57 FPS (average 67), and at 3840x2160 Medium, the minimum is 38 FPS (average 45).

Q: How does the i5-14400F compare to its nearest CPU rivals in raw performance?

A: The i5-14400F's average score of 32279 puts it 0.1% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U (32233) and 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core i9-11900 (32226). It trails the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS by 0.2% (32354) and leads the Intel Core i7-12800H by 0.5% (32121).

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-14400F brings a hybrid configuration to Control: 10 cores and 16 threads operating from a 2.50 GHz base clock up to 4.70 GHz boost. This Raptor Lake-R architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process, features a 20 MB shared L3 cache and 1.25 MB L2 per core. The CPU's 65 W TDP and dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 memory support make it a flexible desktop component, though its locked multiplier means no overclocking headroom.

Benchmark data positions this CPU firmly in the upper tier of processors. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21645 and single-core score of 3055 demonstrate strong throughput for a 14th-generation part. Geekbench results show 11268 multi-core and 2058 single-core, while PassMark's multithread test returns 25470—all consistent with an 83rd percentile ranking. The nearest rival comparisons reveal tight competition: the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U is essentially tied (0.1% delta), while the Intel Core i9-11900 falls just 0.2% behind.

In Control's measured results, the CPU's role becomes evident when examining the spread between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p. The jump from 124 FPS at Low to 68 FPS at Ultra (a 45% reduction) indicates that while the CPU can feed frames quickly at lower graphical loads, the GPU takes over as the primary constraint as settings increase. The 10-core configuration with 16 threads appears sufficient for Control's physics and AI demands, as evidenced by the strong 1080p Low result that approaches high-refresh territory. However, the locked multiplier and 4.70 GHz boost ceiling mean the CPU cannot compensate for GPU limitations at higher resolutions.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 employs the Blackwell 2.0 architecture on TSMC's 5 nm process, packing 16,900 million transistors into a 149 mm² die. Its 2560 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs drive a 13.17 TFLOPS FP32 throughput. The 8 GB GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus provides 320.0 GB/s bandwidth, with memory clocked at 2500 MHz (20 Gbps effective). Base clock sits at 2317 MHz with a 2572 MHz boost.

This GPU's benchmark profile shows a 66th percentile ranking among all GPUs, with a PassMark G3D score of 17326 and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2502. The nearest rival comparisons reveal an intriguing situation: the RTX 5050 sits within 1.6% of the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT, a card from a previous generation, and within 1% of the AMD Radeon HD 8970M. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 90334 and Vulkan score of 89381 suggest strong compute capabilities, but Control's real-time rendering demands tell a different story.

The GPU's 8 GB VRAM capacity and 320.0 GB/s bandwidth appear to be the limiting factors at 4K resolution. At 3840x2160, even Low settings only produce 63 FPS average, while Ultra drops to 35 FPS. The 128-bit memory bus, while efficient for 1080p, struggles to feed the render targets at higher resolutions. The 130 W TDP and 300 W suggested PSU indicate this is a power-efficient card, but Control's visual effects—including the game's signature physics-based destruction and particle systems—require substantial memory bandwidth that this configuration cannot fully deliver at 4K.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides clear guidance for optimal settings. At 1920x1080, Medium settings deliver 88 FPS average with a 75 FPS minimum, offering the best balance between visual quality and smoothness. High settings at 1080p achieve 78 FPS, which remains playable, but the 10 FPS difference between Medium and High suggests diminishing returns on visual fidelity. Low settings at 124 FPS are only useful for competitive play or high-refresh displays, as the visual compromises outweigh the performance gain for most players.

At 2560x1440, Medium settings again provide the sweet spot with 67 FPS average and 57 FPS minimum. High settings drop to 59 FPS, which approaches the edge of smooth gameplay, while Low at 94 FPS offers headroom for faster-paced play. Ultra at 52 FPS is playable but inconsistent, as the lack of minimum FPS data suggests potential frame pacing issues.

For 3840x2160, no setting provides a consistently smooth experience. Medium averages 45 FPS with a 38 FPS minimum, which dips below acceptable thresholds for action games. Low at 63 FPS is the only 4K configuration approaching playability, but the visual degradation negates the purpose of 4K resolution. The recommendation is to prioritize Medium settings at 1440p or 1080p for the best experience, as the data shows this setting tier offers the most stable frame delivery across all resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 1756 out of 2888 tested combinations places it in the 39th percentile of all pairings tested in Control. This mid-pack positioning reflects a system that meets minimum requirements comfortably but lacks the headroom for high-end performance. The CPU's 83rd percentile ranking contrasts sharply with the GPU's 66th percentile, suggesting the graphics card is the weaker component in this pairing.

In the context of the nearest rivals, the RTX 5050's performance mirrors cards like the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT, which launched in a different performance tier. This comparison implies that Control's requirements align more closely with GPU compute capability than raw memory bandwidth—the RX 5600 XT's similar average score translates to comparable in-game results despite different architectures. The combo's rank suggests that for Control specifically, this pairing performs adequately for 1080p and modest 1440p gaming but falls short of the top quartile of tested systems.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured results show a clear progression across settings. Low settings achieve 124 FPS average, followed by Medium at 88 FPS (with 75 FPS minimum and 101 FPS maximum), High at 78 FPS, and Ultra at 68 FPS. The 56 FPS spread between lowest and highest settings indicates the GPU has significant headroom at this resolution, even at Ultra.

Moving to 2560x1440, performance scales predictably. Low settings produce 94 FPS, Medium averages 67 FPS (minimum 57, maximum 77), High reaches 59 FPS, and Ultra drops to 52 FPS. The 42 FPS spread between Low and Ultra narrows compared to 1080p, suggesting the GPU begins to constrain performance more noticeably.

At 3840x2160, the results reveal the GPU's limitations. Low settings average 63 FPS, Medium drops to 45 FPS (minimum 38, maximum 52), High falls to 40 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 35 FPS. The 28 FPS spread between settings is the smallest of any resolution, indicating that at 4K, the GPU's 8 GB VRAM and 320.0 GB/s bandwidth become the primary bottlenecks regardless of graphical configuration.

Resolution Scaling

The transition from 1080p to 4K reveals a steep performance curve. At Low settings, the drop from 124 FPS at 1920x1080 to 94 FPS at 2560x1440 represents a 24% reduction, while the further drop to 63 FPS at 3840x2160 is a 33% reduction from 1440p—a cumulative 49% loss from 1080p to 4K. Medium settings show similar scaling: 88 FPS at 1080p, 67 FPS at 1440p (24% drop), and 45 FPS at 4K (33% drop from 1440p, 49% total).

High settings demonstrate slightly different scaling: 78 FPS at 1080p, 59 FPS at 1440p (24% drop), and 40 FPS at 4K (32% drop from 1440p, 49% total). Ultra settings follow the same pattern: 68 FPS at 1080p, 52 FPS at 1440p (24% drop), and 35 FPS at 4K (33% drop from 1440p, 49% total). This consistent percentage scaling across all settings strongly indicates a GPU-bound scenario—the CPU maintains sufficient frame delivery, but the RTX 5050 cannot sustain higher resolutions.

The 49% performance loss from 1080p to 4K is substantial but not linear with pixel count (which would suggest a 75% reduction). This non-linear scaling implies the GPU has some reserve capacity that partially compensates for the increased pixel workload, likely through memory compression or render optimizations. However, the 8 GB VRAM capacity becomes a critical factor at 4K, as the game's textures and effects likely approach or exceed this limit, forcing the GPU to manage memory more aggressively. The data suggests that for Control, this combo is best utilized at 1080p or 1440p, where the RTX 5050's bandwidth and capacity can deliver playable frame rates without the severe compromises seen at 4K.