Control

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for Control with the Intel Core i5-14600K and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 shows a steep performance cliff as resolution climbs. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo produces 56.1 FPS, which drops to 44.4 FPS at 2560x1440 and further to 28.2 FPS at 3840x2160. That represents a 49.6% reduction in frame rate from 1080p Low to 4K Low, indicating the GPU is the primary bottleneck as pixel count increases.

The pattern becomes more telling when examining the High settings tier. The 1080p High result lands at 36.9 FPS, while 1440p High falls to 25 FPS, and 4K High bottoms out at 16 FPS. The scaling from 1440p to 4K at High settings shows a 36% drop, which is consistent with a GPU-limited scenario where the 4 GB VRAM buffer and 128-bit memory interface are overwhelmed by the 8.3 million pixel count at 4K.

Medium settings tell a similar story: 41.1 FPS at 1080p, 31.1 FPS at 1440p, and 19.2 FPS at 4K. The gap between 1080p and 1440p Medium is 24.3%, while the gap between 1440p and 4K Medium is 38.3%. This widening delta suggests that the GTX 1650's 128.1 GB/s memory bandwidth becomes increasingly insufficient as resolution demands more data throughput.

Ultra settings produce the most constrained results: 28.5 FPS at 1080p, 24 FPS at 1440p, and 18.1 FPS at 4K. The relatively small difference between 1080p Ultra and 1440p Ultra (15.8%) compared to the larger drop to 4K Ultra (24.6% from 1440p) indicates that at higher quality presets, the GPU's compute resources are saturated even at lower resolutions. The limiting component is clearly the GTX 1650, which sits at the 43rd percentile among all GPUs according to benchmark data.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for playable frame rates with this combo?

A: The data shows 1920x1080 Low settings achieves 56.1 FPS, which is the only measured configuration that crosses the 60 FPS threshold. At 1080p Medium, the average drops to 41.1 FPS, and at 1080p High it falls to 36.9 FPS, so 1080p with lower quality presets is the only viable path to smooth gameplay.

Q: How does the GTX 1650 compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The GTX 1650 has an average benchmark score of 8713. Its closest competitors are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile at 8746 (0.4% higher), the AMD Radeon 550X at 8749 (0.4% higher), and the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 at 8671 (0.5% lower). The performance differences are minimal, suggesting the GTX 1650 is positioned in a tightly clustered performance band.

Q: Is the CPU holding back the GPU in Control?

A: No. The Intel Core i5-14600K ranks in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 49166. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X, scores 49062 (0.2% lower). The FPS scaling pattern across resolutions shows the GTX 1650 as the limiting factor, as the CPU's 14 cores and 20 threads provide ample processing headroom.

Q: What settings preset provides the best balance at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Low settings deliver 44.4 FPS, Medium settings drop to 31.1 FPS, and High settings fall to 25 FPS. The Low preset is the only 1440p configuration that approaches playable frame rates, though even that falls short of 60 FPS.

Q: How much performance is lost from 1080p to 4K at the same settings?

A: At Low settings, the drop from 1080p to 4K is 27.9 FPS (56.1 to 28.2). At Medium, the drop is 21.9 FPS (41.1 to 19.2). At High, the drop is 20.9 FPS (36.9 to 16). At Ultra, the drop is 10.4 FPS (28.5 to 18.1). The absolute losses narrow as settings increase, but the percentage losses grow.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-14600K is a 14-core, 20-thread processor from the Core 14th Gen series, built on Intel's Raptor Lake architecture at a 10 nm process node. Its base clock runs at 3.50 GHz with a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, supported by 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU's multi-core performance is robust, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32881 and a single-core score of 4642. Passmark results show a multi-thread score of 38682 and a single-thread score of 4270.

In Control, the CPU's role appears secondary to the GPU. The measured FPS data shows that even at 1080p Low, the combo reaches only 56.1 FPS, which is far below what the i5-14600K could theoretically support. The CPU's Geekbench scores — 15846 multi-core and 2803 single-core — place it well above the thresholds needed for this 2019 Action Adventure title. The game was released on 2019-08-26, predating the CPU's 2023-10-16 release date by several years, so the processor has more than enough architectural headroom.

The CPU's Passmark physics score of 2473 and floating-point math score of 92794 further demonstrate its capacity for handling game logic and physics calculations. The 20 threads provide ample parallelism for modern game engines, though Control's demands at these settings are clearly GPU-bound. The i5-14600K's nearest rivals in overall CPU benchmark performance include the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X with a delta of 0.2% and the Intel Core i5-14600KF with a delta of -0.4%, confirming that this CPU is firmly in high-end territory.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-14600K and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 ranks 1585 out of 1636 tested combos in Control. This places the pairing in the bottom 3.1% of all tested configurations, which is a stark contrast to the individual components' standings. The CPU alone ranks in the 93rd percentile among all processors, while the GPU ranks in the 43rd percentile among all graphics cards. The massive gap between these two percentiles explains the combo's poor ranking — the GTX 1650 is a severe bottleneck that prevents the i5-14600K from contributing meaningfully to game performance.

The rank of 1585 out of 1636 indicates that nearly every other tested combination delivers better frame rates in Control. This is expected given the GPU's modest specifications: 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, 896 shading units, and a 128-bit memory bus. The CPU's strength is effectively wasted in this configuration, as the GPU cannot translate the processor's computational power into higher FPS. The data suggests that pairing this CPU with a more capable GPU would dramatically improve the combo's ranking, though such configurations are outside the scope of this analysis.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is built on the Turing architecture at a 12 nm process node, featuring the TU117 chip with 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. Its base clock runs at 1485 MHz with a boost clock of 1665 MHz, and the 4 GB GDDR5 memory operates at 2001 MHz with an effective data rate of 8 Gbps. The memory interface is 128-bit wide, yielding a bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s. The GPU's compute capabilities include 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, producing a pixel rate of 53.28 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 93.24 GTexel/s.

In Control, the GTX 1650's limitations are evident across all resolution and settings combinations. The GPU's FP32 performance of 2.984 TFLOPS is modest by modern standards, and the 4 GB VRAM capacity is likely a constraint at higher resolutions and quality settings. The GPU's benchmark scores reflect its mid-range positioning: Passmark G3D score of 7880, DirectX 12 score of 35, and Geekbench Vulkan score of 35966. Its average benchmark score of 8713 places it in the 43rd percentile overall, with nearest rivals including the RTX 3050 A Mobile (-0.4%) and AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 (-0.5%).

The measured FPS data shows the GPU's performance ceiling clearly. Even at the lowest settings and resolution, the combo cannot maintain 60 FPS, and at 4K Ultra it falls to 18.1 FPS. The GPU's 75 W TDP and lack of power connectors suggest it was designed for lightweight systems, not high-end gaming. The 128.1 GB/s bandwidth becomes a critical constraint at 4K, where the pixel throughput demands exceed what the memory subsystem can deliver.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the GTX 1650 with the i5-14600K produces its best results. Low settings yield 56.1 FPS, Medium settings yield 41.1 FPS, High settings yield 36.9 FPS, and Ultra settings yield 28.5 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 1080p shows a 49.2% reduction in frame rate, indicating that quality settings have a substantial impact on the GPU's performance envelope.

Moving to 2560x1440, the results drop significantly. Low settings produce 44.4 FPS, Medium settings produce 31.1 FPS, High settings produce 25 FPS, and Ultra settings produce 24 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra at 1440p is minimal at 4%, suggesting that the GPU hits a compute or bandwidth wall at these settings. The 1440p Low result is 20.8% lower than 1080p Low, while 1440p Ultra is 15.8% lower than 1080p Ultra.

At 3840x2160, the performance becomes marginal at best. Low settings deliver 28.2 FPS, Medium settings deliver 19.2 FPS, High settings deliver 16 FPS, and Ultra settings deliver 18.1 FPS. Interestingly, the Ultra preset at 4K outperforms High by 13.1%, which may indicate inconsistent optimization in the game's quality presets. The 4K Low result is 36.5% lower than 1440p Low, and 4K High is 36% lower than 1440p High.

The full dataset reveals that the combo never exceeds 60 FPS in any configuration, and only 1080p Low approaches playability at 56.1 FPS. The GPU's 4 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory interface are the likely culprits for the steep declines at higher resolutions, as Control's environments and effects demand increasing memory bandwidth. The data confirms that this pairing is best suited for 1080p gaming with reduced settings, with any higher resolution pushing frame rates below acceptable thresholds.