Control

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for Control shows a clear pattern: this combination of the Intel Core i5-14600KF and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 becomes progressively more GPU-bound as resolution increases. At 1920x1080 with Ultra settings, the average frame rate is 87.1 FPS, while dropping to Low settings at the same resolution yields 159.1 FPS — a substantial 72 FPS swing that indicates the CPU has significant headroom to feed the GPU at lower graphical loads. This is a strong signal that the RTX 3070 is the primary limiter in most scenarios, not the 14-core processor.

Moving to 2560x1440, the scaling pattern tightens. Ultra settings produce 63.7 FPS, while Low settings reach 122.4 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra narrows from 72 FPS at 1080p to 58.7 FPS at 1440p, showing that pixel count is beginning to constrain the GPU more heavily. At 3840x2160, the story becomes unambiguous: Ultra settings deliver just 44.2 FPS, High settings 53.5 FPS, and even Low settings only reach 83.1 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is 38.9 FPS, dramatically compressed compared to the 1080p spread.

The data indicates that at 1080p, the CPU still matters — the i5-14600KF's 5.30 GHz boost clock and 20 threads keep frame rates high even when the GPU is under lighter load. However, the RTX 3070's 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth become the deciding factor at 1440p and especially 4K. The 4K Ultra result of 44.2 FPS sits below the 60 FPS threshold many users target, while 4K Medium at 60.3 FPS barely crosses it. This pattern strongly suggests that players wanting smooth 4K performance should either lower settings or consider that the GPU is the limiting component in this pairing.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to play Control with this CPU-GPU combo for a high refresh rate experience?

A: At 1920x1080, all four settings presets exceed 87 FPS, with Low reaching 159.1 FPS. This makes 1080p the only resolution where the combo consistently delivers above 60 FPS across every preset, and the only one approaching 144 Hz territory.

Q: How does the RTX 3070's 8 GB VRAM affect 4K performance in Control?

A: The 4K results show 44.2 FPS on Ultra and 53.5 FPS on High, indicating that the 8 GB memory capacity and 256-bit bus are strained at this resolution. The jump from Medium (60.3 FPS) to Low (83.1 FPS) suggests that texture and memory-heavy settings have outsized impact at 3840x2160.

Q: Is the i5-14600KF holding back the RTX 3070 in this game?

A: Benchmark results indicate no significant CPU bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 159.1 FPS, which is near the practical limit for many displays and shows the processor can feed the GPU adequately. The CPU's 93rd percentile ranking among all CPUs further supports that it is not the limiting factor.

Q: Should I use Medium or High settings at 1440p?

A: Medium delivers 83.3 FPS, while High drops to 74.1 FPS. Both are playable, but Meditm provides a 9.2 FPS advantage — roughly 12% higher frame rate — which may be worth the visual compromise depending on your preference for smoothness over fidelity.

Q: How does this combo's overall ranking in Control compare to other tested configurations?

A: The combination ranks 738th out of 1636 tested combos in Control, placing it in the 55th percentile of all configurations. This means it outperforms the majority of systems but sits below the top tier, consistent with its mid-range GPU and high-end CPU pairing.

Q: Can this system handle Ultra settings at any resolution?

A: Ultra settings are playable at 1080p (87.1 FPS) and 1440p (63.7 FPS), but at 4K the 44.2 FPS result falls below the common 60 FPS target. If you insist on Ultra, 1440p is the highest resolution that maintains a comfortable frame rate.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-14600KF brings 14 cores and 20 threads to Control, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. This is a Raptor Lake Refresh part on the Intel Socket 1700 platform, built on Intel's 10 nm process. The processor's 24 MB of shared L3 cache and 2 MB per-core L2 cache provide ample bandwidth for game logic and physics calculations, which Control uses heavily given its action-adventure nature.

Benchmark results for the CPU place it in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 49367. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core i5-14600K, scores 49166 — a mere 0.4% difference, making them effectively equivalent in compute performance. The AMD Ryzen 9 5950X trails by 0.6%, and the AMD EPYC 4345P leads by 0.5%, but these margins are within noise for gaming workloads.

In the context of Control's measured FPS, the CPU's role is best understood through the Low-settings results. At 1080p Low, the combo produces 159.1 FPS, which is the highest frame rate in the entire dataset. This indicates the processor can sustain very high frame rates when the GPU is not the bottleneck. The 20 threads help with DirectX 12's draw call handling and the game's asynchronous physics, but the data shows that even at 1080p High (99.2 FPS), the GPU is still the primary constraint — the CPU would need to be severely underpowered to drop below 60 FPS in this title.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the i5-14600KF and RTX 3070 sits at rank 738 out of 1636 tested combos in Control, placing it squarely in the upper-middle tier of the database. This ranking is notable because the CPU is a top-tier processor (93rd percentile), while the GPU is more mid-range (72nd percentile among all GPUs). The performance distribution suggests that in Control, the GPU's limitations pull the overall ranking down from what the CPU alone would achieve.

Comparatively, the RTX 3070's nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT, scores 0.9% higher in average GPU benchmarks, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti scores 1% higher. These are tight margins, but the RTX 3070's advantage in modern features like DirectX 12 Ultimate and ray tracing cores (46 RT cores) likely explains why it remains competitive despite being end-of-life (production status). The combo's 738th rank out of 1636 means it beats roughly 55% of all tested systems — a solid result for 1440p gaming but one that falls short of high-refresh 4K territory.

Settings Recommendations

For 1920x1080, the data supports using Ultra settings unconditionally. The 87.1 FPS average is well above the 60 FPS floor, and the visual fidelity gain from Ultra over High (99.2 FPS) is worth the 12.1 FPS cost. Even at Ultra, the frame rate remains smooth for most displays.

At 2560x1440, the choice becomes more nuanced. Ultra delivers 63.7 FPS, which is playable but leaves little headroom for demanding scenes. High at 74.1 FPS provides a better safety margin, while Medium at 83.3 FPS is the sweet spot for players prioritizing frame rate consistency. The data suggests High is the best overall recommendation for 1440p — it stays above 70 FPS while retaining most visual quality.

For 3840x2160, the recommendation is to avoid Ultra entirely. The 44.2 FPS result is below the playable threshold for most users. High at 53.5 FPS is marginal, but Medium at 60.3 FPS finally crosses the 60 FPS line. Low at 83.1 FPS offers the smoothest 4K experience but at significant visual cost. Given the 8 GB VRAM limitation, Medium is the recommended 4K preset — it maintains 60 FPS while keeping memory usage reasonable.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full preset ladder shows: Low 159.1 FPS, Medium 111.6 FPS, High 99.2 FPS, Ultra 87.1 FPS. The step from Low to Medium costs 47.5 FPS (a 29.9% reduction), while the step from High to Ultra costs only 12.1 FPS (a 12.2% reduction). This nonlinear scaling indicates that Medium settings introduce significant graphical features that impact the GPU heavily, while Ultra adds diminishing returns.

At 2560x1440, the results are: Low 122.4 FPS, Medium 83.3 FPS, High 74.1 FPS, Ultra 63.7 FPS. The Low-to-Medium drop is 39.1 FPS, slightly smaller than at 1080p, while the High-to-Ultra drop is 10.4 FPS. The overall range from Low to Ultra is 58.7 FPS, showing that resolution scaling compresses the settings impact.

At 3840x2160, the results are: Low 83.1 FPS, Medium 60.3 FPS, High 53.5 FPS, Ultra 44.2 FPS. The Low-to-Medium drop is 22.8 FPS, and the High-to-Ultra drop is 9.3 FPS. The total spread is just 38.9 FPS, confirming that at 4K, the GPU is saturated even at Low settings — the 83.1 FPS Low result is lower than the 1080p Ultra result of 87.1 FPS.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 is built on the GA104 chip using Samsung's 8 nm process, with 17,400 million transistors on a 392 mm² die. Its 5888 shading units, 184 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs deliver a peak FP32 performance of 20.31 TFLOPS. The card operates at a base clock of 1500 MHz and boost clock of 1725 MHz, with memory running at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) across a 256-bit bus for 448.0 GB/s bandwidth.

In Control, the GPU's 8 GB GDDR6 memory is the defining constraint at high resolutions. The 4K Ultra result of 44.2 FPS suggests the texture buffer is being exceeded, forcing the card to swap data. The GPU's 72nd percentile ranking among all GPUs places it below the top tier, and its average benchmark score of 28238 is nearly matched by the AMD FirePro S7150 (28409, a 0.6% difference) and the GTX 980 Ti (27956, a 1% difference). These close scores indicate the RTX 3070 is competitive with older high-end cards but lacks the headroom of newer GPUs.

The 46 ray tracing cores and 184 tensor cores give the RTX 3070 capabilities that older cards like the GTX 980 Ti lack, which is relevant for Control's visual effects. However, the measured FPS data shows that rasterization performance is the primary factor — the card's 165.6 GPixel/s pixel rate and 317.4 GTexel/s texture rate are the figures that matter most for this game's frame rates. The GPU's end-of-life production status and 220 W TDP suggest it remains a capable 1080p and 1440p card, but 4K Ultra is beyond its comfortable range in Control, as the data clearly demonstrates.