Control

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data for Control reveals a clear and predictable scaling pattern as resolution increases, but the magnitude of the drop tells a compelling story about where the bottleneck sits in this Intel Core i7-12700K + AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT combination. At Low settings, the transition from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 sees average FPS fall from 207.6 to 158.2, a reduction of roughly 24%. Pushing further to 3840x2160 drops the average to 108.9, which is about 48% below the 1080p figure. This is a substantial performance hit that points directly at the GPU becoming increasingly stressed as pixel count grows.

The same pattern holds across other settings presets. At High settings, 1080p delivers 134.3 FPS, 1440p drops to 101.6, and 4K falls to 66.3. The percentage drop from 1080p to 4K at High is approximately 51%, almost identical to the Low-settings drop. At Medium, the numbers go from 148.4 at 1080p to 110.5 at 1440p and then 74.1 at 4K — a 50% reduction from the lowest to highest resolution. Ultra settings show the same trend: 111.4 FPS at 1080p, 84.6 at 1440p, and 56.2 at 4K, a 50% drop overall.

What is particularly revealing is that the relative drop from 1440p to 4K is consistently larger than the drop from 1080p to 1440p across all presets. For instance, at High settings, 1440p to 4K costs about 35 FPS, while 1080p to 1440p costs about 33 FPS. This accelerating degradation as resolution climbs is a hallmark of GPU-bound rendering. The RX 7900 XT's 20 GB of GDDR6 memory and 800.0 GB/s bandwidth are being taxed more heavily at 4K, and the data suggests that at 1080p, the CPU still has headroom to push higher frame rates — the 207.6 FPS Low-settings result at 1080p is far above what most displays can show, and it indicates the game is not yet fully GPU-limited at that resolution.

The takeaway is that this combo is well-balanced at 1440p but becomes decisively GPU-bound at 4K. At 1080p with Low settings, the i7-12700K's strong single-thread performance (3dmark_single_thread score of 1043) is likely keeping up with the GPU's output, but the ceiling is the graphics card. At 4K, the RX 7900 XT's raw compute — 51.48 TFLOPS FP32 and 459.6 GPixel/s pixel rate — becomes the dominant factor, and the CPU's role recedes.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core i7-12700K brings 12 cores and 20 threads to this pairing, built on the Alder Lake architecture with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. Its 25 MB of shared L3 cache and per-core L2 of 1.25 MB provide substantial fast memory for game logic. The benchmark scores reinforce that this is a high-end desktop part: the 3dmark_max_threads score of 9979 and Cinebench R23 multicore score of 29241 place it in the 89th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 35684.

For Control, which is an Action Adventure title from 2019, the CPU demands are not extreme by modern standards, but the data shows the i7-12700K is more than adequate. The 3dmark_16_threads score of 9276 suggests strong multi-threaded capability, while the 2-thread score of 2065 and single-thread score of 1043 indicate that lightly-threaded workloads — which games often present — are handled exceptionally well. The 3dmark_8_threads score of 7202 is particularly relevant, as many games of this era scale up to 8 threads effectively.

The nearestRivals data provides context: the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 has an avgScore of 35802, just 0.3% higher than the i7-12700K's 35684. The Intel Core i7-13700T scores 35468 (0.6% lower), and the Intel Core i5-14500HX scores 35940 (0.7% higher). These are all extremely close, meaning the i7-12700K is right in the expected performance band for its class. The 0.8% delta from the Intel Core i7-13800H (35416) is negligible in real-world terms.

Given that Control at 1080p Low reaches 207.6 FPS, the CPU is clearly not the limiting factor at lower resolutions. Even at 4K High, where FPS drops to 66.3, the bottleneck has shifted to the GPU. The CPU's 5.00 GHz boost clock and 12 cores provide ample headroom for the game's physics and AI systems, and the data suggests that even the most demanding scenes would not strangle the processor. The fact that FPS scales so consistently with resolution — rather than showing erratic dips that would indicate CPU stutter — is evidence that the i7-12700K is delivering stable frame pacing.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific combination of the Intel Core i7-12700K and AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT ranks 336th out of 1636 tested combos in Control. That places it in roughly the 79th percentile of all combinations tested — a solidly above-average result, but not among the elite top tier. The rank of 336 means there are 335 other CPU+GPU pairings that achieve higher average FPS in this game, which is expected given that Control is not a particularly demanding title for modern high-end hardware.

The rank is more impressive when considering that the GPU's percentileVsAllGpus is 82, meaning the RX 7900 XT outperforms 82% of all GPUs in the database. The CPU's percentileVsAllCpus of 89 is even higher. Yet the combo still lands at 336/1636, which suggests that there are combinations with even more powerful GPUs or CPUs that push higher frame rates, particularly at 1080p where the CPU matters more.

Looking at the GPU's nearestRivals, the RX 7900 XT's avgBenchmarkScore of 38358 is essentially tied with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 Mobile (38349, 0% delta) and the NVIDIA CMP 70HX (38225, 0.3% higher). The NVIDIA GeForce MX570 scores 38494 (0.4% higher), and the RTX 4080 Mobile scores 38135 (0.6% lower). These tiny deltas mean the RX 7900 XT is performance-class-matched with those cards, and the combo rank reflects the GPU's mid-80s percentile standing.

The rank of 336 out of 1636 is a strong showing for a pairing where neither component is the absolute fastest available. It indicates that this combo delivers high frame rates across all tested settings and resolutions, with the weakest result being 56.2 FPS at 4K Ultra — still playable — and the strongest being 207.6 FPS at 1080p Low. The data implies that users with high-refresh 1440p monitors will be well served, and even 4K gamers can achieve smooth play with settings adjustments.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The measured FPS table provides 12 data points covering three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the results are: Low averages 207.6 FPS, Medium averages 148.4 FPS, High averages 134.3 FPS, and Ultra averages 111.4 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra at 1080p is 96.2 FPS, showing that settings have a massive impact at this resolution. The jump from Low to Medium costs 59.2 FPS, while Medium to High costs only 14.1 FPS, and High to Ultra costs 22.9 FPS. This non-linear scaling is interesting: the biggest single drop comes from the Low to Medium transition, after which the incremental costs are smaller.

At 2560x1440, the numbers are: Low averages 158.2 FPS, Medium averages 110.5 FPS, High averages 101.6 FPS, and Ultra averages 84.6 FPS. The spread here is 73.6 FPS, narrower than at 1080p. The Low to Medium drop is 47.7 FPS, Medium to High is 8.9 FPS, and High to Ultra is 17.0 FPS. The pattern of a large Low-to-Medium gap followed by smaller steps persists, but the absolute differences shrink as resolution rises.

At 3840x2160, the results are: Low averages 108.9 FPS, Medium averages 74.1 FPS, High averages 66.3 FPS, and Ultra averages 56.2 FPS. The spread is 52.7 FPS, the smallest of the three resolutions. Low to Medium costs 34.8 FPS, Medium to High costs 7.8 FPS, and High to Ultra costs 10.1 FPS. The diminishing returns of settings increases are most pronounced at 4K, where even Low settings only reach 108.9 FPS — still above 60, but far from the 207.6 FPS available at 1080p.

Cross-referencing the resolutions at each setting shows consistent scaling. At Low, 1080p to 1440p drops 49.4 FPS, and 1440p to 4K drops 49.3 FPS — almost perfectly linear. At Medium, the drops are 37.9 FPS and 36.4 FPS respectively. At High, 32.7 FPS and 35.3 FPS. At Ultra, 26.8 FPS and 28.4 FPS. This near-constant absolute drop per resolution step, regardless of preset, is a signature of GPU-bound performance where the pixel count is the dominant variable.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT is the workhorse in this pairing, and its specifications align well with the measured results. The GPU features 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 320-bit bus, delivering 800.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This is ample for Control, a 2019 title that does not have extreme VRAM demands, so memory capacity is unlikely to be a limiting factor at any resolution tested. The 20 GB allocation means even at 4K Ultra, the game's textures and assets fit comfortably within the frame buffer.

The clock behavior is worth examining. The base clock is 1387 MHz, the game clock is 2025 MHz, and the boost clock reaches 2394 MHz. The effective memory speed of 20 Gbps is standard for GDDR6. The difference between base and boost — over 1000 MHz — indicates that the card can dynamically scale its frequency depending on load and thermals. In a game like Control, the GPU is likely running closer to boost clocks under sustained load, which explains why 4K Ultra still achieves 56.2 FPS despite the heavy pixel workload.

The compute specifications are substantial: 5376 shading units, 336 TMUs, and 192 ROPs. The pixel rate of 459.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 804.4 GTexel/s are directly relevant to how fast the card can fill and texture the screen. The FP32 performance of 51.48 TFLOPS and FP16 of 103.0 TFLOPS (2:1 rate) indicate strong raw compute for the game's physics and post-processing effects. The 84 ray tracing cores are present, though Control's implementation of RT is not the primary driver of the tested settings.

The GPU's avgBenchmarkScore of 38358 places it in the 82nd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearestRivals — the RTX 5080 Mobile, CMP 70HX, MX570, and RTX 4080 Mobile — all score within 0.6% of the RX 7900 XT, indicating that this card's performance is well-established. The 3dmark_steel_nomad_dx12 score of 5623 is a modern DX12 benchmark, and the geekbench_vulkan score of 160119 shows strong Vulkan API performance, which is relevant for games that use that API. The passmark_g3d score of 29009 and passmark_gpu_compute of 16828 round out the picture of a capable, high-end GPU.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

The measured data provides clear guidance on settings presets. At 1080p, all presets exceed 100 FPS, with Ultra at 111.4 FPS being perfectly smooth. Given that the game is likely GPU-bound at this resolution, there is little reason to drop below High or Ultra unless pushing for the maximum possible frame rate on a 240 Hz display. Low at 207.6 FPS is overkill for most displays, and the visual quality loss would be substantial.

At 1440p, the situation becomes more nuanced. High delivers 101.6 FPS, which is excellent for most high-refresh monitors. Ultra drops to 84.6 FPS, still very smooth, and Medium offers 110.5 FPS. The data suggests that High is the sweet spot for 1440p: it maintains triple-digit FPS while presumably retaining most visual fidelity. Ultra's 84.6 FPS is acceptable but offers diminishing returns over High for an 8.9 FPS difference between Medium and High versus 17.0 FPS between High and Ultra.

At 4K, the recommendations change significantly. Ultra averages 56.2 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold many players consider minimum for smooth play. High at 66.3 FPS crosses that threshold, and Medium at 74.1 FPS provides more headroom. Low at 108.9 FPS is the only preset that delivers a truly comfortable 4K experience. For 4K players, the data points to High as the best balance — it stays above 60 FPS, and the 10.1 FPS cost of moving from High to Ultra is not worth the visual gain. Medium would be the safer choice for demanding scenes where average FPS might dip.

The most interesting finding is the consistent gap between Low and Medium across all resolutions. At 1080p, the gap is 59.2 FPS; at 1440p, 47.7 FPS; at 4K, 34.8 FPS. This suggests that Low settings remove a significant rendering load — likely shadows, reflections, and post-processing — that Medium re-enables. The Medium-to-High gap is always small (7.8-14.1 FPS), implying that High adds relatively little cost over Medium. Therefore, Medium is the minimum recommended preset for visual quality, and High is the best overall choice across all resolutions when prioritizing frame rate stability.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo achieves in Control?

A: The highest measured average FPS is 207.6, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The lowest is 56.2 FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings.

Q: How does this combo rank against other tested CPU+GPU combinations in Control?

A: This combo ranks 336th out of 1636 tested combinations, placing it in roughly the 79th percentile of all tested pairings. The CPU is in the 89th percentile of all CPUs, and the GPU is in the 82nd percentile of all GPUs.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor at 1440p High settings?

A: At 2560x1440 High, the combo averages 101.6 FPS. Given that the FPS drops by about 24% from 1080p to 1440p and another 35% from 1440p to 4K, the data indicates the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck as resolution increases. The CPU's 5.00 GHz boost clock and 12 cores provide sufficient headroom.

Q: What is the difference between Low and Ultra settings at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, Low averages 108.9 FPS while Ultra averages 56.2 FPS, a difference of 52.7 FPS. This means Ultra settings nearly halve the frame rate compared to Low at 4K.

Q: How does the RX 7900 XT's benchmark score compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GPU's avgBenchmarkScore is 38358. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 Mobile, scores 38349 with a deltaPct of 0%. The NVIDIA CMP 70HX scores 38225 (0.3% higher), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile scores 38135 (0.6% lower).

Q: Is 4K Ultra settings playable with this combination?

A: The measured average FPS at 3840x2160 Ultra is 56.2 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold. However, High settings at 4K average 66.3 FPS, which is above 60 FPS and would provide a smoother experience. Medium at 74.1 FPS offers even more headroom.