Control

The Intel Core i7-12700KF paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti presents a classic high-end CPU pairing with a previous-generation flagship GPU. In Control, this combination delivers a playable experience across most settings, though the data reveals a clear bottleneck shift depending on resolution. This analysis breaks down the measured performance, component roles, and optimal configurations based strictly on the provided benchmark data.

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

The Intel Core i7-12700KF is a 12-core, 20-thread processor from the Alder Lake architecture, built on a 10 nm process. It operates at a base clock of 3.60 GHz and boosts up to 5.00 GHz, with a 25 MB shared L3 cache. The CPU’s benchmark profile shows strong multi-threaded capability, scoring 12,111 in Cinebench R20 multi-core and 28,838 in Cinebench R23 multi-core. Single-thread performance is equally robust, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4,071. These numbers place the CPU in the 85th percentile among all tested processors.

In Control, the CPU’s influence is most apparent at lower resolutions where the GPU is less taxed. At 1080p Low settings, the system achieves 133 FPS average, a figure that suggests the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU well beyond the 60 FPS threshold. The high boost clock of 5.00 GHz likely contributes to this, as Control’s physics and particle systems respond well to strong single-thread performance. The 20 threads also provide headroom for background tasks and the game’s asynchronous compute workloads, though the measured FPS data indicates that frame rates scale almost entirely with settings and resolution changes rather than CPU-bound variations.

Comparing the i7-12700KF to its nearest rivals underscores its positioning. The Intel Core i7-13700T scores 35,403 on average, a mere 0.1% difference, while the Intel Core i5-13600T is 0.2% behind. The Intel Core i7-12700K is effectively identical, sitting 0.2% ahead. This means the i7-12700KF is not a performance outlier; it sits squarely in a cluster of capable mid-to-high-range CPUs. For Control, this translates to consistent frame pacing at 1080p and 1440p, where the CPU is rarely the limiting factor. The benchmark data shows no scenario where CPU load appears to cap FPS, as even the most demanding Ultra settings at 4K drop to 37 FPS, a figure far below what the CPU could theoretically support.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is a Pascal-architecture GPU with 11 GB of GDDR5X memory on a 352-bit bus, providing 484.4 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock is 1481 MHz with a boost clock of 1582 MHz, and it features 3,584 shading units. The GPU’s compute capability is rated at 11.34 TFLOPS FP32, and its PassMark G3D score of 18,600 places it in the 58th percentile of all GPUs. This is a formidable card for its era, but it is clearly the limiting component in this pairing for Control.

The measured FPS data confirms this: at 1080p Low, the system hits 133 FPS, but at 4K Ultra, it falls to 37 FPS. The 11 GB VRAM is sufficient for Control’s textures at all settings, as the game’s requirements are modest by modern standards. However, the GPU’s raw compute power dictates the frame rates. At 1440p High, the average FPS is 64, and at 1080p High, it is 84. These numbers show a clear linear relationship between resolution and performance, typical of a GPU-bound scenario. The GTX 1080 Ti’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R9 M380 (0.2% higher avg score) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (1.7% higher avg score), indicating it performs near the RTX 2060 level, though the 1080 Ti’s higher VRAM and bandwidth give it an edge in texture-heavy scenes.

The GPU’s boost clock of 1582 MHz is modest compared to newer cards, but the 484.4 GB/s bandwidth ensures that memory throughput is not a bottleneck at 1080p and 1440p. At 4K, the pixel rate of 139.2 GPixel/s becomes more critical, and the data shows the card struggles to maintain 60 FPS at any setting above Low. The GTX 1080 Ti is a capable 1080p and 1440p card for this title, but it lacks the headroom for 4K gaming at high fidelity.

FAQ

*Q: Can this system run Control at 60 FPS on High settings at 1440p?*

A: No. The measured data shows an average of 64 FPS at 1440p High, which is above 60 FPS, but the margin is slim. The average of 64 suggests that while it can exceed 60 FPS, frame drops are possible in demanding scenes, as the Medium preset at 1440p shows a minimum of 61 FPS.

Q: What is the best resolution for a smooth 60+ FPS experience with this combo?

A: Based on the data, 1080p is the only resolution where all settings maintain an average above 60 FPS. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 73 FPS, while 1440p High averages 64 FPS. For consistent 60 FPS, 1080p with High or Ultra settings is the safest choice.

Q: How much performance is gained by dropping from Ultra to Low at 1080p?

A: The difference is substantial. At 1080p, Low settings yield 133 FPS average, while Ultra yields 73 FPS. This represents a performance increase of approximately 82% when moving from Ultra to Low, indicating that settings have a large impact on this GPU.

*Q: Is the GTX 1080 Ti a bottleneck at 4K in Control?*

A: Yes. At 4K, the highest average FPS recorded is 68 at Low settings, and it drops to 43 at High and 37 at Ultra. The GPU’s compute and memory bandwidth are insufficient to maintain high frame rates at 4K, making it the definitive limiting factor at this resolution.

Q: Does the i7-12700KF hold the GTX 1080 Ti back in any tested scenario?

A: The data does not indicate a CPU bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 133 FPS, and at 1440p Medium, it averages 72 FPS. These figures suggest the CPU provides ample headroom, as performance scales inversely with resolution and settings, which are GPU-dependent variables.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded across all tested configurations?

A: The lowest minimum FPS recorded is 41 at 4K Medium settings. The Medium preset is the only one for which minimum FPS data is provided, showing 41 at 4K, 61 at 1440p, and 80 at 1080p.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The benchmark data provides average FPS for all resolution and settings combinations, with minimum and maximum FPS recorded only for the Medium preset at each resolution. At 1080p, the Low preset achieves 133 FPS average, which drops to 95 FPS on Medium (with a minimum of 80 and maximum of 109), 84 FPS on High, and 73 FPS on Ultra. This shows a steady decline as visual fidelity increases, with the gap between Low and Ultra being 60 FPS.

At 1440p, the pattern continues but with lower absolute numbers. Low settings produce 101 FPS average, Medium yields 72 FPS (minimum 61, maximum 82), High drops to 64 FPS, and Ultra falls to 55 FPS. The 1440p numbers indicate that High settings barely clear the 60 FPS mark, while Ultra falls below it. The minimum FPS of 61 on Medium confirms that frame drops can occur, but the average remains above 60.

At 4K, performance takes a significant hit. Low settings average 68 FPS, which is the only 4K configuration to exceed 60 FPS. Medium averages 48 FPS (minimum 41, maximum 56), High averages 43 FPS, and Ultra averages 37 FPS. None of the 4K settings above Low provide a consistently smooth experience, with Ultra dipping to 37 FPS, which is barely playable for a fast-paced action game.

The Medium preset data is particularly informative because it includes min/max values. At 1080p, the range is 80–109 FPS, indicating a 29 FPS variance. At 1440p, the range is 61–82 FPS, a 21 FPS variance. At 4K, the range is 41–56 FPS, a 15 FPS variance. This suggests that as resolution increases, frame pacing becomes more stable, likely because the GPU is consistently saturated, reducing CPU-induced frame time spikes.

Resolution Scaling

The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is steep, confirming that the GTX 1080 Ti is the primary limiting component. At High settings, the system averages 84 FPS at 1080p, 64 FPS at 1440p, and 43 FPS at 4K. This represents a 24% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a 33% drop from 1440p to 4K. The scaling is not linear, with the 4K resolution imposing a disproportionately heavy load.

At Low settings, the scaling is similar: 133 FPS at 1080p, 101 FPS at 1440p, and 68 FPS at 4K. The percentage drops are 24% and 33%, respectively, matching the High preset’s scaling almost exactly. This consistent scaling across settings indicates that the GPU’s pixel throughput is the bottleneck, as resolution increases require exponentially more pixel work.

The implication is clear: the i7-12700KF’s performance headroom is not being utilized at higher resolutions. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect to see similar FPS numbers across resolutions, but the data shows a clear and consistent decline. At 1080p, the system is likely still GPU-bound at Ultra, given that the 73 FPS average is well below what the CPU could deliver. The 1080p Low result of 133 FPS suggests that even at this resolution, the GPU is the constraint, as a CPU-bound scenario would show frame rates limited by the processor’s max thread performance, which is not evident here.

Settings Recommendations

For a 60 FPS target, the data suggests that 1080p is the only resolution where all presets meet or exceed this threshold. At 1080p, even Ultra settings average 73 FPS, providing a comfortable margin. However, for a smoother experience with higher frame rates, dropping to High at 1080p yields 84 FPS, a 15% improvement over Ultra with minimal visual impact. The Medium preset at 1080p offers 95 FPS, but the visual downgrade may not be worth the extra 11 FPS over High.

At 1440p, the choice is more constrained. High settings average 64 FPS, which is above 60 but with a narrow margin. The Medium preset averages 72 FPS and has a minimum of 61 FPS, making it the safer option for maintaining a consistent 60 FPS experience. Ultra at 1440p falls to 55 FPS, which is below the target. For 1440p gaming, Medium is the recommended preset, as it provides the best balance of performance and visual quality based on the measured data.

At 4K, no preset above Low achieves 60 FPS. Low settings average 68 FPS, which is playable but visually compromised. Medium drops to 48 FPS, and High to 43 FPS, making these unsuitable for smooth gameplay. If 4K is a requirement, Low settings are the only viable option, but the visual trade-off is significant. For most users, 1440p Medium or 1080p High/Ultra will provide the best experience, depending on display capabilities.

The data also shows that the Medium preset at 1440p has a minimum FPS of 61, which is just above the 60 FPS line. This indicates that occasional dips below 60 are possible, but the average of 72 FPS provides enough buffer that these dips should be rare. In contrast, 1440p High has no minimum data, but the average of 64 FPS suggests less headroom for frame spikes.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i7-12700KF + NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti combination ranks 2,090 out of 3,720 tested combos in Control. This places it in the 56th percentile of all tested systems, indicating that it performs above the median but is far from the top tier. The ranking reflects the GPU’s age, as newer cards with higher compute capabilities would push this combo lower in the standings.

The rank is consistent with the measured performance. The system can handle 1080p Ultra at 73 FPS and 1440p Medium at 72 FPS, which are solid results but not exceptional. The CPU’s high percentile (85th) is offset by the GPU’s more modest percentile (58th), resulting in a combined ranking that reflects the weaker component. The GTX 1080 Ti’s nearest rivals, such as the RTX 2060 with a 1.7% higher average score, suggest that the GPU is the limiting factor in determining this combo’s overall standing.

In the context of Control specifically, this combo is well-suited for 1080p gaming with high settings, and it can manage 1440p with adjusted settings. The 4K performance is inadequate for a smooth experience, which is expected given the GPU’s capabilities. The rank of 2,090 out of 3,720 is a reasonable outcome for a system pairing a modern high-end CPU with a previous-generation flagship GPU. The data indicates that users seeking higher rankings would need to upgrade the GPU, as the CPU provides ample headroom for more powerful graphics cards.