Control

The Intel Core i7-12700KF paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 presents a stark imbalance in Control, where the data indicates the GPU is the overwhelming bottleneck. Across all resolutions, the frame rate scales dramatically with settings, but the ceiling remains low enough to qualify this as a 1080p-oriented configuration.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a predictable yet severe drop in performance as resolution increases, confirming that the GTX 1650’s rendering pipeline is the limiting factor. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves an average of 55.9 FPS, which is the only playable result in the entire dataset. Moving to 1440p at the same Low settings yields 43.2 FPS, a 22.7% reduction, while 4K Low plunges to 28.6 FPS. This scaling pattern is typical of a GPU with a 128-bit memory interface and 4 GB of VRAM, as the pixel fill rate and memory bandwidth struggle to keep pace with higher resolutions.

The gap between Low and Ultra settings at each resolution further illustrates the GPU’s limitations. At 1080p, the spread from 55.9 FPS (Low) to 29.5 FPS (Ultra) is 26.4 FPS, a substantial penalty for visual fidelity. At 1440p, the spread narrows to 20.4 FPS (43.2 vs 22.8), and at 4K, it shrinks to 10.8 FPS (28.6 vs 17.8). The narrowing delta at higher resolutions suggests that the GPU is so saturated that even reducing settings cannot fully compensate for the pixel count. The data shows that the CPU, with its 12 cores and 20 threads, is never the constraint here; the GTX 1650’s 2.984 TFLOPS of FP32 compute is simply insufficient for 1440p and 4K in this title.

How This Combo Ranks

In the grand scheme of tested combinations, this pairing sits near the bottom. The comboRankInGame places it at 1581 out of 1636 tested configurations, putting it in the bottom 3.4% of all combos for Control. This rank is unsurprising given the GPU’s percentileVsAllGpus of 43, meaning it performs worse than 57% of all graphics cards. The CPU, by contrast, holds a percentileVsAllCpus of 89, placing it in the top 11% of processors. This pairing of a high-tier CPU with a low-tier GPU creates a profound mismatch; the i7-12700KF is capable of feeding far more frames than the GTX 1650 can render.

Relative to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks, the GTX 1650’s avgBenchmarkScore of 8713 is within 0.5% of the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 (8761), the AMD Radeon 550X (8749), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile (8746). The Quadro P2200 trails slightly at 8671 with a deltaPct of 0.5% against the GTX 1650. However, these synthetic similarities do not translate into playable performance in Control, as the game’s measured FPS at 4K Ultra (17.8 FPS) falls well below the 30 FPS threshold typically considered a minimum for action-adventure titles.

FAQ

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

A: The only configuration that achieves an average above 50 FPS is 1920x1080 with Low settings, hitting 55.9 FPS. Medium settings at 1080p drop to 39.6 FPS, which is playable but below the smoothness of the Low preset.

*Q: Can this system handle 1440p in Control?*

A: Yes, but with significant compromises. At 1440p Low, it averages 43.2 FPS, and High settings fall to 26.4 FPS. Ultra at 1440p manages only 22.8 FPS, which is below the threshold for a responsive experience.

Q: How does the GTX 1650 compare to its closest rivals in raw performance?

A: The GPU’s average benchmark score of 8713 is effectively tied with the RTX 3050 A Mobile (8746, -0.4% delta) and the Radeon 550X (8749, -0.4%). The Quadro P2200 scores 8671, which is 0.5% lower.

Q: Is the Intel Core i7-12700KF a bottleneck for this game?

A: No. The CPU’s percentileVsAllCpus of 89 indicates it is far more powerful than the GPU, and the measured FPS scales with resolution and settings in a way that points exclusively to GPU limitations.

Q: What is the expected frame rate at 4K Ultra?

A: The average FPS is 17.8, which is not suitable for gameplay. Even at 4K Low, the average is only 28.6 FPS, indicating this resolution is impractical for this configuration.

*Q: Does the GPU have enough VRAM for Control at high settings?*

A: The 4 GB VRAM is a limiting factor, especially at 1440p and 4K. The data shows a steep drop from Low to High at those resolutions, consistent with the GPU exceeding its memory capacity and relying on slower system memory.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete dataset for this combo in Control is as follows:

At 1920x1080, the average frame rates are 55.9 FPS on Low, 39.6 FPS on Medium, 37.4 FPS on High, and 29.5 FPS on Ultra. The jump from Low to Medium is a 16.3 FPS loss, while the difference between Medium and High is a mere 2.2 FPS, suggesting diminishing returns in that range.

At 2560x1440, the averages are 43.2 FPS on Low, 28.0 FPS on Medium, 26.4 FPS on High, and 22.8 FPS on Ultra. The Medium to High gap narrows to 1.6 FPS, and the High to Ultra drop is 3.6 FPS, indicating that the GPU is struggling to maintain any headroom.

At 3840x2160, the averages drop to 28.6 FPS on Low, 22.9 FPS on Medium, 18.3 FPS on High, and 17.8 FPS on Ultra. The difference between High and Ultra at 4K is only 0.5 FPS, which shows that the GPU is entirely saturated and cannot translate quality reductions into meaningful performance gains.

Across all resolutions, the pattern is consistent: Low settings are the only viable path to playable frame rates, and even then, only at 1080p does the average exceed 50 FPS. The 55.9 FPS at 1080p Low is the single highest result, and the 17.8 FPS at 4K Ultra is the lowest.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the definitive performance ceiling for this combo. Its 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus provides a bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s, which is sufficient for 1080p but becomes a clear liability at higher resolutions. The memory clock runs at 2001 MHz, effective 8 Gbps, and the core clock is set at 1485 MHz base with a 1665 MHz boost. These clocks are modest by modern standards, and the GPU’s 896 shading units and 32 ROPs are inadequate for the particle-heavy effects and physics simulations in Control.

The GPU’s synthetic benchmarks reinforce its position: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 305 and a Passmark G3D score of 7880 place it in the 43rd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in benchmark scores are the RTX 3050 A Mobile and Radeon 550X, both of which are similarly positioned in the low-end segment. The GTX 1650 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, so it can run Control’s modern APIs, but the raw compute power—2.984 TFLOPS FP32—is the limiting factor. The data shows that even at 1080p Low, the frame rate does not exceed 60 FPS, leaving no headroom for the CPU’s considerable potential to be utilized. This is a GPU-bound scenario in every measurable respect, and the 75 W TDP and lack of power connectors underscore its entry-level positioning.