Control

The Intel Core i7-13700K paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT delivers a robust, high-refresh-rate experience in Control, though the data reveals a clear ceiling at 4K Ultra settings. The benchmark results show a system that is well-balanced for 1440p gaming, with performance scaling predictably across the preset ladder.

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

The Intel Core i7-13700K is a 16-core, 24-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process node. Its base clock is 3.40 GHz, boosting up to 5.40 GHz, with a TDP of 125 W. This is a high-end desktop part with a large 30 MB shared L3 cache and 2 MB per-core L2 cache, alongside 80 KB per-core L1 cache. The CPU supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory across a dual-channel interface, and its 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes provide ample bandwidth for the GPU.

In the context of Control, the CPU's role appears to be feeding the GPU sufficiently at lower resolutions, but the frame rate data indicates that the burden shifts heavily to the graphics card as resolution increases. At 1920x1080, the average frame rates range from 79.1 FPS at Ultra to 140.2 FPS at Low. The 1080p Low result of 140.2 FPS suggests that the CPU can push well beyond 140 frames per second when the GPU is not the bottleneck. However, the single-thread performance, as measured by a 3dmark_single_thread score of 1136, is critical for game logic and draw calls, and it appears adequate for this title. The multi-threaded capability, with a 3dmark_max_threads score of 12412, is substantial, but Control's engine may not fully utilize all 24 threads; the 8-thread score of 8193 is more relevant to gaming workloads. The CPU's percentile rank of 93 versus all CPUs indicates it is in the top tier of processors, which is consistent with the high frame rates observed at 1080p. The data shows a 50.1 FPS jump from 1080p Ultra (79.1 FPS) to 1080p Low (140.2 FPS), which is a significant swing that highlights the GPU's dominance in this pairing.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific combination of the Intel Core i7-13700K and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT ranks 894 out of 1636 tested combos in the database for Control. This places the combo in the middle of the pack, which might seem surprising given the individual component scores. The CPU alone sits at the 93rd percentile, while the GPU sits at the 77th percentile, but the combination's rank suggests that the pairing is not perfectly optimized for this particular title. The rank of 894 out of 1636 combos means that roughly 54% of tested systems perform better, and 46% perform worse. This mid-pack ranking is likely due to the GPU being the limiting factor at higher resolutions and settings, preventing the high-end CPU from fully expressing its capability. The data indicates that the combo is not in the top tier for Control, but it is also far from the bottom, representing a competent, mainstream high-performance setup.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: What is the average frame rate at 2560x1440 with High settings?

A: The measured average FPS at 2560x1440 with High settings is 68.9 FPS.

Q: Does the combo achieve a 60 FPS average at 4K resolution?

A: No. At 3840x2160, the average frame rates are 72.1 FPS at Low settings, 50.0 FPS at Medium, 47.5 FPS at High, and 40.4 FPS at Ultra. Only the Low preset surpasses 60 FPS.

Q: What is the difference in average FPS between 1080p Low and 1440p Low?

A: At 1920x1080 Low, the average is 140.2 FPS, while at 2560x1440 Low, the average is 105.9 FPS. This represents a 34.3 FPS drop when moving from 1080p to 1440p at the Low preset.

Q: How does the GPU's performance rank compared to other graphics cards?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT has a percentile rank of 77 versus all GPUs, indicating it performs better than 77% of tested graphics cards in the benchmark database.

Q: What is the average FPS at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings?

A: The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings is 79.1 FPS. This is a playable frame rate, but it is significantly lower than the 140.2 FPS achieved at Low settings.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more likely to be the bottleneck at 4K Ultra?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the bottleneck. At 3840x2160 Ultra, the combo achieves only 40.4 FPS, which is a substantial drop from the 79.1 FPS at 1080p Ultra. This large decrease with increasing resolution points to the GPU's rendering limits rather than CPU constraints.

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

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of performance scaling across three resolutions and four quality presets. At 1920x1080, the combo delivers an average of 140.2 FPS on Low, 100.0 FPS on Medium, 90.1 FPS on High, and 79.1 FPS on Ultra. The jump from Low to Medium is a 40.2 FPS drop, while the step from High to Ultra is a more modest 11.0 FPS reduction. This indicates that the Low preset is significantly less demanding, likely reducing shadow quality and texture resolution, which frees up GPU resources.

Moving to 2560x1440, the average frame rates are 105.9 FPS on Low, 78.8 FPS on Medium, 68.9 FPS on High, and 57.8 FPS on Ultra. The transition from 1080p to 1440p at High settings results in a 21.2 FPS decrease, from 90.1 FPS to 68.9 FPS. At 1440p, only the Low and Medium presets maintain an average above 60 FPS, with High falling slightly below at 68.9 FPS and Ultra dropping to 57.8 FPS. This suggests that 1440p High is the edge of comfortable playability for this combo.

At 3840x2160, the performance drops significantly. The average FPS is 72.1 on Low, 50.0 on Medium, 47.5 on High, and 40.4 on Ultra. The Low preset at 4K is the only one that remains above the 60 FPS threshold. The difference between Medium and High at 4K is minimal, at 2.5 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is 7.1 FPS. The 4K results show a clear pattern: the GPU is heavily taxed, and the CPU's high clocks cannot compensate for the rendering load. The overall trend across all resolutions is that the Low preset offers roughly double the frame rate of the Ultra preset, highlighting the dramatic impact of quality settings on this hardware combination.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture using a 7 nm process, with a die size of 335 mm² and 17,200 million transistors. It features 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 384.0 GB/s. The GPU has a base clock of 2321 MHz, a game clock of 2424 MHz, and a boost clock of 2581 MHz. Its 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operations pipelines deliver a pixel rate of 165.2 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 413.0 GTexel/s. The card is rated for a TDP of 230 W and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6.

In Control, the GPU's 12 GB VRAM is ample for the textures at all tested settings, as the game's release in 2019 predates the higher VRAM demands of newer titles. The 384.0 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient for the 192-bit bus, but the data suggests that the raw compute power of 13.21 TFLOPS FP32 is the limiting factor. The frame rates at 3840x2160 Ultra (40.4 FPS) and High (47.5 FPS) indicate that the GPU is working at its limits. The GPU's percentile rank of 77 versus all GPUs places it above average, and its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6800, is only 0.7% ahead in average benchmark score. The fact that the RX 6700 XT's average benchmark score is 33721, compared to the RX 6800's 33493, shows that it is competitive with higher-tier cards in synthetic tests, but the real-world Control results show a clear performance ceiling at high resolutions. The 16 Gbps effective memory speed is a key specification, and the boost clock of 2581 MHz is high, yet the card cannot maintain 60 FPS at 4K Ultra.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For a 60 FPS target, the combo can achieve it at 1920x1080 with all presets, as even Ultra delivers 79.1 FPS. At 2560x1440, the Medium preset (78.8 FPS) and High preset (68.9 FPS) both comfortably exceed 60 FPS, making High the best choice for visual fidelity without sacrificing smoothness. The Ultra preset at 1440p drops to 57.8 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold, so it is not recommended for a strict 60 FPS experience.

At 3840x2160, the data shows that only the Low preset (72.1 FPS) maintains an average above 60 FPS. The Medium preset (50.0 FPS) and High preset (47.5 FPS) are playable but will exhibit noticeable stutter on a standard 60 Hz display. The Ultra preset (40.4 FPS) is not recommended for 4K gaming. For the best balance of visual quality and performance, the High preset at 2560x1440 is the sweet spot, offering 68.9 FPS. This preset likely includes high-quality textures and effects without the heavy computational cost of Ultra. If the user prioritizes a higher frame rate for a 144 Hz monitor, the Low preset at 1080p (140.2 FPS) is the only option that approaches that refresh rate. The Medium preset at 1440p (78.8 FPS) also provides a solid experience for 75 Hz displays. The data clearly indicates that the Ultra preset is the most demanding, and the performance cost is not justified at higher resolutions, as the difference between High and Ultra at 1440p is only 11.1 FPS, while the visual difference is often negligible in fast-paced action.