Control

Control, the 2019 action-adventure title, presents an interesting case study for the Intel Core i7-14700F and AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT combination. The measured data shows this pairing performs best at 1080p and 1440p, with a clear shift in bottleneck behavior as resolution increases. At 4K, the system begins to struggle with the highest settings, indicating the GPU becomes the primary limiting factor. This analysis breaks down the specific roles of the CPU and GPU, examines resolution scaling, and provides a detailed look at the measured frame rates.

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

The Intel Core i7-14700F is a 20-core, 28-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. It features a substantial 33 MB of shared L3 cache and 2 MB of L2 cache per core, alongside 80 KB of L1 cache per core. This configuration places it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 53620. In synthetic tests, it scores 35122 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 4958 in single-core, alongside a Geekbench multi-core score of 19620 and a single-core score of 2429.

For Control, the CPU's role is most evident at lower resolutions where the GPU is less taxed. At 1080p Low settings, the system achieves an average of 174 FPS, which is the highest recorded frame rate across all tested configurations. This high ceiling suggests the processor is capable of feeding frames quickly when the graphical load is light. The multi-threaded performance, evidenced by a Passmark multi-thread score of 41317 and a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 35122, ensures that the game's background tasks and physics calculations are handled without introducing stutter, even when frame rates are high.

However, the data shows that the CPU is not the limiting factor in this specific game at higher resolutions. When comparing to its nearest rivals, the Core i7-14700F is only 0.6% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X and 0.8% ahead of the AMD EPYC 7313P in average benchmark score. The difference is negligible for gaming purposes. The processor's boost clock of 5.40 GHz provides strong single-thread performance, which is crucial for Control's game logic, but the frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K demonstrates that the GPU workload dominates as resolution increases. The CPU's 65 W TDP and support for both DDR4 and DDR5 memory indicate a versatile platform, but the measured FPS data suggests that this processor has ample headroom for the game, as the frame rates drop significantly more with resolution increases than they do with settings changes at a fixed resolution.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with a Navi 32 chip, manufactured on a 5 nm process by TSMC. It features 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering a bandwidth of 624.1 GB/s. The GPU has a base clock of 1295 MHz, a boost clock of 2430 MHz, and a game clock of 2124 MHz. With 3840 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, it offers a peak FP32 performance of 37.32 TFLOPS. Despite this hardware, its average benchmark score of 11627 places it in the 51st percentile of all GPUs, which is a moderate ranking.

In Control, the GPU's impact is most visible when comparing frame rates across different settings presets at the same resolution. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra settings is 78 FPS (174 vs 96), which indicates a significant GPU workload scaling. The 16 GB VRAM is more than adequate for the game, even at 4K Ultra, where the average frame rate drops to 49 FPS. This is not a VRAM capacity issue but rather a raw compute limit. The GPU's benchmark scores align with this observation: a Passmark G3D score of 24176 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 4157 show a mid-range level of performance.

The nearest rivals for this GPU are telling. The RX 7800 XT is only 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 and 1.3% ahead of the NVIDIA Tesla K20c in average benchmark score, despite being a much newer and more powerful card in most respects. This suggests that the average benchmark score may not fully capture its gaming performance, or that the score is skewed by compute-heavy tasks. In Control specifically, the measured FPS shows that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at 4K, where the average frame rate at Ultra settings (49 FPS) is only about half of what is achieved at 1080p Ultra (96 FPS). The clock speeds and memory bandwidth are sufficient for 1080p and 1440p gaming, but the 4K results indicate that the card's raw shader output is the limiting factor for this game at higher resolutions.

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

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of resolution scaling that points to the GPU as the primary bottleneck in this combination for Control. Moving from 1080p to 1440p, the average frame rates drop by a consistent margin across all settings. For High settings, the drop is from 110 FPS at 1080p to 83 FPS at 1440p, a 24.5% decrease. For Low settings, the drop is from 174 FPS to 132 FPS, a 24.1% decrease. This consistency suggests that the scaling is predominantly driven by the GPU's pixel throughput, not the CPU.

The transition from 1440p to 4K shows an even more pronounced drop. At High settings, the frame rate falls from 83 FPS to 56 FPS, a 32.5% decrease. At Low settings, it falls from 132 FPS to 89 FPS, a 32.6% decrease. This steeper drop at higher resolutions is a hallmark of GPU-bound performance. The number of pixels at 4K (3840x2160) is 2.25 times that of 1440p (2560x1440), and the frame rate reductions are roughly proportional to this increase in workload, confirming that the CPU has sufficient headroom to keep up.

The data also shows that settings changes have a smaller impact at higher resolutions. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra settings is 78 FPS (174 vs 96). At 4K, the same settings difference is only 40 FPS (89 vs 49). This indicates that at 1080p, the CPU is able to push frame rates high enough that GPU settings begin to matter more, while at 4K, the GPU is already saturated and cannot fully utilize the CPU's potential. The limiting component is clearly the GPU, especially at 4K, where even the Low preset only achieves 89 FPS, suggesting that the RX 7800 XT is the primary constraint for this game at high resolutions.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this CPU and GPU combo in Control?

A: The measured data shows 1080p is the strongest resolution, with all settings presets achieving above 96 FPS. 1440p is also viable, with the Ultra preset hitting 72 FPS, but 4K results are more mixed, with only the Low preset exceeding 60 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in benchmark scores?

A: The Intel Core i7-14700F has an average benchmark score of 53620. It is 0.6% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X and 0.8% ahead of the AMD EPYC 7313P. It is also 0.2% behind the Intel Xeon 6505P and 0.3% ahead of the Intel Xeon Phi 7290.

Q: Is the GPU's VRAM a limiting factor in Control?

A: The RX 7800 XT has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory. The measured FPS data does not indicate a VRAM limitation, as the frame rates scale consistently with resolution and settings. The 4K Ultra preset at 49 FPS is more likely limited by compute performance than memory capacity.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset achieves an average of 132 FPS, while the Ultra preset achieves an average of 72 FPS. This 60 FPS difference shows a significant GPU workload scaling with settings.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested combinations?

A: The Intel Core i7-14700F and AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT combination ranks 1254 out of 3720 tested combos for Control, placing it in the top third of all configurations.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 4K gaming?

A: At 3840x2160, the Low preset achieves an average of 89 FPS, while the Medium preset achieves 63 FPS. The High preset drops to 56 FPS, and Ultra falls to 49 FPS. For a 60 FPS target, only the Low preset is sufficient.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i7-14700F and AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT ranks 1254 out of 3720 tested combos in Control. This places it in the 66th percentile of all combinations, indicating a solid but not top-tier performance for this specific game. The rank reflects the balance between the CPU and GPU, where the processor is clearly not a bottleneck, but the GPU's mid-range standing limits the overall result.

The CPU's high percentile ranking (91st for all CPUs) is not fully translated into the combo rank, which underscores that the GPU is the limiting factor. The RX 7800 XT's 51st percentile ranking among all GPUs is more in line with the combo's performance. The data shows that this pairing is better suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, where the GPU can keep up with the CPU's output, rather than 4K, where the GPU's limitations become apparent. The rank of 1254 out of 3720 suggests that there are many other combinations that achieve higher frame rates in this game, likely featuring more powerful GPUs. However, the specific strengths of this combo, such as the CPU's multi-threaded performance and the GPU's 16 GB VRAM, provide a stable foundation for a good experience at lower resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data offers a comprehensive view of performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 174 FPS, which is the highest recorded value. The Medium preset achieves 124 FPS with a minimum of 105 FPS and a maximum of 142 FPS. The High preset reaches 110 FPS, and the Ultra preset drops to 96 FPS. All 1080p presets are well above the 60 FPS threshold, making this resolution the most comfortable for the combo.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset achieves 132 FPS, while the Medium preset hits 94 FPS with a range of 80 to 108 FPS. The High preset delivers 83 FPS, and the Ultra preset falls to 72 FPS. The 1440p results are still strong, with all presets exceeding 60 FPS, but the gap between settings widens compared to 1080p. At 3840x2160, the Low preset achieves 89 FPS, but the Medium preset drops to 63 FPS with a minimum of 54 FPS. The High preset is at 56 FPS, and the Ultra preset is at 49 FPS. The 4K results show that only the Low preset maintains a consistent 60 FPS, while the Medium preset is borderline, and the higher presets fall below the smooth gameplay threshold.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution. For 1920x1080, the Ultra preset at 96 FPS is the best choice, as it provides the highest visual quality while still maintaining a frame rate well above the 60 FPS standard. The gap between High (110 FPS) and Ultra (96 FPS) is only 14 FPS, so the visual upgrade is worth the performance cost. All presets are playable, so users can prioritize visual fidelity without worrying about frame rate drops.

For 2560x1440, the High preset at 83 FPS is the recommended balance. The Ultra preset at 72 FPS is still smooth, but the High preset offers a 11 FPS improvement with a minor visual compromise. The Medium preset at 94 FPS is also viable for those who prefer higher frame rates over visual detail. The Low preset at 132 FPS is unnecessary unless the user has a high refresh rate monitor and wants to maximize frame rate. For 3840x2160, the Low preset at 89 FPS is the only option that consistently exceeds 60 FPS. The Medium preset at 63 FPS is technically playable but has a minimum frame rate of 54 FPS, which may cause noticeable stutters. The High and Ultra presets at 56 and 49 FPS respectively are not recommended for a smooth experience. Users targeting 4K should either accept the Low preset or consider lowering the resolution to 1440p for a better balance of quality and performance.