Control

Control, Remedy’s 2019 action-adventure, remains a demanding showcase for hardware due to its physics-heavy environments and real-time ray tracing options. This analysis focuses specifically on the combination of the Intel Core i7-14700F processor and the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT graphics card, using measured frame rate data to characterize how this pairing behaves across resolutions and settings. The data reveals a system that is well-balanced at lower resolutions but becomes increasingly GPU-limited as pixel count rises, with specific performance cliffs tied to quality presets.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and predictable scaling pattern as resolution increases, but the magnitude of the drop varies significantly by settings preset. At the Low preset, the average frame rate falls from 193 FPS at 1920x1080 to 146 FPS at 2560x1440, a reduction of approximately 24%. Scaling that same Low preset from 1440p to 3840x2160 brings the average down to 98 FPS, another 33% drop. This indicates that even at Low settings, the RX 9070 XT’s rendering workload scales heavily with pixel count, though the absolute numbers remain very playable at 4K.

The High preset tells a steeper story. At 1080p, the combo produces 122 FPS average, which falls to 92 FPS at 1440p and then to 62 FPS at 4K. The jump from 1440p to 2160p represents a 33% performance loss, which is consistent with the increased fill-rate demands placed on the GPU. The Ultra preset shows the most dramatic scaling behavior: 106 FPS at 1080p drops to 80 FPS at 1440p and then collapses to 54 FPS at 4K. The 1440p-to-4K transition alone costs 26 FPS, or about a 33% reduction, reinforcing that the GPU’s memory bandwidth and pixel throughput are the limiting factors at higher resolutions.

Interestingly, the Medium preset is the only one with complete min/max frame data, showing a 4K average of 70 FPS with a minimum of 59 FPS and a maximum of 80 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the average rises to 103 FPS with a min of 88 and max of 119, while 1080p Medium reaches 137 FPS average (min 116, max 157). The scaling from 1080p to 1440p Medium is a 25% drop, and from 1440p to 4K Medium is a 32% drop, closely mirroring the Low preset’s behavior. This suggests that the transition from 1440p to 4K consistently costs roughly one-third of the frame rate regardless of preset, which points directly to the GPU as the primary bottleneck.

The data indicates that at 1080p, the Core i7-14700F is capable of feeding the RX 9070 XT well beyond 100 FPS in all presets, with the Low preset reaching 193 FPS. At 4K, however, even the Low preset cannot break the 100 FPS barrier, and the Ultra preset dips to 54 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target many users consider optimal. The scaling behavior strongly suggests that users targeting 4K should expect to use Medium or High settings, while 1440p offers a comfortable margin across all presets, and 1080p is largely CPU-bound at Low and Medium settings.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture and the Navi 48 chip, manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It carries 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, yielding a memory bandwidth of 644.6 GB/s. The GPU’s clocks are specified with a base of 1660 MHz, a game clock of 2400 MHz, and a boost clock of 2970 MHz, with memory running at 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective). These specifications directly explain the resolution scaling observed in the measured data.

The 4K Ultra result of 54 FPS average aligns closely with the GPU’s raw compute capabilities. The RX 9070 XT delivers 48.66 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, but Control’s Ultra preset includes heavy post-processing and volumetric effects that tax the 128 ROPs and 256 TMUs. The pixel rate of 380.2 GPixel/s and texture rate of 760.3 GTexel/s are substantial, yet the 4K Ultra workload still overwhelms them, producing a 32% drop from the 1440p Ultra score of 80 FPS. This indicates that the Ultra preset’s additional effects are not purely cosmetic; they require meaningful memory bandwidth and fill-rate headroom.

Comparing to the GPU’s synthetic benchmarks, the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 7260 and Passmark G3D score of 26795 place this card in a specific performance tier. However, the nearest rivals listed in the benchmark database are surprising: the AMD Radeon HD 7770M (avg score 13536, deltaPct 0.1), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570 (avg score 13515, deltaPct 0.2), and NVIDIA P106-090 (avg score 13470, deltaPct 0.5) are all within 1% of the RX 9070 XT’s average benchmark score of 13543. This is likely an artifact of the benchmark database’s aggregation method, as the measured in-game FPS far exceeds what those older GPUs could produce, but it highlights that the RX 9070 XT’s synthetic average score is heavily influenced by less demanding tests.

The GPU’s 16 GB of VRAM is more than sufficient for Control at all tested resolutions and settings, as the game’s texture budgets do not appear to exceed this capacity. The measured FPS data shows no signs of VRAM-related stuttering or frame drops; the minimum FPS values recorded (59 FPS at 4K Medium, 88 FPS at 1440p Medium, 116 FPS at 1080p Medium) are all within a reasonable range of their respective averages. The GPU’s 644.6 GB/s bandwidth appears to be the more critical factor, as the scaling from 1440p to 4K consistently costs about 33% performance, which aligns with the doubling of pixel count and the corresponding increase in memory traffic.

CPU Role

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 33 MB of shared L3 cache and per-core L2 cache of 2 MB, with 80 KB of L1 per core. The CPU’s 91st percentile ranking among all CPUs and an average benchmark score of 53620 indicate strong multi-threaded performance, but Control is not a heavily multi-threaded game. The CPU’s role is primarily to maintain high single-thread throughput to feed the GPU.

At 1080p, the CPU’s influence is evident. The Low preset achieves 193 FPS average, which is a significant jump from the Medium preset’s 137 FPS. This 56 FPS difference at the same resolution suggests that at Low settings, the game’s rendering pipeline is sufficiently lightweight that the CPU becomes the limiting factor for part of the frame time. The Core i7-14700F’s boost clock of 5.40 GHz and single-core benchmark scores (Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4958, Geekbench single-core score of 2429) are strong enough to push high frame rates, but the 1080p Low result indicates a ceiling somewhere around 193 FPS.

Comparing to the CPU’s nearest rivals in the benchmark database, the Intel Xeon 6505P (avg score 53701, deltaPct -0.2) and AMD Ryzen 9 7900X (avg score 53288, deltaPct 0.6) are essentially performance equals. However, in Control, the 14700F’s higher boost clock and gaming-oriented architecture likely provide an advantage in frame pacing, though the measured data alone cannot confirm this. The CPU’s 20 cores and 28 threads are underutilized by Control, which typically scales across 4-8 threads for its gameplay logic and physics simulation.

The 4K results show that the CPU is not a bottleneck at higher resolutions. At 4K Low, the average FPS is 98, which is nearly identical to the 4K Medium result of 70 FPS when accounting for the expected performance difference between settings. If the CPU were limiting, we would expect the Low and Medium presets to converge at 4K, but they do not (98 vs 70). This indicates that even at 4K Low, the GPU is still the primary constraint, and the CPU has ample headroom. The 1080p Ultra result of 106 FPS versus 4K Ultra of 54 FPS further confirms that the CPU can sustain well over 100 FPS in this game, and the frame rate collapse at 4K is entirely attributable to GPU rendering load.

How This Combo Ranks

In the benchmark database’s ranking of tested CPU-GPU combinations for Control, this pairing of the Intel Core i7-14700F and AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT ranks 937th out of 3720 combos. This places it in the 75th percentile of all tested combinations, meaning roughly three-quarters of all pairings tested perform worse than this system in Control. The rank is a composite measure that weighs performance across all resolutions and settings, and the data suggests that the combination is well-optimized for 1440p gaming, where it delivers between 80 and 146 FPS depending on preset.

The rank of 937 out of 3720 is notable because it reflects a balance that many high-end pairings lack. The RX 9070 XT’s 55th percentile ranking among all GPUs (with an average benchmark score of 13543) might seem modest, but the in-game results show it performing far better than that percentile would suggest in Control. Meanwhile, the CPU’s 91st percentile ranking ensures that it does not hold back the GPU at lower resolutions. The delta between the CPU and GPU percentile ranks (91 vs 55) indicates that the processor has significant headroom, but the game’s engine does not require more than this CPU provides.

The combo’s position in the ranking is also influenced by the fact that Control is an older title (released in 2019) that does not fully utilize modern multi-core processors. Many newer CPUs with higher core counts may rank lower because the game cannot leverage their additional cores, while the 14700F’s high boost clock and single-thread performance are more relevant. The 937th rank out of 3720 suggests that while this is not a top-tier combination for Control (those would be occupied by more expensive GPUs like the RTX 4090 or RX 7900 XTX), it is solidly above average and delivers playable frame rates at all tested resolutions with appropriate settings.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows that 2560x1440 is the sweet spot, with all presets delivering 80 FPS or higher (Low: 146, Medium: 103, High: 92, Ultra: 80). At 4K, only Low (98 FPS) and Medium (70 FPS) exceed 60 FPS, while Ultra drops to 54 FPS.

Q: How does the Ultra preset compare to High at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset averages 54 FPS versus 62 FPS for High, a 13% performance penalty. This suggests that Ultra’s extra visual effects cost 8 FPS on average at 4K, making High the better choice for 60 FPS targets.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck at 1080p?

A: The 1080p Low preset reaches 193 FPS, while 1080p Medium reaches 137 FPS. The large gap between Low and Medium at the same resolution indicates that the GPU becomes the limiter once settings increase, but the CPU is capable of driving frame rates near 200 FPS in lighter scenes.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The only min FPS values in the data are for the Medium preset: 59 FPS at 4K, 88 FPS at 1440p, and 116 FPS at 1080p. These represent the lowest frame rates measured during the test runs for those specific configurations.

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

A: It ranks 937th out of 3720 total combinations tested for Control, placing it in the upper 25% of all systems. This rank reflects its strong 1440p performance and playable 4K results at medium settings.

Q: Does the GPU’s 16 GB VRAM affect Control’s performance?

A: The measured data shows no VRAM-related issues. The minimum FPS values are close to averages, indicating no stuttering from memory overflow, and Control’s texture requirements are well within the 16 GB GDDR6 capacity.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its highest frame rates. Low settings produce an average of 193 FPS, Medium averages 137 FPS (with a min of 116 and max of 157), High averages 122 FPS, and Ultra averages 106 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra is 87 FPS, showing that the GPU has significant headroom at this resolution even on the most demanding preset.

At 2560x1440, performance remains strong but drops noticeably. Low averages 146 FPS, Medium averages 103 FPS (min 88, max 119), High averages 92 FPS, and Ultra averages 80 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra narrows to 66 FPS, illustrating the increased GPU load at higher pixel counts.

At 3840x2160, the frame rates become more moderate. Low averages 98 FPS, Medium averages 70 FPS (min 59, max 80), High averages 62 FPS, and Ultra averages 54 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is now 44 FPS, indicating that even the least demanding preset is pushed hard by 4K rendering. The Ultra preset’s 54 FPS average falls just short of the 60 FPS standard, while Medium’s 70 FPS provides a comfortable margin.