Control

Control, Remedy’s 2019 action-adventure, is a demanding title that stresses both the CPU and GPU in unusual ways due to its physics-heavy environments and real-time ray tracing options. The data for the Intel Core i7-14700F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 combination reveals a system that is exceptionally well-balanced for this title, though the performance ceiling varies significantly across the four tested presets. This analysis breaks down exactly how these components interact, where the bottlenecks lie, and which settings provide the most playable experience.

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 built on the Raptor Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. In the context of Control, the data indicates that this CPU is rarely the limiting factor. The game’s engine, while capable of utilizing multiple threads for physics simulations and AI, does not appear to scale in a way that would bottleneck this processor at the tested settings. The Core i7-14700F sits in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 53,620. Its nearest rival, the Intel Xeon 6505P, scores 53,701, which is only 0.2% higher, suggesting that this chip is at the top of its class for gaming workloads.

The high boost clock of 5.40 GHz is critical for Control’s single-threaded game logic, which often determines frame pacing. The data supports this: at 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves an average of 193 FPS, a figure that relies heavily on the CPU’s ability to feed the GPU quickly. When we look at the CPU’s synthetic benchmarks, the single-core score of 4,958 in Cinebench R23 and 4,257 in Passmark single-thread reinforce its strength in scenarios where the game’s main thread is the bottleneck. The 33 MB of shared L3 cache also helps maintain high IPC, reducing the latency of game data access.

However, the CPU’s role becomes more nuanced at higher resolutions. The frame rate drop from 1080p Low (193 FPS) to 4K Low (98 FPS) is a 49% reduction, which is primarily a GPU limitation. Yet, the CPU must still maintain that minimum frame rate floor. The data shows that the i7-14700F’s 20 cores and 28 threads are more than sufficient; Control rarely pushes beyond a fraction of this processor’s capacity. The multi-core scores, such as 35,122 in Cinebench R23 and 41,317 in Passmark multithread, are excellent, but in this game, they are not the primary driver of performance. The system is clearly not CPU-bound, as evidenced by the fact that even at the highest settings and resolution, the frame rate is dictated by the GPU’s rendering speed, not the processor’s compute.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 is the unequivocal performance driver in this pairing. With 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus, it provides 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth. This is crucial for Control, as the game’s textures and post-processing effects can consume significant memory at higher resolutions. The GPU’s boost clock of 2475 MHz and 29.15 TFLOPS of FP32 compute are substantial, but the architecture’s real strength lies in its 46 RT cores and 184 Tensor cores, which are relevant for the game’s ray-traced reflections and DLSS capabilities, though the measured data here does not specify RT or DLSS settings.

The GPU’s performance is directly correlated with the settings presets. At 1080p High, the system averages 122 FPS, but at 4K Ultra, it drops to 54 FPS. This 56% performance loss highlights how the RTX 4070, while powerful, is not a 4K ultra-class card for Control. The VRAM capacity is a key factor here; 12 GB is generally adequate, but the game’s Ultra preset at 4K can push memory usage closer to the limit, potentially causing the min FPS to dip. The data only provides min FPS for Medium settings, where the 4K average is 70 FPS with a min of 59 FPS, suggesting that the GPU is working hard to maintain stability.

Comparing to its rivals, the RTX 4070 has an average benchmark score of 37,648 and sits in the 81st percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest competitor, the NVIDIA Tesla P4, scores 37,628, a mere 0.1% difference, which underscores the RTX 4070’s position as a high-mid-range card. In Control, the GPU’s 12 GB of VRAM is the deciding factor between smooth playable framerates and stutter-prone dips at higher resolutions. The 192-bit memory bus, while not as wide as higher-tier cards, is sufficient for the game’s data throughput needs at 1440p. The data implies that the RTX 4070 is best suited for 1080p and 1440p in this title, where it can leverage its high clock speeds to deliver fluid gameplay.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The Intel Core i7-14700F and RTX 4070 combination ranks 904th out of 3,720 tested combos for Control. This puts it in the top 24.3% of all systems tested, which is a strong showing given the vast array of hardware configurations in the database. This rank is more indicative of the GPU’s ceiling than the CPU’s potential, as the i7-14700F is unlikely to hold the RTX 4070 back in this title.

The fact that this combo ranks 904th is interesting because it suggests that many other systems with more powerful GPUs (like RTX 4080 or 4090 variants) or higher-end CPUs are ahead. However, the delta between this combo and those above it is likely small in real-world terms. The data shows that the RTX 4070’s nearest rival in synthetic benchmarks, the RTX 4080 Mobile, scores 38,135, which is 1.3% higher. This marginal difference in raw compute translates to a few frames per second in Control, meaning the 904th rank is not a reflection of a poorly matched pairing.

Instead, the rank reflects the overall performance envelope. The system is clearly capable of exceeding 60 FPS at 1440p High (92 FPS average), which is a common target for gamers. The rank also implies that for the majority of the 3,720 combos below it, the i7-14700F and RTX 4070 offer a superior experience, especially when considering the CPU’s headroom for future games. The combination is not a top-tier 4K system, but it is a solidly upper-mid-range performer that excels at 1080p and 1440p, where it can hit high refresh rates without breaking a sweat.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Control at 4K with playable framerates?

A: Yes, but only on lower presets. The data shows a 4K average of 62 FPS on High and 98 FPS on Low. On Ultra, the average drops to 54 FPS, which is marginally playable but may feel inconsistent.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to maintain 60+ FPS consistently?

A: At 1440p, the system exceeds 60 FPS on all presets. The High preset averages 92 FPS, while Ultra averages 80 FPS. Even the most demanding 1440p settings remain well above the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How much of a performance drop occurs when moving from 1080p to 4K on High settings?

A: The average FPS drops from 122 at 1080p High to 62 at 4K High. This is a 49% reduction, indicating that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more important for this game’s performance?

A: The GPU is clearly the limiting factor. The frame rates scale directly with resolution and settings, which are GPU-centric workloads. The CPU’s performance is sufficient to avoid bottlenecking, as seen by the high FPS at 1080p Low (193 FPS).

Q: Does the RTX 4070 have enough VRAM for Control at Ultra settings?

A: The data suggests it is sufficient, as the card runs 4K Ultra at an average of 54 FPS. However, the lack of min FPS data for Ultra makes it difficult to assess if there are any VRAM-related stutters.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to other tested systems?

A: It ranks 904th out of 3,720 combos, placing it in the top 24.3% of all systems. This indicates a strong, above-average performance for this specific game.

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

The scaling of FPS across resolutions is a textbook example of GPU-bound behavior. At Low settings, the system averages 193 FPS at 1080p, 146 FPS at 1440p, and 98 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is a 24.4% reduction, while the drop from 1440p to 4K is a 32.9% reduction. This progressive decline is consistent with the GPU’s rendering load increasing proportionally with pixel count.

At High settings, the scaling is even more pronounced: 122 FPS at 1080p, 92 FPS at 1440p, and 62 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 4K is 49%, which is a larger relative decline than at Low settings. This is because higher settings increase the GPU’s per-pixel work, making the resolution the dominant factor. The fact that the CPU’s load does not change significantly with resolution confirms that the RTX 4070 is the sole bottleneck here.

The data implies that the i7-14700F is never the constraint. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see similar FPS across 1080p and 1440p, as the game logic would be the limiting factor. Instead, the FPS scales almost linearly with the number of pixels, which is a clear indicator that the GPU’s shading units, memory bandwidth, and ROPs are the limiting resource. The 12 GB of VRAM is also sufficient across all resolutions, as there is no catastrophic drop in performance that would indicate memory swapping.

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

Based on the measured FPS, the Medium preset offers the best balance of visual fidelity and performance, particularly at 1440p and 4K. At 1440p Medium, the system averages 104 FPS with a minimum of 88 FPS, ensuring a smooth and stable experience with no drops below the 60 FPS threshold. This is ideal for players who want a high refresh rate experience without compromising too much on visual quality.

At 4K, the Medium preset is the only one that provides a consistent 60 FPS experience, averaging 70 FPS with a minimum of 59 FPS. While the High preset at 4K averages 62 FPS, the lack of min FPS data makes it risky, and the Medium preset’s recorded minimum of 59 FPS suggests it is the safer choice for maintaining playability. The Ultra preset at 4K, with an average of 54 FPS, is not recommended for a smooth experience, as it falls below the 60 FPS target.

For 1080p users, the High preset at 122 FPS is the sweet spot, offering excellent visual detail while still allowing for high refresh rate displays. The Ultra preset at 106 FPS is also viable, but the marginal visual improvement over High may not justify the 13% performance loss. The Low preset, while hitting 193 FPS, is only for competitive play or systems with high refresh rate monitors that prioritize frame rate over graphics. The Medium preset’s min FPS of 116 FPS at 1080p is also noteworthy, as it indicates a highly stable frame delivery.

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

1080p (1920x1080):

• Low: average 193 FPS
• Medium: average 137 FPS, min 116 FPS, max 157 FPS
• High: average 122 FPS
• Ultra: average 106 FPS

1440p (2560x1440):

• Low: average 146 FPS
• Medium: average 104 FPS, min 88 FPS, max 119 FPS
• High: average 92 FPS
• Ultra: average 80 FPS

4K (3840x2160):

• Low: average 98 FPS
• Medium: average 70 FPS, min 59 FPS, max 80 FPS
• High: average 62 FPS
• Ultra: average 54 FPS

The data shows a clear hierarchy: performance scales down as resolution and settings increase. The Medium preset is the only one that provides min FPS data across all resolutions, which is a critical metric for assessing stability. At 1080p Medium, the min of 116 FPS ensures no stutters. At 1440p Medium, the min of 88 FPS is still well above playable. At 4K Medium, the min of 59 FPS is just at the edge of the 60 FPS target, but it is acceptable. The lack of min FPS data for other presets makes it difficult to fully assess their stability, but the averages suggest that High is playable at 4K, while Ultra is not recommended for a smooth experience.