Control

The Intel Core i7-14700K paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti is a severely mismatched combination for Control, producing a benchmark result that is almost entirely dictated by the graphics card's limitations. The data places this combo in the 3670th position out of 3720 tested combinations, which puts it in the bottom 1.3% of all tested systems. This is a case where a top-tier modern CPU is completely starved by a legacy entry-level GPU, resulting in frame rates that are unplayable at most settings, and the analysis below details exactly how each component contributes to this outcome.

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

The Intel Core i7-14700K is an exceptionally powerful processor that is not the bottleneck in this configuration. Its specifications are substantial: 20 cores and 28 threads operating at a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. This is a Raptor Lake-R architecture part built on Intel's 10 nm process, and it carries a substantial 33 MB of shared L3 cache alongside 2 MB per core of L2 cache. Its synthetic benchmark scores reflect its high-end positioning, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 33440.5 and a single-core score of 2160, alongside a Geekbench multi-core score of 20767. Its average benchmark score of 69355 places it in the 94th percentile of all CPUs, putting it in the top 6% of processors tested.

The CPU's nearest rivals in the benchmark database illustrate its performance tier. The AMD EPYC 9115 scores an average of 69288, which is a mere 0.1% behind the i7-14700K. Conversely, the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X is 0.2% ahead, the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX is 0.7% ahead, and the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F is 0.9% ahead. These sub-1% deltas confirm that the i7-14700K is operating at the very top of the performance hierarchy for multi-threaded workloads, and its 28 threads are more than capable of handling the game logic and physics of an Action Adventure title like Control.

However, the measured FPS in Control reveals that this CPU power is largely irrelevant to the final outcome. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves 46 FPS, and at 1080p with Ultra settings, it drops to 25 FPS. The performance scaling across settings is a direct result of the GPU's workload, not the CPU's ability to feed frames. A CPU with 20 cores and a 5.60 GHz boost clock would have no trouble processing the game's data at these frame rates, which are far below the thresholds where CPU limitations typically appear. The data strongly suggests that the i7-14700K is idling in terms of game performance, waiting for the GPU to deliver frames that never come. The processor's PassMark multi-thread score of 52392 and its 94th percentile ranking are testaments to its compute potential, but in this specific pairing, that potential is untapped.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti is the definitive performance limiter in this configuration. This Pascal-architecture GPU, built on a 14 nm process at Samsung, is an end-of-life product from 2016 that was designed for entry-level 1080p gaming. Its specifications are modest by modern standards: 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1291 MHz and a boost clock of 1392 MHz, with memory clocked at 1752 MHz (7 Gbps effective). The 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus provides a bandwidth of 112.1 GB/s, which is a severe constraint for a game like Control that demands high-resolution textures and modern rendering features.

The GPU's benchmark scores place it firmly in the low-end category. Its PassMark G3D score is 6340, and its average benchmark score is 4193, which puts it in the 25th percentile of all GPUs—meaning it outperforms only a quarter of the database's entries. Its nearest rivals are similarly weak: the AMD Radeon R5 M330 is 0.6% behind, the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M is 1% behind, and the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M is 1.1% ahead. This is a GPU whose performance is comparable to integrated graphics solutions from the same era, and it is wholly inadequate for a title released in 2019.

The measured FPS data confirms the GPU's role as the bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the combo manages 46 FPS, but this is the absolute ceiling. Moving to High settings at the same resolution drops the average to 29 FPS, and Ultra drops it to 25 FPS. The 4 GB VRAM is likely a contributing factor, as Control's texture pools and effects can easily exceed this capacity at higher settings, leading to potential stuttering and reduced frame rates. The GPU's FP32 performance of 2.138 TFLOPS and its pixel rate of 44.54 GPixel/s are simply not enough to drive the game's physics-based environments and particle effects at acceptable speeds. The GTX 1050 Ti's 75 W TDP and lack of power connectors indicate its intended low-power segment, and the benchmark results show that it cannot handle the demands of this game beyond very low settings.

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

The resolution scaling data provides a clear picture of a GPU-bound system. From 1080p to 1440p, the average FPS drops by roughly 26% to 35% across settings. For example, at Low settings, the average FPS falls from 46 at 1080p to 34 at 1440p. At High settings, it falls from 29 at 1080p to 22 at 1440p. This scaling pattern is typical of a GPU that is already near its limits, as the increased pixel count directly increases the workload on the shading units and memory bandwidth.

The jump from 1440p to 4K is even more punishing, showing a dramatic collapse in performance. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 34 at 1440p to 23 at 4K, a 32% reduction. At High settings, it drops from 22 at 1440p to 15 at 4K, a 32% reduction as well. At 4K Ultra, the combo produces a mere 13 FPS, which is effectively a slideshow. The 4K Medium setting shows an average of 17 FPS with a minimum of 14 FPS and a maximum of 19 FPS, indicating significant frame pacing issues at this resolution.

This scaling behavior is a textbook indicator that the GPU is the limiting component. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see similar FPS across different resolutions, as the CPU's workload (game logic, draw calls) remains relatively constant while the GPU's workload (pixel shading) increases. Instead, the FPS drops proportionally with the number of pixels, showing that the GTX 1050 Ti's 112.1 GB/s of bandwidth and 2.138 TFLOPS of compute power are simply overwhelmed. The 4 GB VRAM is also likely a factor at 4K, where texture data can easily exceed this capacity, causing the GPU to swap data in and out of system memory. The data confirms that no amount of CPU headroom can compensate for this GPU's lack of raw throughput.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combo's ranking in Control is abysmal, and the data is unambiguous about its position. With a comboRankInGame of 3670 out of 3720 tested combinations, this system is in the bottom 1.3% of all tested hardware pairings for this specific game. This ranking places it in the company of systems with similarly weak GPUs, as the CPU's power is essentially ignored by the ranking algorithm when the GPU produces such low frame rates.

To contextualize this rank, consider that the CPU alone is in the 94th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU is in the 25th percentile. The combination of a top-decile CPU with a bottom-quartile GPU creates a system that is fundamentally unbalanced for gaming. The ranking reflects the actual measured FPS, which is what matters for playability. A rank of 3670 means that 99.9% of all other tested combos perform better in Control. The nearest GPU rivals, such as the AMD Radeon R5 M330 and NVIDIA Quadro K2100M, are similarly positioned, but the i7-14700K's presence does nothing to boost the combo's standing. This is a case where a high-end CPU is wasted on a GPU that cannot utilize its potential, and the ranking correctly penalizes the overall system for its weak gaming performance. The data shows that for Control, the GTX 1050 Ti drags the entire system down to a level where even the most powerful consumer CPU cannot rescue the experience.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the only playable configuration for this combo is at 1080p with Low settings, which yields an average of 46 FPS. This is the only setting and resolution combination that approaches a playable frame rate, and even then, it is not smooth by modern standards. All other 1080p settings produce sub-30 FPS averages: Medium at 32 FPS, High at 29 FPS, and Ultra at 25 FPS. The 32 FPS at Medium might be tolerable for some, but the 27 FPS minimum suggests occasional dips into stutter territory.

At 1440p, the situation is worse. Low settings produce 34 FPS, but Medium drops to 24 FPS, High to 22 FPS, and Ultra to 19 FPS. These numbers are all below the threshold for comfortable gaming, and the 21 FPS minimum on Medium indicates significant frame drops. At 4K, the game is essentially unplayable, with Low settings at 23 FPS and Ultra at 13 FPS. The Medium setting at 4K shows a minimum of 14 FPS, which is a slideshow.

The recommendation is clear: players should use 1080p with Low settings to get the best experience, as it is the only measured configuration that maintains an average above 40 FPS. Lowering the resolution further is not an option in the data, but the 46 FPS at 1080p Low is the target. For a game like Control, which has a strong atmospheric and visual identity, playing at Low settings will sacrifice much of the intended visual fidelity, but the alternative is a non-interactive frame rate. The data suggests that even Medium settings at 1080p, with a 32 FPS average and 27 FPS minimum, might be acceptable for players who prioritize visual quality over smoothness, but the Low setting is the only one that provides a consistently responsive experience. The 4 GB VRAM is a concern at higher settings, potentially causing texture pop-in or loading hitches, which further reinforces the recommendation to stick with Low.

FAQ

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

A: The only configuration that achieves a playable average frame rate is 1920x1080 with Low settings, which produces an average of 46 FPS. At 1080p Medium, the average drops to 32 FPS, and at High it is 29 FPS, making Low the only setting that clears 40 FPS.

Q: How does this combo rank against other tested systems in Control?

A: This combo ranks 3670th out of 3720 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 1.3% of all tested systems. This is due to the GPU's severe limitations, despite the CPU's high performance.

Q: Is the Intel Core i7-14700K the bottleneck in this configuration?

A: No. The CPU is in the 94th percentile of all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 69355, while the GPU is in the 25th percentile with an average score of 4193. The measured FPS scales dramatically with resolution, indicating the GPU is the limiting factor.

Q: What is the difference in performance between 1080p and 4K at the same settings?

A: At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 46 at 1080p to 23 at 4K, a 50% reduction. At High settings, the average drops from 29 at 1080p to 15 at 4K, showing that the GPU cannot handle the increased pixel workload at higher resolutions.

Q: Is the GTX 1050 Ti's 4 GB VRAM sufficient for Control?

A: The data suggests it is not sufficient for higher settings. At 4K Medium, the average FPS is only 17 with a minimum of 14, and at 1080p Ultra, the average is 25 FPS. The low frame rates at higher settings indicate the GPU's memory bandwidth of 112.1 GB/s and 4 GB capacity are overwhelmed.

Q: How does the GPU's performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GTX 1050 Ti has an average benchmark score of 4193. It is 0.6% ahead of the AMD Radeon R5 M330 (4170), 1% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M (4151), and 1.1% behind the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M (4241). This places it in the same performance class as these legacy mobile and entry-level parts.