Control

How This Combo Ranks

The pairing of the Intel Core i7-14700K with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti lands at rank 1452 out of 1636 tested combos for Control. That places this configuration in the bottom 12% of all tested systems, a striking result given the CPU's pedigree. The i7-14700K sits in the 96th percentile against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 70074, placing it within 0.3% of the AMD EPYC 9115 and roughly 0.5% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X in synthetic averages. Yet the GPU tells a different story: the GTX 1660 Ti ranks in the 55th percentile against all GPUs, with an average score of 13925, nearly identical to the AMD Radeon RX 570X (0.4% difference) and the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile (0.8% difference). This massive gap between CPU capability and GPU capability defines the combo's overall position.

The data suggests a profound imbalance. The processor is built for heavy multi-threaded workloads, evidenced by a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44534 and a Geekbench multi-core score of 18896, while the graphics card's PassMark G3D score of 12871 reflects a mid-range part from a previous generation. In Control, a game that stresses both geometry and physics, the measured frames-per-second figures reveal that the GPU is the limiting factor at every resolution tested. The rank of 1452 is not a statement about either component in isolation; it is a statement about their pairing. A system with this CPU but a stronger GPU would rank far higher, while this GPU paired with a weaker CPU would likely produce similar or worse results. The benchmark data indicates that the combo's rank is dragged down almost entirely by the graphics subsystem.

FAQ

Q: Why does this combo rank so low despite having a top-tier CPU?

A: The combo ranks 1452 out of 1636 because the GTX 1660 Ti's average benchmark score of 13925 and its 55th percentile standing against all GPUs bottleneck the system. The i7-14700K's 96th percentile CPU ranking (avg score 70074) cannot compensate for the GPU's mid-range performance in Control, which is heavily graphics-dependent.

Q: How much faster is the CPU compared to its closest rivals?

A: The i7-14700K's average benchmark score of 70074 is essentially tied with the Intel Core i7-14700KF (70104, 0% delta) and sits 0.3% ahead of the AMD EPYC 9115 (69887). It trails the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X by 0.5% (70420) and the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 by 1.4% (71056), showing it is within a very tight performance band at the top tier.

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

A: At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo achieves 93.7 FPS, which is the highest average frame rate measured. At 2560x1440 Low, it drops to 66.4 FPS, and at 3840x2160 Low, it falls to 49.7 FPS. The 1080p Low preset is the only configuration that clears the 90 FPS threshold.

Q: Does the CPU's core count matter for this game?

A: The i7-14700K has 20 cores and 28 threads with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and boost clock of 5.60 GHz. In Control, the data shows that at 1080p Low, the combo hits 93.7 FPS, but at 4K Low, it drops to 49.7 FPS — a pattern that indicates the GPU, not the CPU, is handling the extra load, so the CPU's core count is not the deciding factor in these results.

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

A: The GTX 1660 Ti's avg benchmark score of 13925 is within 0.4% of the AMD Radeon RX 570X (13871) and within 0.8% of the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile (13821) and GTX 680 (13812). It is 0.7% behind the NVIDIA Tesla K10 (14029), meaning these five GPUs are virtually interchangeable in synthetic benchmarks.

Q: Is the combo more CPU-limited or GPU-limited at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, the frame rate drops from 49.7 FPS on Low to 25.3 FPS on Ultra, a 49% reduction. This steep scaling with settings at the same resolution points to the GPU being the primary constraint, as the CPU's performance headroom is not being utilized.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of GPU-bound scaling as resolution increases. Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 at High settings, the average frame rate falls from 56.0 FPS to 43.1 FPS, a 23% drop. From 2560x1440 to 3840x2160 at High, it further declines from 43.1 FPS to 29.6 FPS, another 31% reduction. This progressive degradation is characteristic of a system where the graphics card's memory bandwidth and shading throughput are saturated.

At Low settings, the scaling is steeper: 93.7 FPS at 1080p, 66.4 FPS at 1440p, and 49.7 FPS at 4K. The 1080p to 4K transition at Low shows a 47% performance loss, whereas at Ultra, the same resolution jump yields a 48% loss (49.1 to 25.3 FPS). This consistency across settings suggests that the limiting component is not the CPU, which would typically show less scaling at lower resolutions, but rather the GPU's raw fill rate and pixel processing capabilities.

The GTX 1660 Ti's 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth becomes a bottleneck at 4K, where the pixel rate of 84.96 GPixel/s and texture rate of 169.9 GTexel/s are insufficient to maintain smooth frame rates. The data implies that at 1080p, the i7-14700K has enough headroom to feed the GPU, but as pixel count quadruples, the GPU's limitations dominate, and the CPU's 20 cores remain underutilized.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers 93.7 FPS on Low, 65.0 FPS on Medium, 56.0 FPS on High, and 49.1 FPS on Ultra. The step from Low to Medium costs 28.7 FPS, while the step from High to Ultra costs only 6.9 FPS. This indicates that the Low preset removes enough graphical load to let the GPU stretch, but diminishing returns set in quickly as settings increase.

At 2560x1440, the numbers are 66.4 FPS (Low), 50.2 FPS (Medium), 43.1 FPS (High), and 36.6 FPS (Ultra). The relative drop from Low to Ultra is 45%, which is slightly less severe than at 1080p (48%), suggesting that at higher resolutions, the GPU is already working near its limit regardless of preset.

At 3840x2160, the results are 49.7 FPS (Low), 33.6 FPS (Medium), 29.6 FPS (High), and 25.3 FPS (Ultra). The gap between Low and Medium is 16.1 FPS, the largest single-step drop in the entire dataset, indicating that the Medium preset introduces a significant increase in shading or texture work that the TU116 chip cannot handle efficiently at 4K.

Across all resolutions, the Low preset always yields the highest frame rate, and the Ultra preset always yields the lowest. The 1080p Low result of 93.7 FPS is the only measurement that approaches a high-refresh-rate experience, while the 4K Ultra result of 25.3 FPS is below playable thresholds.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured data, the optimal experience for this combo is at 1920x1080 with High settings, which delivers 56.0 FPS. This is a playable frame rate that balances visual fidelity with performance, and it avoids the steep drop to 49.1 FPS at Ultra, which is unlikely to provide a perceptible visual improvement given the GPU's limitations. For users prioritizing smoothness, the 1080p Low preset at 93.7 FPS is the best choice, as it nearly doubles the frame rate of the Ultra preset while sacrificing only shadow and texture quality.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset at 50.2 FPS is the only configuration that stays above 50 FPS, making it the recommended option for 1440p displays. The High preset at 43.1 FPS is borderline, while Ultra at 36.6 FPS is too low for action-heavy sequences. At 3840x2160, the Low preset at 49.7 FPS is the only playable option, but even that is marginal; the Medium preset at 33.6 FPS and High at 29.6 FPS are not recommended due to the risk of stuttering in combat.

The data shows a consistent pattern: the Low preset is the only one that allows this GPU to reach acceptable frame rates at higher resolutions. For the best balance of image quality and performance, 1080p High at 56 FPS is the sweet spot, as it provides 14% more frame rate than 1440p Medium but at a lower resolution that better matches the GPU's memory bandwidth.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i7-14700K is a 20-core, 28-thread processor based on Raptor Lake architecture, fabricated on a 10 nm process. It has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz, with 33 MB of shared L3 cache and 2 MB of L2 cache per core. The CPU's benchmark results are exceptional: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44534 and a single-core score of 6287, alongside a PassMark multi-thread score of 52392. These numbers place it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs.

In Control, however, the CPU's role is largely masked by the GPU bottleneck. The measured FPS at 1080p Low (93.7 FPS) is the highest in the dataset, and the scaling from 1080p to 4K at the same settings shows a 47% drop, which is typical of a GPU-limited scenario. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the frame rate would be more consistent across resolutions, as the processor's workload (physics, AI, draw calls) does not scale linearly with pixel count. The i7-14700K's 28 threads are overkill for a game like Control, which is unlikely to utilize more than a handful of cores effectively. The data suggests that the CPU is never the primary constraint in these measurements; even at 4K Low with 49.7 FPS, the processor has significant headroom, as evidenced by its high multi-core and single-core scores.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is based on the TU116 chip on a 12 nm process, with 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. It has 1536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, with a base clock of 1500 MHz and a boost clock of 1770 MHz. The GPU's FP32 performance is 5.437 TFLOPS, and its pixel rate is 84.96 GPixel/s. Its PassMark G3D score of 12871 and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1061 reflect its mid-range positioning.

In Control, the GPU's limitations are evident across all resolutions. At 1080p, the difference between Low (93.7 FPS) and Ultra (49.1 FPS) is 44.6 FPS, showing that the GPU's shading units and texture units are quickly saturated as settings increase. At 4K, the same settings gap yields only 24.4 FPS (49.7 to 25.3), indicating that the memory bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s is the hard limit. The 6 GB VRAM capacity is also a factor; at 4K Ultra, the game likely exceeds this amount, causing texture thrashing, which the data reflects in the steep drop to 25.3 FPS. The GPU's 55th percentile standing against all GPUs confirms that it is a mid-pack part, and in a game like Control with heavy particle effects and destructible environments, it cannot keep up with the CPU's capabilities. The benchmark results indicate that the GPU is the definitive bottleneck, and any improvement in frame rate would require a GPU with higher memory bandwidth and more shading units.