Control

Control is an action-adventure title from 2019 that remains a demanding showcase for GPU-heavy effects. This analysis pairs the Intel Core i7-14700KF with the AMD Radeon RX 7700, using measured frame rate data to assess the combo’s performance across resolutions and settings. The data indicates a system that is strongly CPU-capable but GPU-bound at higher loads, with specific trade-offs between visual fidelity and frame pacing.

How This Combo Ranks

The benchmark database places this specific processor and graphics card combination at rank 1294 out of 2888 tested combos for Control. This positioning puts it in the 45th percentile of all tested systems, meaning roughly 55% of the recorded configurations deliver higher average frame rates in this title. The rank reflects a pairing where the CPU’s immense processing headroom is largely untapped by the game’s engine, while the GPU’s mid-range standing becomes the primary determinant of the final score.

The Intel Core i7-14700KF sits at the 94th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 70,163. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F, which scores 69,996 (a 0.2% difference), and the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX at 69,875 (0.4% behind). The i7-14700KF also edges out the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X by 0.9% and falls just 1% short of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K. These margins are negligible in gaming terms, confirming that the processor is not the bottleneck in this configuration.

Conversely, the AMD Radeon RX 7700 sits at the 58th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 15,852. Its rival scores are notably close: the AMD Radeon R9 370X is 0.1% ahead, the AMD Radeon RX 9060 is 1% ahead, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti leads by 1.7%. The AMD Radeon Pro W5500 trails by 1.1%. This clustering around the 16,000-point mark indicates that the RX 7700 is positioned in a tightly contested performance band, and its Control results reflect that competitive but not dominant standing.

The overall combo rank of 1294 out of 2888 is a direct consequence of this GPU-centric limitation. While the CPU’s 94th percentile standing suggests it could drive far more powerful graphics cards, the RX 7700’s 58th percentile performance caps the system’s ability to maintain high frame rates in Control, especially at higher resolutions and settings.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to achieve 60 FPS in Control?

A: At 2560x1440 with High settings, the combo averages 71 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS threshold comfortably. At 3840x2160, only Low settings reach above 60 FPS with an average of 76 FPS, while Medium drops to 54 FPS. Therefore, 1440p is the highest resolution where High settings deliver a smooth experience.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its closest rival in raw processing power?

A: The Intel Core i7-14700KF has an average benchmark score of 70,163, which is 0.2% higher than the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F’s 69,996. It also outperforms the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX by 0.4% and the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X by 0.9%, while trailing the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K by 1%.

Q: Is this system more limited by the CPU or the GPU in Control?

A: The data strongly indicates the GPU is the limiting component. The CPU’s 94th percentile rank and high multi-core scores are never stressed, while the GPU’s 58th percentile rank aligns with the measured frame rates. The gap between 1080p and 4K performance (almost a 50% drop at High settings) is classic GPU-bound behavior.

Q: What is the frame time consistency like at 1080p Medium settings?

A: At 1920x1080 with Medium settings, the combo averages 105 FPS with a minimum of 89 FPS and a maximum of 121 FPS. The 16 FPS spread between minimum and average indicates generally stable frame pacing, though not perfectly flat.

Q: How much of a performance gain is there from Ultra to Low settings at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, moving from Ultra (41 FPS) to Low (76 FPS) yields an 85% increase in average frame rate. This is a substantial jump, suggesting that Low settings are the only viable path to high refresh rates at 4K on this hardware.

Q: Does the CPU’s high core count benefit Control specifically?

A: Control is not a heavily multi-threaded title, so the i7-14700KF’s 20 cores and 28 threads are largely idle. The CPU’s single-core performance, as evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 6,235, is more relevant, but the game still relies primarily on the GPU for its rendering workload.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i7-14700KF is a Raptor Lake Refresh processor built on Intel’s 10 nm process, featuring 20 cores and 28 threads. Its base clock is 3.40 GHz with a boost clock of 5.60 GHz, and it carries 33 MB of shared L3 cache. The chip supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory across a dual-channel bus, and its 125 W TDP reflects a high-power desktop design. It is unlocked for overclocking, which is consistent with its performance-oriented positioning.

In synthetic benchmarks, the i7-14700KF posts a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44,167 and a single-core score of 6,235. The Geekbench results are similarly strong at 21,462 multi-core and 2,578 single-core. These numbers place the CPU in the 94th percentile of all processors, showing that it has far more compute capability than Control can utilize. The nearest rivals, such as the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X (0.9% behind) and the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K (1% ahead), confirm that this is a top-tier processor by any measure.

For Control, the CPU’s role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and physics data without becoming a bottleneck. The measured FPS data shows no signs of CPU limitation: at 1080p Low settings, the system reaches 148 FPS, which is a high but not extreme frame rate that would typically expose CPU limits in other titles. The fact that the frame rate scales down predictably with resolution increases (from 148 FPS at 1080p to 76 FPS at 4K on Low) indicates that the GPU is the sole constraint. The i7-14700KF’s high single-core performance ensures that Control’s primary thread is never starved, but the extra cores provide no tangible benefit for this specific workload.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rate data covers three resolutions and four settings levels, providing a comprehensive view of the combo’s behavior in Control. At 1920x1080, the system delivers its highest frame rates across all settings. Low settings produce an average of 148 FPS, Medium drops to 105 FPS with a minimum of 89 and maximum of 121, High averages 93 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 81 FPS. This 1080p range shows that the RX 7700 can comfortably handle high refresh rate gaming at this resolution, even with Ultra settings pushing past the 80 FPS mark.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance scales down as expected. Low settings average 112 FPS, which remains excellent for competitive play. Medium averages 80 FPS with a minimum of 68 and maximum of 92, High drops to 71 FPS, and Ultra falls to 61 FPS. The 1440p results demonstrate that High settings are the sweet spot for a 60 FPS experience, while Ultra settings barely hold onto 60 FPS on average, which could result in occasional dips below that threshold.

At 3840x2160, the GPU’s limitations become pronounced. Low settings average 76 FPS, which is surprising given the 4K resolution, but Medium drops to 54 FPS with a minimum of 46 and maximum of 62. High settings average 48 FPS, and Ultra falls to 41 FPS. The 4K data reveals a steep cliff between Low and Medium, suggesting that the RX 7700’s 16 GB of memory and 624.1 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for the lower settings, but the increased shader complexity at Medium and above overwhelms the GPU’s 25.18 TFLOPS of FP32 compute.

The pattern across all resolutions is consistent: Low settings provide the highest headroom, while Ultra settings are only viable at 1080p for smooth gameplay. The minimum frame rates recorded at Medium settings (46 FPS at 4K, 68 FPS at 1440p, 89 FPS at 1080p) indicate that the GPU’s frame pacing is generally stable, with no severe stuttering observed in the data.

Resolution Scaling

The performance scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a classic GPU-bound scenario. At High settings, the average frame rate drops from 93 FPS at 1080p to 71 FPS at 1440p (a 23.7% reduction) and then to 48 FPS at 4K (a 48.4% reduction from 1080p). This scaling is nearly proportional to the pixel count increase, which is the expected behavior when the GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU’s performance is not a variable in this equation, as its frame delivery capability far exceeds what the GPU can render.

At Low settings, the scaling is even more dramatic: 148 FPS at 1080p drops to 112 FPS at 1440p (24.3% reduction) and then to 76 FPS at 4K (48.6% reduction from 1080p). This consistent ~24% drop per resolution step indicates that the RX 7700’s compute units are fully saturated at all tested resolutions, with no headroom left for the CPU to exploit. The fact that the percentage drops are nearly identical across Low and High settings suggests that the GPU’s memory bandwidth and shading units are the primary constraints, not the settings themselves.

The 4K to 1080p ratio at Medium settings is particularly telling: 54 FPS at 4K versus 105 FPS at 1080p, which is a 48.6% reduction. This is almost exactly the pixel count difference (4K has four times the pixels of 1080p, but the frame rate only halves), indicating that the GPU is not purely pixel-bound but also shader-bound. The RX 7700’s 160 TMUs and 96 ROPs are being pushed hard, and the results show that 4K gaming is only feasible at Low settings, where the GPU can maintain a playable 76 FPS average.

The data suggests that the limiting component is unequivocally the GPU. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see frame rates plateau at 1080p and only drop slightly at higher resolutions. Instead, the linear scaling with resolution confirms that the RX 7700 is the performance ceiling for this combo in Control.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience balance between visual quality and frame rate, the measured data points to 2560x1440 with High settings as the optimal configuration. This combination delivers an average of 71 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS standard for smooth gameplay. It provides a 10 FPS improvement over Ultra settings at the same resolution, while the visual difference between High and Ultra in Control is generally subtle for most users. The 71 FPS average also leaves enough headroom to avoid dips below 60 FPS in demanding scenes, though the data does not record minimums for High settings to confirm this.

At 1920x1080, High settings are also an excellent choice, offering 93 FPS on average. This is well above the 60 FPS threshold and would be suitable for high refresh rate monitors. However, Medium settings at 1080p provide a 12 FPS increase to 105 FPS with a recorded minimum of 89 FPS, making it the better option for competitive play or for users who prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity. Ultra at 1080p drops to 81 FPS, which is still playable but offers diminishing returns over High.

For 4K gaming, the recommendations are more constrained. Low settings at 3840x2160 produce an average of 76 FPS, which is the only way to achieve a smooth 60+ FPS experience at this resolution. Medium settings fall to 54 FPS, which is borderline playable but may suffer from inconsistent frame pacing, as evidenced by the 46 FPS minimum. High and Ultra at 4K are not recommended, as they average 48 FPS and 41 FPS respectively, which will be noticeably stuttery during action sequences.

The best overall experience for most users is 1440p High, as it offers a strong balance of visual detail and performance. If the user has a 1080p monitor, Medium settings provide the highest frame rates with a minimum of 89 FPS, ensuring no dips below the 60 FPS threshold. For 4K users, Low settings are the only viable option for smooth gameplay, and the visual trade-offs may be acceptable given the resolution’s inherent detail. The data shows no scenario where Ultra settings are preferable, as they uniformly reduce frame rates by 12-15% compared to High without a proportional visual benefit.