Control

The Intel Core i9-14900K paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT delivers a highly capable 1080p experience in Control, but the data reveals a clear shift in bottleneck behavior as resolution climbs. At 4K, the system struggles to maintain smooth frame rates at higher presets, indicating that the GPU becomes the primary limiting factor. This combination ranks in the middle of the pack for this title, suggesting that while it is not a top-tier performer, it offers a balanced profile for gamers targeting high refresh rates at mainstream resolutions.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to achieve over 60 FPS at High settings?

A: At 2560x1440 with High settings, the combo achieves an average of 71.7 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold. At 3840x2160 with the same settings, the average drops to 45.6 FPS, falling below that target.

Q: How much of a performance gain does switching from Ultra to Low settings provide at 4K?

A: The data shows a significant jump. At 3840x2160, the average FPS increases from 41.4 on Ultra to 75.8 on Low, representing a substantial improvement of 34.4 FPS for players willing to reduce visual fidelity.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more likely to be the bottleneck at 1080p?

A: The benchmark results suggest the GPU is the limiting factor. At 1920x1080, the frame rate scales consistently with settings (from 84.9 FPS on Ultra to 149.8 FPS on Low), which is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario rather than a CPU-limited one.

*Q: What is the combo's overall ranking compared to all other tested combinations in Control?*

A: This specific CPU and GPU pairing ranks 806th out of 1636 tested combos, placing it in the 49th percentile. This indicates it performs slightly below the median of all tested systems.

Q: Does the i9-14900K's high multi-core score translate to a clear advantage in this game?

A: Not directly. While the CPU has a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 49872 and a single-core score of 7040, the game's performance scaling with resolution points to the GPU as the main constraint. The CPU's strength ensures it does not hold back the GPU, but it does not overcome the GPU's limits at higher resolutions.

Q: What are the FPS differences between Medium and High settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the average FPS is 78.0 on Medium and 71.7 on High. The difference of 6.3 FPS is modest, suggesting that the visual upgrade to High comes at a relatively small performance cost at this resolution.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT is the central figure in this combo's performance in Control. Its 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus provides a 432.0 GB/s bandwidth, which is sufficient for the game's textures at 1440p and even 4K, though the data indicates capacity is not the primary issue. The GPU's clock speeds are notable: a base clock of 2150 MHz, a game clock of 2495 MHz, and a boost clock of 2600 MHz. These high clocks help drive the frame rates at lower resolutions, where the GPU's compute units are fully utilized.

However, the GPU's role shifts dramatically with resolution. At 1080p, the RX 6750 XT is clearly the workhorse, delivering 149.8 FPS on Low settings and 84.9 FPS on Ultra. This suggests it has ample raw power for the pixel count. As resolution increases to 1440p, the GPU still manages to provide playable frame rates, with 71.7 FPS on High. The turning point is 4K. Here, the GPU's 13.31 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 166.4 GPixel/s pixel rate are insufficient to maintain high frame rates on higher presets. The 45.6 FPS at 4K High and 41.4 FPS at 4K Ultra show a clear struggle, indicating that the GPU's shading and rasterization throughput is the decisive factor limiting performance.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a predictable but steep performance decline as resolution increases. Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 at High settings, the average FPS drops from 91.3 to 71.7, a reduction of 19.6 FPS (21.5%). This is a manageable cost for the additional pixel density. The scaling from 1440p to 4K is far more punishing. At High settings, the frame rate falls from 71.7 FPS at 2560x1440 to 45.6 FPS at 3840x2160, a loss of 26.1 FPS (36.4%). This disproportionate drop strongly suggests the GPU is hitting its rendering limits.

The pattern is consistent across all settings. For example, on Low settings, the FPS goes from 149.8 at 1080p to 109.9 at 1440p, and then to 75.8 at 4K. The scaling factor from 1440p to 4K is similar across presets, indicating that the GPU is the bottleneck. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect the frame rates to remain relatively flat across resolutions, especially at lower settings. The data shows the opposite, with frame rates scaling directly with the number of pixels rendered. This confirms that the RX 6750 XT's pixel throughput is the primary constraint at 4K, while at 1080p and 1440p, it has enough headroom to provide high frame rates.

How This Combo Ranks

In the context of all tested combinations for Control, this pairing of the Intel Core i9-14900K and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT secures a rank of 806 out of 1636. This places it almost exactly in the middle of the field, at the 49th percentile. This is a noteworthy result, as it suggests that the combination is not a top-tier performer for this specific title, despite the individual strengths of its components. The CPU is a high-end part, with a benchmark percentile of 97 versus all CPUs, and an average benchmark score of 79824. In contrast, the GPU's percentile is 79 versus all GPUs, with an average score of 35327.

The rank implies that the GPU is holding the combo back from higher positions. The i9-14900K is more than capable of feeding the GPU, but the RX 6750 XT's performance ceiling limits the overall result. When compared to its nearest rivals, the RX 6750 XT is very close in average score to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080, with a deltaPct of -1.3. This indicates that the combo's rank would likely be similar if paired with a GPU of that performance class. The data suggests that for Control, a more powerful GPU would significantly improve this combo's standing, but as configured, it sits in the middle of the pack.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution. For 1920x1080, the High preset is the clear sweet spot, delivering an average of 91.3 FPS. This provides a smooth, high-refresh-rate experience without sacrificing much visual quality. The Ultra preset, at 84.9 FPS, is also viable but offers diminishing returns for a 6.4 FPS loss. For 2560x1440, the High preset remains the best choice, with 71.7 FPS. This is comfortably above the 60 FPS target for most displays. The Medium preset offers a slight boost to 78.0 FPS, but the visual upgrade to High is generally worth the small performance cost.

At 3840x2160, the situation is more challenging. The High preset only yields 45.6 FPS, which is not ideal for a smooth experience. The Medium preset, at 55.6 FPS, is a viable option for players who want a balance between quality and performance. However, the Low preset at 75.8 FPS is the only setting that provides a consistently smooth frame rate at 4K. Given the game's genre, the Low preset at 4K is a reasonable trade-off for playability. The data indicates that players should prioritize the High preset for 1080p and 1440p, and consider dropping to Low or Medium for 4K to maintain playable frame rates.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete set of measured average FPS values provides a detailed picture of the combo's performance. At 1920x1080, the results are as follows: Low settings achieve 149.8 FPS, Medium achieves 106.1 FPS, High achieves 91.3 FPS, and Ultra achieves 84.9 FPS. This shows a smooth progression, with a 64.9 FPS difference between the Low and Ultra presets. At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low at 109.9 FPS, Medium at 78.0 FPS, High at 71.7 FPS, and Ultra at 60.1 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra narrows to 49.8 FPS, reflecting the increased pixel load.

At 3840x2160, the performance drops significantly. The Low preset averages 75.8 FPS, Medium averages 55.6 FPS, High averages 45.6 FPS, and Ultra averages 41.4 FPS. This represents a 34.4 FPS difference between Low and Ultra. Notably, the 4K Low setting (75.8 FPS) is faster than the 1440p Ultra setting (60.1 FPS), highlighting the importance of resolution over settings for this GPU. The data also shows that the drop from 1080p to 1440p is less severe than the drop from 1440p to 4K, confirming the GPU's scaling limitations.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i9-14900K is a formidable processor that ensures the system is never CPU-limited in Control. With 24 cores and 32 threads, its architecture is designed for heavy multi-threaded workloads, as evidenced by its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 49872. Its single-core performance is equally impressive, with a score of 7040 in the same test, driven by a boost clock of 6.00 GHz. This high clock speed is crucial for gaming, as it ensures rapid instruction processing.

However, the benchmark data indicates that the CPU's role is to provide a stable foundation rather than to directly boost frame rates. The consistent scaling of FPS with resolution and settings points to the GPU as the bottleneck. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would see frame rates plateau at lower resolutions, which is not the case. The i9-14900K's nearest rivals, such as the Intel Core i9-14900KF and Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF, show a deltaPct of 0.7 and 0.7 respectively, indicating they are nearly identical in overall benchmark performance. This suggests that swapping the CPU for a similarly performing part would not change the outcome in Control. The CPU's job is to keep the GPU fed, and it does so without becoming a constraint, allowing the RX 6750 XT to be the sole determinant of performance.