Control

# Control — Intel Core i9-14900K + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER

The measured frame rates for this combination place it at rank 110 out of 1,636 tested combos in Control, putting it in the top 7% of all configurations. The Intel Core i9-14900K, with its 24 cores and 32 threads, sits at the 97th percentile among all CPUs, while the RTX 4080 SUPER ranks at the 88th percentile among GPUs. Across twelve measured scenarios spanning three resolutions and four quality presets, the data reveals a system that remains fluid at 4K but truly opens up at lower resolutions, where the CPU's high single-thread performance becomes more apparent.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is substantial but not catastrophic, indicating a balanced system where the GPU becomes the primary limiting factor at higher resolutions. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 244.9 FPS at 1920x1080 to 122.9 FPS at 3840x2160 — a reduction of exactly 50%. This halving of performance at 4K is a classic sign of GPU-bound behavior, as the rendering load scales with pixel count while the CPU work remains relatively constant.

At Medium settings, the scaling pattern shifts slightly. The 1080p result of 177.7 FPS drops to 130.1 FPS at 1440p (a 26.8% reduction), then to 89.0 FPS at 4K (a further 31.6% reduction). The total drop from 1080p to 4K at Medium is 49.9%, nearly identical to the Low preset. This consistency suggests that the RTX 4080 SUPER's 16 GB of GDDR6X memory and 736.3 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient to handle the increased resolution without memory capacity bottlenecks, keeping the scaling curve smooth.

High settings show a slightly different trajectory: 156.4 FPS at 1080p, 115.8 FPS at 1440p, and 79.4 FPS at 4K. The percentage drops are 26.0% from 1080p to 1440p, then 31.4% from 1440p to 4K. The Ultra preset follows the steepest curve, beginning at 133.9 FPS at 1080p, falling to 102.2 FPS at 1440p, and reaching 68.9 FPS at 4K — a total reduction of 48.5% from the lowest to highest resolution.

The pattern across all presets indicates that resolution scaling is highly predictable. Each step from 1080p to 1440p costs roughly 26-31% performance, and each step from 1440p to 4K costs another 31-35%. This linear degradation points to the GPU as the limiting component at 4K, while the i9-14900K's boost clock of 6.00 GHz ensures the CPU never becomes a bottleneck even at 1080p Low, where 244.9 FPS is achieved.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER operates with a base clock of 2295 MHz and a boost clock of 2550 MHz, built on the AD103 chip using TSMC's 5 nm process. Its 10,240 shading units and 320 texture mapping units provide the raw throughput needed for Control's particle effects and physics-based destruction. The memory subsystem consists of 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus, delivering 736.3 GB/s of bandwidth — a configuration that appears well-matched to this game's requirements.

The GPU's benchmark scores contextualize its positioning. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 6,600, while PassMark G3D gives 34,245 and PassMark GPU Compute yields 19,822. These synthetic results align with the measured in-game performance, where the 4K Ultra average of 68.9 FPS represents the most demanding scenario tested. The pixel rate of 285.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 816.0 GTexel/s are theoretical maxima; the measured data suggests real-world performance stays within 27-31% of these limits depending on resolution.

Comparing to nearest rivals, the RTX 4080 SUPER's average benchmark score of 53,610 places it just 0.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT (53,489) and 0.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M (53,414). The gap widens to 2.1% over the AMD Radeon RX 7700S (52,505) and 2.9% over the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti (52,086). These margins are small in synthetic tests, but the in-game results show the 4080 SUPER maintaining playable frame rates at every resolution and preset combination tested.

The GPU's 320 W TDP and triple-slot cooler suggest thermal headroom for sustained loads, which is relevant for Control's action sequences that can maintain high GPU utilization for extended periods. The 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die result in a transistor density of 121.1 million per mm², enabling the 52.22 TFLOPS FP32 performance that drives the higher preset levels.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides clear guidance on preset selection based on target frame rates. At 4K, the High preset delivers 79.4 FPS, which comfortably exceeds the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. The Ultra preset falls to 68.9 FPS, still playable but with less headroom for demanding scenes. The Medium preset at 89 FPS offers a better margin, while Low at 122.9 FPS provides the highest refresh rate potential at this resolution.

For 1440p displays, the High preset achieves 115.8 FPS, which is suitable for high-refresh-rate monitors up to 100 Hz. The Medium preset at 130.1 FPS extends this to 120 Hz-class displays, while Low at 186.5 FPS supports even 144 Hz panels. Ultra at 102.2 FPS remains above the 100 FPS mark, making it viable for gamers who prioritize visual fidelity over raw frame rate.

At 1080p, all presets exceed 133 FPS, with Low reaching 244.9 FPS. The Ultra preset at 133.9 FPS is sufficient for 120 Hz displays, while High at 156.4 FPS and Medium at 177.7 FPS support 144 Hz and 165 Hz panels respectively. The data indicates that the High preset offers the best balance across all three resolutions, providing frame rates that are 15-18% higher than Ultra while maintaining most of the visual enhancements. For competitive play, the Low preset at 1080p gives the maximum 244.9 FPS, but the visual trade-offs may not be justified given that High already exceeds 156 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured averages are 244.9 FPS on Low, 177.7 FPS on Medium, 156.4 FPS on High, and 133.9 FPS on Ultra. The gap between Low and Ultra is 111 FPS, representing an 82.9% performance spread. The step from Low to Medium costs 67.2 FPS (27.4%), while Medium to High costs 21.3 FPS (12.0%), and High to Ultra costs 22.5 FPS (14.4%). This diminishing returns pattern suggests the Low preset is CPU-limited, with the i9-14900K's 24 cores providing ample headroom.

At 2560x1440, the results are 186.5 FPS on Low, 130.1 FPS on Medium, 115.8 FPS on High, and 102.2 FPS on Ultra. The spread narrows to 84.3 FPS (82.5% difference). Low to Medium costs 56.4 FPS (30.2%), Medium to High costs 14.3 FPS (11.0%), and High to Ultra costs 13.6 FPS (11.7%). The percentage cost of each preset step is more consistent at 1440p, indicating the GPU is becoming the primary constraint.

At 3840x2160, the averages are 122.9 FPS on Low, 89.0 FPS on Medium, 79.4 FPS on High, and 68.9 FPS on Ultra. The spread is 54 FPS (78.4% difference). Low to Medium costs 33.9 FPS (27.6%), Medium to High costs 9.6 FPS (10.8%), and High to Ultra costs 10.5 FPS (13.2%). The 4K results show the smallest absolute differences between presets, confirming that the RTX 4080 SUPER is the limiting factor at this resolution — even the Low preset cannot reach the 244.9 FPS seen at 1080p.

How This Combo Ranks

With a combo rank of 110 out of 1,636 tested combinations, this system sits in the 93.3rd percentile of all configurations tested in Control. This places it ahead of the vast majority of systems while acknowledging that higher-end GPUs or more specialized combinations achieve better results. The ranking reflects the balance between the i9-14900K's 97th percentile CPU standing and the RTX 4080 SUPER's 88th percentile GPU standing.

The CPU's nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks show how close the top of the stack is. The AMD EPYC 7413 scores 80,041 (0.3% higher), while the Intel Core i9-14900KF (79,245) and Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF (79,240) are each 0.7% behind, and the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K (79,102) trails by 0.9%. These margins are negligible in gaming scenarios, meaning the CPU is unlikely to be the differentiating factor in this combo's rank.

The GPU's nearest rivals tell a similar story. The AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT scores 53,489 (0.2% behind), the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M scores 53,414 (0.4% behind), the AMD Radeon RX 7700S scores 52,505 (2.1% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti scores 52,086 (2.9% behind). The 4080 SUPER leads this group, but the small deltas suggest that any of these GPUs would produce similar in-game results, with the ranking likely determined by other system components or driver optimizations.

FAQ

Q: What is the best preset for 4K gaming with this combo?

A: The High preset at 3840x2160 delivers 79.4 FPS, which is the highest quality setting that remains above the 60 FPS comfort threshold. Ultra falls to 68.9 FPS, while Medium reaches 89.0 FPS.

Q: Can this system hit 144 FPS at 1440p?

A: Yes, at 2560x1440 the Low preset achieves 186.5 FPS, and Medium reaches 130.1 FPS. High (115.8 FPS) and Ultra (102.2 FPS) do not quite reach 144 FPS.

Q: How does the RTX 4080 SUPER compare to its nearest GPU rivals in synthetic tests?

A: The average benchmark score of 53,610 is 0.2% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT (53,489), 0.4% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M (53,414), 2.1% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 7700S (52,505), and 2.9% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti (52,086).

Q: What is the performance cost of each preset step at 1080p?

A: Moving from Low (244.9 FPS) to Medium (177.7 FPS) costs 27.4% performance. Medium to High (156.4 FPS) costs 12.0%, and High to Ultra (133.9 FPS) costs 14.4%.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor at 4K?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the primary constraint at 3840x2160. The performance difference between Low (122.9 FPS) and Ultra (68.9 FPS) is 54 FPS, and even the lowest settings cannot approach the 244.9 FPS achievable at 1080p.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested configurations in Control?

A: It ranks 110th out of 1,636 tested combos, placing it in the top 7% of all systems tested for this game.