Control

Control is a 2019 action-adventure title that stresses both the CPU and GPU, and the combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 125H with the AMD Radeon 760M represents a specific mobile-focused pairing. The measured data for this combo shows a system that is capable of running the game, but only at the most forgiving settings and resolutions. The Core Ultra 5 125H is a 14-core, 18-thread Meteor Lake processor with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz, built on Intel’s 7 nm process. The Radeon 760M is an integrated GPU based on RDNA 3.0, with 512 shading units and a boost clock of 2599 MHz, drawing from a 15 W TDP. This is not a high-end gaming rig; the data indicates a setup that will require significant compromises to achieve playable frame rates, and the benchmark results reflect that reality.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to play Control with this CPU and GPU combo?

A: Based on the measured FPS data, 1920x1080 is the only resolution where the average frame rate reaches a playable threshold, and even then, only with the Low preset. At 1920x1080 Low, the combo averages 40 FPS. The 2560x1440 Low preset drops to 30 FPS, and 3840x2160 Low averages only 21 FPS.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 5 125H compare to its nearest CPU rivals in general benchmark performance?

A: The CPU’s average benchmark score is 27507, placing it in the 79th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 7 5800, scores 27535, which is a delta of -0.1%, meaning the two are essentially tied. The Intel Core i5-12600K and AMD Ryzen 7 5700X both score 27578, putting the Ultra 5 125H 0.3% behind them. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355G scores 27382, which is 0.5% lower than the Ultra 5 125H.

Q: What is the GPU performance position of the AMD Radeon 760M relative to other graphics cards?

A: The Radeon 760M’s average benchmark score is 6019, which places it in the 35th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 6400, which scores 6001, a delta of 0.3% in favor of the 760M. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M scores 6000, also a 0.3% difference. The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 scores 6049, making it 0.5% faster than the 760M.

Q: Does the CPU’s performance in Control depend more on its multi-core or single-core strength?

A: The data shows that even at 1080p Low, where the CPU is most likely to be a limiting factor, the average FPS is only 40. The CPU’s PassMark single-thread score is 3399 and its multithread score is 21100. Given that the frame rate is still relatively low at the lowest settings, the bottleneck is likely the GPU, but the CPU’s modest single-core performance does not provide headroom for higher settings.

Q: Is this combo ranked well among all tested combinations for Control?

A: No. The comboRankInGame for this pairing is 3709 out of 3720 tested combos. This places it in the bottom fraction of a percent of all systems tested, indicating that it is one of the least capable configurations for this specific game in the benchmark database.

Q: What is the difference in average FPS between the Low and Ultra presets at 1920x1080?

A: The difference is 18 FPS. At 1920x1080 with the Low preset, the average FPS is 40. With the Ultra preset, the average FPS drops to 22. This shows a significant performance cost for the higher visual fidelity settings.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data is unambiguous: this combo is not designed for high-fidelity gaming in Control. The only configuration that achieves an average frame rate above 30 FPS is 1920x1080 with the Low preset, which delivers 40 FPS. This is the only settings combination that can be considered playable for a smooth experience. At 2560x1440 Low, the average drops to 30 FPS, which is borderline and will feel less fluid. At 3840x2160, all presets are below 21 FPS, making the game essentially unplayable.

For the best experience, the recommendation is straightforward: run the game at 1920x1080 with the Low preset. This yields the highest average FPS of 40. The Medium preset at 1080p drops the average to 29 FPS, with a measured minimum of 24 FPS and a maximum of 33 FPS. This is a noticeable step down in smoothness and may result in visible stuttering during intense action sequences. The High preset at 1080p averages 25 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 22 FPS. Neither is recommended for consistent playability.

If a user prioritizes visual quality over frame rate, the Medium preset at 1080p is the highest setting that stays remotely near playable territory, but the data shows a 27.5% drop in average FPS from Low. The trade-off is severe. There is no scenario in the measured data where increasing the resolution to 1440p or 2160p provides a better experience than 1080p Low, as even the Low preset at those resolutions produces lower average frame rates. The practical advice is to accept the Low preset at 1080p to get the best performance from this hardware.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 760M is an integrated GPU, meaning its memory is system shared, and its bandwidth is system dependent. This is a critical limitation for a game like Control, which has detailed textures and effects. The GPU has a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2599 MHz, with 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Its FP32 performance is 5.323 TFLOPS. The GPU’s benchmark scores are modest, with a PassMark G3D score of 5310 and a PassMark DirectX 12 score of 25, indicating weak DirectX 12 performance, which is the API Control uses.

The data shows that the GPU is the primary bottleneck in this combo. At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 40, but increasing to Medium drops it to 29, High to 25, and Ultra to 22. This scaling is characteristic of a GPU that is heavily constrained by its shading and memory bandwidth. The Radeon 760M’s 16 ROPs and low pixel rate of 41.58 GPixel/s limit its ability to fill the screen, particularly at higher resolutions. At 4K, the average FPS is 21 on Low, 15 on Medium, 13 on High, and 11 on Ultra. The GPU simply does not have the raw throughput to handle 3840x2160.

The GPU’s nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6400, scores 6001, which is 0.3% lower than the 760M’s 6019. This suggests the 760M is comparable to a low-end discrete GPU. However, the integrated nature of the 760M means it shares system memory, which can further reduce performance. The system-dependent bandwidth is a key factor; in a laptop with slower RAM, the performance would be even worse. The data indicates that for Control, the 760M is only viable for low-resolution, low-detail gaming, and any attempt to raise settings will result in sub-30 FPS averages.

How This Combo Ranks

The comboRankInGame for the Intel Core Ultra 5 125H and AMD Radeon 760M is 3709 out of 3720 tested combinations. This rank is exceptionally poor, placing the combo in the bottom 11 positions of all tested systems. This is a clear indicator that this hardware configuration is among the least capable for running Control in the benchmark database. The rank reflects the combined performance of the CPU and GPU, but given the GPU’s 35th percentile ranking versus the CPU’s 79th percentile, it is evident that the GPU is dragging the overall score down.

To put this in perspective, the CPU alone is a mid-pack performer, sitting near the AMD Ryzen 7 5800 and Intel Core i5-12600K in average benchmark scores. The GPU, however, is a bottom-tier performer, ranking in the 35th percentile. The combination of a solid CPU with a weak integrated GPU results in a system that is poorly suited for gaming. The rank of 3709 out of 3720 means that nearly every other combination of CPU and GPU tested delivers higher frame rates in Control. This is not a combo that will provide a satisfying experience for most players, and the measured FPS data confirms this, with only one settings/resolution pair exceeding 30 FPS.

The data shows that even compared to other integrated graphics solutions, this combo underperforms. The GPU’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro P2000, is 0.5% faster, but the Quadro P2000 is a workstation card with different drivers and optimizations. The fact that the 760M is near the RX 6400 and GTX 770M in raw benchmark score does not translate to good gaming performance in modern titles like Control, which demands more from the GPU than synthetic benchmarks suggest. For a user looking at this rank, the message is clear: this is a last-resort configuration for playing Control.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 125H is a Meteor Lake processor with 14 cores and 18 threads, a base clock of 3.60 GHz, and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. It has an 18 MB shared L3 cache and supports DDR5 memory. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 12804.5 and single-core is 1647.5. In PassMark, it scores 21100 in multithread and 3399 in single-thread. This places the CPU in the 79th percentile of all CPUs, which is a respectable position for a mobile processor. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 7 5800, is essentially tied with a delta of -0.1%.

In the context of Control, the CPU’s role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and handle game logic. The data suggests that the CPU is not the primary bottleneck in this combo. At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 40, which is likely GPU-limited given the 760M’s modest capabilities. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see similar frame rates across different settings at the same resolution, but the data shows a clear drop from Low to Medium, indicating the GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU has enough single-core performance to keep up with the GPU’s output at lower settings, but it does not have enough headroom to push higher frame rates if the GPU were faster.

The CPU’s 14 cores and 18 threads are more than sufficient for Control, which is not a highly multi-threaded game. The single-core performance, as measured by Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1647.5, is adequate for the game’s physics and AI. However, the CPU’s performance is irrelevant if the GPU cannot render frames quickly enough. The benchmark results indicate that the CPU is not holding back the system in a meaningful way; the GPU is the clear limiting factor. The 28 W TDP of the CPU also suggests that it is designed for efficiency, not maximum performance, which is consistent with its mobile market segment.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of how this combo performs across resolutions and settings. The data is measured, not estimated, and it shows a consistent pattern of performance degradation as resolution and settings increase.

At 3840x2160, the highest resolution tested, the results are all sub-30 FPS. The Low preset averages 21 FPS. The Medium preset averages 15 FPS, with a minimum of 12 and a maximum of 17. The High preset averages 13 FPS. The Ultra preset averages 11 FPS. This resolution is not playable at any setting. The gap between Low and Ultra is 10 FPS, showing a steep cost for higher settings. Even on Low, the frame rate is below 24 FPS, which is the standard for cinematic frame rates, but not for interactive gameplay.

At 2560x1440, the results improve but remain marginal. The Low preset averages 30 FPS, which is the minimum for acceptable playability in many games. The Medium preset averages 22 FPS, with a minimum of 18 and a maximum of 25. The High preset averages 19 FPS. The Ultra preset averages 17 FPS. The only setting that hits the 30 FPS mark is Low. The Medium preset’s minimum of 18 FPS indicates that there will be noticeable stutters. The data shows a 13 FPS difference between Low and Ultra at this resolution.

At 1920x1080, the best-case scenario is achieved. The Low preset averages 40 FPS, which is the highest average frame rate recorded for this combo. The Medium preset averages 29 FPS, with a minimum of 24 and a maximum of 33. The High preset averages 25 FPS. The Ultra preset averages 22 FPS. The Low preset is the only one that provides a consistently smooth experience, while Medium is borderline. The drop from Low to Medium is 11 FPS, which is a significant 27.5% decrease. The data shows that this combo is best used at 1080p Low, with any other setting resulting in a sub-30 FPS average or worse.

In summary, the measured FPS data tells a clear story. This combo is only capable of playing Control at 1080p Low with an average of 40 FPS. Every other configuration results in an average frame rate below 30 FPS, which is generally considered the minimum for a playable experience. The GPU is the limiting factor, and the CPU’s strong benchmark scores cannot compensate for the integrated graphics’ lack of performance. For anyone considering this hardware for Control, the expectation should be set to low settings and a 1080p resolution, with the understanding that even then, performance will be modest.