Control

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H paired with the AMD Radeon 880M lands at rank 2817 out of 2888 tested combos in Control. This places the configuration in the bottom 10% of all tested systems, a position that reflects the integrated GPU's modest standing rather than any deficiency in the processor. The Radeon 880M's percentile of 43 against all GPUs tells a similar story; it is outclassed by the majority of discrete graphics solutions. The data shows a combo that is fundamentally constrained by its graphics subsystem, where even the CPU's strong relative performance cannot compensate for the GPU's output limitations.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 2817 out of 2888 represents a bottom-tier finish, but the delta between the components tells a more nuanced story. The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H sits in the 81st percentile against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 29093. That score places it within 0.1% of the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X and just 0.5% above the AMD Ryzen 5 5600XT. This is a processor that punches well above its mobile positioning in synthetic tests. In contrast, the AMD Radeon 880M lands in the 43rd percentile against all GPUs, with an average score of 8436, putting it within 0.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX and 0.3% below the NVIDIA GeForce MX330. The GPU is effectively a mid-pack performer from a bygone era of discrete mobile graphics.

The measured frame rates in Control reinforce this imbalance. At 1080p Ultra, the combo manages 30 FPS; at 4K Ultra, it drops to 15 FPS. These are not the results of a balanced system. The CPU's Cinebench R23 multicore score of 11875.5 and single-core score of 1700 demonstrate a processor capable of feeding a far more powerful GPU. The Passmark multithread score of 22422 and single-thread score of 3521 further confirm that the 135H is not the bottleneck. The ranking reflects the GPU's inability to translate CPU headroom into playable frame rates in a demanding Action Adventure title like Control.

Compared to the nearest rival combos, the GPU's deltaPct values are telling. The Radeon 880M is 0.1% faster than the GTX 675MX and 1.3% faster than the Radeon R9 M375X, but 0.3% slower than both the MX330 and Radeon HD 8870M. These are nominal differences, meaning the 880M's performance class is essentially that of an entry-level discrete GPU from a decade ago. The combo's overall rank is dragged down by this reality. At 1080p Medium, the system produces 39 FPS, which is playable but far from smooth; at 1440p Medium, it falls to 30 FPS, and at 4K Medium, it collapses to 20 FPS. The data indicates a system that can handle Control at lower presets and resolutions, but nothing beyond that.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS rows provide a clear hierarchy of playability. At 1080p, the Low preset yields 55 FPS, which is the only setting in the entire dataset that approaches a smooth 60 FPS target. The Medium preset at 1080p drops to 39 FPS, with a minimum of 33 FPS and a maximum of 45 FPS, indicating some stutter in demanding scenes. High at 1080p delivers 35 FPS, while Ultra falls to 30 FPS. The data suggests that Low at 1080p is the only preset offering a consistently fluid experience, with a 16 FPS advantage over Medium.

Stepping up to 1440p, the Low preset manages 42 FPS, which is still playable but shows a 13 FPS drop from 1080p Low. Medium at 1440p delivers 30 FPS with a minimum of 25 FPS, which is borderline for an action game. High at 1440p produces 26 FPS, and Ultra drops to 23 FPS. At 4K, even Low falls to 28 FPS, with Medium at 20 FPS, High at 18 FPS, and Ultra at 15 FPS. The pattern is unambiguous: the combination of higher resolution and higher settings quickly overwhelms the Radeon 880M.

For the best experience per the measured rows, the 1080p Low preset is the clear recommendation. It is the only configuration that stays above 50 FPS, and the 55 FPS average leaves enough headroom to avoid frequent dips into the 40s. If visual fidelity is a priority, 1080p Medium at 39 FPS is the highest preset that remains consistently above 30 FPS, though the minimum of 33 FPS suggests occasional drops. Users should avoid 1440p and 4K entirely unless they are willing to accept sub-30 FPS averages, as even 1440p Low at 42 FPS is a compromise that sacrifices resolution for marginal smoothness.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a GPU-bound system. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 55 at 1080p to 42 at 1440p, a 23.6% reduction, and then to 28 at 4K, a 33.3% reduction from 1440p. This is a steep decline that indicates the Radeon 880M is the primary limiting factor. The CPU's performance is not the constraint here; the Intel Core Ultra 5 135H has ample headroom, as evidenced by its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 11875.5 and Passmark integer math score of 73509. The data shows that each resolution step roughly halves the pixel count, and the FPS drops are proportionally larger, confirming that the GPU is saturated.

At Medium settings, the scaling is similar: 39 FPS at 1080p, 30 FPS at 1440p, and 20 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 23.1%, and from 1440p to 4K is 33.3%. This consistency across presets suggests that the GPU's memory bandwidth and shading resources are the binding constraints. The Radeon 880M has a memory bandwidth listed as "System Dependent," meaning it shares system memory, which is a significant bottleneck in a game like Control that streams textures and geometry. The GPU's pixel rate of 46.40 GPixel/s and texture rate of 139.2 GTexel/s are modest figures that align with the observed performance.

The scaling pattern also indicates that the iGPU's 768 shading units and 48 TMUs are insufficient for 4K rendering, even at Low settings. The 4K Low result of 28 FPS is only 50.9% of the 1080p Low result, which is a worse scaling efficiency than what a discrete GPU would typically show. This is because the system-shared memory architecture creates additional latency and bandwidth pressure as resolution increases. The data strongly suggests that the limiting component is the GPU, not the CPU, as the processor's benchmark scores show no signs of being overwhelmed.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and preset for playable frame rates in Control?

A: The only configuration that achieves a 55 FPS average is 1080p with the Low preset. At 1080p Medium, the average drops to 39 FPS with a minimum of 33 FPS, which is playable but not ideal. All 1440p and 4K presets deliver averages below 42 FPS, with most falling under 30 FPS.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 5 135H compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The CPU's average benchmark score of 29093 places it 0.1% below the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X, 0.5% below the Intel Xeon Phi 7210, and 0.6% below the Intel Core i5-13500HX. It is 0.5% above the AMD Ryzen 5 5600XT. The processor sits in the 81st percentile against all CPUs.

Q: Is the AMD Radeon 880M a capable GPU for modern games like Control?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score of 8436 places it in the 43rd percentile against all GPUs, with performance nearly identical to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX and NVIDIA GeForce MX330. In Control, it can only manage a 55 FPS average at 1080p Low, indicating it is suited for lower settings and resolutions.

Q: What is the CPU's boost clock and how does it relate to gaming performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H has a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, which contributes to its single-thread performance. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1700 and Passmark single-thread score of 3521 indicate that the CPU is not a bottleneck in Control, as the GPU limits frame rates at all settings.

Q: How does the GPU's memory configuration affect Control's performance?

A: The Radeon 880M uses "System Shared" memory with a bandwidth listed as "System Dependent." This means it relies on the CPU's DDR5 memory, which creates a bottleneck in bandwidth-heavy scenes. This is reflected in the steep FPS drops at higher resolutions, where memory bandwidth becomes more critical.

Q: What are the CPU's core and thread counts, and do they suffice for Control?

A: The CPU has 14 cores and 18 threads, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 11875.5. This is more than sufficient for Control, as the game's demands on the CPU are modest compared to the GPU's workload, which is the clear limiting factor in this combo.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 880M is an integrated GPU based on the RDNA 3.5 architecture, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It features 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with 12 ray tracing cores. The boost clock is 2900 MHz, with a base clock of 400 MHz. These specifications yield a pixel rate of 46.40 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 139.2 GTexel/s, with a FP32 compute rating of 4.454 TFLOPS. The GPU's memory is "System Shared," with a bus width and bandwidth listed as "System Dependent," meaning it draws from the CPU's DDR5 memory pool.

In Control, these specs translate to the observed frame rates. The 4.454 TFLOPS of compute power is insufficient for the game's physics-heavy action sequences at higher resolutions. The 16 ROPs are a particular bottleneck for fill-rate-dependent effects, which explains why the 4K Ultra preset manages only 15 FPS. The GPU's Passmark G3D score of 7615 and DirectX 12 score of 32 indicate that it struggles with modern API workloads, which Control uses extensively. The Geekbench Vulkan score of 40006 is more respectable, but it does not translate into playable frame rates in this title.

The GPU's performance class is defined by its nearest rivals: it is 0.1% faster than the GTX 675MX, 0.3% slower than the MX330, and 1.3% faster than the Radeon R9 M375X. These are all entry-level or older discrete GPUs, and the 880M matches them in Control. The 1080p Low result of 55 FPS is the only bright spot, while the 1080p Ultra result of 30 FPS is the ceiling. The data indicates that the GPU's 768 shading units are simply too few to handle Control's detailed environments at higher settings, and the system-shared memory architecture compounds the issue by limiting bandwidth.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H is a Meteor Lake processor with 14 cores and 18 threads, featuring a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. It has 18 MB of shared L3 cache, with 2 MB of L2 cache per core and 112 KB of L1 cache per core. The CPU is built on Intel's 7 nm process and has a TDP of 28 W. In synthetic benchmarks, it achieves a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 11875.5 and a single-core score of 1700, with a Passmark multithread score of 22422 and a single-thread score of 3521. These scores place it in the 81st percentile against all CPUs.

In Control, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and physics calculations. The data shows that the CPU is not the limiting factor; even at 1080p Low, where the GPU is least stressed, the FPS is only 55, which is well below what the CPU could sustain. The Cinebench R15 multicore score of 1718 and Passmark physics score of 1482 indicate that the CPU handles the game's physics engine with ease. The Passmark data compression score of 251651 and encryption score of 15026 further demonstrate that the processor has substantial computational headroom.

The CPU's nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks include the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X and Intel Core i5-13500HX, with deltaPct values of -0.1% and -0.6%, respectively. This means the 135H is essentially on par with these desktop and high-end mobile parts, yet the combo's rank in Control is dragged down by the GPU. The CPU's 18 threads are more than adequate for Control's threading model, and the 4.60 GHz boost clock ensures responsiveness. The data suggests that upgrading the GPU in this system would yield massive gains in Control, as the CPU is capable of supporting far higher frame rates than the 880M can deliver.