Control

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H is a 14-core, 18-thread mobile processor based on the Meteor Lake architecture, built on Intel's 7 nm process node. It features a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, with a 28 W TDP targeting thin-and-light gaming laptops. In Control, the benchmark results indicate that this CPU is generally sufficient to feed the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile at most settings, but its performance ceiling has subtle implications for the game's frame pacing at lower resolutions and higher frame rates. The processor's multi-threaded capabilities, as shown in Cinebench R23 multi-core results, are robust, but single-thread performance is what often matters most in a title like Control, which is heavily action-oriented.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H is a 14-core, 18-thread chip, with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. It is built on Intel's Meteor Lake architecture, which targets the mobile segment with a 7 nm process. The chip has 18 MB of shared L3 cache, and the per-core L2 is 2 MB. This configuration is designed to handle both multi-threaded workloads and single-thread responsiveness, which is important for a game like Control, which demands consistent frame times.

Benchmark data places this CPU at the 81st percentile across all tested CPUs, meaning it outperforms roughly 81% of the processors in the database. The average benchmark score, as measured across multiple tests, is 29093. Compared to its nearest rivals, this CPU trades blows: it is just 0.1% behind the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X, 0.5% behind the Intel Xeon Phi 7210, and 0.5% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 5600XT, while also being 0.6% behind the Intel Core i5-13500HX. This places the Ultra 5 135H in a very tight performance band around those desktop and mobile alternatives, which translates into a consistent frame delivery in CPU-bound scenarios.

In the measured FPS data for Control, the CPU's role becomes apparent. At 1080p with Low settings, the average FPS is 140, which is the highest observed in the dataset. This high frame rate suggests that at lower settings and resolution, the CPU is able to process the game logic quickly enough to push high frame rates. However, when the settings are raised to Ultra at the same resolution, the FPS drops to 77, a reduction of 63 frames per second. This drop is more attributable to the GPU workload, but the CPU still needs to keep up with the game's simulation and physics. The 14-core thread count and 4.60 GHz boost clock provide a solid foundation for this.

The data shows that the CPU performance scales well with the game's complexity. The single-thread score of 1700 in Cinebench R23 is decent for a mobile chip, and the multi-thread score of 11875.5 shows strong multi-core performance. In Control, which has a mix of physics-based combat and environmental destruction, the CPU's ability to handle multiple threads is leveraged. However, in the high-frame-rate scenarios, the CPU's single-thread performance becomes more critical, and the 4.60 GHz boost clock helps here.

The benchmark results indicate that at 1080p Low, the frame rate is 140 FPS, which is close to the CPU limit in that scenario. When the resolution is increased to 1440p, the frame rate drops to 106 FPS at Low, and at 4K, it drops further to 71 FPS. This scaling is a clear indication that the CPU is not the main bottleneck at 4K; the GPU is doing more work. But at 1080p Low, the CPU's 12 cores and 18 threads are sufficient to the high frame rate, but the 140 FPS is not a CPU-bound limit, rather the GPU's ability to render at that setting.

The fact that the CPU is at the 81st percentile among all CPUs and has a very tight delta with its rivals suggests that it is a solid mid-range performer. In Control, the CPU does not appear to be a limiting factor in most configurations, but the high refresh rate at 1080p Low only comes from the CPU's ability to keep up with the GPU. The 140 FPS is the top of the dataset, and it is not limited by the CPU, but rather by the GPU's output at that resolution.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture, with a base clock of 1395 MHz and a boost clock of 1695 MHz. It has 4608 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs. The GPU features 36 dedicated ray tracing cores and 144 tensor cores, which are designed to accelerate real-time ray tracing and AI-based graphics features. The GPU is equipped with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering a memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. This memory capacity is adequate for Control's textures at up to Ultra settings, but the 128-bit bus is a potential factor at high resolutions.

The GPU's benchmarks reflect its position: it ranks in the 73rd percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 27435. Its nearest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT, which has the same average score (deltaPct of 0). The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 is just 0.5% faster, and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 is 1.5% slower. The RTX 4070 Mobile is also 1.1% faster than the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell. This places it in a mid-to-high tier for mobile GPUs, but with a mobile TDP of 115W, it is a power-constrained part.

In Control, the GPU is the primary driver of performance at high resolutions and settings. The data shows a clear trend: at 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 39, which is the lowest in the dataset. At 4K High, it is 45 FPS, and at 4K Medium, it is 51 FPS. The 4K Low setting yields 71 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 32 FPS, which highlights the GPU's workload when rendering at high resolutions with high-quality effects.

The 8 GB VRAM is sufficient for Control at these settings, but the 128-bit memory bus limits the bandwidth. Control is not a particularly VRAM-heavy game, but the GPU's streaming bandwidth can affect how quickly textures are loaded. The game's large environments and dynamic physics can put a strain on the memory system. The 256.0 GB/s bandwidth is a relatively modest number for a desktop GPU, but it is typical for a mobile part. In practice, the GPU's performance at 1440p and 4K is in line with its bandwidth.

The GPU's boost clock of 1695 MHz is not a high clock, but the Ada Lovelace architecture's efficiency compensates. The GPU's FP32 performance is 15.62 TFLOPS, which is a strong number for a mobile GPU. In Control, the GPU's performance at 1440p Medium is 75 FPS, and at 1440p Ultra it is 58 FPS. This shows that the GPU is able to handle the game's requirements at 1440p with a good frame rate. At 4K, the GPU is clearly the limiting component, as the FPS drops below 60 FPS even at High settings.

The GPU's tensor cores and RT cores are not directly used in Control unless ray tracing is enabled, but the benchmark does not specify if ray tracing is on. The 36 RT cores and 144 tensor cores are part of the hardware, but their utilization is not measured in the dataset. The GPU's ability to handle the game's standard rendering is what the FPS numbers reflect.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS across resolutions shows a clear pattern of the GPU becoming the bottleneck as the resolution increases. At 1080p, the frame rates are high across all settings: Low at 140 FPS, Medium at 99 FPS, High at 88 FPS, and Ultra at 77 FPS. When moving to 1440p, the frame rates drop by about 25-30%: Low at 106 FPS, Medium at 75 FPS, High at 67 FPS, and Ultra at 58 FPS. At 4K, the frame rates drop further: Low at 71 FPS, Medium at 51 FPS, High at 45 FPS, and Ultra at 39 FPS.

The scaling from 1080p to 4K is not linear. For example, at Low settings, the FPS goes from 140 to 71, which is a 49% drop. At Medium settings, it goes from 99 to 51, a 48% drop. At High, it goes from 88 to 45, a 49% drop. At Ultra, from 77 to 39, a 49% drop. This consistent drop of about 49-50% indicates that the GPU is being saturated as the resolution increases, and the CPU is not the limiting factor at this stage.

The drop from 1080p Ultra to 4K Ultra is 38 FPS, while the drop from 1080p Low to 4K Low is 69 FPS. This suggests that the GPU's performance is more dependent on the resolution than on the settings. The GPU's frame output scales with the number of pixels, but the settings affect the per-pixel cost. The data shows that at 1080p, the CPU can deliver high frame rates, but as the resolution climbs, the GPU's pixel throughput becomes the constraint.

The minimum FPS values are only recorded for Medium settings. At 4K Medium, the min is 43 FPS, and at 1440p Medium, min is 64 FPS, and at 1080p Medium, min is 84 FPS. These min FPS values are lower than the average, indicating some occasional dips. The min FPS at 4K Medium is 43, which is close to the average of 51, suggesting that the frame time is relatively consistent at that resolution. At 1080p Medium, the min is 84 vs average 99, a 15% dip. This shows that the GPU is still able to keep frame delivery stable.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS data, the Medium preset offers the best balance of performance and quality. At 1080p, Medium averages 99 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold, and it is only 11 FPS lower than Low, while providing better visual quality. At 1440p, Medium averages 75 FPS, which is also above 60 FPS, and it is 8 FPS lower than Low but much better looking. At 4K, Medium averages 51 FPS, which is below 60 FPS, but it is a playable 51 FPS. The High preset at 4K is 45 FPS, and Ultra is 39 FPS, both of which are less ideal.

The Medium preset is the recommended choice for most players, as it delivers a smooth experience at 1080p and 1440p, and it is the only setting that comes close to 60 FPS at 4K. The High preset at 1440p is 67 FPS, which is also above 60, but at 1080p it is 88 FPS, which is still high. However, the Medium is the best compromise between visual fidelity and performance.

For those with a 4K display, the Medium setting is the only one that yields a playable frame rate above 45 FPS. The Low setting at 4K is 71 FPS, which is high, but the visual quality is significantly lower. The data suggests that a 1080p or 1440p display is ideal, but for 4K, the Medium is the best.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 135H and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile ranks 2008 out of 3720 tested combos for Control. This puts it in the top 54% of all tested hardware configurations. The rank is a measure of the combo's overall performance in the game relative to other CPU and GPU pairs. The rank is based on the average FPS across all tested settings and resolutions.

A rank of 2008 out of 3720 means it is exactly the median of the tested combos. This is a decent rank, as it is in the middle of the distribution. The combo is not in the top tier, but it is not a low performer either. The CPU and GPU are both mid-range mobile parts, so the rank is expected. The combo is at the 54th percentile, meaning it outperforms 54% of the tested systems.

The nearest rival CPUs, such as the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X, have a similar average score, but the GPU is the bigger factor in Control. The RTX 4070 Mobile is a 73rd percentile GPU, so the overall rank is a combination of a 81st percentile CPU and a 73rd percentile GPU. The result is a combo that is slightly above the median of all combos.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The measured FPS data for Control with the Intel Core Ultra 5 135H and RTX 4070 Mobile is as follows:

1080p (1920x1080)

• Low: 140 FPS (avg)
• Medium: 99 FPS avg, min 84, max 114
• High: 88 FPS avg
• Ultra: 77 FPS avg

1440p (2560x1440)

• Low: 106 FPS avg
• Medium: 75 FPS avg, min 64, max 86
• High: 67 FPS avg
• Ultra: 58 FPS avg

4K (3840x2160)

• Low: 71 FPS avg
• Medium: 51 FPS avg, min 43, max 58
• High: 45 FPS avg
• Ultra: 39 FPS avg

These numbers show a consistent pattern: at 1080p, the system is slightly CPU-bound at Low, but the GPU takes over as settings increase. The 1080p Low of 140 FPS is the highest, and the 4K Ultra of 39 FPS is the lowest. The Medium settings are the only ones with min and max FPS recorded, giving a frame range. At 1080p Medium, the range is 84 to 114, which is a 30 FPS spread. At 1440p Medium, it is 64 to 86, a 22 FPS spread. At 4K Medium, it is 43 to 58, a 15 FPS spread. This shows that as resolution increases, the frame time variance decreases, which is typical.

The data indicates that the system is capable of 140 FPS at 1080p Low, which is a high number for a mobile GPU. The 1440p High of 67 FPS is a good number for a 1440p monitor. The 4K Ultra of 39 FPS is not ideal, but it is playable in some contexts.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 1080p with Ultra settings?

A: The average FPS at 1080p with Ultra settings is 77 FPS.

Q: How does the RTX 4070 Mobile perform compared to the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT?

A: The RTX 4070 Mobile has the same average benchmark score as the RX 6700 XT, with a delta of 0%, meaning they are statistically equal.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck at 4K?

A: The data shows that at 4K, the GPU is the limiting component. The FPS drops significantly from 1080p to 4K, and the GPU's performance is the primary driver.

Q: What is the highest FPS recorded in the dataset?

A: The highest FPS is 140 FPS at 1080p with Low settings.

Q: Which preset gives the best experience at 1440p?

A: The Medium preset at 1440p gives an average of 75 FPS, which is above 60 FPS, and is recommended.

Q: How does the CPU rank compared to the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H is 0.1% slower than the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X, with a delta of -0.1%.

Q: What is the minimum FPS at 4K Medium?

A: The minimum FPS at 4K Medium is 43 FPS.