Control

Control on this platform pairing shows a clear pattern: this game is far more demanding on the GPU than the CPU across all tested resolutions. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 provides more than enough processing headroom, while the AMD Radeon RX 6600 becomes the limiting factor as resolution and settings increase, with average frame rates ranging from 108 FPS at 1080p Low down to 30 FPS at 4K Ultra. The data indicates that players should prioritize GPU-bound settings and consider lower resolutions to achieve smooth gameplay.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 is a 10-core, 10-thread desktop processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The CPU’s benchmark scores place it in the 85th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 36938. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F (average score 36945, delta 0%), the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D (37018, -0.2%), and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 (37093, -0.4%), showing the 225 sits right at the performance level of these mid-range processors.

For a 2019 action-adventure game like Control, the CPU’s single-thread performance is critical, and the Core Ultra 5 225 delivers strong results. In Cinebench R23, it scores 3655 points in single-core and 25891 points in multi-core. These scores indicate that the processor can handle the game’s physics and AI calculations without bottlenecking the graphics card. The measured FPS data supports this: at 1080p Low, where the CPU load is relatively highest compared to the GPU, the system achieves an average of 108 FPS, which is well above playable thresholds. The 10 threads are sufficient for Control’s engine, and the high boost clock of 4.90 GHz helps in maintaining consistent frame pacing in demanding scenes.

The CPU’s memory support for DDR5 with dual-channel configuration and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth further ensures that data can be fed to the GPU quickly, reducing potential stutter. Additionally, the processor’s integrated graphics (Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 16EU) are present but play no role in this discrete GPU configuration. The data shows that across all resolutions and settings, the CPU is not the limiting component; the largest FPS drops occur when increasing resolution or graphical settings, which primarily stress the GPU. For instance, moving from 1080p High (68 FPS) to 1440p High (52 FPS) is a 24% reduction, while the CPU workload remains similar. This indicates that users with this processor can expect consistent performance headroom, and any frame rate limitations in Control will come from the Radeon RX 6600.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: What is the highest average frame rate achievable with this CPU and GPU combo in Control?

A: The highest average frame rate recorded is 108 FPS at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This is the only configuration in the measured data that exceeds 100 FPS, indicating that high refresh rate gameplay is possible only at the lowest settings and resolution.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in overall benchmark performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 has an average benchmark score of 36938, which is essentially tied with the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F (36945, 0% delta). It is slightly behind the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D (37018, -0.2%) and AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 (37093, -0.4%), but ahead of the Intel Core i9-12900T (37112, -0.5%). These differences are minimal, suggesting near-identical CPU performance in gaming workloads.

Q: Is the GPU capable of running Control at 4K resolution smoothly?

A: No, the data shows that at 3840x2160 resolution, the average frame rates range from 30 FPS at Ultra settings to 55 FPS at Low settings. At High settings, the average is 35 FPS, and at Medium it is 39 FPS. None of these meet the 60 FPS target, and even the best 4K result (55 FPS at Low) is below ideal smoothness.

Q: What is the frame time consistency like at 1440p Medium settings?

A: At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the average FPS is 58, with a minimum of 49 FPS and a maximum of 67 FPS. The 18 FPS spread between minimum and maximum indicates moderate frame pacing, with occasional drops that could be noticeable but generally acceptable for single-player gameplay.

Q: How does the GPU's benchmark performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6600 has an average benchmark score of 19036, which is nearly identical to the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 (19030, 0% delta) and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile (19049, -0.1%). It is slightly ahead of the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation (18954, 0.4%) and slightly behind the NVIDIA Tesla K20m (19089, -0.3%). This places the RX 6600 in the 63rd percentile among all GPUs.

Q: What is the best resolution for maintaining a 60+ FPS average in Control?

A: At 1920x1080, the average frame rate stays above 60 FPS for Low (108 FPS), Medium (77 FPS), and High (68 FPS) settings. Only Ultra settings drop to 59 FPS, which is just below the 60 FPS threshold. At 1440p, only Low settings (82 FPS) achieve 60+ FPS, while Medium and High fall to 58 and 52 FPS respectively. Therefore, 1080p is the recommended resolution for a consistent 60+ FPS experience.

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

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of GPU-bound scaling in Control. At Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 108 FPS at 1080p to 82 FPS at 1440p (a 24% reduction) and further to 55 FPS at 4K (a 49% reduction from 1080p). This steep decline with increasing resolution is the hallmark of a GPU-limited scenario, as the CPU has ample headroom to maintain frame rates if the GPU could keep up.

At High settings, the scaling is even more pronounced: 68 FPS at 1080p drops to 52 FPS at 1440p (24% reduction) and then to 35 FPS at 4K (49% reduction from 1080p). The consistency of these percentage drops across different settings confirms that the Radeon RX 6600's rendering capability is the primary constraint. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see similar frame rates across resolutions at the same settings, but the data shows a linear relationship between pixel count and performance.

The jump from 1440p to 4K is particularly punishing. At Medium settings, the average FPS goes from 58 at 1440p to 39 at 4K, a 33% drop. At Ultra settings, the average goes from 45 at 1440p to 30 at 4K, a 33% drop as well. This indicates that the GPU's memory bandwidth of 224.0 GB/s and 8 GB of VRAM are being saturated at higher resolutions, especially with the game’s complex visual effects. The RX 6600’s 128-bit memory bus and 8 GB capacity are sufficient for 1080p and playable at 1440p, but 4K exceeds its capabilities, as evidenced by the sub-60 FPS averages across all settings.

The data also shows that reducing settings at a fixed resolution provides a significant FPS boost, further confirming GPU limitations. At 4K, moving from Ultra (30 FPS) to Low (55 FPS) yields an 83% improvement, which is a substantial gain but still not enough to reach 60 FPS. This suggests that even at the lowest settings, the pixel fill rate and shading requirements of 4K are too demanding for this GPU. In contrast, at 1080p, the same settings reduction from Ultra (59 FPS) to Low (108 FPS) provides an 83% improvement, indicating that the GPU has more headroom at lower resolutions.

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

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: Average 108 FPS. This is the highest recorded frame rate in the entire dataset, indicating that the GPU is far from maxed out at this setting and resolution.
• Medium: Average 77 FPS, with a minimum of 65 FPS and maximum of 88 FPS. The 12 FPS variance suggests decent consistency, though frame drops can occur in intense scenes.
• High: Average 68 FPS. This is the first setting where the average drops below 70 FPS, but it remains comfortably above the 60 FPS playable threshold.
• Ultra: Average 59 FPS. This is just below 60 FPS, making it a borderline choice for players who prefer maximum visual quality over a locked frame rate.

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: Average 82 FPS. This is the only 1440p setting that maintains a 60+ FPS average, showing that the GPU has enough headroom for high refresh rates at lower visual fidelity.
• Medium: Average 58 FPS, with a minimum of 49 FPS and maximum of 67 FPS. The 18 FPS spread indicates more significant frame pacing issues compared to 1080p Medium.
• High: Average 52 FPS. This is below the 60 FPS target, and players may notice occasional stutter in combat scenarios.
• Ultra: Average 45 FPS. This is a playable frame rate for a single-player game but lacks the smoothness of 60 FPS, especially during fast-paced action.

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: Average 55 FPS. This is the best 4K result, but it still falls short of 60 FPS, meaning 4K is not a viable option for a fully smooth experience.
• Medium: Average 39 FPS, with a minimum of 33 FPS and maximum of 45 FPS. The 12 FPS variance is notable, and the low average makes gameplay feel sluggish.
• High: Average 35 FPS. This is below the threshold for comfortable play, and the frame rate is likely to dip further in demanding scenes.
• Ultra: Average 30 FPS. This is the lowest recorded performance and is generally considered unplayable for a game like Control that requires quick reactions.

The data shows a consistent pattern: each resolution step down (from 4K to 1440p to 1080p) provides approximately a 50-60% increase in average FPS across all settings. This linear scaling is typical for a GPU-bound game, confirming that the RX 6600 is the limiting component in this pairing.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with the Navi 23 chip, produced on a 7 nm process by TSMC. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU has a base clock of 1626 MHz, a game clock of 2044 MHz, and a boost clock of 2491 MHz. With 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs, the RX 6600 delivers a pixel rate of 159.4 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 279.0 GTexel/s. Its FP32 performance is 8.928 TFLOPS.

The GPU’s benchmark performance places it in the 63rd percentile among all GPUs, with an average score of 19036. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 (19030, 0%), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile (19049, -0.1%), and NVIDIA Tesla K20m (19089, -0.3%). This shows that the RX 6600 is a solid mid-range performer, but its 8 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory bus are limiting factors for Control at higher resolutions.

In Control, the 8 GB VRAM is likely a constraint at 4K, where the game’s textures and effects can exceed this capacity. The data supports this: at 4K, the average FPS drops significantly even at Low settings (55 FPS), indicating that memory bandwidth and capacity are being stressed. The 224.0 GB/s bandwidth is adequate for 1080p and playable at 1440p, but it becomes a bottleneck at 4K, where the GPU must fetch and process larger textures and higher-resolution buffers.

The GPU’s boost clock of 2491 MHz is relatively high for a mid-range card, allowing it to perform well at 1080p where the pixel fill rate is less demanding. The measured results show that at 1080p Low, the RX 6600 can achieve 108 FPS, which is a strong result for a card in this performance tier. However, the 128-bit memory bus limits its ability to scale to higher resolutions. The 14 Gbps effective memory speed is standard for GDDR6, but the narrow bus width means total bandwidth is lower than competing cards with wider interfaces.

The GPU’s TDP of 132 W and suggested PSU of 300 W indicate that it is a power-efficient card, but this efficiency does not translate to high-end 4K performance. The data shows that the RX 6600 can deliver playable frame rates (above 30 FPS) at 4K only at Low and Medium settings, and even then, the average FPS is below 60. This positions the card as a 1080p and entry-level 1440p solution, with 4K being a stretch goal that requires significant settings compromises.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the user’s resolution and performance priorities. For the best balance of visual quality and frame rate, the data suggests the following recommendations:

At 1080p (1920x1080): The High preset is the recommended choice, delivering an average of 68 FPS. This is above the 60 FPS threshold and provides a good balance of visual fidelity. The Ultra preset at 59 FPS is a viable alternative for players who prioritize graphics over a locked 60 FPS, but the 9 FPS drop from High to Ultra may not be worth the marginal visual improvement. For competitive or high-refresh-rate play, the Medium preset at 77 FPS offers a smoother experience, though it sacrifices some visual quality.

At 1440p (2560x1440): The Low preset is the only option that maintains a 60+ FPS average (82 FPS), but it significantly reduces visual quality. For players who prefer better graphics, the Medium preset at 58 FPS is a reasonable compromise, as it stays close to 60 FPS and provides a more detailed image. The High preset at 52 FPS is playable but may show noticeable frame drops in demanding scenes. Ultra at 45 FPS is not recommended for this resolution, as the frame rate is too low for comfortable gameplay.

At 4K (3840x2160): None of the presets achieve a 60 FPS average, so the best experience is the Low preset at 55 FPS. This provides the highest frame rate at this resolution, though it still falls short of smoothness standards. The Medium preset at 39 FPS is borderline playable for a slow-paced game, but Control’s action sequences may suffer. High and Ultra presets at 35 and 30 FPS respectively are not recommended, as they result in a choppy experience.

For the overall best experience, the data indicates that 1080p with High settings is the sweet spot for this combo, offering 68 FPS with good visual quality. Players with 1440p monitors should accept the Medium preset at 58 FPS to balance quality and performance. 4K is only viable for players who prioritize resolution over frame rate and are willing to accept sub-60 FPS performance at Low settings. In all cases, the CPU is not a limiting factor, and users can focus on GPU settings to achieve their desired performance.