Control

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 and AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT pairing delivers a robust 1080p and 1440p experience in Control, with 4K requiring settings adjustments to maintain smooth play. The data shows a clear scaling pattern across resolutions, where the GPU’s 16 GB of memory and RDNA 3 architecture provide ample headroom, while the CPU’s 10-core configuration ensures consistent frame delivery.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to achieve a consistent 60+ FPS average?

A: Based on the measured FPS data, both 1920x1080 and 2560x1440 deliver averages above 60 FPS across all settings, from 174 FPS at Low 1080p down to 72 FPS at Ultra 1440p. For 3840x2160, only Low and Medium settings achieve averages above 60 FPS (89 and 63 FPS respectively).

Q: How does the RX 7800 XT compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The RX 7800 XT’s average benchmark score is 11627, placing it near the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 (11680, -0.5% delta), the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M (11528, +0.9% delta), and the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT (11842, -1.8% delta). The data indicates performance is essentially neck-and-neck with these older or lower-tier cards in generic tests.

Q: What is the combo’s overall ranking among tested systems for this game?

A: The combination ranks 899th out of 2888 tested combos in Control, placing it in the upper third of all tested configurations. This percentile suggests a strong, above-average pairing for this specific title.

*Q: Does the CPU’s thread count limit performance in Control?*

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 has 10 cores and 10 threads. With a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, the data shows it achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 25891 and a single-core score of 3655. In Control, the measured FPS at 1080p Low (174 FPS) indicates no significant CPU bottleneck at lower settings.

Q: What is the performance delta between the Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the average FPS drops from 132 FPS at Low settings to 72 FPS at Ultra settings, a reduction of 60 FPS or roughly 45%. This shows a significant performance cost for maximum visual fidelity.

Q: Is the RX 7800 XT’s 16 GB VRAM a factor in this game?

A: The 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 624.1 GB/s of bandwidth. While the measured FPS data does not include VRAM usage, the high bandwidth and capacity are consistent with the GPU maintaining playable frame rates even at 4K Medium (63 FPS average).

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT achieves a combo rank of 899 out of 2888 tested configurations in Control. This places the pairing in the 69th percentile of all tested combos, indicating a solidly above-average system for this title. The ranking reflects the balance between the CPU’s strong single-thread performance and the GPU’s high memory bandwidth.

Looking at the individual components, the CPU’s percentile stands at 85 among all processors, while the GPU’s percentile is 51 among all graphics cards. This discrepancy suggests that the CPU is a stronger performer relative to its peers than the GPU, yet the combined result is still positive. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 36938 is nearly identical to its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F (36945, 0% delta), and slightly better than the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D (37018, -0.2% delta). The GPU’s average score of 11627 is similarly close to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 (11680, -0.5% delta), indicating that while the hardware is not class-leading, the synergy in Control produces a favorable outcome.

The data implies that the combo’s rank is largely driven by the CPU’s ability to feed the GPU efficiently. The Core Ultra 5 225’s 10 cores and boost clock of 4.90 GHz are well-suited for the game’s engine, which appears to scale with both single and multi-threaded performance. The measured FPS at 1080p Low (174 FPS) suggests the pairing is capable of high refresh rates, while the 4K Ultra result (49 FPS) shows the limits of the GPU under maximum load. Overall, this combo is a strong mid-range contender, outperforming 69% of tested systems in Control.

Settings Recommendations

For the best balance of visual quality and performance, the data supports using High settings at 2560x1440. This configuration yields an average FPS of 83, which is comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. The jump from Medium to High at this resolution costs only 11 FPS (from 94 to 83), while the jump from High to Ultra costs an additional 11 FPS (from 83 to 72). The visual fidelity improvement from High to Ultra is typically marginal compared to the performance hit, making High the sweet spot.

At 1920x1080, High settings provide an average of 110 FPS, which is ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors. The data shows that even Ultra settings at 1080p maintain a 96 FPS average, so users with 144Hz displays can comfortably push for maximum quality. However, the performance headroom at 1080p suggests that Medium (124 FPS) is a safe choice for competitive play where frame consistency is paramount.

For 3840x2160, the data indicates that Medium settings (63 FPS average, with a min of 54 FPS) are the highest preset that maintains a playable experience. High settings drop to 56 FPS, and Ultra falls to 49 FPS, both of which may result in noticeable stutter. Low settings at 4K (89 FPS) offer a high frame rate but at a significant visual cost. The recommendation is to use Medium at 4K to preserve image quality while staying above 60 FPS on average.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data for Control reveals a consistent scaling pattern across resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the combo delivers 174 FPS on Low, 124 FPS on Medium (with a min of 105 FPS and max of 142 FPS), 110 FPS on High, and 96 FPS on Ultra. This shows a total drop of 78 FPS from Low to Ultra, with the largest single-step decrease occurring from Low to Medium (50 FPS). The frame time consistency, indicated by the min/max values at Medium, remains tight, suggesting stable performance.

Moving to 2560x1440, the averages are 132 FPS on Low, 94 FPS on Medium (min 80, max 108), 83 FPS on High, and 72 FPS on Ultra. The transition from 1080p to 1440p results in a 24% performance reduction at Low settings (from 174 to 132 FPS), while at Ultra the reduction is 25% (from 96 to 72 FPS). This consistent scaling indicates the GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions, as the CPU’s workload remains relatively static.

At 3840x2160, the performance drops significantly. Low settings yield 89 FPS, Medium 63 FPS (min 54, max 73), High 56 FPS, and Ultra 49 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 26 FPS, while the gap between Medium and High is only 7 FPS, and between High and Ultra is another 7 FPS. This non-linear scaling suggests that the game’s effects at Medium and above have diminishing returns on performance. The min FPS of 54 at 4K Medium indicates occasional frame dips below the 60 FPS target, which may be noticeable on VRR displays.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT is the primary driver of frame rates in Control, particularly at higher resolutions. Its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 624.1 GB/s of bandwidth, which is sufficient for the game’s texture-heavy environments. The GPU’s boost clock of 2430 MHz and game clock of 2124 MHz, combined with 3840 shading units, deliver a peak FP32 throughput of 37.32 TFLOPS. The data shows that this hardware scales predictably with resolution: the FPS drop from 1080p to 1440p is approximately 24-25% across settings, and from 1440p to 4K is approximately 33-35%.

The GPU’s benchmark scores place it in the 51st percentile of all graphics cards, with an average score of 11627. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 (11680, -0.5% delta) and the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT (11842, -1.8% delta), both of which are significantly older or lower-tier products. This indicates that the RX 7800 XT’s synthetic performance is comparable to much older hardware, yet its real-world performance in Control is strong due to its modern architecture and ample VRAM. The 60 ray accelerators also support the game’s optional ray tracing features, though the measured data does not include RT-specific results.

The GPU’s memory bandwidth of 624.1 GB/s is likely a critical factor in maintaining playable frame rates at 4K, where the game’s asset streaming demands are high. The 16 GB VRAM capacity ensures that the game does not exceed memory limits, preventing stutter and texture pop-in. The data shows that at 4K Medium (63 FPS average), the GPU is operating near its limits, as indicated by the 54 FPS minimum frame time.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 plays a supporting role in Control, ensuring that the GPU is not starved of data. With 10 cores and 10 threads, the CPU’s architecture is designed for efficiency, running at a base clock of 3.30 GHz and boosting up to 4.90 GHz. The 20 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory support (102.4 GB/s bandwidth) provide low-latency access to game data. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 scores of 25891 (multi-core) and 3655 (single-core) demonstrate strong performance for a mid-range desktop part.

The CPU’s average benchmark score of 36938 places it in the 85th percentile of all processors, with its nearest rivals being the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F (36945, 0% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D (37018, -0.2% delta). This indicates that the Core Ultra 5 225 is a top-tier performer in its class, rivaling older high-end chips. In Control, the CPU’s single-core performance is crucial for game logic and physics, while its multi-core capabilities handle background tasks and streaming.

The data shows that the CPU is not a bottleneck at 1080p Low, where the combo achieves 174 FPS. Even at 1080p Ultra (96 FPS), the CPU’s workload is unlikely to be the limiting factor, as the GPU’s performance scales consistently with resolution. The CPU’s boost clock of 4.90 GHz ensures that frame times remain consistent, as evidenced by the tight min/max values at 1440p Medium (80-108 FPS). The CPU’s 65W TDP also indicates efficient power delivery, which helps maintain sustained boost clocks during extended gaming sessions.