Control

FAQ

Q: What is the average frame rate for this combo at 1080p with Low settings?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 paired with the GTX 1650 delivers an average of 56 FPS at 1920x1080 on Low settings in Control. This is the highest average frame rate recorded across all tested settings and resolutions in the data.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested combinations in Control?

A: This specific CPU-GPU pairing ranks 3588 out of 3720 tested combos in Control. That places it in the lower percentile of systems, indicating that performance is constrained by the graphics card in this title.

Q: What is the difference in average FPS between High and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the High preset yields an average of 27 FPS, while the Ultra preset drops to 23 FPS. The difference between these two presets is 4 frames per second on average, with High providing a modest playability advantage.

Q: Is the GTX 1650's 4 GB VRAM sufficient for 4K gaming in Control?

A: Benchmark results indicate that at 3840x2160, even the Low preset only achieves 29 FPS average, while Medium falls to 20 FPS. The data suggests that 4K resolution overwhelms this GPU, as frame rates remain below 30 FPS across all settings at that resolution.

Q: Which preset at 1080p provides the closest balance between visual quality and performance?

A: The Medium preset at 1920x1080 delivers 40 FPS average with a minimum of 34 FPS and maximum of 46 FPS. This offers a more stable experience than High (36 FPS) while providing better visual fidelity than Low (56 FPS), making it the recommended middle ground.

Q: How does the CPU's single-thread performance compare to its nearest rival?

A: The Core Ultra 5 225 scores 3655 in Cinebench R23 single-core, while its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F, has an average benchmark score of 36945 with a delta of 0%. This indicates near-identical overall benchmark performance between the two processors.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is built on the Turing architecture using a 12 nm process from TSMC, featuring 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 raster operation units. Its memory configuration consists of 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, providing 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1485 MHz with a boost clock of 1665 MHz, while memory runs at 2001 MHz or 8 Gbps effective.

This modest memory capacity becomes a critical bottleneck in Control, a game known for its dense environments and physics-heavy combat. The 4 GB VRAM buffer limits the ability to store high-resolution textures and geometry data, which directly impacts performance at higher resolutions. Benchmark data confirms this: at 3840x2160, average frame rates range from 16 FPS on Ultra to 29 FPS on Low, with Medium yielding 20 FPS. Even at 2560x1440, the card struggles to maintain smooth gameplay, with the best result being 43 FPS on Low.

The GTX 1650's overall performance percentile sits at 40 among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 7472. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (0.3% faster), Intel UHD Graphics 750 (0.4% faster), and AMD Radeon R7 350 (0.6% faster), while the Intel Arc A310 is 1% slower. This places the card in the lower-midrange segment, which is consistent with its measured gaming performance in Control.

The GPU's pixel rate of 53.28 GPixel/s and texture rate of 93.24 GTexel/s provide theoretical ceilings that the game's rendering demands quickly exceed at higher resolutions. The FP32 performance of 2.984 TFLOPS further illustrates the card's limitations when handling modern effects like volumetric lighting and particle simulations that Control utilizes extensively. The GTX 1650 draws 75 W under load and requires a 250 W power supply, making it a low-power solution, but that efficiency does not translate into high frame rates in this demanding title.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the most viable experience for this combo is at 1920x1080 with the Low preset, which achieves 56 FPS average. This is the only configuration that approaches smooth, responsive gameplay, as every other setting at 1080p falls below 40 FPS. The Medium preset at 1080p delivers 40 FPS average with a minimum of 34 FPS and maximum of 46 FPS, offering a compromise between visual fidelity and playability, though it may exhibit occasional stutter during intense action sequences.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset provides 43 FPS average, which is playable but not ideal for fast-paced combat. The High preset at 1440p drops to 27 FPS, while Ultra falls to 23 FPS, both of which are below the threshold for smooth gameplay. For users with 1440p monitors, dropping to Low settings is the only reasonable option, as frame rates at higher presets become too inconsistent for an action-adventure game that requires precise timing.

The 3840x2160 resolution is not recommended with this hardware. Even at Low settings, the average frame rate of 29 FPS is below the standard for acceptable performance, and the Medium preset yields only 20 FPS with a minimum of 17 FPS. The Ultra preset produces just 16 FPS, making the game nearly unplayable at 4K. Users should avoid this resolution entirely unless they are willing to tolerate significant visual compromises and reduced responsiveness.

For the best overall experience, the data supports using 1080p with either Low (56 FPS) or Medium (40 FPS) settings. The Medium preset appears to be the sweet spot for those who prioritize visual quality while still maintaining a reasonably stable frame rate. Players who value smoothness above all else should select Low, which provides a 16 FPS advantage over Medium while sacrificing some graphical detail.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 combined with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 ranks 3588 out of 3720 tested combinations in Control. This places the combo in the bottom 4% of all systems tested, indicating severe performance limitations for this particular game. The ranking reflects the GPU's modest specifications, as the GTX 1650 sits at the 40th percentile among all GPUs, while the CPU itself is far more capable.

The CPU's percentile of 85 among all processors demonstrates that the Core Ultra 5 225 is not the limiting factor in this configuration. Its average benchmark score of 36938 places it nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F (36945, 0% delta), slightly ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D (37018, -0.2%), and marginally behind the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 (37093, -0.4%) and Intel Core i9-12900T (37112, -0.5%). This suggests the CPU has ample headroom for more powerful graphics cards.

The disparity between CPU and GPU performance highlights a significant bottleneck in this pairing. While the processor can handle the game's simulation and physics calculations with ease, the graphics card is overwhelmed by the rendering demands. This imbalance is reflected in the low combo ranking, as other systems with similar CPUs but stronger GPUs would achieve substantially better frame rates.

Given the combo's low rank, users seeking improved performance in Control would benefit more from a GPU upgrade than a CPU upgrade. The data indicates that the GTX 1650's 4 GB VRAM and limited compute capabilities are the primary constraints, and any meaningful improvement would require a graphics card with greater memory bandwidth and processing power.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 features 10 cores and 10 threads based on the Arrow Lake architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process at TSMC. It operates at a base clock of 3.30 GHz with a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, providing strong single-threaded performance for gaming workloads. The processor includes 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache, totaling 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die.

In Control, which relies heavily on physics simulations and complex AI routines, the CPU's multi-threaded capabilities are exercised significantly. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 25891 and single-core score of 3655 indicate robust performance across both heavily threaded and lightly threaded tasks. The Passmark single-thread score of 4412 further confirms the CPU's ability to handle the game's primary thread efficiently.

The processor's 65 W TDP and dual-channel DDR5 memory support with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth provide adequate data throughput for gaming. The PCIe Gen 5 interface with 20 CPU lanes ensures fast communication with the GPU, though the GTX 1650 only utilizes PCIe 3.0 x16. The integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 16EU is present but irrelevant for this configuration, as the discrete GPU handles all rendering duties.

In this benchmark setup, the CPU demonstrates that it is not a performance bottleneck. The Core Ultra 5 225's benchmark scores place it at the 85th percentile among all CPUs, and its nearest rivals show negligible performance differences. The processor's 10 cores and 10 threads provide sufficient parallel processing capability for Control's demands, allowing the GPU to be the sole limiting factor in the system's overall performance.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its best results across all resolutions tested. The Low preset achieves an average of 56 FPS, which represents the highest frame rate in the entire dataset. The Medium preset provides 40 FPS average with a minimum of 34 FPS and maximum of 46 FPS, offering a playable experience with moderate visual quality. The High preset drops to 36 FPS average, while the Ultra preset yields 31 FPS average. These results show a clear progression where each step up in settings costs approximately 4-5 FPS on average.

Moving to 2560x1440, performance declines noticeably across all presets. The Low setting produces 43 FPS average, which is still marginally playable but represents a 23% reduction compared to the same setting at 1080p. The Medium preset at 1440p delivers 30 FPS average with a minimum of 26 FPS and maximum of 35 FPS, while High drops to 27 FPS and Ultra falls to 23 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium at this resolution is 13 FPS, indicating that the Medium preset's additional visual features significantly impact the GPU's limited resources.

At 3840x2160, the GTX 1650 is severely overmatched. The Low preset produces 29 FPS average, which is the only configuration at 4K that comes close to playable frame rates. The Medium preset yields 20 FPS average with a minimum of 17 FPS and maximum of 24 FPS, while High drops to 18 FPS and Ultra bottoms out at 16 FPS. These results demonstrate that 4K resolution is entirely unsuitable for this hardware combination in Control, as even the most minimal settings cannot maintain a stable 30 FPS.

Across all resolutions, the Low preset consistently provides the highest frame rates, with the delta between Low and Ultra ranging from 25 FPS at 1080p to 13 FPS at 4K. The Medium and High presets show diminishing returns, with High offering only marginal visual improvements over Medium while costing 4-6 FPS depending on resolution. The data suggests that the GTX 1650's 4 GB VRAM and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth are the primary constraints, as frame rates scale almost linearly with resolution changes but respond more dramatically to preset changes that affect texture quality and shadow complexity.