Control

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 delivers a playable but not exceptional experience in Control, with performance heavily dictated by resolution and the GPU's capabilities. The data shows this combo ranks at 2274 out of 2888 tested combinations, placing it in the lower-middle tier of systems for this title. This ranking reflects a configuration that can handle the game at 1080p with high frame rates but struggles to maintain smooth gameplay at 4K, where the GPU becomes the definitive limiting factor.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 2274 out of 2888 tested combinations places it in the 22nd percentile overall, meaning roughly 78% of tested systems deliver higher average frame rates in Control. This is a modest standing that aligns with the hardware profile: the RTX 2060 is an end-of-life product from the GeForce 20-series, and while the Core Ultra 5 225 is a current-generation desktop processor, the combination is not optimized for high-refresh-rate or high-resolution gaming in this specific title.

Breaking down the components, the CPU's average benchmark score of 36938 places it at the 85th percentile against all processors, indicating it is a strong performer for general compute tasks. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F with a nearly identical average score (36945, 0% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D (37018, -0.2% delta). This suggests the CPU is well within the performance envelope of its peers and is unlikely to be the primary bottleneck in most gaming scenarios. Conversely, the GPU's average benchmark score of 15290 places it at only the 58th percentile against all graphics cards. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 (15283, 0% delta) and the AMD Radeon 680M (15270, 0.1% delta), which are significantly older or integrated solutions. This indicates that while the RTX 2060 is not a weak card, it is far from the top of the performance hierarchy, and in Control, its age shows at higher resolutions.

The measured frame rates support this interpretation. The combo's performance is respectable at 1080p, but the margin between low and ultra settings narrows as resolution increases, pointing to the GPU as the limiting component. The data suggests that for a smoother experience, users would need to sacrifice visual fidelity or lower the resolution, as the CPU headroom is sufficient to push higher frame rates if the GPU could keep up.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Control?*

A: At 1920x1080, the combo achieves an average of 107 FPS on Low settings and 68 FPS on High, making it the only resolution where all settings presets remain comfortably playable. At 2560x1440, averages range from 45 FPS on Ultra to 81 FPS on Low, which is acceptable but not ideal for high-refresh-rate displays. At 3840x2160, the average FPS drops to 30 on Ultra and 55 on Low, indicating that 4K is only viable on the lowest settings.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its direct rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 has an average benchmark score of 36938, which is nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F (36945, 0% delta) and slightly lower than the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D (37018, -0.2% delta). This places it in a tightly contested performance band, with less than 1% separating it from its closest competitors.

*Q: Is the GPU the main bottleneck in this system for Control?*

A: Yes, the data strongly indicates this. The GPU's percentile rank (58th) is significantly lower than the CPU's (85th), and the measured FPS drops more sharply with resolution increases than would be expected if the CPU were the limiting factor. At 4K, the average FPS on High is 35, which is roughly half of the 68 FPS seen at 1080p on the same settings.

Q: What are the minimum and maximum FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The only measured min/max values are for Medium settings. At 1920x1080 Medium, the FPS ranges from 65 to 88 with an average of 76. At 2560x1440 Medium, the range is 49 to 66 with an average of 58. At 3840x2160 Medium, the range is 33 to 45 with an average of 39. No min/max data is available for Low, High, or Ultra presets.

*Q: Does the CPU's lack of hyperthreading affect performance in Control?*

A: The CPU has 10 cores and 10 threads, meaning each core handles a single thread. While this configuration is efficient for many tasks, the benchmark data shows the CPU's multithreaded score (30459 in Passmark) is strong, and its performance is nearly identical to rivals like the Ryzen 5 5600F. In Control, the frame rates suggest the CPU is not the primary constraint, as even at 1080p Low (107 FPS), the system is likely GPU-bound.

Q: How does the RTX 2060's VRAM capacity influence performance?

A: The GPU has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus with 336.0 GB/s bandwidth. In Control, the measured FPS drops are consistent with VRAM or memory bandwidth limitations at higher resolutions. At 4K, the High preset achieves only 35 FPS, and the Ultra preset drops to 30 FPS, suggesting the card's memory capacity and bandwidth are insufficient for the game's demands at that resolution.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear and consistent pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases, which is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario. Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 on High settings reduces the average FPS from 68 to 51, a drop of 17 FPS or approximately 25%. Moving further to 3840x2160 on the same settings reduces the average to 35 FPS, another drop of 16 FPS, for a total reduction of about 49% from the 1080p baseline.

This scaling behavior is more pronounced at lower settings. On Low, the average FPS goes from 107 at 1080p to 81 at 1440p (a 26 FPS drop) and then to 55 at 4K (a further 26 FPS drop). The percentage drop from 1080p to 4K on Low is approximately 49%, which is nearly identical to the percentage drop on High. This consistency suggests that the GPU is the limiting factor across all settings, as the relative performance hit from increasing resolution is similar regardless of the preset.

The data also shows that the gap between Low and Ultra settings widens at lower resolutions. At 1080p, the difference between Low (107 FPS) and Ultra (59 FPS) is 48 FPS. At 1440p, the difference is 36 FPS (81 vs 45). At 4K, the difference shrinks to 25 FPS (55 vs 30). This shrinking margin at higher resolutions is a classic sign that the GPU is saturated, as the additional workload from higher settings cannot be fully realized when the card is already struggling to maintain frame rates.

The limiting component is unequivocally the GPU. The CPU's strong synthetic benchmarks and high percentile rank (85th) suggest it has ample headroom to feed the GPU at lower resolutions, but as the pixel count increases, the RTX 2060's compute and memory resources are exhausted. The 6 GB VRAM and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth are likely insufficient for the game's texture and shading demands at 4K, resulting in the observed frame rate collapse.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the target resolution and the user's preference for smoothness versus visual fidelity. At 1920x1080, all presets are playable, but the Medium preset offers the best balance. The average FPS of 76 with a minimum of 65 ensures that frame pacing remains consistent, avoiding the stutter that can occur when FPS dips below 60. High settings at 1080p (68 FPS) are also viable, but the lower minimum FPS makes Medium a safer choice for a locked experience. Ultra at 1080p (59 FPS) is borderline, as it hovers near the 60 FPS threshold and may not provide a consistently smooth experience.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset again stands out as the best compromise. The average FPS of 58 with a minimum of 49 is playable, but the minimum is below 60, which may result in noticeable frame drops during intense action sequences. Low settings at 1440p (81 FPS) provide a more comfortable margin, but the visual quality reduction is significant. High settings at 1440p (51 FPS) are acceptable for slower-paced exploration but may feel sluggish in combat. Ultra at 1440p (45 FPS) is not recommended, as the frame rate is too low for a smooth experience.

At 3840x2160, the situation is more constrained. Only Low settings (55 FPS) approach a playable frame rate, but the minimum FPS is not recorded, so stability is uncertain. Medium at 4K (39 FPS) and High at 4K (35 FPS) are below the threshold for smooth gameplay, and Ultra at 4K (30 FPS) is effectively a slideshow. For 4K, the only viable option is Low, and even then, users should expect occasional dips. The data suggests that for the best experience in Control, users should target 1080p with Medium settings, as this provides the highest average FPS with a recorded minimum above 60.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of performance across three resolutions and four settings presets.

At 1920x1080, the combo achieves its highest frame rates. On Low settings, the average FPS is 107, which is the fastest recorded for this combo. Medium settings yield an average of 76 FPS, with a minimum of 65 and a maximum of 88. High settings produce an average of 68 FPS, while Ultra settings drop to an average of 59 FPS. This represents a 45% reduction from Low to Ultra, indicating that the GPU's performance headroom at 1080p is limited but sufficient for all presets.

At 2560x1440, performance scales down as expected. Low settings average 81 FPS, which is still playable. Medium settings average 58 FPS, with a minimum of 49 and a maximum of 66. High settings average 51 FPS, and Ultra settings average 45 FPS. The drop from Low to Ultra is 36 FPS, or approximately 44%, which is slightly less than at 1080p. This suggests that the GPU is beginning to become the limiting factor, as the relative cost of higher settings diminishes at higher resolutions.

At 3840x2160, performance drops significantly. Low settings average 55 FPS, which is the only preset that remains above 50 FPS. Medium settings average 39 FPS, with a minimum of 33 and a maximum of 45. High settings average 35 FPS, and Ultra settings average 30 FPS. The drop from Low to Ultra is 25 FPS, or approximately 45%, but the absolute values are low enough that only Low settings are recommended for actual gameplay. The data shows that this combo is not suited for 4K gaming in Control, as even the lowest settings fail to maintain a consistent 60 FPS.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 is a 10-core, 10-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It has a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, with a TDP of 65 W. The CPU supports DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, and it features 20 MB of shared L3 cache. These specifications position it as a capable mid-range desktop processor for gaming.

In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU demonstrates strong performance. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score is 25891, and its single-core score is 3655. The Passmark single-thread score is 4412, and the multithread score is 30459. These numbers place the CPU at the 85th percentile against all processors, indicating that it outperforms the majority of CPUs on the market. Its nearest rivals in the average benchmark score are all within 0.5% of its 36938 score, suggesting that it is well-matched against comparable AMD and Intel offerings.

For Control, the CPU's role is primarily to feed the GPU with draw calls and game logic. The data shows that the CPU is not the limiting factor in this combo, as the frame rates are more closely tied to resolution and GPU settings. At 1080p Low, the 107 FPS average suggests that the CPU can handle the game's demands without issue, as the GPU is likely the bottleneck even at this low resolution. The CPU's high single-thread performance (4412 in Passmark) is particularly relevant for games like Control, which rely on a few threads for main loop and physics calculations. The 10 cores and 10 threads provide sufficient parallelism for the game's background tasks, but the lack of hyperthreading is not a significant disadvantage given the game's threading model.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 is based on the TU106 chip, built on a 12 nm process by TSMC. It has 1920 shading units, 120 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, with 30 RT cores and 240 tensor cores. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1365 MHz and a boost clock of 1680 MHz, with a TDP of 160 W. It features 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6.

In synthetic benchmarks, the GPU's performance is modest. Its Passmark G3D score is 14111, and its Geekbench Vulkan score is 65846. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 1242, which is a low number for modern standards. These results place the GPU at the 58th percentile against all graphics cards, indicating that it is an average performer. Its nearest rivals, such as the GTX 580 and Radeon 680M, are either much older or integrated solutions, which highlights the RTX 2060's aging status.

In Control, the GPU is the primary determinant of performance. The measured FPS data shows that the card's 6 GB VRAM and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for high-resolution gaming. At 4K, the average FPS on High is 35, and on Ultra it is 30, which are unplayable frame rates. The card's compute capability, measured at 6.451 TFLOPS FP32, is also a limiting factor, as the game's visual effects and physics simulations require substantial GPU processing power. The RT cores, while present, are not heavily utilized at these frame rates, as the game's ray tracing features would further reduce performance. The data suggests that the RTX 2060 is best suited for 1080p gaming in Control, where it can maintain playable frame rates on Medium to High settings, but it is not capable of delivering a smooth experience at higher resolutions.