Control

Control is a demanding action-adventure title from 2019, and this analysis examines how the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 combination performs across its measured settings and resolutions. The data presents a clear picture of a system that is heavily GPU-bound at higher resolutions, with the CPU providing ample headroom for high frame rates at 1080p. The following sections break down the measured FPS, scaling behavior, and the specific roles of the processor and graphics card in delivering these results.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a classic pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases, but the magnitude of the drop reveals a system that transitions from CPU-leaning to firmly GPU-bound. At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 156 FPS at 1920x1080 to 118 FPS at 2560x1440, a reduction of 38 FPS or approximately 24%. Moving from 2560x1440 to 3840x2160 at High settings, the average drops further to 79 FPS, another 39 FPS decrease or roughly 33%. This accelerating decline as resolution climbs is a hallmark of a GPU that is increasingly the limiting factor.

The scaling from 1080p to 4K at High settings results in a total drop of 77 FPS, from 156 to 79, which means the 4K average is just over half of the 1080p figure. This is a substantial reduction that indicates the RTX 4080's rendering capabilities are being saturated at 3840x2160, even though the absolute performance remains playable. At Ultra settings, the pattern is similar but with a lower starting point: 135 FPS at 1080p, 102 FPS at 1440p, and 69 FPS at 4K. The percentage drop from 1080p to 4K at Ultra is roughly 49%, a slightly larger relative decline than at High settings, suggesting that the heavier graphical load amplifies the GPU bottleneck.

The Low settings row provides the clearest evidence of the CPU's capability. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combination produces 246 FPS, which is an exceptionally high frame rate that far exceeds typical display refresh rates. At 2560x1440 Low, it still achieves 186 FPS, and even at 3840x2160 Low, it maintains 126 FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p at Low shows a 60 FPS drop, while moving from 1440p to 4K shows another 60 FPS drop. This linear decline at Low settings, where the GPU has less work to do per pixel, suggests that the RTX 4080 is still the primary constraint, but the CPU is clearly capable of feeding it with enough data to sustain very high frame rates.

The Medium settings row includes min and max FPS data, which provides insight into frame time consistency. At 1920x1080 Medium, the average is 175 FPS with a minimum of 149 and maximum of 201. The spread of 52 FPS between min and max indicates some variance but not an unstable experience. At 2560x1440 Medium, the average drops to 132 FPS with a min of 113 and max of 152, a similar relative spread. At 3840x2160 Medium, the average is 89 FPS with a min of 76 and max of 103, showing that even at 4K resolution, the frame rate remains relatively consistent without extreme dips.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides a clear hierarchy of performance across the four settings presets at each resolution, allowing for a straightforward recommendation based on the balance between visual quality and frame rate. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset delivers 135 FPS on average, which is well above the threshold for smooth gameplay on high-refresh-rate monitors. The High preset offers a 21 FPS improvement to 156 FPS, while Medium reaches 175 FPS. Given that the difference between High and Medium is only 19 FPS, and Ultra is still very playable, the High preset appears to be the sweet spot for 1080p, offering a substantial visual upgrade over Medium with a relatively modest frame rate cost. Low settings at 1080p produce 246 FPS, which is excessive for most displays and would sacrifice significant visual fidelity for minimal practical benefit.

At 2560x1440, the recommendations shift slightly. The Ultra preset produces 102 FPS, which is still comfortably above 60 FPS and suitable for most gaming scenarios. High settings at 1440p yield 118 FPS, a 16 FPS improvement over Ultra. Medium settings reach 132 FPS. For 1440p, the High preset is again the recommended choice, as it provides a strong balance of visual quality and performance, with the 16 FPS gap between High and Ultra being less impactful than the visual differences between the two presets. The Low preset at 186 FPS is unnecessary for most users at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the situation becomes more constrained. The Ultra preset averages 69 FPS, which is just above the 60 FPS threshold but may not provide enough headroom for demanding scenes. High settings at 4K achieve 79 FPS, offering a more comfortable margin above 60 FPS. Medium settings reach 89 FPS. For 4K gaming, the High preset is the recommended choice, as it delivers a 10 FPS improvement over Ultra while maintaining high visual quality. The difference between High and Medium at 4K is also 10 FPS, so the High preset provides the best combination of visual fidelity and performance headroom. The Low preset at 126 FPS at 4K is viable for competitive play but would significantly degrade the visual experience.

FAQ

Q: What is the average frame rate at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings?

A: The measured average FPS for the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 combination at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings is 135 FPS.

Q: How does the performance at 3840x2160 compare to 2560x1440 at High settings?

A: At High settings, the average frame rate drops from 118 FPS at 2560x1440 to 79 FPS at 3840x2160, a decrease of 39 FPS or approximately 33%.

Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded across all measured configurations?

A: The highest average FPS in the data is 246 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: Is the performance at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings above 60 FPS?

A: Yes, the measured average FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings is 69 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: What are the minimum and maximum FPS values recorded at 2560x1440 with Medium settings?

A: At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the minimum FPS is 113 and the maximum FPS is 152, with an average of 132 FPS.

Q: How much faster is Low settings compared to Ultra settings at 1920x1080?

A: At 1920x1080, Low settings produce an average of 246 FPS, which is 111 FPS higher than the 135 FPS average achieved with Ultra settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete set of measured FPS data provides a detailed view of the combination's performance across all tested configurations. Beginning with 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers the highest average at 246 FPS. The Medium preset averages 175 FPS, with a minimum of 149 and a maximum of 201 FPS. High settings average 156 FPS, and Ultra settings average 135 FPS. This ordering is consistent, with each step up in settings quality resulting in a lower average frame rate. The difference between Low and Medium is 71 FPS, which is the largest single-step drop at this resolution, while the difference between High and Ultra is 21 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the same ordering is maintained. Low settings average 186 FPS. Medium settings average 132 FPS, with a minimum of 113 and a maximum of 152 FPS. High settings average 118 FPS, and Ultra settings average 102 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 54 FPS, which is smaller than at 1080p, indicating that the GPU is beginning to have a larger impact. The difference between High and Ultra at 1440p is 16 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the performance envelope tightens considerably. Low settings average 126 FPS. Medium settings average 89 FPS, with a minimum of 76 and a maximum of 103 FPS. High settings average 79 FPS, and Ultra settings average 69 FPS. At this resolution, the gap between Low and Medium is 37 FPS, and the difference between High and Ultra is only 10 FPS. The data shows that as resolution increases, the absolute difference between settings presets narrows, reinforcing the conclusion that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at 4K. The Medium settings row is the only one with complete min and max data across all resolutions, showing a consistent pattern where the minimum FPS is approximately 85-87% of the average.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 holds a rank of 241 out of 3720 tested combos for Control. This places the system in the top 6.5% of all tested combinations, indicating that it is a high-performance pairing for this game. The percentile ranking for the CPU alone is 85, meaning it outperforms 85% of all tested processors, while the GPU's percentile is 86, outperforming 86% of all tested graphics cards. These individual rankings are consistent with the combo's overall position, showing that neither component is a significant weak point.

The combo's rank of 241 suggests that there are 240 other tested combinations that achieve higher performance in Control. Given the high individual rankings of the CPU and GPU, it is likely that these higher-ranked combos feature either more powerful GPUs or CPUs with higher benchmark scores. The GPU's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER with a deltaPct of 0.1, meaning it scores 0.1% higher on average. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X is 1.1% higher, the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB is 2.6% higher, and the AMD Radeon 8060S is 2.7% higher. These small deltas suggest that the RTX 4080 is very closely matched with several other GPUs in general benchmark performance.

For the CPU, the nearest rivals show that the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 is essentially tied with the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F, which has a deltaPct of 0. The AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D is 0.2% lower, the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 is 0.4% lower, and the Intel Core i9-12900T is 0.5% lower. This indicates that the Ultra 5 225's overall CPU performance is competitive with a range of other processors, and the small deltas mean that in-game performance differences are likely to be minimal. The combo's rank of 241 out of 3720 is a strong result, confirming that this pairing is well-suited for Control.

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 node. Its base clock is 3.30 GHz with a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The CPU has a 20 MB shared L3 cache and 3 MB of L2 cache per core. Its benchmark results show a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 25891 and a single-core score of 3655. These scores indicate strong multi-threaded and single-threaded performance, which is relevant for Control's engine that can utilize multiple cores.

In the context of Control, the CPU's role appears to be providing a high enough frame rate ceiling that the GPU becomes the limiting factor. The measured FPS at Low settings, particularly at 1080p where the combination reaches 246 FPS, suggests that the CPU is capable of processing game logic and draw calls at very high rates. The difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p is 111 FPS, which is substantial, but it is not primarily due to CPU limitations. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rate at Low settings would be closer to the frame rate at higher settings, as the graphics load would be less significant.

The CPU's single-thread performance, as indicated by the Cinebench R23 score of 3655, is likely a significant factor in its ability to sustain high frame rates in Control. Games often have a primary game thread that can become a bottleneck at high FPS, but the data here shows that this is not the case for this combination. The fact that the frame rate scales down significantly as resolution increases, even at Low settings, points to the GPU as the main constraint. The CPU's 10 threads and high boost clock of 4.90 GHz provide sufficient processing power to avoid limiting performance in the tested configurations.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 is the primary driver of Control's performance in this combination, as evidenced by the resolution scaling data. The GPU features 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 716.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth. Its base clock is 2205 MHz with a boost clock of 2505 MHz. The GPU has 9728 shading units, 304 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, along with 76 RT cores and 304 tensor cores. The FP32 performance is 48.74 TFLOPS, and the texture rate is 761.5 GTexel/s.

The GPU's role is clearly demonstrated by the significant frame rate drops as resolution increases. At High settings, the average FPS falls from 156 at 1080p to 79 at 4K, a 49% reduction. This is a direct result of the increased pixel count requiring more GPU processing power. The RTX 4080's 16 GB of VRAM is ample for Control at all tested settings, as the game's textures and effects at 4K Ultra would not exceed this capacity. The memory bandwidth of 716.8 GB/s is sufficient to feed the GPU's processing units without becoming a bottleneck.

The GPU's benchmark scores reinforce its high-end positioning. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 6567, and its Passmark G3D score is 34457. The GPU's percentile ranking of 86 puts it ahead of 86% of all tested graphics cards. In practical terms for Control, the RTX 4080 is capable of delivering playable frame rates at 4K Ultra (69 FPS) and excellent performance at 1440p and 1080p. The data shows that the GPU is the limiting component at 4K, but it still provides a smooth experience above 60 FPS at the highest settings. The GPU's performance is well-matched to the CPU, as neither component is severely underutilized or bottlenecked in the tested scenarios.