Control

Control is a 2019 action-adventure title that stresses both the CPU and GPU, but the measured data for the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT combination reveals a clear bottleneck hierarchy. At 1080p, the system is capable of delivering high frame rates, but the performance scaling across resolutions indicates that the Radeon RX 6750 XT becomes the primary limiting factor as pixel count increases. The benchmark results show a configuration that is well-balanced for 1440p gaming, offering a substantial performance uplift over 4K while still maintaining playable frame rates at the highest settings. The data indicates that this pairing is best suited for high-refresh-rate 1440p gameplay, with 4K requiring a reduction in settings to achieve smooth performance.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a predictable but steep decline in performance as resolution increases, which is the classic signature of a GPU-bound workload at higher pixel counts. At 1080p High settings, the system achieves an average FPS of 94. Moving to 1440p High reduces this to 71 FPS, a drop of 23 FPS, and then to 4K High, it falls to 48 FPS, a further 23 FPS reduction. This linear degradation pattern strongly suggests that the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT is the component determining performance at these settings, as the Core Ultra 5 235 has sufficient headroom to feed the GPU at lower resolutions.

The scaling from 1080p to 4K is severe, with the 4K High average being roughly half of the 1080p High average. Specifically, the 48 FPS at 4K High is 48.9% lower than the 94 FPS at 1080p High. This indicates that the GPU's rendering capabilities, including its 12 GB of GDDR6 memory and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth, are being fully utilized at 4K, and the frame rate is tied directly to the pixel throughput. The situation changes when looking at Low settings, where the 4K average of 76 FPS is still higher than the 1440p High average of 71 FPS, showing that the game's visual complexity, not just resolution, heavily influences the load on the GPU.

At 1080p, the gap between settings is relatively narrow, with Low hitting 148 FPS, Medium hitting 105 FPS, High hitting 94 FPS, and Ultra hitting 81 FPS. This suggests that at this resolution, the CPU is still capable of pushing high frame rates, but the GPU is already starting to become a factor. However, the most telling data point is the difference between Low and Ultra at each resolution. At 1080p, the difference is 67 FPS, while at 4K, the difference is only 34 FPS. This compression of the performance gap at higher resolutions confirms that the GPU is the limiting component, as its maximum output is constrained by pixel count, not by the game's settings.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average frame rate this combination can achieve in Control?

A: The highest measured average frame rate is 148 FPS, which is achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This indicates that the system has significant headroom for high-refresh-rate monitors when visual fidelity is lowered.

Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Control?

A: Yes, but with compromises. At 4K with High settings, the average FPS is 48, which is playable but not ideal for fast-paced action. To achieve a smoother experience at 4K, the data shows that dropping to Low settings raises the average to 76 FPS, while Medium settings yield 54 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the primary bottleneck in this game?

A: The benchmark data indicates the GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions. The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is substantial, and the gap between Low and Ultra settings narrows as resolution increases, which is a clear sign of GPU limitation. The CPU's performance headroom is evident at 1080p Low, where the frame rate reaches 148 FPS.

Q: What is the best resolution for a balance of visual quality and performance?

A: The data suggests that 2560x1440 is the optimal resolution for this pairing. At 1440p High settings, the average FPS is 71, which is a good balance. At 1440p Ultra, the average is 62 FPS, which is still smooth, while 1080p High only offers a 23 FPS increase over 1440p High.

Q: How does the system perform at Ultra settings?

A: The Ultra preset is the most demanding. At 1080p, it achieves an average of 81 FPS. At 1440p, the average drops to 62 FPS, and at 4K, it falls to 42 FPS. The 4K result is the lowest average FPS recorded in the data set.

Q: Is there a significant difference between Medium and High settings?

A: Yes, the data shows a consistent performance hit when moving from Medium to High. At 1080p, the difference is 11 FPS (105 vs 94). At 1440p, the difference is 9 FPS (80 vs 71), and at 4K, the difference is 6 FPS (54 vs 48). This suggests that High settings add a notable load on the GPU.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT is the central component in determining Control's performance, particularly at higher resolutions. The GPU's 12 GB of GDDR6 memory and 192-bit memory bus provide a 432.0 GB/s bandwidth, which is a critical resource for a game like Control that features complex textures and physics effects. The benchmark results show that the GPU's 2560 shading units and 64 ROPs are taxed heavily, as evidenced by the significant frame rate drops when moving from 1440p to 4K. The GPU's boost clock of 2600 MHz and game clock of 2495 MHz are high for the RDNA 2.0 architecture, but they are not enough to overcome the sheer pixel count at 4K.

The data reveals that the GPU's performance ceiling is reached at 4K with Ultra settings, where the average FPS is 42. This is the lowest score in the measured data, indicating that the card is fully saturated. In contrast, at 1080p, the GPU has more headroom, with Low settings producing 148 FPS, suggesting that the card is capable of much higher output if the CPU can keep up. The GPU's 13.31 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is a strong indicator of its raw compute capability, but the measured FPS shows that memory bandwidth and pixel fill rate are more critical in this game. The card's 166.4 GPixel/s pixel rate is a key factor, as the 4K resolution requires over 8 million pixels to be processed per frame.

The GPU's position in the benchmark database, with a percentile of 71, shows it is a capable mid-range performer. Its nearest rivals, such as the AMD Radeon R9 M395X and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile, have similar average scores, with deltas of 0.5% and 1.1% respectively. This indicates that the RX 6750 XT's performance in Control is consistent with its overall benchmark standing. The data shows that the GPU's 40 RT cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support are not the primary drivers of performance here, as the game's rasterization load is what causes the frame rate to scale down with resolution. The 12 GB memory capacity is also not a limiting factor at these settings, as the game does not appear to exceed this allocation at the measured resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system demonstrates its peak performance. With Low settings, the average FPS is 148, which is the highest score in the entire data set. This suggests that the CPU and GPU combination is capable of very high frame rates when the graphical load is minimized. Moving to Medium settings, the average drops to 105 FPS, with a minimum of 90 and a maximum of 121, showing a stable frame time distribution. High settings produce an average of 94 FPS, while Ultra settings bring the average down to 81 FPS. The relatively small gap between Medium and Ultra at this resolution (24 FPS) indicates that the CPU is still a significant contributor, as the GPU is not yet the sole bottleneck.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates become more moderate, reflecting the increased pixel load. Low settings yield an average of 112 FPS, which is still excellent for competitive play. Medium settings produce an average of 80 FPS, with a minimum of 68 and a maximum of 92, which is a slightly wider variance than at 1080p. High settings average 71 FPS, and Ultra settings average 62 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 50 FPS, which is smaller than the 67 FPS difference at 1080p. This narrowing gap is a clear indicator that the GPU is becoming the limiting factor, as its ability to render frames at higher resolutions is constrained.

At 3840x2160, the system's performance is significantly reduced. Low settings are the only preset that provides a high frame rate, with an average of 76 FPS. Medium settings average 54 FPS, with a minimum of 46 and a maximum of 62. High settings average 48 FPS, and Ultra settings average 42 FPS. The data shows that the difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is only 34 FPS, which is the smallest gap across all resolutions. This confirms that the GPU is heavily bottlenecked at this resolution, and the game's settings have a reduced impact on performance because the pixel fill rate is the dominant constraint. The 4K Medium result, with its 46 FPS minimum, is a critical data point, as it indicates that even this setting can experience drops below the 50 FPS threshold.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 plays a supporting role in Control, but its capabilities are essential for achieving the high frame rates seen at lower resolutions. With 14 cores and 14 threads, the CPU provides a solid foundation for the game's physics and AI calculations. Its boost clock of 5.00 GHz is high, which is beneficial for the single-threaded performance that many game engines rely on. The CPU's benchmark scores, such as a 2085 single-core score in Cinebench R23, indicate that it has strong single-thread performance, which is crucial for maintaining high frame rates in scenarios where the GPU is not the bottleneck.

The data shows that at 1080p with Low settings, the CPU is able to push the frame rate to 148 FPS, which is likely near its practical limit for this game. The CPU's 24 MB of shared L3 cache and 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth help to feed the GPU with data, but the architecture's performance is not the limiting factor at higher resolutions. The CPU's overall benchmark score of 46062 places it in the 89th percentile, and its nearest rivals, such as the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 and Intel Core i9-13900HX, have nearly identical average scores with deltas of 0.1% or less. This suggests that the Core Ultra 5 235 is a very capable processor for gaming, but its performance is not what dictates the frame rates in this specific test.

The CPU's role becomes more apparent when comparing the 1080p and 1440p results. At 1080p Ultra, the average FPS is 81, while at 1440p Ultra, it is 62. This 19 FPS drop is primarily due to the GPU, but the fact that the CPU can still deliver 81 FPS at 1080p Ultra shows that it is not a weak link in the chain. However, the CPU's performance is not the reason for the frame rate being capped at 148 FPS at 1080p Low; this is likely due to the game's engine or a driver-level frame rate limit. The CPU's power draw of 65 W TDP is efficient, but its performance in this game is secondary to the GPU's rendering capabilities.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the optimal settings for this configuration depend heavily on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For players with a 1080p display, the High preset is the recommended choice, as it delivers a 94 FPS average, which is smooth and visually detailed. The Ultra preset at 1080p offers an 81 FPS average, which is still playable, but the 13 FPS difference between High and Ultra suggests that the visual gains may not be worth the performance cost. For competitive play at 1080p, the Low preset's 148 FPS is the best option, but it sacrifices significant visual fidelity.

For 1440p displays, the Medium preset is the best balance of performance and quality. The 80 FPS average is high enough for a smooth experience, and the minimum of 68 FPS ensures that there are no major stutters. The High preset at 1440p is also viable, with a 71 FPS average, but the drop from 80 to 71 FPS may be noticeable to some users. The Ultra preset at 1440p, with a 62 FPS average, is the most demanding option and is only recommended for players who prioritize visual quality over frame rate stability.

At 4K, the data clearly shows that the Low preset is the only way to achieve a consistently high frame rate, with a 76 FPS average. The Medium preset, at 54 FPS, is playable but may have occasional dips to 46 FPS, which can be disruptive. The High and Ultra presets at 4K, with averages of 48 and 42 FPS respectively, are not recommended for a smooth experience, as they fall below the 50 FPS threshold that is often considered the minimum for action games. The best overall experience for this system is at 1440p with Medium or High settings, as this provides a strong balance between visual fidelity and performance, taking full advantage of the GPU's capabilities without overburdening it.