Control

Control pairs a 14-core Intel Core Ultra 5 235 processor with an 8 GB AMD Radeon RX 7600, and the measured results in this Action Adventure title show a combination that scales predictably across resolutions and presets. The data indicates a system that can handle 1080p comfortably but requires setting expectations for 4K, with the CPU providing consistent headroom while the GPU becomes the primary constraint. This analysis uses only the measured FPS rows and hardware specifications provided, interpreting what the numbers mean for gameplay without speculation.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Control based on the measured data?

A: The data shows 1920x1080 as the only resolution where every preset averages above 60 FPS, ranging from 65 FPS at Ultra to 118 FPS at Low. At 2560x1440, High and Ultra presets dip to 56 FPS and 49 FPS respectively, while 3840x2160 only reaches 60 FPS at Low settings.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in overall benchmark scores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 has an average benchmark score of 46062, placing it 0.1% above the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 and 0.1% below the Intel Core i9-13900HX. It sits 0.2% ahead of both the AMD EPYC 4364P and AMD EPYC 7303, which shows these processors are effectively tied in synthetic performance.

Q: Does the RX 7600's VRAM capacity limit gameplay in Control?

A: The GPU has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The measured FPS drops from 60 FPS at 3840x2160 Low to 33 FPS at 3840x2160 Ultra, indicating that higher presets at 4K exceed what this memory configuration can sustain for smooth performance.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the average FPS goes from 118 at Low to 65 at Ultra, a difference of 53 FPS. The Medium preset averages 84 FPS with a minimum of 71 FPS and maximum of 97 FPS, while High sits at 75 FPS.

Q: How does the GPU rank against other graphics cards in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7600 achieves a percentile rank of 57 among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 15171. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM, scores 15199, which is 0.2% higher, while the AMD Radeon 680M scores 15270, putting it 0.7% ahead.

Q: Is the CPU's 14-core configuration beneficial for this game?

A: The Core Ultra 5 235 has 14 cores and 14 threads, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and boost clock of 5.00 GHz. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 14769 and single-core score of 2085 suggest strong per-thread performance, which matters for Control's engine, though the GPU remains the bottleneck in the measured results.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7600 is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 33 chip, featuring 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. Its boost clock reaches 2655 MHz, with a game clock of 2250 MHz and base clock of 1720 MHz. The memory operates at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective speed, delivering 288.0 GB/s across a 128-bit bus. These specifications translate into a pixel rate of 169.9 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 339.8 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance at 21.75 TFLOPS.

In Control, the GPU's role becomes clear when examining the measured FPS across settings. At 3840x2160, the average FPS drops from 60 at Low to 43 at Medium (with a 36 FPS minimum and 49 FPS maximum), then to 38 at High, and finally 33 at Ultra. This steep decline indicates that the 8 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory bus struggle with the texture and geometry demands of higher presets at 4K. The 33 FPS at Ultra is below playable thresholds, while the 60 FPS at Low is exactly at the edge of acceptable smoothness.

At 2560x1440, the pattern repeats but with more headroom. Low settings produce 89 FPS, Medium averages 64 FPS with a 54 FPS minimum, High drops to 56 FPS, and Ultra falls to 49 FPS. The 1440p results suggest that Medium is the practical ceiling for maintaining 60 FPS average, though the 54 FPS minimum means there will be noticeable dips during intense scenes. At 1920x1080, the GPU finally shows its strengths: Low achieves 118 FPS, Medium averages 84 FPS with a 71 FPS minimum, High reaches 75 FPS, and Ultra still manages 65 FPS.

The GPU's benchmark scores reflect this mid-range positioning. It scores 2310 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 88051 in Geekbench OpenCL, and 34401 in Geekbench Vulkan. The Passmark G3D score of 16634 and GPU compute score of 8790 place it at the 57th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the RTX 3050 OEM, scores nearly identically at 15199 versus the RX 7600's 15171 average, confirming that this card competes in the same performance tier.

How This Combo Ranks

The combined Control setup ranks 2028 out of 2888 tested combos in this game, placing it in the lower half of configurations. This rank reflects a pairing where the CPU is more capable than the GPU, which creates a bottleneck that limits overall performance. The CPU's percentile rank of 89 among all processors indicates it is a strong performer, but the GPU's 57th percentile ranking pulls the combo down in a game that is graphically demanding.

The data suggests that the combo's rank is driven primarily by GPU limitations. When comparing the CPU to its nearest rivals, the Core Ultra 5 235 sits within 0.2% of the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375, Core i9-13900HX, EPYC 4364P, and EPYC 7303 in average benchmark scores. This tight grouping means the CPU is not the differentiator in this combo's rank. Instead, the GPU's position relative to other cards — 0.2% behind the RTX 3050 OEM and 0.7% behind the Radeon 680M — establishes the performance ceiling.

The 2028th rank out of 2888 combos means that roughly 860 tested configurations perform better in Control. This places the combo in a position where it can handle 1080p gaming well but will not be competitive at higher resolutions with maxed settings. For a game released in 2019, this rank suggests the hardware is adequate but not exceptional for modern standards, given that the RX 7600 was released in 2023 and the CPU in 2025, yet the combination still lands in the lower half of tested setups.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the data shows a clear hierarchy across presets. Low settings produce an average of 60 FPS, which is the only playable option at this resolution. Medium drops to 43 FPS average with a 36 FPS minimum and 49 FPS maximum, indicating inconsistent performance. High averages 38 FPS, and Ultra averages 33 FPS, both of which are below the 60 FPS target for smooth gameplay. The 27 FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 4K demonstrates how much the GPU struggles with higher presets.

Moving to 2560x1440, the results improve substantially. Low settings hit 89 FPS, providing a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. Medium averages 64 FPS with a 54 FPS minimum and 73 FPS maximum, meaning most scenes stay playable but occasional dips below 60 FPS occur. High averages 56 FPS, which is close to but not consistently above the 60 FPS threshold. Ultra averages 49 FPS, showing that even at 1440p, the highest preset cannot maintain smooth performance. The 40 FPS gap between Low and Ultra at 1440p is smaller than at 4K but still significant.

At 1920x1080, every preset exceeds 60 FPS average. Low delivers 118 FPS, giving substantial headroom for high refresh rate displays. Medium averages 84 FPS with a 71 FPS minimum and 97 FPS maximum, providing a solid balance of quality and speed. High averages 75 FPS, which is still well above the 60 FPS threshold. Ultra averages 65 FPS, making it the only resolution where Ultra is genuinely playable. The 53 FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p shows the GPU's scaling, but even the lowest result remains acceptable.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 uses the Arrow Lake-S architecture on a 3 nm process from TSMC, with 14 cores and 14 threads. Its base clock of 3.40 GHz boosts to 5.00 GHz, and it carries 24 MB of shared L3 cache with 3 MB L2 per core and 192 KB L1 per core. The CPU supports DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, and its 65 W TDP makes it a power-efficient choice for desktop builds.

In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU shows strong multithreaded performance with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 14769 and single-core score of 2085. The Passmark multithread score of 37816 and single-thread score of 4516 reinforce this picture. Its integer math score of 87948 and floating-point math score of 117951 indicate robust compute capabilities. The data compression score of 390711 and encryption score of 29293 further demonstrate its versatility.

For Control, the CPU's single-core performance is particularly relevant, as the game's engine tends to rely on fewer threads for main game logic. The Cinebench R15 single-core score of 210 and R20 single-core score of 875, along with the R23 single-core score of 2085, suggest that the Ultra 5 235 can handle the game's per-thread demands without becoming a bottleneck. The 14-core configuration provides headroom for background tasks and any future games that scale better with more threads.

The CPU's 89th percentile ranking among all processors confirms it is a high-performing part, sitting just 0.1% away from the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 and Core i9-13900HX in average benchmark scores. This means the CPU is not limiting the combo's performance in Control; instead, the measured FPS results are constrained by the GPU's capabilities, particularly at higher resolutions and presets.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the best experience for this combo depends on the target resolution. At 1920x1080, Ultra settings with 65 FPS average are viable, but Medium offers a better balance with 84 FPS average and a 71 FPS minimum that keeps dips above 60 FPS. For players prioritizing smoothness over visual fidelity, High at 75 FPS is a strong middle ground, while Low at 118 FPS is unnecessary unless chasing very high refresh rates.

At 2560x1440, Medium settings provide the most playable experience with 64 FPS average and a 54 FPS minimum. This preset maintains acceptable performance while delivering better visuals than Low's 89 FPS. High at 56 FPS is borderline, and Ultra at 49 FPS should be avoided for consistent gameplay. The 54 FPS minimum at Medium means there will be occasional stutters, but the overall experience remains within a tolerable range.

At 3840x2160, the options are limited. Low settings at 60 FPS average are the only way to achieve smooth performance, but this sacrifices significant visual quality. Medium at 43 FPS average and High at 38 FPS are not recommended for action sequences, and Ultra at 33 FPS is effectively unplayable for a game that requires quick reactions. For 4K, the data suggests that Low is the only acceptable preset, and even then, the 60 FPS average leaves no headroom for demanding scenes.

The optimal configuration across all resolutions is to prioritize Medium settings at 1080p or 1440p, as this preset consistently delivers the best combination of visual quality and frame rate stability. The measured minimum FPS values for Medium at 1080p (71 FPS) and 1440p (54 FPS) show that this preset maintains smoother performance than High or Ultra, making it the data-driven recommendation for this hardware combination.