Control

Control is a 2019 Action Adventure title that stresses both the CPU and GPU in different ways depending on the resolution and settings preset. This analysis examines the measured performance of the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT, interpreting the data to understand where bottlenecks lie and how the combination scales across typical gaming configurations. The benchmark results provided offer a clear picture of a system that is capable at 1080p, but which requires careful settings management for higher resolutions.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a classic pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases, but the rate of that degradation is highly dependent on the quality preset. At Low settings, the frame rate drops from 124 FPS at 1920x1080 to 94 FPS at 2560x1440, and finally to 63 FPS at 3840x2160. This represents a 24% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 33% drop from 1440p to 4K. The overall scaling from 1080p to 4K at Low is a 49% reduction in FPS. This suggests that even at the lowest settings, the pixel throughput demand at 4K is a significant challenge for the RX 7600 XT.

The scaling becomes even more pronounced at higher quality presets. With High settings, the system produces 78 FPS at 1080p, 59 FPS at 1440p, and 40 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 24%, while the drop from 1440p to 4K is 32%. The trend suggests that the GPU is the primary limiting factor here, as the increasing pixel count puts more strain on the rendering pipeline. The Ultra preset shows the most severe scaling, with 68 FPS at 1080p falling to 51 FPS at 1440p (a 25% drop) and then to 35 FPS at 4K (a 31% drop).

What does this imply? The consistent ~25% drop from 1080p to 1440p across all presets indicates that the GPU is saturated at 1440p, and the jump to 4K only exacerbates this. The data shows that the delta between Low and Ultra at a given resolution is surprisingly consistent. At 1080p, the difference between Low (124 FPS) and Ultra (68 FPS) is 56 FPS. At 1440p, the difference is 43 FPS (94 vs 51). At 4K, it's 28 FPS (63 vs 35). This shrinking absolute difference suggests that at higher resolutions, the GPU's raw shading and pixel fill rate limits the maximum possible FPS, regardless of how much load is reduced by lowering settings. The system is clearly more render-bound than CPU-bound at 4K, while at 1080p, the CPU has more headroom to push higher frame rates.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is the central component in this performance story. Its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus provides a bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s. This memory configuration is likely sufficient for Control's textures at 1080p and 1440p, but the 4K results suggest that memory bandwidth and capacity might be a contributing factor to the performance cliff. The GPU's boost clock of 2755 MHz and game clock of 2470 MHz are relatively high, which helps in achieving the strong 1080p numbers.

The GPU's benchmark scores place it in the 60th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 17083. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070, scores 17208, which is a 0.7% delta in favor of the RTX 3070. This close margin in synthetic tests does not fully translate to the measured game FPS, where the RX 7600 XT shows it can handle 1080p Ultra at 68 FPS. The GPU's PassMark G3D score of 17132 and DirectX 12 score of 65 are the relevant metrics for a title like Control, which uses DX12. The data indicates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions, as evidenced by the significant FPS drops from 1440p to 4K across all presets.

The 4K Medium preset is the only one with min/max FPS data, showing an average of 45 FPS with a minimum of 38 and a maximum of 52. This range suggests that the GPU is struggling to maintain a stable frame rate, with dips that could affect gameplay smoothness. The fact that 4K Low (63 FPS) is significantly faster than 4K High (40 FPS) shows that the GPU is highly sensitive to the increased shader complexity and texture filtering that comes with higher presets.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo achieve 60 FPS at 2560x1440?

A: Yes, but only with the right settings. The data shows 59 FPS on High and 67 FPS on Medium. The Low preset achieves 94 FPS, while the Ultra preset drops to 51 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor at 1920x1080?

A: The benchmark results indicate that the GPU is still the primary limiter. While the CPU has a high average benchmark score of 46062, the FPS at 1080p scales with the graphics preset (124 FPS Low vs 78 FPS High), which points to the GPU's rendering capabilities as the key constraint.

Q: What is the best preset for a smooth 4K experience?

A: The only 4K preset that exceeds 60 FPS is Low, with an average of 63 FPS. The Medium preset provides an average of 45 FPS, which is playable but not consistently smooth. High and Ultra presets fall below 40 FPS.

Q: How does this GPU compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The RX 7600 XT has an average benchmark score of 17083. Its closest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070, has a score of 17208, making the RX 7600 XT 0.7% slower in that specific metric. It is, however, 0.3% faster than the GeForce GTX 690.

Q: Does the 16 GB of VRAM provide an advantage in this game?

A: The data suggests that the 16 GB frame buffer is not the main issue. The performance drops from 1440p to 4K are substantial, but the game runs on the Low preset at 4K with 63 FPS. The bottleneck appears to be the GPU's compute and fill rate rather than memory capacity, as the memory bandwidth is 288.0 GB/s.

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

A: The difference is 56 FPS. The Low preset runs at 124 FPS, while the Ultra preset runs at 68 FPS. This shows a significant performance cost for the higher visual fidelity.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system performs best. The Low preset delivers an average of 124 FPS, making it ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors. The Medium preset averages 88 FPS, with a minimum of 75 and a maximum of 101 FPS, providing a good balance. High settings reduce the average to 78 FPS, and Ultra settings bring it down to 68 FPS. All 1080p presets are playable, but the drop from Medium to High is 10 FPS, and from High to Ultra is another 10 FPS.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance degrades noticeably. The Low preset still manages a strong 94 FPS. The Medium preset averages 67 FPS, with a minimum of 57 and a maximum of 76 FPS, which is on the edge of smooth gameplay. High settings average 59 FPS, which is technically playable but may have stutters. The Ultra preset drops to 51 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target for many players. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p costs roughly 24-25% of the frame rate across all presets.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly overburdened. The Low preset is the only one that is smoothly playable, with an average of 63 FPS. The Medium preset averages 45 FPS, with a minimum of 38 and a maximum of 52 FPS, indicating noticeable frame pacing issues. High settings average 40 FPS, and Ultra settings average only 35 FPS. The data shows that 4K gaming with this combo requires significant compromises in visual quality to maintain acceptable performance.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 is a 14-core, 14-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture. It has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. This CPU has a high average benchmark score of 46062, placing it in the 89th percentile of all CPUs. Its performance is nearly identical to its nearest rivals, with a 0.1% delta compared to both the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 and the Intel Core i9-13900HX.

In the context of Control, the CPU's role appears to be secondary to the GPU. The benchmark results show that the FPS scales primarily with resolution and graphics preset, which are GPU-centric variables. Even at 1080p Low, where the CPU would be most likely to become a bottleneck, the system achieves 124 FPS. This suggests that the Core Ultra 5 235 has sufficient single-thread and multi-thread performance to feed the GPU at this level. The CPU's PassMark single-thread score of 4516 and multithread score of 37816 indicate strong gaming performance, but the game is not pushing the CPU to its limits based on the FPS data.

The fact that the CPU's synthetic scores are so close to the competition (within 0.2%) but the measured FPS in Control is entirely dependent on the GPU settings suggests that, for this specific game, the CPU is not the limiting component. The 24 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB per-core L2 cache are likely sufficient for the game's data needs. The data implies that any performance issues at 1440p or 4K should be addressed by adjusting GPU settings, not CPU settings.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution and refresh rate. For 1920x1080, the High preset (78 FPS) is a strong choice, offering a good balance of visual quality and performance. The Ultra preset (68 FPS) is also viable for those who prioritize image quality over a higher frame rate. The Medium preset (88 FPS) is the best option for players with a 144Hz monitor who want to stay above 75 FPS.

For 2560x1440, the Medium preset (67 FPS) is the recommended starting point. It provides a playable experience, though the minimum FPS of 57 shows that there may be occasional dips. The High preset (59 FPS) is acceptable, but players sensitive to frame drops may prefer the extra headroom of Medium. The Low preset (94 FPS) is the best for competitive or fast-paced play, while the Ultra preset (51 FPS) should be avoided for a smooth experience.

At 3840x2160, the options are limited. The Low preset (63 FPS) is the only one that consistently hits the 60 FPS mark. The Medium preset (45 FPS) is the highest quality setting that remains playable, but the 38 FPS minimum makes it risky for serious gaming. High (40 FPS) and Ultra (35 FPS) presets are not recommended for this resolution, as they do not provide a fluid experience. The data suggests that for 4K, players must prioritize frame rate over graphical fidelity with this hardware combination.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations for Control, this specific pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT holds a rank of 1817 out of 2888 combinations. This places it in the lower-middle tier of all tested systems. This ranking is somewhat surprising given the individual component scores, but it reflects the GPU's 60th percentile standing among all GPUs, which is a limiting factor for a demanding game like Control.

The ranking suggests that while the CPU is high-end, the GPU is not powerful enough to boost this combination to the top echelons of the charts. The combo's performance is likely dragged down by the GPU's inability to maintain high frame rates at 1440p and 4K with higher presets. The fact that the GPU's nearest rivals include older cards like the GTX 690 and mobile parts like the HD 7970M highlights that the RX 7600 XT, while modern, does not have the raw throughput of higher-tier cards.

The rank of 1817 out of 2888 implies that over a third of the tested combinations outperform this one in Control. This is a direct consequence of the GPU's mid-range positioning. The data indicates that for the CPU to be fully utilized in this game, a more powerful GPU would be necessary to push higher frame rates, especially at resolutions above 1080p. This combination is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, where the GPU can provide a satisfying experience, but it is not a top-tier performer for 4K.