Control

Control pairs a 14-core Intel Core Ultra 5 235 with a 6 GB NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti, and the measured frame rates in this Action Adventure title show a system that is decisively GPU-bound at every resolution tested. The data indicates that the GTX 1660 Ti, a Turing-based card from the GeForce 16 generation, is the primary determinant of performance, with the Core Ultra 5 235 providing sufficient headroom to avoid becoming a bottleneck even at 1080p. Benchmark results place this combination at rank 2471 out of 2888 tested combos, which places it in the lower half of the database, a position consistent with the GPU’s 41st percentile standing among all GPUs. The CPU, by contrast, sits in the 89th percentile, reinforcing that the graphics card is the limiting factor in this pairing.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 is a desktop processor built on the Arrow Lake architecture, manufactured on TSMC’s 3 nm process node. It features 14 cores and 14 threads, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. This configuration, combined with a 24 MB shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory support delivering 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth, gives the CPU strong synthetic benchmark numbers. In Cinebench R23, it scores 14769 points multi-core and 2085 points single-core; in Passmark, it achieves 37816 on multithreaded tests and 4516 on single-thread tests. These scores place the CPU at the 89th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 46062.

The nearest rivals in the CPU database are tightly clustered, with the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 scoring 46030 (0.1% higher), the Intel Core i9-13900HX scoring 46098 (0.1% lower), and AMD EPYC parts at 45970 and 45960 (0.2% higher). This clustering shows that the Core Ultra 5 235 is a mid-to-high-tier processor by synthetic metrics, but in Control, its role is secondary. The game’s measured FPS data shows no scenario where the CPU appears to limit performance: at 1080p Low, the combo reaches 91 FPS average, which is the highest FPS recorded across all settings and resolutions, yet even that figure is well below what the CPU’s single-thread capabilities would suggest as a ceiling. Control is a game that relies heavily on GPU rasterization and effects, and with a GTX 1660 Ti, the CPU’s 14 cores and 5.00 GHz boost are more than adequate to feed frames.

The CPU’s 65 W TDP and socket LGA 1851 are not directly relevant to game FPS, but the processor’s memory bandwidth and cache hierarchy contribute to consistent frame delivery. The data shows that the CPU’s Cinebench R15 single-core score of 210 and R20 single-core score of 875 are strong, yet there is no FPS measurement where the CPU becomes the bottleneck. At 1080p Ultra, the combo averages 50 FPS, and at 1080p High, 57 FPS — both figures are far lower than what the CPU could theoretically support, confirming that the GTX 1660 Ti is the constraining component. The CPU’s Passmark physics score of 2570 and floating-point math score of 117951 are robust, but Control’s engine does not appear to stress these aspects in a way that would differentiate this CPU from slower alternatives.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combo of the Core Ultra 5 235 and GTX 1660 Ti ranks 2471 out of 2888 tested combinations in Control, placing it in the bottom 15% of all combos in the database. This rank is heavily influenced by the GPU’s weak relative standing — the GTX 1660 Ti sits at the 41st percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 7723. Its nearest GPU rivals are all lower-performing parts: the AMD Radeon 540 scores 7673 (0.7% higher), the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 scores 7580 (1.9% higher), the AMD Radeon R7 250 scores 7557 (2.2% higher), and the Intel Arc A310 scores 7550 (2.3% higher). This cluster indicates that the GTX 1660 Ti is near the bottom of the GPU performance spectrum, which drags the combo’s rank down despite the CPU’s strong showing.

In practical terms, the combo’s rank means that a majority of tested systems — roughly 417 combos out of 2888 — deliver better performance in Control. The data shows that the CPU’s 89th percentile standing does little to offset the GPU’s 41st percentile, because Control’s frame rates scale primarily with GPU capability. For example, at 1080p High, the combo averages 57 FPS; a system with the same CPU but a stronger GPU would likely achieve significantly higher FPS, but the database only records this specific pairing. The rank also reflects the GPU’s age: the GTX 1660 Ti was released in February 2019, and its Turing architecture lacks dedicated ray tracing cores, which is a notable limitation for a game like Control that features ray-traced reflections and other advanced effects, though the measured FPS data here does not include ray tracing settings.

The combo’s position at 2471 of 2888 is consistent with its FPS profile: at 4K Ultra, it averages 25 FPS, which is below playable thresholds for most users, and at 1440p Ultra, it averages 38 FPS. Only at 1080p Low does it exceed 90 FPS, and even that is a modest result by modern standards. The takeaway is that this combo is positioned for 1080p gaming at medium-to-high settings, but it falls short at higher resolutions and ultra settings, which is exactly what the rank implies when compared to other combos in the database.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

Resolution scaling data reveals a clear pattern of GPU limitation. From 1080p to 4K, average FPS drops consistently across all settings, and the percentage drop is steepest at the highest settings. At Low settings, the combo averages 91 FPS at 1080p, 69 FPS at 1440p, and 46 FPS at 4K — a drop of 24.2% from 1080p to 1440p and a further 33.3% from 1440p to 4K. At High settings, the averages are 57 FPS at 1080p, 43 FPS at 1440p, and 29 FPS at 4K, representing a 24.6% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 32.6% drop from 1440p to 4K. These percentage drops are roughly similar across settings, which indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor — if the CPU were limiting, the drop from 1080p to 4K would be much smaller because the GPU would have more time to render each frame.

The most telling data point is the Ultra setting: at 1080p, the combo averages 50 FPS; at 1440p, 38 FPS; and at 4K, 25 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 4K is exactly 50%, which is a hallmark of a GPU-bound scenario where doubling the pixel count halves the frame rate. The GTX 1660 Ti has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, and at 4K, the memory bandwidth and shading throughput are insufficient to maintain higher FPS. The CPU’s performance does not change with resolution, so the fact that FPS falls by half from 1080p to 4K at Ultra settings confirms the GPU is the primary constraint.

Interestingly, the relative drop between settings is consistent across resolutions. At 1080p, Low yields 91 FPS while Ultra yields 50 FPS, a 45.1% reduction. At 4K, Low yields 46 FPS while Ultra yields 25 FPS, a 45.7% reduction. This consistency shows that the GPU’s scaling with settings is predictable and that the CPU is not introducing variability. The measured FPS data includes min and max values only for Medium settings: at 1080p Medium, the range is 55 to 74 FPS; at 1440p Medium, 41 to 56 FPS; and at 4K Medium, 28 to 38 FPS. These ranges are tight, which suggests stable frame pacing and no CPU-induced stutters.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its best results. Low settings produce an average of 91 FPS, which is the highest FPS recorded in the entire dataset. Medium settings average 64 FPS, with a minimum of 55 FPS and a maximum of 74 FPS. High settings average 57 FPS, and Ultra settings average 50 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 41 FPS, which shows that the GTX 1660 Ti has a wide performance range depending on settings, but even at Ultra, 50 FPS is playable for most action-adventure titles.

At 2560x1440, the averages drop noticeably. Low settings yield 69 FPS, Medium yields 49 FPS (min 41, max 56), High yields 43 FPS, and Ultra yields 38 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p at each setting is roughly 20-25%, which is expected given the 1.78x increase in pixel count. At 1440p Ultra, 38 FPS is borderline, and at 1440p High, 43 FPS is playable but not smooth on high-refresh displays.

At 3840x2160, the combo struggles. Low settings average 46 FPS, Medium averages 33 FPS (min 28, max 38), High averages 29 FPS, and Ultra averages 25 FPS. The 4K Low result of 46 FPS is the only 4K setting that approaches playability, and it does so by sacrificing visual quality. At 4K Ultra, 25 FPS is a slideshow, and even at 4K High, 29 FPS is below the 30 FPS threshold that many consider the minimum for console-like play. The Medium setting at 4K has a min FPS of 28 and a max of 38, indicating that the GPU is hitting its limits, with frame times varying significantly.

Across all resolutions, the data shows a consistent pattern: Low settings are the only way to achieve 60+ FPS, and that only happens at 1080p (91 FPS) and 1440p (69 FPS). For 60 FPS play, users would need to target 1080p Medium or Low. For 4K, even Low settings only reach 46 FPS, which is below 60. The max FPS values at Medium settings (74 at 1080p, 56 at 1440p, 38 at 4K) further illustrate the GPU’s ceiling.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is the dominant factor in this combo’s Control performance. It uses the TU116 chip on a 12 nm process, with 1536 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, and 48 raster output units. Its base clock is 1500 MHz with a boost clock of 1770 MHz, and it has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory running at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) on a 192-bit bus, yielding 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU’s FP32 performance is 5.437 TFLOPS, and its pixel rate is 84.96 GPixel/s with a texture rate of 169.9 GTexel/s. These specs place it at the 41st percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 7723.

In Control, the 6 GB VRAM is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p at most settings, but at 4K, the memory may be a limiting factor. The game’s textures and effects at Ultra settings can exceed 6 GB at 4K, which could cause the GPU to fall back to slower memory management, though the measured FPS data shows a consistent scaling pattern that suggests bandwidth, not capacity, is the primary constraint. The 288.0 GB/s bandwidth is modest by modern standards, and at 4K, the GPU must move more data per frame, which explains why 4K Ultra drops to 25 FPS.

The GTX 1660 Ti’s nearest rivals in the GPU database are all significantly weaker: the AMD Radeon 540 (0.7% higher average score), AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (1.9% higher), AMD Radeon R7 250 (2.2% higher), and Intel Arc A310 (2.3% higher). This clustering shows that the GTX 1660 Ti is at the very bottom of the performance tier for modern GPUs, which is why the combo ranks so low. The GPU’s Passmark G3D score of 12871 and DirectX 12 score of 51 are low, and its Geekbench Vulkan score of 5827 is similarly weak. These synthetic scores correlate with the measured FPS: at 1080p High, the combo averages 57 FPS, which is roughly half of what a mid-range GPU would achieve.

The GPU’s lack of dedicated ray tracing cores (the RT cores field is null) means that Control’s ray-traced features would be handled by the CUDA cores, which is inefficient. However, the measured FPS data does not include ray tracing settings, so the impact is not quantified. The GPU’s 120 W TDP and 300 W suggested PSU are modest, but these are not relevant to game performance. The GPU’s release date of February 2019 and its end-of-life production status indicate that it is an older part, and Control, released in August 2019, was contemporary with it, but the game’s demanding rendering still pushes the GTX 1660 Ti to its limits, particularly at higher resolutions.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo achieves in Control?

A: The highest average FPS is 91, recorded at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

Q: Is this combo capable of 60 FPS at 1440p in Control?

A: No. At 2560x1440, the highest average FPS is 69 at Low settings, but Medium settings drop to 49 FPS, and High settings to 43 FPS. Only Low settings exceed 60 FPS at 1440p.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 has an average benchmark score of 46062, which is 0.1% higher than the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (46030), 0.1% lower than the Intel Core i9-13900HX (46098), and 0.2% higher than both the AMD EPYC 4364P (45970) and AMD EPYC 7303 (45960).

Q: What is the GPU’s percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti sits at the 41st percentile, with an average benchmark score of 7723. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon 540, scores 7673, which is 0.7% lower.

Q: At 4K Ultra, what average FPS does this combo deliver?

A: At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the combo averages 25 FPS. The only 4K setting that exceeds 30 FPS is Low, which averages 46 FPS.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck the GPU in this game?

A: No. The data shows that the GPU is the limiting factor at all resolutions. The CPU’s 89th percentile standing and strong single-thread scores (2085 in Cinebench R23) are far above what Control requires, as evidenced by the consistent FPS drops from 1080p to 4K, which are typical of GPU-bound scenarios.