Control

# Control with Intel Core Ultra 5 235 + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER

Control's benchmark data with this combination reveals a system that handles the game's physics-heavy action well at mainstream resolutions but strains under maximum settings. The pairing of Intel's 14-core Arrow Lake processor with NVIDIA's Turing-based RTX 2070 SUPER produces a predictable bottleneck pattern: the GPU becomes the limiting factor as resolution climbs, while the CPU's strong single-thread performance keeps frame rates respectable at 1080p. The measured FPS across twelve resolution/settings combinations tells a story of a rig that can deliver smooth gameplay at 1440p with tweaks, but the gap between Low and Ultra settings at each resolution exposes the RTX 2070 SUPER's age.

Resolution Scaling

The data shows a dramatic FPS drop as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160, and the pattern reveals where the bottleneck lives. At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 82 FPS at 1080p to 62 FPS at 1440p (a 24.4% reduction) and then to 42 FPS at 4K (a 32.3% further drop). This scaling curve is characteristic of a GPU-limited scenario — the frame rate declines nearly proportionally with the pixel count increase, which indicates the RTX 2070 SUPER's 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth are being saturated rather than the CPU holding things back.

The Low settings scaling reinforces this interpretation. At Low, the system produces 130 FPS at 1080p, 98 FPS at 1440p (down 24.6%), and 66 FPS at 4K (down 32.7% from 1440p). The consistency of those percentage drops across different quality presets is telling: even when the graphics workload is reduced, the resolution penalty remains similar, suggesting that raw pixel throughput — governed by the GPU's 64 ROPs and 113.3 GPixel/s pixel rate — is the primary constraint. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the Low preset at 1080p would show a smaller drop when moving to 1440p because the CPU would still be able to feed frames.

Interestingly, the Medium preset at each resolution shows a smaller gap between minimum and maximum FPS compared to the average. At 4K Medium, the spread is 40 to 54 FPS around a 47 FPS average; at 1440p Medium it's 59 to 80 around 70; at 1080p Medium it's 78 to 106 around 92. These ranges indicate that the game's dynamic elements — likely physics interactions and particle effects during combat — cause frame time variance, but the system maintains a playable floor even at 4K Medium. The Ultra preset, however, shows no minimum or maximum values in the data, which suggests the frame pacing becomes more erratic or the measurement methodology captures only averages for that setting.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 brings 14 cores and 14 threads to this pairing, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The CPU's benchmark profile shows a strong single-thread performance — a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2085 and a PassMark single-thread score of 4516 — which matters for Control because the game's physics and AI systems tend to rely on a few heavily loaded threads. The CPU's percentile ranking of 89 among all processors indicates it sits comfortably in the upper tier, and its nearest rivals in aggregate benchmarks include the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (0.1% faster) and Intel Core i9-13900HX (0.1% slower), showing the 235 holds its own against mobile flagship parts.

In this game's context, the CPU likely keeps frame rates from collapsing during intense moments. The multi-threaded performance is solid — Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 14769 and PassMark multi-thread score of 37816 — but Control is not typically a title that scales perfectly across many cores. The 14-thread configuration provides headroom for background tasks and the game's streaming systems, yet the measured FPS deltas between settings at the same resolution are more attributable to GPU workload than CPU capability. The fact that Low preset at 1080p hits 130 FPS while Ultra at the same resolution drops to 71 FPS — a 45.4% reduction — points to graphics settings, not CPU limits, as the determining factor.

The CPU's 24 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory support (102.4 GB/s bandwidth) provide adequate data feeding for the GPU. The 3 nm process node from TSMC and 17,800 million transistors give the 235 an efficiency profile that keeps the 65 W TDP manageable, though this doesn't directly translate to gaming performance. The PassMark data encryption score of 29293 and data compression score of 390711 suggest strong general-purpose throughput, but these are not directly gaming-relevant metrics. What matters for Control is that the CPU's single-thread score places it in the 89th percentile, ensuring that the game's main thread logic doesn't become a bottleneck at 1080p where the GPU has more headroom.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER is the clear performance limiter in this configuration, and its specifications explain the measured results. The GPU features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its TU104 chip on a 12 nm process contains 13,600 million transistors across a 545 mm² die, with 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The boost clock of 1770 MHz and base clock of 1605 MHz, combined with the 40 RT cores and 320 tensor cores, give it a 9.062 TFLOPS FP32 rating that was competitive in 2019 but now falls behind modern mid-range cards.

The GPU's benchmark scores place it at the 65th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 20282. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Arc B570 at -1.3% and the Intel Arc A750 at -1.5%, indicating the 2070 SUPER trades blows with current entry-level options. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1651 and PassMark G3D score of 18169 reflect its aging Turing architecture. For Control specifically, the GPU's 8 GB VRAM is adequate for 1080p and 1440p at most settings, but the Ultra preset at 4K likely pushes against memory capacity limits — the 36 FPS average at 4K Ultra is the lowest measured value in the entire dataset.

The memory clock of 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) and the 256-bit bus width provide enough bandwidth for 1440p High (62 FPS) and even 4K Medium (47 FPS), but the pixel rate of 113.3 GPixel/s becomes a constraint at 4K. The GPU's DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) means it can handle Control's modern rendering features, but the raw compute throughput is insufficient for high-refresh 4K gaming. The PassMark DirectX 12 score of 67 is notably lower than the DirectX 11 score of 151, which could indicate driver overhead or architectural limitations in newer API workloads, though Control's implementation seems to perform adequately based on the measured frame rates.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers playable frame rates across all settings. Low preset averages 130 FPS, Medium averages 92 FPS (with a range of 78-106), High averages 82 FPS, and Ultra averages 71 FPS. The step from Low to Medium represents a 29.2% performance hit, while the step from Medium to High costs 10.9%, and High to Ultra costs another 13.4%. These diminishing returns suggest that Medium or High at 1080p offers the best balance for high-refresh monitors, as the jump from 92 to 130 FPS at Low sacrifices significant visual quality.

At 2560x1440, the averages drop to 98 FPS at Low, 70 FPS at Medium (59-80 range), 62 FPS at High, and 54 FPS at Ultra. The Medium preset at 1440p maintains a 59 FPS minimum, which keeps gameplay fluid on standard 60 Hz displays. The Ultra preset at 54 FPS is borderline — playable but with visible frame pacing issues during intense scenes. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 44.9%, slightly smaller than the 45.4% gap at 1080p, indicating that resolution scaling is compressing the performance differences between settings.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles. Low preset averages 66 FPS, Medium averages 47 FPS (40-54 range), High averages 42 FPS, and Ultra averages 36 FPS. The 4K Ultra result is the weakest in the entire dataset, falling below the 40 FPS threshold that many consider the minimum for acceptable action gameplay. Even 4K Low at 66 FPS is not consistently smooth, and the Medium preset's 40 FPS minimum shows that Control at 4K on this GPU requires significant compromises. The data indicates that 4K is only viable with Low settings, and even then, the experience will be marginal.

How This Combo Ranks

This combination ranks 1632 out of 2888 tested combos in Control, placing it in the 43rd percentile of all system pairings. This is a middle-of-the-pack result that reflects the GPU's age more than the CPU's capability. The RTX 2070 SUPER's 65th percentile GPU ranking drags down the overall combo, while the CPU's 89th percentile ranking suggests that pairing this processor with a modern GPU would yield significantly better Control performance. The rank of 1632 means that roughly 56% of tested combos outperform this setup, which is expected for a GPU released in 2019 paired with a 2025 processor.

The GPU's nearest rivals — the Intel Arc B570 and Arc A750 — are within 1.5% of its average benchmark score, yet those cards are typically paired with modern CPUs in budget builds. The fact that this combo sits in the lower half of the distribution for Control specifically suggests that the game's demands are more GPU-intensive than CPU-intensive. A better GPU pairing with the same CPU would likely push the combo rank significantly higher, as the CPU has demonstrated it can feed frames at 130 FPS at 1080p Low without bottlenecking. The combo rank of 1632 out of 2888 is a statistical indicator that while this system handles Control adequately at 1080p and 1440p, it is not a top-tier configuration for this title.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution. At 1920x1080, Medium preset (92 FPS average, 78 FPS minimum) provides the best experience for smooth gameplay, as the jump to High (82 FPS) costs 10 FPS for marginal visual gains, while Ultra (71 FPS) sacrifices 21 FPS from Medium for minimal improvement. For players with 144 Hz monitors, Low preset at 130 FPS is the only option that approaches refresh rate saturation, but the visual compromise may not be worth it.

At 2560x1440, Medium preset (70 FPS average, 59 FPS minimum) is the recommended choice, as it maintains a 59 FPS floor that stays above the 60 Hz refresh threshold for most displays. High preset at 62 FPS is also viable, but the Medium's minimum FPS of 59 provides better consistency. Ultra at 54 FPS dips below 60 and will be noticeable during action sequences. Low at 98 FPS is unusually fast for 1440p and could be used in competitive scenarios, but the visual downgrade is significant.

At 3840x2160, only Low preset (66 FPS) provides a playable experience, with Medium (47 FPS) and High (42 FPS) falling below the 50 FPS threshold for comfortable gameplay. Ultra (36 FPS) is not recommended for this resolution. Players wanting 4K with this GPU must accept Low settings, which undermines the visual experience that 4K resolution is meant to deliver. For most users, 1440p Medium or 1080p High will provide the best balance of visual fidelity and frame rate with this combo.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Control at 4K 60 FPS?

A: No. The highest 4K average FPS measured is 66 at Low settings, but Medium drops to 47 FPS and Ultra falls to 36 FPS. 4K 60 FPS is not achievable with this GPU in Control.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 1440p gameplay?

A: Medium preset at 2560x1440 delivers 70 FPS average with a 59 FPS minimum, making it the recommended choice for smooth 60 Hz gameplay. High preset at 62 FPS is also viable but with less headroom.

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

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

Q: Is the GPU or CPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU's 89th percentile ranking and strong single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2085) exceed what Control requires, while the GPU's 65th percentile ranking and 8 GB VRAM constrain frame rates, especially at higher resolutions.

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

A: At 1920x1080, Low preset averages 130 FPS while Ultra averages 71 FPS, representing a 45.4% performance reduction. The largest drop occurs between Low and Medium (from 130 to 92 FPS, a 29.2% decrease).

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested configurations?

A: This combination ranks 1632 out of 2888 tested combos in Control, placing it in the 43rd percentile. The rank reflects the GPU's age relative to newer graphics cards, not a deficiency in the CPU.