Control

Control on this Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and RTX 4080 combination delivers a performance profile that is firmly GPU-bound at higher resolutions but reveals the CPU’s capability at 1080p. The measured frames per second range from a playable 69 FPS at 4K Ultra to a very high 246 FPS at 1080p Low, showing a wide performance envelope. The data indicates that this pairing is well-balanced for high-refresh 1440p gaming, while 4K Ultra remains demanding on the graphics card, and 1080p Low exposes the processor’s strong single-thread headroom. Across all tested settings, the combination never falls below 69 FPS average, which suggests a consistently smooth experience even at the most demanding preset.

Resolution Scaling

Resolution scaling in Control is starkly visible in the measured data, with average frame rates dropping substantially as pixel count increases. At High settings, the average frame rate moves from 156 FPS at 1920x1080, down to 118 FPS at 2560x1440, and further to 79 FPS at 3840x2160. This represents a 49.4% reduction from 1080p to 4K at High settings, indicating that the rendering load scales heavily with resolution, a pattern typical for a game with demanding visual effects. The gap between 1440p and 4K is 39 FPS, while the gap between 1080p and 1440p is 38 FPS, showing a nearly linear decline in performance as resolution increases, which points to the GPU being the primary limiting factor at these settings.

Looking at the Low preset, the scaling is even more pronounced in absolute terms but less severe proportionally. The average frame rate drops from 246 FPS at 1080p to 186 FPS at 1440p, and then to 126 FPS at 4K. The percentage drop from 1080p to 4K at Low is 48.8%, similar to High, but the absolute numbers are much higher. This suggests that even at the lowest settings, the GPU is still the main bottleneck, though the CPU’s ability to push 246 FPS at 1080p Low indicates it is not holding back the graphics card at that resolution. At 4K Low, the 126 FPS average still comfortably exceeds 120 FPS, showing that this combo can handle high refresh rates even at 4K when settings are reduced.

The Medium preset shows a similar trend, with 175 FPS at 1080p, 132 FPS at 1440p, and 89 FPS at 4K. The Ultra settings, which are the most demanding, produce 135 FPS at 1080p, 102 FPS at 1440p, and 69 FPS at 4K. The 4K Ultra figure of 69 FPS is the only measured point below 70 FPS, and it still clears 60 FPS, which is the minimum for smooth gameplay on standard displays. The pattern across all settings is consistent: the biggest absolute drop occurs between 1440p and 4K, suggesting that 4K resolution imposes a significant load on the RTX 4080’s 16 GB of memory and 256-bit bus, even with 716.8 GB/s of bandwidth available.

What this scaling data reveals about the limiting component is that the RTX 4080 is the dominant constraint at 1440p and 4K. At 1080p, the frame rates are high enough that the CPU starts to matter more, but the fact that 1080p Low hits 246 FPS shows the Intel Core Ultra 5 235’s 5.00 GHz boost clock is sufficient to feed the GPU effectively. The difference between 1080p and 1440p at Low is 60 FPS, while the difference between 1440p and 4K at Low is also 60 FPS, which is a linear pattern that strongly implies the GPU’s compute and memory throughput are the limiting factors. In contrast, the CPU’s 14 cores and 14 threads are likely underutilized at higher resolutions, where the workload shifts almost entirely to the graphics card.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235’s role in this game’s results is best understood through its benchmark scores and how they relate to the measured frame rates. With 14 cores and 14 threads, this processor has a high core count but no hyper-threading, which is a notable design choice. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 14769 and single-core score of 2085 show a strong balance, with the single-core performance being particularly relevant for Control, a game that relies on a main simulation thread. The 5.00 GHz boost clock is the key enabler for the high frame rates seen at 1080p, where the CPU must keep up with the GPU’s output.

In the context of the measured FPS, the CPU’s influence is most visible at 1080p Low, where the average frame rate reaches 246 FPS. This figure is high enough that even a capable GPU like the RTX 4080 could be limited by CPU processing if the processor’s single-thread performance were weaker. However, the Core Ultra 5 235’s Cinebench R20 single-core score of 875 and PassMark single-thread score of 4516 indicate strong per-core capability, allowing it to maintain high frame rates without becoming a bottleneck. The processor’s nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375, has an average benchmark score of 46030, which is just 0.1% lower than the Intel chip’s 46062, showing that they are effectively tied in overall CPU performance.

The CPU’s memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s and DDR5 support also contribute to feeding the GPU with data, though Control’s engine is not typically bandwidth-limited at these settings. The L3 cache of 24 MB shared is moderate, but the L2 cache of 3 MB per core helps with data locality. The PassMark multi-thread score of 37816 and the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 14769 place this CPU in the 89th percentile of all CPUs, indicating it is a strong performer for gaming workloads. The fact that the combo ranks 241st out of 3720 tested combinations in Control suggests that this CPU-GPU pairing is in the top 6.5% of all tested systems, which is a strong showing.

When comparing to its nearest rivals, the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 is essentially on par with the Intel Core i9-13900HX, which has an average score of 46098 and a deltaPct of -0.1%, meaning the i9-13900HX is marginally faster. The AMD EPYC 4364P and EPYC 7303 are 0.2% behind, with scores of 45970 and 45960, respectively. These differences are negligible in real-world gaming, so the CPU’s role is consistent across these comparable processors. The data shows that Control’s frame rates at 1080p are high enough to suggest the CPU is not a limiting factor, but the scaling from 1080p to 4K indicates that the GPU takes over as the primary constraint at higher resolutions.

FAQ

Q: Why does the frame rate drop so much from 1080p to 4K?

A: The measured data shows an average FPS drop of roughly 48-49% from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 across all settings. For example, at High settings, the frame rate goes from 156 FPS at 1080p to 79 FPS at 4K. This indicates that the RTX 4080’s rendering workload scales heavily with pixel count, making the GPU the limiting component at higher resolutions.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 a bottleneck in Control?

A: At 1080p Low, the combo reaches 246 FPS, which shows the CPU can feed the GPU effectively. At higher resolutions, the frame rates drop due to GPU load, not CPU limits. The CPU’s single-core performance, evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2085, is sufficient to avoid bottlenecking at these settings.

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

A: The 2560x1440 resolution at High settings yields 118 FPS, which is a strong balance of visual quality and performance. At 4K High, the frame rate drops to 79 FPS, while 1440p Ultra still achieves 102 FPS, making 1440p the sweet spot for high-refresh gaming.

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

A: The combo ranks 241st out of 3,720 tested combinations in Control, placing it in the top 6.5% of systems. This indicates that the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and RTX 4080 pairing is a high-performing setup for this game.

Q: What is the performance difference between Low and Ultra settings at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 126 FPS, while Ultra averages 69 FPS. This 57 FPS difference shows that Ultra settings impose a significant load on the GPU, but even the lowest frame rate remains above 60 FPS.

Q: Does the CPU’s core count matter for Control?

A: The CPU has 14 cores and 14 threads, but Control is not heavily multi-threaded. The single-core performance, with a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, is more important. The high 1080p frame rates suggest that the CPU’s per-core speed is sufficient, and additional threads provide no measurable benefit.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the best experience for this combo depends on the target display refresh rate. For 4K displays, the High preset at 3840x2160 delivers 79 FPS, which is above 60 FPS and provides a good visual experience. The Ultra preset at 4K drops to 69 FPS, which is still playable, but the 10 FPS gain from moving to High is worthwhile if you prioritize smoothness over maximum visual fidelity. The Medium preset at 4K averages 89 FPS, which is a better option for 4K monitors with 90-120 Hz refresh rates, offering a 12.7% improvement over High while still looking good.

For 1440p displays, the High preset at 2560x1440 achieves 118 FPS, which is ideal for 120 Hz monitors. The Ultra preset at 102 FPS is also excellent, and the difference between High and Ultra is only 16 FPS, so choosing Ultra is reasonable if you want max settings. The Medium preset at 132 FPS is better for 144 Hz displays, but High is a better balance. At 1080p, all presets exceed 135 FPS, with High at 156 FPS and Low at 246 FPS. For 1080p users with high refresh rates (165 Hz or above), the Low preset is the only way to fully utilize the display, but the Medium preset at 175 FPS is a better visual compromise.

The data suggests that the Medium preset is the most balanced option across all resolutions. At 1080p Medium, the frame rate is 175 FPS with a minimum of 149 FPS, which is very stable. At 1440p Medium, it’s 132 FPS with a minimum of 113 FPS, and at 4K Medium, it’s 89 FPS with a minimum of 76 FPS. The minimum FPS values for Medium settings are notably higher than the averages for Ultra at the same resolution, indicating better frame pacing. For example, at 4K Medium, the minimum of 76 FPS is higher than the Ultra average of 69 FPS, so Medium provides a more consistent experience.

The Ultra preset is the most demanding, and while it never falls below 69 FPS at 4K, it does not offer a large visual leap over High for the performance cost. The High preset is a strong recommendation for most users, as it provides a substantial frame rate advantage over Ultra while maintaining high visual quality. Specifically, at 4K High, you get 79 FPS versus 69 FPS on Ultra, a 14.5% improvement. At 1440p, High gives 118 FPS versus 102 FPS on Ultra, a 15.7% gain. The Low preset is only advisable for competitive play at 1080p, where 246 FPS is achievable, but the visual quality is reduced.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 with NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 ranks 241st out of 3,720 tested combinations in Control, placing it in the 93.5th percentile of all tested systems. This is a strong result, indicating that this pairing is well above average for this game. The RTX 4080 itself sits in the 86th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 54,247, while the CPU is in the 89th percentile of all CPUs with an average score of 46,062. The combination of two high-percentile components yields a system that performs exceptionally well in Control.

When comparing the GPU to its nearest rivals, the RTX 4080 is essentially tied with the RTX 4080 SUPER, which has an average score of 54,209 and a deltaPct of 0.1%, meaning the SUPER is marginally faster. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X is 1.1% behind, and the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB is 2.6% behind, with a score of 55,698. The AMD Radeon 8060S is 2.7% behind. This shows that the RTX 4080 is competitive with the fastest GPUs, and its performance in Control is consistent with its overall benchmark standing.

The CPU’s ranking relative to its nearest rivals is also close. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 is just 0.1% faster in average score, while the Intel Core i9-13900HX is 0.1% faster, and the AMD EPYC processors are 0.2% faster. These differences are within measurement noise, so the CPU’s performance in Control is representative of its class. The combo rank of 241 out of 3,720 means there are 240 combinations that perform better, which likely include systems with more powerful GPUs like the RTX 4090 or newer cards, but for this CPU and GPU pairing, the results are excellent.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of performance across three resolutions and four settings. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves an average of 246 FPS, the Medium preset averages 175 FPS with a minimum of 149 and maximum of 201, the High preset averages 156 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 135 FPS. The 1080p results show that even at Ultra settings, the frame rate stays above 135 FPS, making this resolution ideal for high-refresh monitors. The spread from Low to Ultra is 111 FPS, indicating that settings have a significant impact at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 186 FPS, Medium averages 132 FPS with a minimum of 113 and maximum of 152, High averages 118 FPS, and Ultra averages 102 FPS. The 1440p results show a tighter spread of 84 FPS from Low to Ultra, but all presets remain above 100 FPS, which is excellent for 144 Hz displays. The Medium preset’s minimum of 113 FPS is particularly strong, ensuring no noticeable stuttering. The High preset at 118 FPS is also a solid choice for 120 Hz monitors, while Ultra at 102 FPS is suitable for 100 Hz displays.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 126 FPS, Medium averages 89 FPS with a minimum of 76 and maximum of 103, High averages 79 FPS, and Ultra averages 69 FPS. The 4K results show a spread of 57 FPS from Low to Ultra, with all presets staying above 60 FPS. The Medium preset’s minimum of 76 FPS is the highest minimum at 4K, providing a very stable experience. The High preset at 79 FPS is the best balance for 4K, while Ultra at 69 FPS is still playable but leaves less headroom for demanding scenes. The Low preset at 126 FPS is surprisingly high for 4K, showing that the RTX 4080 has enough power to push high frame rates even at this resolution when settings are reduced.

The data also shows that the Medium preset is the only one that reports minimum and maximum FPS values across all resolutions, which allows for a more detailed analysis. At 1080p Medium, the 149 FPS minimum is very close to the High preset’s average of 156 FPS, indicating that Medium provides a more consistent frame rate. At 1440p Medium, the 113 FPS minimum is higher than the Ultra average of 102 FPS, and at 4K Medium, the 76 FPS minimum is higher than the Ultra average of 69 FPS. This consistency makes Medium the most reliable preset for smooth gameplay, especially at higher resolutions.