Control

Control is a demanding action-adventure title that stresses both the CPU and GPU, and the data for the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT shows a configuration that is well-balanced for high-refresh-rate 1440p play, but requires settings adjustments for a locked 60 FPS experience at 4K. The combination ranks in the 70th percentile of all tested combos, indicating solid performance that is held back by the GPU at higher resolutions and by the CPU at lower ones. The following analysis breaks down the measured FPS data, component roles, and scaling behavior to provide a clear picture of what this pairing delivers in this specific title.

FAQ

Q: What is the average frame rate at 1080p with Ultra settings?

A: The measured average frame rate at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings is 98 FPS, which is the lowest average among the 1080p presets tested, but still comfortably above 60 FPS.

Q: How does the combo's overall performance rank against other tested configurations?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT combination ranks 852nd out of 2888 tested combos in Control, placing it in the top 30 percent of all configurations.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra settings at 2560x1440?

A: At 2560x1440, the average frame rate drops from 136 FPS on Low settings to 74 FPS on Ultra settings, a significant decrease of 62 FPS.

Q: Does the CPU have a high benchmark score compared to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 has an average benchmark score of 48995, which is 0.8% higher than the Intel Core i5-14600K and 0.5% lower than the AMD Ryzen 9 7900, indicating it is competitively positioned among its peers.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded at 4K Medium settings?

A: The data shows a minimum FPS of 55 at 3840x2160 with Medium settings, with an average of 65 FPS and a maximum of 75 FPS.

Q: Which component has the higher percentile ranking among all its peers?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 CPU has a percentile ranking of 90 against all CPUs, while the AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT GPU has a percentile ranking of 85 against all GPUs, showing that the CPU is slightly more exceptional relative to its market segment.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT is the primary driver of frame rates in Control, especially as resolution increases. This GPU is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture and features 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 512.0 GB/s. The high memory capacity and bandwidth are crucial for handling the game's detailed textures and effects at higher resolutions without becoming a bottleneck.

With a base clock of 1825 MHz and a boost clock of 2250 MHz, the GPU's compute power is substantial, featuring 4608 shading units and 72 ray accelerators. The measured FPS data reflects this strength. At 3840x2160, the GPU's performance dictates the experience, with the average frame rate dropping from 92 FPS on Low settings to 50 FPS on Ultra settings. This shows that the GPU is heavily taxed at 4K, and the 16 GB frame buffer, while ample, cannot compensate for the raw compute demand of the highest preset.

The GPU's benchmark scores place it at the 85th percentile of all GPUs, with an average score of 48477. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti, which scores 3% higher, and the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64, which also scores 3% higher. This places the RX 6800 XT in a competitive position, but the data shows that in Control, it is the limiting factor at 4K Ultra, where the average FPS of 50 is below the 60 FPS target. The GPU's 20.74 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is what enables the high frame rates at 1080p and 1440p, but the game's demands at 4K push it to its limits.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 plays a supporting role in Control, ensuring that the GPU is fed with enough data to maintain high frame rates. This CPU features 14 cores and 14 threads, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. This configuration is built on the Arrow Lake architecture and has a 24 MB shared L3 cache, which helps with game logic and physics calculations.

The CPU's benchmark results are strong, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32924 and a single-core score of 4648. More importantly, its PassMark single-thread score of 4394 indicates strong per-core performance, which is critical for games like Control that often rely on a few heavily loaded threads. The CPU's overall average benchmark score of 48995 places it at the 90th percentile of all CPUs, making it a more exceptional part than the GPU relative to their respective markets.

The data suggests that the CPU is not a bottleneck at higher resolutions. For example, at 4K, the frame rate scales almost entirely with GPU settings, going from 92 FPS on Low to 50 FPS on Ultra. However, at 1080p, the CPU's influence becomes more apparent. The jump from 179 FPS on Low to 113 FPS on High shows that the CPU can push very high frame rates, but the GPU still has headroom. The CPU's performance is within 0.8% of the Intel Core i5-14600K and 0.4% of the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G, indicating that it is well-matched with the RX 6800 XT for avoiding CPU-induced stutters in this title.

How This Combo Ranks

The combined performance of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT in Control is robust, securing a rank of 852 out of 2888 tested combos. This places the configuration in the top 29.5% of all pairings, which is a strong result for a mid-to-high-end setup. The ranking reflects a balanced system where neither component severely bottlenecks the other across the tested resolutions.

To contextualize this rank, consider the CPU's individual standing. The Core Ultra 5 245 is at the 90th percentile among all CPUs, and its nearest rival, the Intel Core i5-14600K, has an average score that is 0.8% lower. The GPU, while also strong at the 85th percentile, is slightly less exceptional relative to its peers. The combination's 852nd rank out of 2888 is likely influenced by the GPU's position, as many higher-ranked combos would feature more powerful graphics cards.

The data indicates that this combo is more capable than the average tested system, but it is not at the very top tier. The rank of 852 suggests that there are 851 other tested configurations that deliver higher average FPS in Control. This is consistent with the measured FPS, which shows that while the system can exceed 100 FPS at 1080p, it struggles to maintain 60 FPS at 4K Ultra. The combo is positioned for high-refresh-rate 1440p gaming, where it can deliver well over 60 FPS on most presets.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a detailed look at how the combo performs across different resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the system delivers high frame rates across the board. On Low settings, the average FPS is 179, which is exceptionally high and indicates that the CPU and GPU are both capable of handling the game's lighter load. At Medium settings, the average FPS drops to 127, with a minimum of 108 and a maximum of 146. High settings see an average of 113 FPS, and Ultra settings average 98 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 1080p shows an 81 FPS drop, which is significant but still leaves the game playable at high refresh rates on all presets.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain strong, but the GPU's load increases. Low settings yield an average of 136 FPS, which is still very smooth. Medium settings average 96 FPS, with a minimum of 82 and a maximum of 111. High settings average 86 FPS, and Ultra settings average 74 FPS. The drop from Low to Ultra at 1440p is 62 FPS, which is less severe than at 1080p, suggesting that the GPU is becoming a more significant factor. At this resolution, even Ultra settings provide a playable experience above 60 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the clear bottleneck. Low settings average 92 FPS, which is still respectable for 4K. Medium settings average 65 FPS, with a minimum of 55 and a maximum of 75, showing some dips below the 60 FPS target. High settings average 58 FPS, and Ultra settings average 50 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 4K is a 42 FPS drop, which is the smallest relative drop of the three resolutions, indicating that the GPU is already heavily loaded even at Low settings. The data shows that for a locked 60 FPS experience at 4K, users would need to use Low or Medium settings, with Medium being borderline due to the 55 FPS minimum.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution and refresh rate. For 1080p displays, the Ultra preset is the best choice for most users, as it delivers an average of 98 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold and suitable for high-refresh-rate monitors. The drop from High to Ultra is only 15 FPS, so the visual gains are worth the performance cost.

For 1440p gaming, the High preset is the recommended balance. It delivers an average of 86 FPS, which is smooth and responsive, while the Ultra preset drops to 74 FPS. The 12 FPS difference between High and Ultra at 1440p may be noticeable to some users, but High provides a more consistent experience. For users with 144Hz monitors, even the Medium preset at 96 FPS would be an excellent choice, offering a significant boost in frame rate with a modest reduction in visual fidelity.

At 4K, the situation is more constrained. The High preset averages 58 FPS, which is just below the 60 FPS target and may result in occasional stutters. The Medium preset averages 65 FPS, but the minimum of 55 FPS indicates that there will be dips below the target. For a consistently smooth experience, the Low preset at 92 FPS is the safest bet, but it sacrifices visual quality. Given the data, the Medium preset is the best compromise for 4K, as it provides an average above 60 FPS with only occasional dips, while Low is recommended for users who prioritize a completely stable frame rate.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals important insights into the system's bottleneck. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 179 at 1080p to 136 at 1440p (a 24% decrease) and then to 92 at 4K (a 32% decrease from 1440p). This scaling suggests that at low graphics load, the CPU is still able to maintain very high frame rates, but the GPU's workload increases significantly at higher resolutions, causing the frame rate to drop.

At Ultra settings, the scaling is more linear. The average FPS drops from 98 at 1080p to 74 at 1440p (a 24% decrease) and then to 50 at 4K (a 32% decrease from 1440p). This pattern shows that the GPU is the primary limiting factor at Ultra settings across all resolutions. The fact that the percentage drop from 1080p to 4K is similar at both Low and Ultra settings (roughly 50% in both cases) indicates that the GPU is consistently the bottleneck at higher resolutions, but the CPU still has enough headroom to avoid becoming a limiting factor.

The data points to the GPU being the limiting component in this configuration for Control. At 1080p Low, the CPU can push 179 FPS, but the GPU's performance ceiling is tested at 4K Ultra, where it can only manage 50 FPS. The CPU's high single-thread score of 4394 and its 90th percentile ranking suggest it is more than capable of handling the game's logic, while the GPU's 85th percentile ranking and its 16 GB of VRAM are sufficient for the game's assets but not for the highest compute loads at 4K. This is a classic case of a well-matched mid-to-high-end combo where the GPU is the first to hit its limit as resolution increases.