Control

# Control with Intel Core Ultra 5 245 + AMD Radeon RX 7600

This combo ranks 2028th out of 2888 tested combinations for Control, placing it in the lower-middle tier of the database. The pairing of a high-end 14-core CPU with a mid-range 8 GB GPU produces a system that is consistently GPU-limited in this title, with the measured frame rates reflecting the graphics card's position in the 57th percentile of all GPUs rather than the processor's 90th percentile standing.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and AMD Radeon RX 7600 achieves a rank of 2028 out of 2888 tested combos in Control, which places it in the 30th percentile of all system pairings. This ranking is notably lower than what the individual components might suggest, since the CPU sits in the 90th percentile of all processors while the GPU sits in the 57th percentile. The discrepancy between these two positions indicates that the graphics card is the primary constraint on performance in this game, and the combo's overall rank is dragged down by the GPU's mid-tier standing.

The CPU's average benchmark score of 48995 places it within 0.8% of the Intel Core i5-14600K (48618) and just 0.5% behind the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (49228). This tight clustering around the 49,000 mark shows that the Core Ultra 5 245 delivers computational performance comparable to established mid-range and upper-mid-range processors. However, in Control specifically, the measured FPS across all resolutions and settings stays within the range of 33 to 118 frames per second, which is consistent with a GPU-bound scenario where the CPU's headroom cannot be fully utilized.

The combo's rank of 2028 out of 2888 means that roughly 70% of tested pairings deliver higher frame rates in Control. This is a meaningful gap, and the data suggests that users seeking higher performance in this game would need to pair a stronger GPU with this CPU, or conversely, pair this GPU with a less powerful CPU without suffering significant FPS penalties in most scenarios.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7600 is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 33 chip, manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The GPU features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding a memory bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s. The base clock runs at 1720 MHz, with a game clock of 2250 MHz and a boost clock of 2655 MHz. The card has 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units, along with 32 ray tracing cores.

In Control, the GPU's 8 GB VRAM capacity and memory bandwidth play a critical role in determining performance at higher resolutions. The measured data shows a clear pattern: at 4K, the average FPS ranges from 33 at Ultra settings to 60 at Low settings, with Medium and High landing at 43 and 38 FPS respectively. The frame rate scaling across settings at 4K is steep, indicating that the GPU is heavily taxed by the game's rendering demands at this resolution. The 8 GB frame buffer appears sufficient for Low settings at 4K (60 FPS average), but High and Ultra settings push the card to its limits, with average frame rates dropping to 38 and 33 FPS respectively.

The GPU's benchmark scores further contextualize its performance. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2310 and PassMark G3D score of 16634 place it in the 57th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM (15199, 0.2% higher) and the AMD Radeon 680M (15270, 0.7% higher), showing that the RX 7600 sits in a competitive mid-range bracket. The GPU's FP32 compute throughput of 21.75 TFLOPS and pixel rate of 169.9 GPixel/s are respectable for this class, but Control's demanding visual effects and particle systems require more raw throughput than this card can deliver at maximum settings in 4K.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a consistent pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases from 1080p to 4K. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves an average of 118 FPS. This drops to 89 FPS at 1440p and 60 FPS at 4K, representing a 25% reduction from 1080p to 1440p and a further 33% reduction from 1440p to 4K. The total drop from 1080p Low to 4K Low is 49%, which is substantial but not unexpected for a mid-range GPU handling a demanding action-adventure title.

At Medium settings, the scaling shows a similar trend: 84 FPS at 1080p, 64 FPS at 1440p, and 43 FPS at 4K. This represents a 24% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 33% drop from 1440p to 4K. The High settings row follows the same pattern with 75 FPS at 1080p, 56 FPS at 1440p, and 38 FPS at 4K. Ultra settings produce 65 FPS at 1080p, 49 FPS at 1440p, and 33 FPS at 4K, with the percentage drops being 25% and 33% respectively.

The consistency of these percentage drops across all settings is notable. The approximately 25% reduction when moving from 1080p to 1440p and the subsequent 33% reduction from 1440p to 4K indicate that the GPU is the limiting component across the entire resolution spectrum. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rate would show less degradation at higher resolutions, since the GPU would have more time to complete its work. Instead, the steady decline in FPS with each resolution increase confirms that the RX 7600's compute and memory resources are being fully utilized at every resolution. The fact that the Ultra settings at 1080p (65 FPS) produce a higher frame rate than Low settings at 4K (60 FPS) further emphasizes the GPU's dominance as the performance limiter.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Control?

A: The data shows that 1080p provides the most playable experience, with average FPS ranging from 65 at Ultra to 118 at Low settings. At 1440p, the range drops to 49–89 FPS, while at 4K it falls to 33–60 FPS. For maintaining frame rates above 60 FPS, 1080p with Medium or lower settings is recommended, while 1440p only achieves 60+ FPS at Low settings.

Q: How does the RX 7600 compare to its nearest rival in terms of benchmark scores?

A: The RX 7600 has an average benchmark score of 15171, which is 0.2% lower than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM (15199) and 0.7% lower than the AMD Radeon 680M (15270). It is 0.6% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro 560X (15082) and 0.7% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti (15063).

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

A: The GPU is clearly the limiting factor. The CPU sits in the 90th percentile of all processors with a benchmark score of 48995, while the GPU sits in the 57th percentile with a score of 15171. The consistent FPS scaling across resolutions (approximately 25% drop from 1080p to 1440p and 33% from 1440p to 4K) confirms a GPU-bound scenario.

Q: What settings should be used to achieve 60 FPS at 1080p?

A: At 1080p, Low settings deliver 118 FPS, Medium delivers 84 FPS, High delivers 75 FPS, and Ultra delivers 65 FPS. All four settings achieve above 60 FPS, so users can select any preset depending on visual preference, with Ultra still maintaining a 65 FPS average.

Q: Can this combo run Control at 4K?

A: Yes, but only at Low settings, which produces an average of 60 FPS. Medium settings drop to 43 FPS, High to 38 FPS, and Ultra to 33 FPS. For a consistently smooth experience at 4K, Low settings are the only viable option per the measured data.

Q: How does the Core Ultra 5 245 compare to the Ryzen 9 7900 in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Core Ultra 5 245 has an average benchmark score of 48995, which is 0.5% lower than the AMD Ryzen 9 7900's 49228. In Cinebench R23, the Core Ultra scores 32924 in multi-core and 4648 in single-core, while its nearest rival comparisons show a delta of -0.4% versus the Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (49196) and +0.8% versus the Core i5-14600K (48618).

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 is a 14-core, 14-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process at TSMC. It has a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, with a TDP of 65 W. The CPU features 24 MB of shared L3 cache, with 192 KB of L1 cache per core and 3 MB of L2 cache per core. Memory support is DDR5 with dual-channel configuration, providing a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The processor uses the Intel Socket 1851 and supports PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes.

In Control, the CPU's role is largely secondary to the GPU, as evidenced by the consistent frame rate scaling across resolutions. The processor's single-thread performance is strong, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4648 and a PassMark single-thread score of 4394. These scores place the CPU in the 90th percentile overall, and its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (49228, 0.5% higher) and the Intel Core i5-14600K (48618, 0.8% lower). The multi-threaded performance is equally robust, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32924 and a PassMark multithread score of 38706.

The 14 cores and 14 threads (without hyperthreading) provide ample computational headroom for Control's game logic and physics simulation. However, since the GPU is the bottleneck at all tested resolutions, the CPU's capabilities are not fully exercised in this title. The data shows that even at 1080p Low settings, where the frame rate reaches 118 FPS, the CPU is still not limiting performance, as the FPS scales proportionally with resolution changes. This indicates that the Core Ultra 5 245 has sufficient processing power to drive the RX 7600 to its maximum in Control, but the GPU's mid-range performance ceiling prevents the system from achieving higher frame rates.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides clear guidance for optimal settings based on resolution and desired frame rate targets. At 1080p, all four settings presets achieve above 60 FPS, with Low at 118 FPS, Medium at 84 FPS, High at 75 FPS, and Ultra at 65 FPS. For users with 1080p displays, Ultra settings deliver a playable experience at 65 FPS average, making it the recommended choice for visual quality without sacrificing smoothness. However, for those prioritizing maximum frame rates, Low settings at 118 FPS provide the highest responsiveness.

At 1440p, the situation changes. Only Low settings achieve above 60 FPS, with an average of 89 FPS. Medium delivers 64 FPS, High drops to 56 FPS, and Ultra falls to 49 FPS. For 1440p users, Medium settings at 64 FPS offer the best balance between visual fidelity and playability, while Low settings at 89 FPS are recommended for competitive or fast-paced gameplay. High and Ultra settings at 1440p fall below the 60 FPS threshold and may exhibit noticeable stuttering in demanding scenes.

At 4K, the options are severely limited. Low settings achieve exactly 60 FPS on average, making it the only playable preset at this resolution. Medium drops to 43 FPS, High to 38 FPS, and Ultra to 33 FPS. For 4K displays, Low settings are the only viable choice for a smooth experience, and even then, the 60 FPS average may dip during intense sequences. Users with 4K monitors should consider either lowering resolution to 1440p or accepting reduced visual quality at 4K.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured FPS data for this combo in Control is as follows:

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low settings: 118 FPS average
• Medium settings: 84 FPS average, with min FPS of 71 and max FPS of 97
• High settings: 75 FPS average
• Ultra settings: 65 FPS average

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low settings: 89 FPS average
• Medium settings: 64 FPS average, with min FPS of 54 and max FPS of 73
• High settings: 56 FPS average
• Ultra settings: 49 FPS average

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low settings: 60 FPS average
• Medium settings: 43 FPS average, with min FPS of 36 and max FPS of 49
• High settings: 38 FPS average
• Ultra settings: 33 FPS average

The Medium settings rows at each resolution include minimum and maximum FPS values, which provide insight into frame time consistency. At 1080p Medium, the range spans from 71 to 97 FPS, a spread of 26 FPS around the 84 FPS average. At 1440p Medium, the range spans from 54 to 73 FPS, a spread of 19 FPS around the 64 FPS average. At 4K Medium, the range spans from 36 to 49 FPS, a spread of 13 FPS around the 43 FPS average. The narrowing of the frame rate range at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU's workload becomes more consistent when it is fully saturated, reducing the variance that can occur when the GPU has spare capacity at lower resolutions.