Control

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

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 is a 14-core, 14-thread desktop processor built on the Arrow Lake architecture and manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The chip features a 24 MB shared L3 cache, 3 MB L2 per core, and 192 KB L1 per core, alongside dual-channel DDR5 memory support with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32,924 and a single-core score of 4,648, placing it in the 90th percentile among all CPUs tested.

The nearest rivals for this processor, based on average benchmark scores, include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (avg score 49,196, delta -0.4%), AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (avg score 49,228, delta -0.5%), Intel Xeon Gold 5318H (avg score 48,698, delta +0.6%), and Intel Core i5-14600K (avg score 48,618, delta +0.8%). These deltas are tight, all within roughly 1% of the Core Ultra 5 245's average benchmark score of 48,995, indicating that the processor sits in a highly competitive performance band. The data suggests that while the CPU is not a class leader, it is fully capable of feeding a discrete GPU in most gaming scenarios, as its single-threaded performance (Cinebench R23 single-core 4,648) is strong enough to avoid bottlenecking typical game workloads.

In the context of Control, an action-adventure title that relies on physics, particle effects, and destructible environments, the CPU's multi-threaded throughput (Cinebench R20 multi-core 13,828, Passmark multithread 38,706) can matter for maintaining consistent frame pacing during complex scenes. However, the measured FPS data for this combo shows that frame rates scale more dramatically with resolution changes than with CPU-bound settings, which indicates the GPU is the primary limiter in most tested configurations. The Core Ultra 5 245's 14 threads are more than sufficient for Control's engine, which typically does not scale beyond 8-12 threads in a meaningful way. The processor's Passmark single-thread score of 4,394 and Cinebench R15 single-core of 468 reinforce that it delivers ample per-core performance for game logic, AI, and draw-call submission.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is based on the GP102 chip and the Pascal architecture, manufactured on a 16 nm process by TSMC. It features 3,584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 88 raster operation units. The card operates at a base clock of 1,481 MHz with a boost clock of 1,582 MHz, and its 11 GB of GDDR5X memory runs at 1,376 MHz (11 Gbps effective) across a 352-bit bus, yielding 484.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The GPU delivers 11.34 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, a pixel rate of 139.2 GPixel/s, and a texture rate of 354.4 GTexel/s. It supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and is rated at a 250 W TDP.

In benchmark terms, the GTX 1080 Ti sits at the 58th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 15,548. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R9 M380 (avg score 15,521, delta +0.2%), AMD Radeon Pro W5500 (avg score 15,679, delta -0.8%), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (avg score 15,290, delta +1.7%), and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 (avg score 15,283, delta +1.7%). These deltas are again very small, placing the 1080 Ti in a performance tier where small variations in driver or workload can shift rankings. The card's 11 GB VRAM is notably generous for its generation, and in Control—a game that can use significant memory at high resolutions—this capacity helps avoid texture thrashing at 4K, though the measured FPS at 4K Ultra (37 avg) suggests compute and bandwidth limits rather than VRAM exhaustion.

The GTX 1080 Ti's memory bandwidth of 484.4 GB/s is a critical factor in Control, which is known for its heavy use of post-processing, reflections, and volumetric effects. At 1080p, the card delivers playable frame rates even at Ultra (73 avg), but the drop to 4K reveals the architectural age of Pascal: the lack of hardware ray tracing and the older shading approach mean that the GPU must brute-force the game's visual effects. The measured FPS data shows that the GTX 1080 Ti performs best at 1080p and 1440p, where its raw compute and bandwidth are sufficient, but struggles to maintain 60 FPS at 4K on anything above Low settings.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to maintain 60+ FPS?

A: At 1920x1080, all tested settings (Low 133 avg, Medium 95 avg, High 84 avg, Ultra 73 avg) exceed 60 FPS. At 2560x1440, Low (101 avg) and Medium (72 avg) also stay above 60, but High (64 avg) is borderline and Ultra (55 avg) falls below. At 3840x2160, only Low (68 avg) achieves 60+ FPS.

Q: How does the GTX 1080 Ti's average benchmark score compare to its nearest rival?

A: The GTX 1080 Ti has an average benchmark score of 15,548. Its closest rival, the AMD Radeon R9 M380, scores 15,521, a delta of +0.2%, meaning the 1080 Ti is essentially tied with it. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 trails by 1.7% with a score of 15,290.

Q: What is the CPU's percentile ranking among all processors?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 falls in the 90th percentile among all CPUs tested, indicating it outperforms 90% of processors in the benchmark database. Its average benchmark score is 48,995.

Q: Does the combo rank higher or lower in Control compared to all tested combos?

A: The combo ranks 1,585 out of 2,888 tested combos in Control, placing it in the upper half but not the top tier. This reflects the GTX 1080 Ti's age relative to newer GPUs.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 101 FPS, while Ultra averages 55 FPS. That's a 46 FPS drop, representing a 45.5% reduction in frame rate from Low to Ultra.

Q: Does the GTX 1080 Ti support modern graphics APIs needed for Control?

A: Yes, the GPU supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, which covers Control's API requirements. However, it lacks dedicated ray tracing cores, so any ray-traced features would rely on software fallbacks.

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

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of this combo's performance across three resolutions and four quality presets. At 1920x1080, the combo starts at 133 FPS average on Low, drops to 95 FPS on Medium (with min 80, max 109), then to 84 FPS on High, and finally 73 FPS on Ultra. The drop from Low to Ultra is 60 FPS, or 45.1% of the Low value, showing that the GPU has headroom at this resolution but the quality settings take a toll.

Moving to 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 101 FPS, Medium 72 FPS (min 61, max 82), High 64 FPS, and Ultra 55 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra here is 46 FPS, a 45.5% reduction. The medium preset's min of 61 FPS is notable: it indicates that even at 1440p, frame pacing can dip below 60 in demanding scenes, though the average remains above that threshold.

At 3840x2160, the picture changes dramatically. Low averages 68 FPS, Medium 48 FPS (min 41, max 56), High 43 FPS, and Ultra 37 FPS. The Low-to-Ultra gap is 31 FPS, a 45.6% reduction, consistent with the pattern seen at lower resolutions. However, the absolute numbers tell the story: only Low manages to stay above 60 FPS, and Medium's minimum of 41 FPS indicates significant stutter potential in busy scenes. High and Ultra drop below 45 FPS, which is generally considered the threshold for playable in fast-paced action games.

The data shows a consistent scaling pattern: each step from Low to Medium to High to Ultra costs roughly 15-20% of the previous frame rate, regardless of resolution. This suggests the GTX 1080 Ti is compute-bound rather than bandwidth-bound in Control, as the relative performance drops are uniform across resolutions. The 4K results, particularly the 37 FPS Ultra and 43 FPS High, indicate that this GPU is not suited for 4K gaming in Control at high quality settings.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti ranks 1,585 out of 2,888 tested combos in Control. This places the combo in the 54.9th percentile of all tested configurations, meaning it outperforms slightly more than half of the combos in the database. The rank is a reflection of the GTX 1080 Ti's age: while the CPU is a modern, 90th-percentile processor, the GPU sits at only the 58th percentile among all GPUs.

The CPU's nearest rivals—the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 and Intel Core i5-14600K—are both more modern processors, and when paired with the same GPU, would likely rank higher in the combo list due to their superior multi-threaded performance in synthetic tests. However, in a game like Control, which is primarily GPU-bound at higher resolutions, the CPU's influence on the combo rank is muted. The data shows that the combo rank is more heavily weighted by the GPU's measured FPS results, which are constrained by the GTX 1080 Ti's Pascal architecture.

The GPU's nearest rivals, particularly the RTX 2060 (which trails by 1.7% in average benchmark score), would likely produce similar FPS in Control, given the close synthetic scores. The fact that the combo ranks in the mid-field (1,585 of 2,888) suggests that while the GTX 1080 Ti is not top-tier by modern standards, it remains a viable option for 1080p and 1440p gaming in this title. The rank also indicates that there are 1,303 combos that perform worse, which includes setups with weaker CPUs or older GPUs.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution and the user's preference for frame rate versus visual fidelity. At 1920x1080, all presets deliver playable frame rates, but the Medium preset (95 avg, min 80) offers the best balance. It provides a 13.1% improvement over High (84 avg) while maintaining a minimum FPS above 80, which is smooth for most displays. Ultra at 73 avg is acceptable, but the drop from Medium is 23.2%, and the visual gains in Control are not always obvious at 1080p.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset (72 avg, min 61) is the recommended choice. The min FPS of 61 is just above the 60 FPS threshold, but the average of 72 provides some headroom. Low (101 avg) is an option for competitive play, but it sacrifices significant visual quality. High (64 avg) is playable but leaves little margin for frame drops, and Ultra (55 avg) falls below 60 FPS consistently, making it less ideal for a smooth experience.

At 3840x2160, the situation is more constrained. Low (68 avg) is the only preset that stays above 60 FPS, and it does so with a reasonable margin. Medium (48 avg) is playable but requires accepting occasional dips to 41 FPS, which can be jarring in fast-paced combat. High (43 avg) and Ultra (37 avg) are not recommended for 4K gaming, as the frame rates are too low for a responsive experience in an action-adventure title. For users who prioritize visuals over frame rate, Medium at 4K is the highest acceptable option, but the data clearly indicates that this combo is best suited for 1080p or 1440p gaming.

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

The resolution scaling data reveals a clear pattern: the GTX 1080 Ti is the limiting component in this combo. From 1920x1080 to 2560x1440, the average FPS drops by 24.1% (from 133 to 101) on Low, 24.2% (95 to 72) on Medium, 23.8% (84 to 64) on High, and 24.7% (73 to 55) on Ultra. The consistency of this ~24% drop across all settings indicates that the GPU's pixel throughput is the bottleneck, as the CPU remains capable of feeding the GPU at both resolutions.

From 2560x1440 to 3840x2160, the drops are more severe: Low falls from 101 to 68 (32.7% decrease), Medium from 72 to 48 (33.3%), High from 64 to 43 (32.8%), and Ultra from 55 to 37 (32.7%). The larger percentage drop at 4K is a hallmark of a GPU that is running out of fill rate and memory bandwidth. The pixel count increases by 2.25x from 1440p to 4K, but the FPS drops by only ~33%, which suggests the GPU is not purely pixel-limited; rather, the memory bandwidth of 484.4 GB/s and the shading rate of 11.34 TFLOPS are constraining performance.

The fact that the FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is roughly linear (about 49% reduction across all settings) indicates that the GPU's compute and bandwidth are scaling predictably with resolution. The CPU's role is minimal in this scaling: the Core Ultra 5 245's single-threaded performance is sufficient to keep up with the GTX 1080 Ti's frame output, even at 1080p Low where the GPU is producing 133 FPS. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see smaller FPS gains from lowering resolution, but the data shows consistent scaling, confirming that the GTX 1080 Ti is the primary limiter. For users seeking higher frame rates at 4K, a GPU upgrade would be necessary, as the current combo's best 4K result is 68 FPS on Low, which is adequate but not ideal for a smooth experience.