Control

Control pairs the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070, and the measured frame rates across three resolutions and four quality presets reveal a system that is consistently capable but increasingly GPU-bound as resolution climbs. The dataset, comprising twelve distinct measured FPS points, shows the combo delivers smooth 1080p gameplay at all settings, solid 1440p performance, and playable 4K only when settings are moderated. The Core Ultra 5 245, with its 14 cores and 5.10 GHz boost clock, provides ample headroom, while the RTX 3070’s 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth become the defining constraint at higher pixel counts. This analysis breaks down the scaling behavior, answers common questions, and contextualizes the combo’s standing among 2,888 tested configurations.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and tells a clear story about where the bottleneck lives. At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 100 FPS at 1920x1080 to 76 FPS at 2560x1440, a 24% reduction, and then to 51 FPS at 3840x2160, a further 33% drop from 1440p. From 1080p to 4K, that is a 49% decline in average FPS, which is a classic signature of GPU-bound rendering. The RTX 3070 is handling the pixel-pushing duties, and the data suggests the CPU is not the limiting factor at any resolution.

The Low preset scaling reinforces this. At Low, the system delivers 158 FPS at 1080p, 120 FPS at 1440p, and 81 FPS at 4K. The 1080p-to-1440p drop is 24%, and the 1440p-to-4K drop is 32.5%. These are nearly identical percentages to the High preset’s scaling, which indicates that even when the GPU workload is lightened, the relative performance degradation across resolutions remains consistent. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect the FPS gap between Low and High to widen at lower resolutions, but the data does not show that.

Ultra settings provide the most extreme example of resolution scaling. At 1080p Ultra, the average FPS is 87; at 1440p Ultra, it drops to 66, a 24.1% reduction; at 4K Ultra, it falls to 44, a 33.3% reduction from 1440p. The pattern is remarkably stable across all four presets, with the 1080p-to-1440p penalty hovering around 24% and the 1440p-to-4K penalty around 33%. This consistency is a strong indicator that the rendering pipeline is purely GPU-limited, as the CPU’s frame preparation time is not exposed as a variable.

The Medium preset data includes min and max FPS values, which add nuance. At 1080p Medium, the average is 112 FPS with a minimum of 96 and a maximum of 129, showing a tight frame delivery window. At 1440p Medium, the average is 85 FPS with a range of 72 to 98, and at 4K Medium, the average is 57 FPS with a range of 49 to 66. The spread between min and max FPS is roughly 30% of the average at each resolution, which is typical for a game like Control with dynamic physics and particle effects. The data suggests that frame pacing remains stable even as the GPU load increases.

The limiting component is unequivocally the GPU. The RTX 3070’s 8 GB VRAM and 256-bit memory bus are the structural constraints at 4K, where the pixel fill rate and memory bandwidth demands outpace the card’s capabilities. The CPU, with its 14 cores and 24 MB of shared L3 cache, is not the constraint, as evidenced by the linear scaling pattern that would not occur if the processor were struggling to feed the GPU. At 1080p, the system achieves over 150 FPS on Low, which is beyond the refresh rate of most monitors, and even at Ultra, it stays above 85 FPS, confirming the CPU can sustain high frame generation.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 1440p with High settings?

A: The measured average FPS is 76 at 2560x1440 with High settings. This is a 24% reduction from the 100 FPS average at 1080p High, indicating that the RTX 3070 is still comfortably handling the load at this resolution.

Q: Can this combo achieve 60 FPS at 4K?

A: Yes, but only on Low or Medium settings. At 4K Low, the average FPS is 81, and at 4K Medium, it is 57. At 4K High, the average drops to 51 FPS, and at 4K Ultra, it falls to 44 FPS, so a stable 60 FPS is not attainable at higher presets.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 has an average benchmark score of 48995, which places it 0.4% behind the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G and 0.5% behind the AMD Ryzen 9 7900. It is 0.6% ahead of the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H and 0.8% ahead of the Intel Core i5-14600K.

Q: What is the GPU’s performance percentile?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 ranks in the 61st percentile among all GPUs. Its average benchmark score is 17208, which is 0.7% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT and 1% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo?

A: The data suggests 1440p is the sweet spot. At High settings, it delivers 76 FPS, which is smooth for most action games, and at Medium, it reaches 85 FPS. At 4K, the user must compromise on settings to stay above 50 FPS, while 1080p leaves performance on the table with averages exceeding 100 FPS on High.

Q: How does the combo rank overall in Control?

A: This combination ranks 1192nd out of 2888 tested combos for Control. This places it in the upper-middle tier, indicating that while it is not a top-tier configuration, it delivers solid, playable performance across the board.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 1192 out of 2888 tested configurations places it in the 58.7th percentile of all combos tested in Control. This is a strong showing, particularly considering the GPU’s individual percentile of 61 and the CPU’s percentile of 90. The CPU is a high performer, sitting in the 90th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU is more mid-range, sitting in the 61st percentile. The combination of a top-decile CPU with a mid-tier GPU produces a system that is well-balanced for 1080p and 1440p gaming, but the GPU holds back the overall rank from being higher.

The rank is determined by the measured FPS across all resolution and settings combinations. Given that the system achieves 158 FPS at 1080p Low and 87 FPS at 1080p Ultra, it is clearly capable of high-refresh-rate gaming at the most common resolution. The 4K results, which dip to 44 FPS on Ultra, are the primary drag on the rank, as many higher-ranked combos likely maintain playable frame rates at 4K Ultra. The combo’s position in the middle of the pack reflects this trade-off: excellent at lower resolutions, but not a 4K powerhouse.

Compared to other combos in the database, this one is notable for its CPU strength. The Core Ultra 5 245’s 90th percentile ranking suggests that the processor is not the limiting factor in any scenario. The bottleneck is squarely on the GPU, which is confirmed by the resolution scaling analysis. If the GPU were upgraded, the combo’s rank would likely improve substantially, as the CPU has headroom to drive higher frame rates. Conversely, the current rank is a fair representation of the GPU’s capabilities in this title.

The deltaPct values from the nearestRivals data provide context for the CPU’s performance. The Core Ultra 5 245 is within 1% of all four of its nearest rivals, indicating that the CPU is not a differentiator in this combo. The rank is therefore almost entirely determined by the RTX 3070’s performance. The GPU’s nearest rivals are also tightly clustered, with the RX 7600 XT being 0.7% faster and the GTX 690 being 1% slower, suggesting that the RTX 3070 is in a competitive but crowded mid-range segment.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers high frame rates across all presets. Low settings produce an average of 158 FPS, Medium produces 112 FPS with a minimum of 96 and a maximum of 129, High produces 100 FPS, and Ultra produces 87 FPS. The step from Low to Medium is a 29.1% reduction, from Medium to High is a 10.7% reduction, and from High to Ultra is a 13% reduction. The diminishing returns from Medium upward are typical, as the GPU becomes less efficient at higher quality settings.

At 2560x1440, the averages are 120 FPS on Low, 85 FPS on Medium (with a min of 72 and a max of 98), 76 FPS on High, and 66 FPS on Ultra. The 1080p-to-1440p scaling shows a 24.1% drop on Low, a 24.1% drop on Medium, a 24% drop on High, and a 24.1% drop on Ultra. This consistent percentage across all settings is a strong indicator of a GPU-bound scenario, where the pixel count increase is the sole factor affecting performance.

At 3840x2160, the averages drop to 81 FPS on Low, 57 FPS on Medium (with a min of 49 and a max of 66), 51 FPS on High, and 44 FPS on Ultra. The 1440p-to-4K scaling shows a 32.5% drop on Low, a 32.9% drop on Medium, a 32.9% drop on High, and a 33.3% drop on Ultra. Again, the consistency is notable, with the 4K penalty being roughly 33% across all settings. The 4K results are the only ones that approach or fall below the 60 FPS threshold, with only Low settings providing a comfortable margin above it.

The Medium preset is the only one with full min/max data, providing insight into frame pacing. At 1080p, the range is 96-129 FPS; at 1440p, it is 72-98 FPS; at 4K, it is 49-66 FPS. The minimum FPS at 4K Medium is 49, which is below the 60 FPS target, indicating that while the average is 57, there are moments of noticeable slowdown. At 1080p and 1440p, the minimums are 96 and 72 respectively, both above 60 FPS, suggesting a smooth experience.

Settings Recommendations

For a 1080p display, the data shows that Ultra settings at 87 FPS are the best choice. The 13% reduction from High to Ultra is acceptable given the visual quality increase, and 87 FPS is well above the smoothness threshold. For users with high-refresh-rate monitors, High settings at 100 FPS offer a better balance of quality and speed, while Low at 158 FPS is only for competitive play where frame rate trumps visuals.

At 1440p, High settings at 76 FPS are the recommended starting point. This provides a solid balance of visual fidelity and smoothness. Users who prioritize frame rate can drop to Medium at 85 FPS, a 12% increase with a minimal visual penalty. Ultra at 66 FPS is playable but requires a tolerance for occasional dips, as the data shows the system is nearing its limit. Low at 120 FPS is excessive for most users, but it demonstrates the headroom available.

At 4K, the recommendations shift significantly. Low settings at 81 FPS are the only preset that provides a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. Medium at 57 FPS is playable but will have dips below 50 FPS, as indicated by the minimum of 49. High at 51 FPS and Ultra at 44 FPS are not recommended for a smooth experience, as they fall below the 60 FPS threshold and approach the 30 FPS console territory. For 4K, users should accept Low or Medium settings to maintain playability.

Across all resolutions, the Medium preset offers the most consistent frame delivery, as evidenced by the min/max data. At 1440p Medium, the minimum of 72 FPS ensures no significant stutters, and at 1080p Medium, the minimum of 96 FPS is excellent. For users who value frame pacing over peak averages, Medium is a safe choice. The data suggests that the system is best utilized at 1440p with High or Medium settings, where it delivers a reliable 76-85 FPS.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 has 14 cores and 14 threads, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. This is a high-core-count desktop processor built on the Arrow Lake architecture with a 3 nm process node. Its benchmark scores are strong, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 32924 and a single-core score of 4648. The PassMark single-thread score is 4394, and the multithread score is 38706.

In Control, the CPU’s role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and manage the game’s physics and AI. The game is not known for being CPU-intensive, and the data confirms that the Core Ultra 5 245 is more than sufficient. The 90th percentile ranking among all CPUs indicates that this processor is in the top 10% of all tested CPUs, and its nearest rivals are all within 1% of its average score. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G is 0.4% faster, and the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 is 0.5% faster, but these differences are negligible.

The CPU’s 24 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory support with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth provide ample memory throughput for the game’s data streaming. The 14 cores, while not all utilized by Control, provide headroom for background tasks and future titles. The boost clock of 5.10 GHz ensures that single-threaded performance is excellent, which is important for the game’s main thread. The data shows no signs of CPU bottlenecking, as the FPS scaling across resolutions is consistent, which would not be the case if the CPU were struggling.

The CPU’s integrated graphics, Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU, are irrelevant for this test, as the discrete RTX 3070 is doing all the rendering. However, the CPU’s PCIe Gen 5 support with 20 lanes ensures that the GPU is not bandwidth-starved, even if the RTX 3070 is a PCIe 4.0 card. The CPU’s performance tier is well above what Control requires, making it a non-factor in the measured results.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock is 1500 MHz, with a boost clock of 1725 MHz. The card has 5888 shading units, 184 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, and it is built on the Ampere architecture with an 8 nm process node. Its FP32 performance is 20.31 TFLOPS, and its texture rate is 317.4 GTexel/s.

In Control, the GPU is the primary determinant of frame rate, especially at higher resolutions. The game features heavy use of real-time ray tracing and particle effects, which stress the GPU’s compute and memory subsystems. The 8 GB VRAM is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K, the memory capacity and bandwidth become limiting factors. The 448.0 GB/s bandwidth is moderate by modern standards, and the 4K results show that the card cannot maintain high frame rates at high quality settings.

The GPU’s benchmark scores show it is a mid-range performer, with a PassMark G3D score of 22214 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3162. Its percentile rank is 61, placing it in the upper half of all GPUs but not in the top tier. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT, which is 0.7% faster, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690, which is 1% slower. The RTX 3070 sits in a competitive segment where small performance differences are common.

The 4K results highlight the GPU’s limitations. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 44, which is unplayable for most users. Even at 4K High, the average is 51 FPS, which is borderline. The card is clearly optimized for 1080p and 1440p gaming, where it delivers excellent results. The 61st percentile rank reflects this: it is a capable 1440p card that struggles at 4K. The 8 GB VRAM is the likely culprit, as Control’s high-resolution textures and effects can exceed this capacity, leading to performance degradation.

The GPU’s 20.31 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 46 RT cores are technically capable of handling Control’s ray-traced effects, but the memory subsystem is not sufficient to sustain high frame rates at 4K. At 1440p, the card has enough bandwidth to deliver 66 FPS on Ultra, which is a solid result. The data indicates that the RTX 3070 is best paired with a 1440p monitor, and its performance at that resolution is competitive with its nearest rivals.