Control

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 delivers a compelling 1440p and 4K experience in Control, with performance scaling that clearly delineates the strengths and bottlenecks of each component. The dataset reveals that while the CPU provides a robust foundation, the GPU becomes the primary limiting factor as resolution increases, though both components demonstrate exceptional headroom at lower settings.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and predictable pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At High settings, the average frame rate drops from 156 FPS at 1080p to 118 FPS at 1440p, a 24.4% reduction, and then further to 79 FPS at 4K, representing an additional 33.1% decline from the 1440p figure. This scaling curve is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario at higher resolutions, where the RTX 4080's rendering workload expands significantly with each pixel count increase.

The Low settings data reinforces this interpretation with even more dramatic scaling. The RTX 4080 achieves 246 FPS at 1080p on Low, which drops to 186 FPS at 1440p (a 24.4% decrease) and then to 126 FPS at 4K (a 32.3% decrease from 1440p). The consistent percentage drops across both High and Low settings suggest that the resolution scaling factor is relatively independent of graphical complexity, pointing to a fixed pixel-throughput limitation rather than a shader or texture-bound bottleneck.

At Medium settings, where min and max frame data is available, the scaling pattern continues: 175 FPS at 1080p with a 149 FPS minimum, 132 FPS at 1440p with a 113 FPS minimum, and 89 FPS at 4K with a 76 FPS minimum. The frame time consistency, as evidenced by the min-to-max ranges, remains tight across all resolutions, with the 4K Medium run showing a 27 FPS spread (76-103) that indicates stable performance even under heavy load. This behavior suggests that the RTX 4080's 16 GB of GDDR6X memory and 716.8 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient to prevent VRAM-related stuttering across all tested configurations.

The transition from 1080p to 1440p produces roughly a 24-25% performance penalty, while the jump from 1440p to 4K costs approximately 32-33% of the frame rate. This non-linear scaling is typical for modern GPUs where the pixel fill rate (280.6 GPixel/s) becomes increasingly taxed at higher resolutions. The data indicates that at 1080p, the CPU and GPU are more balanced, but by 4K, the RTX 4080's rendering pipeline is the dominant constraint, with the Core Ultra 5 245's 5.10 GHz boost clock proving more than adequate to feed frames at all tested settings.

FAQ

Q: What is the maximum average FPS achievable with this combo in Control?

A: The highest recorded average FPS is 246, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This represents the ceiling of the measured dataset, with Ultra settings at the same resolution yielding 135 FPS.

Q: How does the RTX 4080 compare to its nearest rival in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The RTX 4080's average benchmark score of 54247 is effectively identical to the RTX 4080 SUPER, which scores 54209, showing a negligible 0.1% delta. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X scores 54828, placing it 1.1% higher, while the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB sits 2.6% lower and the AMD Radeon 8060S is 2.7% lower.

Q: What is the best 4K performance recorded in the dataset?

A: The highest 4K average FPS is 126, achieved at Low settings. Medium settings deliver 89 FPS, High settings drop to 79 FPS, and Ultra settings produce 69 FPS, making 4K Ultra the most demanding configuration tested.

Q: Does the Core Ultra 5 245 outperform or underperform its closest rivals?

A: The Core Ultra 5 245's average benchmark score of 48995 places it slightly below the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (49196, -0.4%) and AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (49228, -0.5%). It edges out the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H (48698, +0.6%) and Intel Core i5-14600K (48618, +0.8%).

Q: What frame rate can users expect at 1440p with High settings?

A: The measured average FPS is 118, which represents a 24.4% drop from the 1080p High result of 156 FPS. This remains well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay.

Q: Is the RTX 4080's performance consistent with its synthetic benchmark standing?

A: The GPU's 86th percentile ranking among all GPUs aligns with its in-game performance, though the measured FPS results show it capable of exceeding 240 FPS at 1080p Low, demonstrating that its 48.74 TFLOPS FP32 compute capacity translates effectively to real-world gaming scenarios.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 brings 14 cores and 14 threads to the pairing, operating with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. This configuration, built on the Arrow Lake architecture with a 3 nm process, delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32924 and a single-core score of 4648, placing the CPU in the 90th percentile among all CPUs. These synthetic results suggest robust computational headroom for game logic, physics, and draw call processing in Control.

In the context of the measured FPS data, the CPU's role becomes clear when examining the 1080p Low results. At 246 FPS average, the CPU must process frame submissions rapidly enough to sustain this rate, and the Core Ultra 5 245's single-thread performance (4648 in Cinebench R23) proves sufficient for this task. The 5.10 GHz boost clock is particularly relevant here, as Control's engine tends to favor a few well-optimized threads for main game logic, and the high boost clock ensures these threads can execute without becoming a limiting factor.

The transition from Low to Ultra settings at 1080p shows a 45% performance reduction (from 246 to 135 FPS), which is primarily a GPU-side effect of increased shading and texture work. However, the fact that the CPU can still feed the GPU at 135 FPS on Ultra indicates that the 14-core, 14-thread configuration (with 24 MB of shared L3 cache) provides ample parallel processing capability for the game's background tasks and asset streaming. The 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth over dual-channel DDR5 further supports this, ensuring that level geometry and texture data can flow to the GPU without causing CPU-side stalls.

At higher resolutions, the CPU's influence diminishes as expected. The nearly identical percentage drops from 1080p to 4K across all settings (ranging from 48.7% at Ultra to 48.8% at Low) confirm that the CPU is not introducing variable bottlenecks at different quality presets. Instead, the Core Ultra 5 245 maintains consistent frame generation capability, with the PassMark multi-thread score of 38706 and single-thread score of 4394 indicating that neither heavily multithreaded nor lightly threaded workloads will struggle to keep pace with the RTX 4080 in this title.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 + RTX 4080 combination holds the 241st position out of 3720 tested combos in Control, placing it in the top 6.5% of all configurations recorded in the database. This ranking reflects the balanced nature of the pairing: the RTX 4080's 86th percentile GPU standing and the Core Ultra 5 245's 90th percentile CPU standing combine to produce a system that excels across the full resolution spectrum tested.

The 241st rank out of 3720 indicates that while this combo is not at the absolute top of the performance hierarchy, it sits comfortably in the upper echelon. The 3720 total combos encompass a wide range of hardware pairings, from entry-level systems to flagship configurations, and this result places the combo in the 93.5th percentile of all tested systems. This is a strong showing that aligns with the individual component percentiles, suggesting no significant pairing inefficiencies.

When considering the CPU's nearest rivals, the delta between the Core Ultra 5 245 and the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 is only 0.5%, meaning that swapping to that CPU would yield negligible changes in Control's performance given the same GPU. Similarly, the RTX 4080's 0.1% delta from the RTX 4080 SUPER indicates that the combo's rank is not sensitive to minor GPU variations either. The 241st position is therefore representative of the broader class of high-end systems, with performance differences between this combo and those ranked slightly higher or lower being within the margin of synthetic benchmark variance.

The rank also reflects the game-specific optimization of Control. Being an Action Adventure title from 2019, it does not heavily utilize the latest GPU features like ray tracing or DLSS in the measured presets, meaning the raw rasterization performance of the RTX 4080 (48.74 TFLOPS FP32, 761.5 GTexel/s texture rate) is the primary determinant of the final rank. This explains why the combo achieves a higher relative ranking in this game than it might in more modern, feature-heavy titles.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 serves as the dominant performance driver in this pairing, particularly at 1440p and 4K resolutions. Built on the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD103 chip at a 5 nm process, the GPU features 9728 shading units, 304 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, enabling a pixel rate of 280.6 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 761.5 GTexel/s. Its 48.74 TFLOPS FP32 compute capacity is matched by the same FP16 throughput, indicating strong compute headroom for both traditional rendering and compute-heavy workloads.

The 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus delivers 716.8 GB/s of bandwidth, which proves critical for Control's asset-heavy environments at 4K. The measured 4K results show the GPU maintaining playable frame rates even at Ultra settings (69 FPS average), with the memory subsystem showing no signs of bandwidth starvation. At Medium settings, the 4K min FPS of 76 with a max of 103 demonstrates that the GPU can sustain consistent performance without memory-related hitches, a signal of the 716.8 GB/s bandwidth being sufficient for this title's texture streaming requirements.

In synthetic benchmarks, the RTX 4080 scores 34457 in PassMark G3D and 214739 in Geekbench OpenCL, placing it in the 86th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the RTX 4080 SUPER, is statistically indistinguishable with a 0.1% delta, while the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB trails by 2.6%. These figures contextualize the in-game results: the RTX 4080's performance in Control is consistent with its synthetic standing, delivering frame rates that are 2.6% to 2.7% higher than what the Radeon alternatives would likely produce.

The GPU's clock behavior, with a base of 2205 MHz and boost of 2505 MHz, contributes to its scaling efficiency. The boost clock allows the GPU to dynamically increase performance when thermal and power headroom permit, which is evident in the 1080p Low result of 246 FPS — a figure that exceeds the 240 Hz refresh rate of many gaming monitors. The 320 W TDP and triple-slot design indicate that this performance comes with substantial power requirements, but the data shows no evidence of thermal throttling affecting the measured results.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the RTX 4080 demonstrates overwhelming performance across all settings. Low settings produce an average of 246 FPS, Medium settings yield 175 FPS with a minimum of 149 FPS and maximum of 201 FPS, High settings deliver 156 FPS, and Ultra settings still manage 135 FPS. The 111 FPS gap between Low and Ultra settings illustrates the GPU's headroom at this resolution, with even the most demanding preset remaining well above the 100 FPS threshold.

Moving to 2560x1440, performance remains strong but shows the expected reduction. Low settings drop to 186 FPS, Medium settings average 132 FPS with a range of 113-152 FPS, High settings produce 118 FPS, and Ultra settings yield 102 FPS. The 1440p Ultra result of 102 FPS is particularly notable as it demonstrates that the combo can deliver high-refresh-rate gaming at this resolution even with maximum graphical fidelity, making it an ideal pairing for 144 Hz monitors.

At 3840x2160, the GPU's workload becomes more demanding, but results remain playable. Low settings still achieve 126 FPS, Medium settings average 89 FPS with a 76-103 FPS range, High settings drop to 79 FPS, and Ultra settings produce 69 FPS. The 4K Ultra result of 69 FPS is just above the 60 FPS standard for console-like smoothness, though users seeking higher refresh rates at 4K would need to drop to High or Medium settings, which provide 79 FPS and 89 FPS respectively.

The Medium settings rows are the only ones with complete min/max data, and they reveal consistent frame pacing across all resolutions. The 1080p Medium range of 149-201 FPS represents a 52 FPS spread, the 1440p Medium range of 113-152 FPS shows a 39 FPS spread, and the 4K Medium range of 76-103 FPS has a 27 FPS spread. This narrowing range at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU's frame time consistency improves as it becomes the primary bottleneck, reducing CPU-induced variability.

Settings Recommendations

For users prioritizing maximum frame rates at 1080p, the Low preset delivers 246 FPS, but the Medium preset at 175 FPS offers a better balance between visual quality and speed. The 71 FPS difference between Low and Medium represents a significant visual upgrade for a moderate performance cost, and the 149 FPS minimum ensures no drops below the 144 Hz refresh rate threshold. At this resolution, Ultra settings at 135 FPS remain viable for users with 120 Hz displays, though the 40 FPS gap from Medium may not justify the visual gains.

At 1440p, the Medium preset (132 FPS average, 113 FPS minimum) emerges as the most recommended configuration, as it provides a comfortable margin above 100 FPS while maintaining solid graphical fidelity. The High preset at 118 FPS is also excellent for 120 Hz monitors, and the Ultra preset at 102 FPS still exceeds 100 FPS, making 1440p Ultra a legitimate choice for users who prioritize image quality. The Low preset at 186 FPS is excessive for most displays and sacrifices too much visual detail for its performance advantage.

For 4K gaming, the Medium preset (89 FPS average, 76 FPS minimum) offers the best experience per the measured data, providing a substantial improvement over High (79 FPS) and Ultra (69 FPS) while maintaining a 76 FPS floor that prevents noticeable stuttering. The High preset at 79 FPS is a viable alternative for users seeking higher visual quality, and the Ultra preset at 69 FPS remains playable for users who prioritize fidelity over smoothness. The Low preset at 126 FPS is the only 4K option that enables high-refresh-rate gaming, but its visual compromises make it less appealing than the Medium or High presets for most users.

Across all resolutions, the Medium settings consistently provide the best performance-per-visual-quality ratio, with the 4K Medium result of 89 FPS representing the sweet spot for this combo in Control. Users with 144 Hz displays should target 1440p Medium or High, while 60 Hz display owners can maximize visual quality at 4K Ultra without dropping below the 60 FPS threshold.