Control

Control pairs the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H with the AMD Radeon 890M integrated graphics, and the measured FPS rows reveal a system that is consistently GPU-bound across all tested settings. The benchmark data shows that this combination ranks 2728th out of 2888 tested combos in this game, placing it in the bottom percentile of systems, which aligns with the integrated GPU's 45th percentile standing among all GPUs. The Core Ultra 7 155H, by contrast, sits in the 83rd percentile among CPUs, highlighting a stark imbalance where the processor's capabilities far outstrip what the Radeon 890M can deliver in Control's demanding environments.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data offers a clear hierarchy of playable presets, with the Low setting providing the only consistently smooth experience across all resolutions. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves an average of 58 FPS, which is the sole row in the entire dataset that approaches standard 60 FPS gameplay; this represents a dramatic 41% improvement over the Medium preset's 41 FPS at the same resolution. The Low preset also produces the highest minimum FPS recorded in the entire test suite, though min FPS data is only available for Medium settings across all three resolutions, making direct comparisons incomplete.

Stepping up to Medium at 1080p yields 41 FPS average with a minimum of 35 FPS and maximum of 47 FPS, which is playable for slower-paced action but will struggle during Control's intense combat sequences with particle effects and physics-based destruction. The High preset at 1080p drops to 37 FPS average, and Ultra falls further to 32 FPS, making both presets marginal for a game that benefits from responsive aiming. For the best balance between visual fidelity and playability, the Low preset at 1080p is the only measured configuration that delivers a consistently fluid experience, while Medium at 1080p serves as a compromise for users who prioritize visual quality over frame rate stability.

At 2560x1440, even the Low preset drops to 44 FPS average, which is a 24% reduction from the 1080p Low result, and the Medium preset falls to 31 FPS with a minimum of 27 FPS. The 4K resolution data shows that Low settings produce 30 FPS average, which is technically playable but will feel sluggish during fast-paced encounters, while Medium drops to 21 FPS and Ultra falls to a nearly unplayable 16 FPS. The data strongly suggests that users should stick to 1080p with Low settings for the best experience, or accept Medium at 1080p if they can tolerate occasional dips below 40 FPS.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 890M is an integrated GPU based on the RDNA 3.5 architecture with 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output pipelines, operating at a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz. The GPU features 16 ray tracing cores, which is notable for an integrated solution, though Control's implementation of ray tracing is not reflected in the measured FPS data, which likely means the tested settings did not enable this feature. The GPU's memory configuration is entirely system-shared, with no dedicated VRAM, meaning its bandwidth is dependent on the system's DDR5 memory and dual-channel bus configuration.

The GPU's benchmark scores provide context for its gaming performance: it achieves 8076 in PassMark G3D and 37254 in Geekbench OpenCL, with a Vulkan score of 40808 that is notably higher than its OpenCL result. The PassMark DirectX scores are particularly telling, DirectX 11 yields 73, DirectX 12 yields 37, and DirectX 9 yields 97, indicating that the GPU performs better with older API versions, which may explain why Control's newer rendering features cause significant frame rate drops. The 890M's nearest rival in terms of average benchmark score is the AMD Radeon Vega 8, which scores 9221, a mere 0.1% difference, suggesting that this integrated GPU offers performance comparable to older integrated solutions rather than discrete graphics cards.

The GPU's 45th percentile ranking among all GPUs places it squarely in the lower half of the performance spectrum, and its 5.939 TFLOPS FP32 compute capability is the theoretical ceiling for its raw processing power. In Control, the 890M's integrated nature means it shares thermal and power resources with the CPU, and its 15 W TDP suggests that sustained gaming loads will cause thermal throttling, which likely explains why the measured FPS numbers are so consistent in their mediocrity across different settings.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and consistent across all settings, revealing the GPU as the primary bottleneck. At Low settings, the average FPS falls from 58 at 1080p to 44 at 1440p (a 24% reduction) and then to 30 at 4K (a 48% reduction from 1440p). This non-linear scaling indicates that the GPU is hitting memory bandwidth or fill-rate limits as pixel count increases, which is expected for an integrated GPU sharing system memory for both frame buffer and game assets.

The Medium preset shows a similar pattern: 41 FPS at 1080p, 31 FPS at 1440p (a 24% drop), and 21 FPS at 4K (a 32% drop from 1440p). The High preset follows the same trajectory with 37, 28, and 19 FPS respectively, while Ultra drops from 32 to 24 to 16 FPS. The percentage drops between 1440p and 4K are slightly less severe for Medium and High presets compared to Low, which suggests that at higher settings, the CPU or driver overhead begins to play a larger role in limiting performance, though the overall trend remains firmly GPU-bound.

The data implies that the Radeon 890M's performance scales linearly with pixel count until it hits a hard ceiling around 4K, where even the lowest settings struggle to maintain 30 FPS. For users with 1440p displays, the Low preset is the only viable option for smooth gameplay, while 4K is essentially unusable for anything beyond static exploration at Low settings. The resolution scaling analysis strongly suggests that this system is best paired with a 1080p display for Control, as the GPU simply does not have enough memory bandwidth or pixel throughput to handle higher resolutions with playable frame rates.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H and AMD Radeon 890M ranks 2728th out of 2888 tested combos in Control, placing it in the bottom 5.5% of all systems tested for this game. This rank is consistent with the GPU's 45th percentile standing, but drastically worse than the CPU's 83rd percentile, confirming that the integrated GPU is the limiting factor in this pairing. The rank position means that 160 other tested combinations performed worse than this system, which is a surprisingly small number given the GPU's low standing, suggesting that Control is particularly demanding on integrated graphics.

In terms of raw benchmark scores, the 890M's average of 9210 is nearly identical to its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Vega 8, which scores 9221 with a deltaPct of -0.1%, meaning the 890M is essentially tied with an older integrated solution. The other nearest rivals are discrete GPUs from the GTX 900 series, the GTX 960 scores 9273 and the GTX 850M scores 9302, which shows that the 890M's integrated performance is comparable to entry-level discrete graphics from a decade ago. This contextualizes the Control results: the system performs as expected for its GPU class, but that class is simply too weak for this game's requirements.

The CPU's nearest rivals in terms of average benchmark score include the Intel Core i5-14600T (32707, 0% delta), AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 (32662, 0.1% delta), and AMD Ryzen 5 7400F (32750, -0.2% delta), all of which are within a fraction of a percent of the Core Ultra 7 155H's 32697 average. This CPU performance is clearly not the bottleneck in Control, as the frame rates are far below what this processor could drive with a more capable GPU, making the combo rank a direct reflection of the GPU's limitations.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 155H features 16 cores and 22 threads based on the Meteor Lake architecture, with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The CPU's cache hierarchy includes 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache, which provides ample fast storage for game data. Its synthetic benchmark results are strong, Cinebench R23 multicore reaches 15028, single-core reaches 1743, and PassMark multithread scores 24873, all indicating that the CPU has no trouble feeding the GPU with draw calls and physics calculations in Control.

The CPU's 83rd percentile ranking among all CPUs confirms that it is a high-performing mobile processor, and its PassMark data encryption score of 16358 and integer math score of 86870 show strong general computing capability. However, in Control, the CPU's role is secondary because the GPU is so severely bottlenecked that the CPU likely spends most of its time waiting for the GPU to complete frame rendering. The FPS differences between settings at the same resolution, for example, 58 FPS at Low versus 32 FPS at Ultra at 1080p, show that the GPU workload is the dominant factor, not CPU processing.

The CPU's integrated Arc Xe-LPG 128EU graphics are not used in this configuration since the system pairs with the discrete AMD Radeon 890M, but the CPU's memory controller and dual-channel DDR5 support are critical for the GPU's performance since the 890M relies on system memory. The 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth is the theoretical maximum available to the GPU, and Control's texture-heavy environments likely require more bandwidth than this integrated solution can provide, which explains the steep FPS drops at higher resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured results show a clear performance hierarchy: Low averages 58 FPS with no min/max data recorded, Medium averages 41 FPS with a minimum of 35 FPS and maximum of 47 FPS, High averages 37 FPS, and Ultra averages 32 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 17 FPS (41% difference), which is the largest jump between any two consecutive settings at this resolution, indicating that the Low preset likely disables several expensive rendering features like volumetric lighting or ambient occlusion.

At 2560x1440, the same pattern holds but with lower absolute numbers: Low averages 44 FPS, Medium averages 31 FPS with a minimum of 27 FPS and maximum of 36 FPS, High averages 28 FPS, and Ultra averages 24 FPS. The percentage difference between Low and Medium at 1440p is 42%, nearly identical to the 1080p difference, suggesting that the performance cost of each setting tier is consistent regardless of resolution.

At 3840x2160, the results become marginal: Low averages 30 FPS, Medium averages 21 FPS with a minimum of 18 FPS and maximum of 24 FPS, High averages 19 FPS, and Ultra averages 16 FPS. The Medium preset at 4K has the only complete min/max data across all resolutions, showing a tight 18-24 FPS range that indicates the GPU is consistently saturated. The data shows that the 890M can technically render Control at 4K Low settings at 30 FPS, but this is a cinematic frame rate that will feel unresponsive during combat, while the 1080p Low preset remains the only configuration that approaches playable smoothness.

FAQ

Q: What is the best settings preset for this system in Control?

A: Based on the measured data, the Low preset at 1920x1080 is the only configuration that achieves a 58 FPS average, making it the best playable option. The Medium preset at 1080p drops to 41 FPS, which is playable but less smooth, while all higher settings or resolutions produce frame rates below 37 FPS.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon 890M compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The 890M scores 9210 on average, which is nearly identical to the AMD Radeon Vega 8's 9221 (a -0.1% delta), and slightly below the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960's 9273 (-0.7% delta) and GTX 850M's 9302 (-1% delta). This places it in the 45th percentile of all GPUs.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this system for Control?

A: The GPU is clearly the bottleneck. The Core Ultra 7 155H ranks in the 83rd percentile among CPUs with a strong Cinebench R23 multicore score of 15028, while the 890M ranks in the 45th percentile. The FPS drops across resolution and settings changes align with GPU-bound behavior.

Q: Can this system run Control at 4K?

A: Technically yes, but not well. The Low preset at 4K averages 30 FPS, Medium averages 21 FPS, High averages 19 FPS, and Ultra averages 16 FPS. Only Low settings produce a barely playable frame rate at 4K, and even that will suffer during intense action sequences.

Q: What is the combo's overall ranking among all tested systems in Control?

A: This combo ranks 2728th out of 2888 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 5.5% of all systems tested for Control. This rank is consistent with the GPU's low performance percentile relative to other hardware.

Q: How much performance is lost when increasing from Low to Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset averages 58 FPS while Ultra averages 32 FPS, representing a 45% reduction in frame rate. The Medium preset at 41 FPS and High at 37 FPS show that each step up in settings costs approximately 4-17 FPS depending on the tier.