Control

The Intel Core Ultra 7 165H paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 delivers a combination that sits in the 52nd percentile of all tested system configurations for Control, ranking 1515th out of 2888 unique combos. This places the pairing in the upper-middle tier of the database, indicating a system that can handle the game’s demands but is not at the absolute top of the performance stack. The ranking reflects a balance between the CPU’s 84th percentile standing among all processors and the GPU’s 81st percentile among all graphics cards, suggesting that neither component is a weak link, but the overall combo is dragged down by the demanding nature of Control at higher resolutions. In practical terms, this means the system is more than capable of delivering smooth gameplay at 1080p, but users targeting 4K will need to make careful settings adjustments to maintain playable frame rates.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 1515th out of 2888 tested configurations, which translates to a percentile rank of roughly 52.5. This is a middle-of-the-pack result, but context is important. The CPU alone outperforms 84% of all processors in the database, and the GPU outperforms 81% of all graphics cards. The fact that the combined rank is significantly lower than either individual component’s percentile highlights how Control scales with both hardware and resolution. At 1080p, the system is likely bottlenecked by the CPU in certain scenes, while at 4K, the GPU becomes the limiting factor. The result is a combo that performs admirably at mainstream resolutions but struggles to maintain high frame rates at 4K with maximum settings.

Looking at the CPU’s nearest rivals, the Core Ultra 7 165H posts an average benchmark score of 34083. This is within a fraction of a percent of the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H (33989, +0.3%), the AMD EPYC 4244P (34220, -0.4%), the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 (34222, -0.4%), and the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X (34260, -0.5%). The differences are negligible, meaning the CPU’s processing power is essentially on par with these alternatives. For the GPU, the RTX 4070’s average score of 37648 puts it nearly identical to the NVIDIA Tesla P4 (37628, +0.1%) and the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 (37507, +0.4%), while trailing the RTX 4080 Mobile (38135, -1.3%) and leading the Radeon PRO W6400 (37157, +1.3%). These margins are small, indicating that the GPU is competitively positioned among its peers.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture using a 5 nm process from TSMC, with a chip size of 294 mm² and 35,800 million transistors. Its 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus provides 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth, which is crucial for Control’s texture-heavy environments and particle effects. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1920 MHz and a boost clock of 2475 MHz, with memory running at 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective). These specifications allow the card to render the game’s physics-based destruction and telekinetic combat effects without significant memory bottlenecks.

In practical terms, the GPU’s performance in Control shows a clear pattern: the gap between Low and Ultra settings narrows as resolution drops. At 4K, the average FPS drops from 71 on Low to 39 on Ultra, a 45% reduction. At 1440p, the same settings range yields 106 FPS down to 58 FPS, a 45% drop. At 1080p, the range is 140 FPS to 77 FPS, a 45% reduction. This consistency indicates that the GPU is the primary driver of performance scaling with settings, and the 12 GB VRAM is sufficient to avoid texture swapping even at 4K Ultra. The GPU’s 5888 shading units and 64 ROPs handle the game’s lighting and reflections, while the 184 tensor cores and 46 RT cores provide headroom for any future ray tracing enhancements, though the measured data does not include RT-specific results.

FAQ

Q: How does this combo perform at 1080p compared to higher resolutions?

A: At 1080p, the system achieves 140 FPS on Low settings and 77 FPS on Ultra. This is a 45% performance drop from Low to Ultra, which is consistent across all resolutions, indicating that settings have a uniform impact regardless of resolution.

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

A: The data shows that 1440p offers a strong balance, with 106 FPS on Low and 58 FPS on Ultra. This resolution provides a significant visual upgrade over 1080p while maintaining playable frame rates, unlike 4K where Ultra dips to 39 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck at 4K Ultra?

A: The 4K Ultra result of 39 FPS, combined with the GPU’s 81st percentile ranking, suggests the GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU, ranked in the 84th percentile, has more headroom, as evidenced by the fact that dropping settings at 4K yields a much larger FPS increase than dropping resolution at the same settings.

Q: How does the RTX 4070 compare to its nearest rivals in this game?

A: The GPU’s average score of 37648 is nearly identical to the NVIDIA Tesla P4 (37628) and AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 (37507), and it trails the RTX 4080 Mobile (38135) by 1.3%. This indicates that the RTX 4070 is competitively positioned, though slightly behind the higher-tier mobile 4080.

Q: What frame rates can be expected at 1440p Medium?

A: The measured data shows 75 FPS average at 1440p Medium, with a minimum of 64 FPS and a maximum of 86 FPS. This is the only settings/resolution combination with full min/max data, suggesting it is a stable configuration.

*Q: Does the CPU’s performance affect frame rates in Control?*

A: The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 14551 and single-core score of 1759 indicate strong processing power. However, the consistent 45% FPS drop from Low to Ultra across all resolutions suggests that GPU load is the dominant factor, and the CPU is not a limiting constraint at any tested setting.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience, the data points to 1440p Medium as the sweet spot. This configuration delivers 75 FPS average, with a minimum of 64 FPS and a maximum of 86 FPS, providing smooth gameplay without sacrificing too much visual fidelity. The 64 FPS minimum is above the 60 FPS threshold typically considered playable, and the average is well within the range of a high-refresh-rate monitor. If users prefer higher visual quality, 1440p High yields 67 FPS average, which is still playable but with a lower safety margin for demanding scenes.

At 1080p, the system is clearly GPU-bound at lower settings, with 140 FPS on Low. However, the jump to High (88 FPS) and Ultra (77 FPS) shows diminishing returns, and the visual difference between High and Ultra may not justify the 11 FPS loss. For users with 1080p displays, High settings at 88 FPS offer a good balance. At 4K, the situation is more challenging. Ultra averages only 39 FPS, which is below playable standards for most users. High at 45 FPS is borderline, but Medium at 51 FPS is the minimum recommended for a playable experience. Low at 71 FPS is playable but sacrifices most of the game’s visual atmosphere.

The data suggests that users should prioritize 1440p Medium as the default recommendation, with 1440p High as an option for those with more tolerant frame rate expectations. The 4K resolution is only viable at Low or Medium settings, and even then, the experience is marginal compared to the smoothness of 1440p.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system shows a wide performance range. Low settings produce 140 FPS average, which is the highest measured result across all configurations. Medium settings drop to 99 FPS, with a minimum of 84 FPS and a maximum of 114 FPS. High settings yield 88 FPS, while Ultra reduces the average to 77 FPS. The difference from Low to Ultra is 63 FPS, representing a 45% reduction. This indicates that at 1080p, the GPU has ample headroom, and even Ultra settings do not push the system to its limits.

At 2560x1440, the performance scales predictably. Low settings average 106 FPS, Medium drops to 75 FPS with a range of 64-86 FPS, High yields 67 FPS, and Ultra averages 58 FPS. The gap from Low to Ultra is 48 FPS, again a 45% reduction. The Medium setting’s minimum of 64 FPS is noteworthy because it is the only configuration with reported min/max data, suggesting that this is a stable point for the system. The 1440p results show a clear step-down from 1080p, with the average FPS dropping by roughly 24-27% across all settings.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles to maintain high frame rates. Low settings average 71 FPS, Medium drops to 51 FPS with a minimum of 43 FPS and maximum of 58 FPS, High yields 45 FPS, and Ultra averages 39 FPS. The drop from Low to Ultra is 32 FPS, representing a 45% reduction. The Medium setting’s minimum of 43 FPS is the lowest measured value in the entire dataset, indicating that 4K is the most demanding scenario for this combo. The 4K results show a 49-50% reduction in average FPS compared to 1440p, highlighting the significant load that 4K places on the GPU.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 165H is a 16-core, 22-thread processor based on the Meteor Lake architecture, manufactured on a 7 nm process. It has a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, with a TDP of 28 W. The cache hierarchy includes 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. These specifications are reflected in its benchmark scores: Cinebench R23 multi-core scores 14551, while single-core scores 1759. The PassMark multi-thread score is 25933, and the single-thread score is 3509.

In Control, the CPU’s role is less pronounced than the GPU’s, as evidenced by the consistent 45% FPS reduction from Low to Ultra across all resolutions. This suggests that the game’s performance is primarily GPU-bound, and the CPU has sufficient headroom to feed the graphics card without becoming a bottleneck. The CPU’s 84th percentile ranking among all processors means it outperforms the vast majority of CPUs in the database, and its nearest rivals are all within 0.5% of its average score. This positions the Core Ultra 7 165H as a capable processor that can handle the game’s physics and AI calculations without compromising frame rates.

The CPU’s memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, combined with dual-channel DDR5 support, ensures that data can be fed to the GPU efficiently. The 24 MB of L3 cache is particularly beneficial for games like Control that have complex world states and dynamic object interactions. While the CPU is not the star of the show in this combo, it provides a solid foundation that allows the GPU to perform at its full potential.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals important insights about the system’s bottleneck. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 140 at 1080p to 106 at 1440p (a 24% reduction) and then to 71 at 4K (a 33% reduction from 1440p). At Ultra settings, the drop is from 77 at 1080p to 58 at 1440p (a 25% reduction) and then to 39 at 4K (a 33% reduction from 1440p). The consistent percentage drops across settings indicate that resolution scaling is uniform, and the GPU is the primary limiting factor at all resolutions.

The fact that the percentage drop from 1440p to 4K (33%) is larger than the drop from 1080p to 1440p (24%) suggests that the GPU’s memory bandwidth and processing power are increasingly strained as pixel count rises. The 12 GB of VRAM and 504.2 GB/s bandwidth are adequate for 1440p, but at 4K, the system begins to hit memory bandwidth limits, causing the frame rate to drop more steeply. The CPU’s role in this scaling is minimal, as the consistent percentage drops across settings indicate that the CPU is not a bottleneck at any resolution.

The data shows that the system is best utilized at 1440p, where it can deliver high frame rates without the steep performance penalty seen at 4K. At 1080p, the system has excess GPU headroom, and the frame rates are limited by the game’s engine and CPU in certain scenes. At 4K, the GPU is the clear bottleneck, and users must sacrifice settings to achieve playable frame rates. The scaling pattern suggests that the RTX 4070 is a 1440p-class GPU, with 4K performance that is only suitable for less demanding titles or with significant settings reductions.