Control

Control is a demanding Action Adventure title, and this specific pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 produces a set of results that clearly delineate the GPU's capabilities against the CPU's headroom. The data shows a configuration that ranks near the middle of the pack for this game, with performance characteristics that shift meaningfully depending on resolution and quality settings. The measured frames per second reveal a system where the graphics card is the primary driver of performance, but the processor’s architecture still plays a significant role in establishing the ceiling for frame rates.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the database of tested combinations for Control, this specific pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 holds a rank of 1551 out of 2888 total combos. This places the system in the 54th percentile of all tested configurations, indicating that while it is not an outlier at the top of the charts, it delivers a competitive experience for this title. The position suggests that the hardware is well-balanced enough to avoid being a bottleneck, but there are many other systems that achieve higher frame rates, likely due to more powerful desktop-class components or higher-tier mobile parts.

The ranking becomes more telling when considering the individual components' standings. The CPU alone sits in the 84th percentile against all other processors in the database, which is a strong showing for a mobile chip. Meanwhile, the GPU lands in the 82nd percentile against all other graphics cards. When combined, their performance in Control is slightly lower than what each component's individual percentile might suggest, pointing to a scenario where the game's engine and the specific demands of its physics and rendering do not perfectly scale with the hardware's theoretical capabilities. The combo's rank of 1551 is a more moderate result than the sum of its parts, indicating that the game presents a unique workload that doesn't fully leverage the strengths of either component to their maximum potential.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each component helps contextualize the performance. The CPU's closest competitor in average benchmark score is the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H, which is only 0.3% behind, making the two effectively tied in general compute tasks. On the other side, the AMD EPYC 4244P and AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 are both 0.4% ahead, while the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is 0.5% ahead. These are marginal differences, meaning the Core Ultra 7 165H is positioned in a tight cluster of processors with similar overall compute power. For the GPU, the rivalry is even closer, with the AMD Radeon Pro 580 being just 0.1% ahead in average score. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 is 0.8% ahead, and the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile is 2% behind. This suggests that the RTX 5070's raw compute performance is very similar to these professional-grade cards, though in gaming, the specific drivers and architecture of the GeForce line typically yield different results. The data for this Control combo, however, reflects the actual gaming performance, which is what matters for this analysis.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 is the undisputed workhorse in this pairing for Control. It is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture and utilizes the GB205 chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process by TSMC. The GPU is equipped with 12 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing a substantial 672.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth. This memory configuration is critical for a game like Control, which features complex textures and physics-based destruction that can quickly fill VRAM at higher resolutions. The 12 GB capacity is sufficient for the game's demands at the tested settings, ensuring that the GPU does not run out of memory and suffer from stuttering or texture pop-in.

Clock speeds are another key factor. The GPU has a base clock of 2325 MHz and a boost clock of 2512 MHz. These high frequencies, combined with the 6144 shading units and 192 tensor cores, provide the raw computational throughput needed to handle the game's DirectX 12 rendering. The 48 RT cores are present for ray-traced effects, though Control's implementation of ray tracing can be particularly punishing, and the measured FPS data here likely reflects non-ray-traced performance given the relatively high frame rates at 1080p. The GPU's pixel rate is 201.0 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 482.3 GTexel/s, which are strong figures that help maintain visual fidelity without sacrificing frame rate.

In the context of the measured results, the GPU's role is clear. At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves 137 FPS, which indicates that the GPU is not the limiting factor at this resolution and settings level. However, as resolution and settings increase, the GPU's workload grows exponentially. The difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p is a drop from 137 FPS to 75 FPS, a 45% reduction in performance. This is entirely a GPU-bound penalty, as the CPU's workload remains relatively constant regardless of graphical fidelity. The GPU's 82nd percentile ranking against all GPUs is reflected in its ability to handle 1440p High at 66 FPS, but the strain becomes apparent at 4K, where even Medium settings only yield 50 FPS. The data shows that the RTX 5070 is a capable mid-range performer, but it is not a 4K powerhouse for demanding titles like Control.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 165H serves as the central processor for this system, and its role in Control is to feed the GPU with enough data to keep it busy. This is a 16-core, 22-thread processor based on the Meteor Lake architecture, with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The core configuration is a mix of performance and efficiency cores, which is designed to balance power consumption with high single-threaded performance when needed. For a game like Control, which relies heavily on physics simulations and AI, the thread count is beneficial, but the single-threaded performance is often more critical for maintaining high frame rates.

The CPU's cache hierarchy includes 112 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. This cache structure helps reduce latency when accessing frequently used data, which is important for game logic. The processor also supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, which is ample for feeding both the CPU and, indirectly, the GPU through system memory. The CPU's integrated graphics, Arc Xe-LPG 128EU, is present but is not a factor in this discrete GPU configuration.

The benchmark scores for the CPU indicate a solid mid-range performer. In Cinebench R23, it scores 14551 in multi-core and 1759 in single-core. The single-core score is particularly relevant for gaming, as it demonstrates the processor's ability to handle the primary game thread efficiently. The multi-core score of 14551 shows that the CPU is capable of handling heavy background workloads without compromising game performance. The Passmark multithread score of 25933 further corroborates this. In the context of Control, the CPU's role is to maintain consistent frame pacing. The measured FPS data shows that at 1080p Low, the system hits 137 FPS, which suggests the CPU is capable of high frame rates. However, the gap between 1080p and 1440p at the same Low settings is a drop from 137 FPS to 104 FPS, a 24% decrease. This drop is larger than what would be expected if the CPU were the main bottleneck, indicating that the GPU is already starting to struggle at 1440p. The CPU's performance is sufficient to support the GPU up to a point, but it does not appear to be the limiting factor in this game. The data suggests the CPU is providing a solid foundation, with its 84th percentile ranking supportive of the GPU's efforts.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data for Control provides a comprehensive look at how this combo performs across various resolutions and settings. Beginning at 1920x1080, the system demonstrates strong performance. With Low settings, the average frame rate is 137 FPS, which is excellent for a smooth experience on a high-refresh-rate monitor. Moving to Medium settings, the average drops to 98 FPS, with a minimum of 83 FPS and a maximum of 112 FPS. This is still very playable. High settings yield an average of 87 FPS, and Ultra settings bring the average down to 75 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra at 1080p shows a clear scaling of GPU load, but even at Ultra, the frame rate remains above 60 FPS, providing a playable experience.

At 2560x1440, the performance takes a noticeable step down. Low settings produce an average of 104 FPS, which is still above 60 and quite good. Medium settings average 74 FPS, with a minimum of 63 FPS and a maximum of 85 FPS, which is a comfortable range for most players. High settings average 66 FPS, which is playable but getting close to the 60 FPS threshold. Ultra settings at 1440p average 57 FPS, dipping below the 60 FPS target. This indicates that for a locked 60 FPS experience at 1440p, players will need to stick to High settings or lower.

The 3840x2160 resolution presents the biggest challenge. Low settings average 70 FPS, which is surprisingly playable at 4K. Medium settings average 50 FPS, with a minimum of 42 FPS and a maximum of 57 FPS, which is a noticeable drop from Low. High settings average 44 FPS, and Ultra settings average 39 FPS. These numbers show that 4K gaming in Control is only viable with Low settings for a smooth experience, and even then, it's not reaching the high refresh rates seen at lower resolutions. The data clearly shows a system that is comfortable at 1080p, good at 1440p, and struggling at 4K for this specific title.

Resolution Scaling

The scaling of performance across resolutions is a key indicator of where the bottleneck lies. From 1080p Low (137 FPS) to 1440p Low (104 FPS), the frame rate drops by 24%. From 1440p Low to 4K Low (70 FPS), the frame rate drops by another 33%. This is a significant degradation, and it points directly to the GPU being the limiting factor as resolution increases. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see a smaller drop in performance at higher resolutions, because the CPU's workload is largely independent of resolution. The fact that the frame rate drops so precipitously at 4K, even at Low settings where the GPU's shading work is reduced, confirms that the RTX 5070's computational resources are being maxed out.

The same pattern holds for the Medium settings. The frame rate goes from 98 FPS at 1080p to 74 FPS at 1440p, a 24% drop, and then to 50 FPS at 4K, a 32% drop from 1440p. This consistent scaling suggests that the GPU's fill rate and shading capacity are the primary constraints. The CPU, with its high single-thread performance, is able to keep up with the game's logic at all resolutions, but it cannot compensate for the GPU's inability to render more pixels. The memory bandwidth of 672.0 GB/s is also a factor, as higher resolutions require more data to be moved across the bus, but the consistent percentage drops suggest that raw compute is the more significant limitation.

The decrease from High settings at 1080p (87 FPS) to High at 1440p (66 FPS) is a 24% drop, and from 1440p High to 4K High (44 FPS) is a 33% drop. This pattern is remarkably consistent, indicating a predictable scaling curve that is entirely GPU-bound. The conclusion is clear: for this combo, the RTX 5070 is the limiting component at 1440p and 4K, while at 1080p, the CPU and GPU are more balanced, though the GPU still handles the bulk of the performance scaling.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this system depend heavily on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For 1920x1080, the Ultra preset is the best choice for players who prioritize visual fidelity, as it still maintains an average of 75 FPS. The High preset at 87 FPS and Medium at 98 FPS are also excellent options for those who want higher refresh rates or more headroom for drops. Given that even Ultra stays above 60 FPS, there is no reason to sacrifice visual quality at 1080p unless aiming for 120+ FPS, in which case Low settings at 137 FPS is the only option that gets close.

At 2560x1440, the High preset is the recommended sweet spot. It delivers an average of 66 FPS, which is just above the 60 FPS target for a smooth experience. The Medium preset, at 74 FPS, offers a bit more headroom and is also a solid choice, particularly if players want to avoid any minor dips below 60. The Ultra preset at 57 FPS is borderline, and while playable, it may not provide a consistent experience. For a locked 60 FPS experience, High settings are the safest choice, as the minimum FPS data for Medium shows 63 FPS, which is just above the threshold, while High does not have a reported minimum but is likely close.

For 3840x2160, the situation is more constrained. The Low preset is the only one that consistently delivers an average above 60 FPS, hitting 70 FPS. This is the recommended setting for 4K play. The Medium preset at 50 FPS is playable but requires a tolerance for lower frame rates, and its minimum of 42 FPS indicates potential stuttering in demanding scenes. High and Ultra at 44 FPS and 39 FPS respectively are not recommended for a smooth experience. Players who want to play at 4K should accept the Low preset, or consider reducing the resolution to 1440p to take advantage of higher quality settings. The data suggests that this combo is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, with 4K being a compromise for this particular game.