Control

The pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 in Control produces a fascinating dataset, revealing a system where the GPU’s immense raw power is frequently tempered by the mobile processor’s capabilities. The measured frames per second across three resolutions and four quality presets show a clear hierarchy of performance, but the scaling patterns expose a bottleneck that shifts depending on the workload. This analysis breaks down the measured results, contextualizes the ranking, and offers practical guidance based strictly on the observed data.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drops from 1080p to 4K are steep but not uniform across settings, indicating a dynamic balance between CPU and GPU limits. At Low settings, the game’s performance scales almost linearly with pixel count: the average jumps from 203 FPS at 1920x1080 to 153 FPS at 2560x1440 (a 24.6% drop), and then further down to 103 FPS at 3840x2160 (a 32.7% drop from 1440p). This pattern suggests that at Low settings, the system is heavily reliant on the GPU’s fill rate, and the RTX 5090’s 423.6 GPixel/s pixel rate is the primary driver. The 1080p result of 203 FPS is notably high, hinting that the CPU can still feed the GPU adequately at this lower resolution, but the substantial decline to 4K shows the GPU is being pushed to its limits.

At High settings, the scaling is more aggressive. The average FPS falls from 128 at 1080p to 97 at 1440p (a 24.2% drop) and then to 65 at 4K (a 33.0% drop from 1440p). The 4K High result of 65 FPS is significantly lower than the 4K Low result of 103 FPS, showing that the added graphical complexity of High settings—likely involving more advanced lighting and texture work—places a heavy burden on the GPU’s 104.8 TFLOPS of FP32 compute power. The gap between 1080p and 1440p at High is nearly identical to the gap at Low, but the absolute numbers are lower, suggesting that the CPU is not the limiting factor at these resolutions; instead, the GPU’s rendering workload dominates.

The Medium and Ultra presets reinforce this trend. At Medium, the 1080p average is 144 FPS, dropping to 109 at 1440p (a 24.3% drop) and 73 at 4K (a 33.0% drop from 1440p). At Ultra, the numbers are 111 FPS at 1080p, 84 at 1440p (a 24.3% drop), and 57 at 4K (a 32.1% drop from 1440p). The consistency of the percentage drops—roughly 24% from 1080p to 1440p and 32-33% from 1440p to 4K—across all four settings is striking. This uniformity indicates that the scaling is driven primarily by resolution’s pixel count, not by the specific preset. However, the absolute FPS at each resolution is heavily influenced by the preset, with Ultra at 4K producing just 57 FPS versus Low’s 103 FPS.

The data suggests that the limiting component changes with resolution. At 1080p, the high FPS values (203 FPS at Low, 144 FPS at Medium) approach the practical limits of what a mobile CPU with 16 cores and 22 threads can sustain in terms of frame pacing, even if the boost clock reaches 5.00 GHz. At 4K, the GPU’s workload becomes so intense that the CPU has more headroom, but the RTX 5090’s 32 GB of GDDR7 memory and 1.79 TB/s bandwidth are still not enough to maintain high framerates at the most demanding settings. The result is a system that feels CPU-bound at lower resolutions and GPU-bound at higher ones, with the crossover point occurring somewhere between 1440p and 4K depending on the preset.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution for achieving over 100 FPS in Control with this combo?*

A: Based on the measured data, 1920x1080 at Low settings yields 203 FPS, and 2560x1440 at Low settings yields 153 FPS, both exceeding 100 FPS. At High settings, only 1080p (128 FPS) breaks the 100 FPS barrier, while 1440p High falls to 97 FPS.

Q: How does the Ultra preset perform at 4K?

A: The 3840x2160 Ultra preset produces an average of 57 FPS, which is the lowest measured result in the dataset. This is just above the 60 FPS threshold but may feel less smooth than the Medium preset’s 73 FPS at the same resolution.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the primary bottleneck at 1080p?

A: The data suggests the CPU becomes a limiting factor at 1080p. The Intel Core Ultra 7 165H has a boost clock of 5.00 GHz and 24 MB of shared L3 cache, but the 203 FPS at Low settings appears to be near the practical ceiling for frame generation, as the GPU has ample headroom to render more frames if fed faster.

Q: What is the performance difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 153 FPS, while Ultra averages 84 FPS. This represents a 45.1% reduction in average framerate when moving from Low to Ultra, showing the significant cost of the highest quality settings.

*Q: Does the RTX 5090’s 32 GB memory capacity provide a benefit in Control?*

A: The game’s measured results do not indicate any memory capacity limitations, as even the highest settings at 4K do not show stutter or frame drops beyond what the GPU’s 423.6 GPixel/s pixel rate would suggest. The 32 GB capacity is more than sufficient for this title.

*Q: How does the combo rank among other tested systems for Control?*

A: The combo ranks 563rd out of 2888 tested combinations, placing it in the top 19.5% of all systems. This indicates that while the RTX 5090 is an exceptionally powerful GPU, the mobile Core Ultra 7 165H prevents the system from reaching the very top tier of performance in this game.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 563 out of 2888 tested combinations places it in the 80.5th percentile of all systems benchmarked in Control. This is a strong showing, but it is lower than one might expect given the GPU’s individual standing. The RTX 5090 alone holds the 92nd percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 79,842, placing it near the top of the heap. In contrast, the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H sits at the 84th percentile among CPUs, with an average score of 34,083. The gap between the GPU’s 92nd percentile and the CPU’s 84th percentile is reflected in the combo’s overall 80.5th percentile ranking.

Looking at the CPU’s nearest rivals, the data shows how tight the competition is at this performance tier. The Core Ultra 7 165H has an average benchmark score of 34,083, which is just 0.3% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H’s score of 33,989, and 0.4% higher than both the AMD EPYC 4244P’s 34,220 and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350’s 34,222. However, it trails the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X by 0.5%, which scores 34,260. These minuscule deltas—all within a single percentage point—indicate that the CPU’s performance is essentially interchangeable with its closest competitors. This means the 563rd rank is not due to a specific CPU deficiency, but rather the inherent limitations of a mobile processor compared to desktop parts that may be paired with the RTX 5090 in other configurations.

The GPU’s nearest rivals tell a similar story. The RTX 5090’s average score of 79,842 is 0.3% higher than the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB’s 79,605, and 0.6% higher than the Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB’s 79,396. It also leads the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT by 1.1%, which scores 78,940, but trails the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X by 1.4%, which scores 80,959. The fact that the GPU is within 1.4% of its nearest rivals, all of which are professional or workstation-class parts, underscores the RTX 5090’s dominance in the consumer space. Yet, in Control, the combo’s 563rd rank suggests that many other systems—likely with higher-performing desktop CPUs—achieve better framerates, even if the GPU is slightly less powerful.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of performance across all twelve combinations of resolution and settings. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers the highest average at 203 FPS, followed by Medium at 144 FPS, High at 128 FPS, and Ultra at 111 FPS. The Medium preset’s minimum of 122 FPS and maximum of 165 FPS show a tight frame delivery, indicating consistent performance. The Ultra preset’s 111 FPS average is respectable but represents a 45.3% drop from Low, showing the cost of the highest quality settings at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 153 FPS, which is still highly playable for competitive scenarios. Medium drops to 109 FPS with a minimum of 93 FPS and maximum of 125 FPS, High falls to 97 FPS, and Ultra reaches 84 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 69 FPS, or 45.1%, mirroring the percentage drop seen at 1080p. This consistency suggests that the settings’ impact on performance is proportional regardless of resolution, even though the absolute numbers differ.

At 3840x2160, the performance becomes more demanding. Low averages 103 FPS, which is just above the 100 FPS threshold and shows that even at 4K, the RTX 5090 can deliver high framerates when settings are lowered. Medium averages 73 FPS with a minimum of 62 FPS and maximum of 85 FPS, High averages 65 FPS, and Ultra averages 57 FPS. The Ultra result is the only preset/resolution combination that falls below 60 FPS, making it the most demanding configuration in the dataset. The Medium preset’s minimum of 62 FPS is notable, as it suggests that occasional dips below 60 FPS are possible even at Medium settings, while the average remains comfortable.

The progression from 1080p to 4K at each settings level shows a consistent pattern: Low loses 100 FPS (203 to 103), Medium loses 71 FPS (144 to 73), High loses 63 FPS (128 to 65), and Ultra loses 54 FPS (111 to 57). The absolute drop decreases as settings increase, but the percentage drop remains consistent. This indicates that the GPU’s rendering workload scales predictably with pixel count, and the CPU’s role becomes less significant at higher resolutions.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 165H is a mobile processor with 16 cores and 22 threads, based on the Meteor Lake architecture built on Intel’s 7 nm process. Its base clock of 3.80 GHz and boost clock of 5.00 GHz provide strong single-threaded performance, as evidenced by its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1,759 and Passmark single-thread score of 3,509. In Control, which is an action-adventure game that typically relies on a few heavily-threaded tasks, the CPU’s multi-core capabilities are also relevant. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 14,551 and Passmark multithread score of 25,933 show that the CPU can handle concurrent workloads, but the 28 W TDP and mobile form factor limit sustained performance compared to desktop parts.

The CPU’s cache hierarchy—112 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3—is adequate for feeding the GPU, but the data suggests it becomes a bottleneck at 1080p. At 1920x1080 Low, the 203 FPS average is likely constrained by the CPU’s ability to process draw calls and physics updates, rather than the GPU’s rendering speed. The RTX 5090’s 21760 shading units and 104.8 TFLOPS of FP32 compute are vastly overprovisioned for Low settings, meaning the CPU must work hard to keep up. The 5.00 GHz boost clock helps, but the mobile chip’s thermal and power limits likely prevent it from sustaining the highest clocks for extended periods.

At higher resolutions, the CPU’s role diminishes. The 4K results show that the GPU becomes the limiting factor, as the RTX 5090’s 423.6 GPixel/s pixel rate and 1,636.8 GTexel/s texture rate are stretched by the increased pixel count. The CPU’s 16 cores and 22 threads are sufficient to keep the GPU fed at 4K, as evidenced by the fact that the scaling from 1440p to 4K is consistent across all settings. The CPU’s nearest rivals—the Core Ultra 5 338H and Ryzen AI 7 350—show similar average benchmark scores, all within 0.4% of the 165H, which means that swapping the CPU would not dramatically change the Control results. The bottleneck is the mobile platform itself, not the specific chip.

Settings Recommendations

For the best balance of visual fidelity and performance, the Medium preset at 2560x1440 is the most compelling choice. It delivers an average of 109 FPS with a minimum of 93 FPS and maximum of 125 FPS, providing smooth gameplay that stays comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold. The 1440p Medium result is 12 FPS higher than the High preset at the same resolution, showing that dropping from High to Medium yields a meaningful performance gain without sacrificing too much visual quality. The minimum of 93 FPS ensures that even the most intense scenes remain fluid.

For players prioritizing maximum framerate, the Low preset at 1920x1080 is the clear winner, with an average of 203 FPS. This is the only configuration that breaks the 200 FPS barrier, making it ideal for high-refresh-rate displays. The 1440p Low preset at 153 FPS is also an excellent option, offering higher resolution while still maintaining a very high framerate. Both of these configurations are well-suited for competitive play or for users who prefer responsiveness over visual detail.

At 4K, the Low preset is the only one that achieves over 100 FPS, averaging 103 FPS. This makes it the recommended choice for players with 4K displays who want to maintain high framerates. The Medium preset at 4K averages 73 FPS with a minimum of 62 FPS, which is playable but shows occasional dips near the 60 FPS line. The Ultra preset at 4K averages 57 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target and may result in noticeable stutter. Therefore, the data suggests avoiding Ultra at 4K and instead using Medium or Low to ensure a consistent experience.

The High preset offers a middle ground but rarely provides the best value. At 1080p, it averages 128 FPS, which is lower than Medium’s 144 FPS. At 1440p, it averages 97 FPS, just below Medium’s 109 FPS. At 4K, it averages 65 FPS, which is lower than Medium’s 73 FPS. In every case, High is outperformed by Medium, making it a redundant choice unless the specific visual differences are critical. The Ultra preset is only recommended at 1080p, where it averages 111 FPS, or 1440p, where it averages 84 FPS, as these are still playable, but at 4K, the 57 FPS average is too low for a smooth experience.