Control

Control is a demanding action-adventure title that stresses both processor and graphics hardware, and the pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 with the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT produces a set of results that reveal a clear performance hierarchy. The measured frame rates across resolutions and settings show a system that is capable of smooth play at 1080p, but which encounters increasing difficulty as the resolution climbs. This analysis breaks down the data to explain exactly where the bottlenecks lie and what the numbers mean for the overall experience.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a 20-core, 20-thread processor built on the Arrow Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. The data suggests that this CPU is not the primary limitation in this game setup, as its performance metrics are strong relative to other processors. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42216 and single-core score of 5960 place it in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, indicating a high level of capability for both threaded and single-threaded workloads. Control, being an action-adventure game, often benefits from strong single-core performance for game logic and physics, but the measured FPS data indicate that the GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

The processor's 30 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory support contribute to its ability to feed data to the GPU without becoming a bottleneck in most scenarios. In the benchmark results, the CPU's average benchmark score of 64640 is nearly identical to its nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 4464P, which scores 64823, a delta of only -0.3%. This suggests that the Core Ultra 7 265's performance is well-balanced and consistent with other high-end desktop chips. However, the game's frame rates show a pattern where the CPU's influence diminishes as resolution increases, with the GPU taking over as the dominant factor. At 1080p Low, the average FPS of 148 suggests the CPU is capable of feeding frames quickly, but the GPU's limits become apparent when settings and resolution are raised.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT ranks 1267 out of 2888 tested combos in Control, placing it in the upper-middle tier of all tested systems. This rank, which is based on the measured FPS data, shows that while the combo is not at the top of the charts, it outperforms a significant portion of the field. The rank of 1267 out of 2888 means that roughly 56% of tested combos perform better, but this specific pairing offers a balanced experience that is competitive for its component class. The GPU's percentile rank of 71 among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 26011, is notably lower than the CPU's 93rd percentile, which reinforces the idea that the GPU is the more limiting component in this pairing.

The nearest rivals for the GPU, such as the AMD Radeon R9 M395X with a delta of 0.5% and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile with a delta of 1.1%, all have similar average benchmark scores, indicating that the RX 6750 XT sits in a specific performance bracket. When combined with the CPU, the overall combo rank reflects this GPU limitation. The data shows that the CPU is more than capable of keeping up with the GPU, as evidenced by the fact that the combo's rank is not significantly dragged down by processor performance. Instead, the rank is a direct consequence of the GPU's mid-range capabilities, which are well-suited for 1080p gaming but struggle at higher resolutions.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average frame rate this combo achieves in Control?

A: The highest average frame rate is 148 FPS, which occurs at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This indicates that the combo is highly capable at 1080p when graphical demands are reduced.

Q: How does the combo perform at 4K resolution with Ultra settings?

A: At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the combo achieves an average FPS of 42. This is below the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay, suggesting that 4K Ultra is not a viable option for this pairing.

Q: Is there a significant performance difference between Medium and High settings at 1440p?

A: Yes, the data shows that at 2560x1440, Medium settings yield an average of 80 FPS, while High settings yield 71 FPS. This is a difference of 9 FPS, indicating that the Medium preset offers a better balance of visual quality and performance at this resolution.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for this combo in the measured data?

A: The minimum FPS recorded is 46, which occurs at 3840x2160 resolution with Medium settings. This is the only setting where a minimum FPS is listed, and it shows that there is potential for frame drops in demanding scenes.

Q: How does the CPU's benchmark score compare to its nearest rival?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 has an average benchmark score of 64640, which is nearly identical to the AMD EPYC 4464P's score of 64823, a difference of only -0.3%. This indicates that the CPU's performance is on par with its closest competitors.

Q: Does the combo's rank in the game suggest it is better suited for lower resolutions?

A: Yes, the combo rank of 1267 out of 2888, combined with the FPS data, suggests that it is better suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, where it can achieve higher frame rates, rather than 4K, where performance drops significantly.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

At 1920x1080, the combo shows its strongest performance. With Low settings, the average FPS is 148, which is excellent for high-refresh-rate monitors. Medium settings reduce the average to 105 FPS, with a minimum of 90 FPS and a maximum of 121 FPS, indicating a stable experience. High settings yield an average of 94 FPS, while Ultra settings drop to 81 FPS. These numbers show that at 1080p, the combo can handle even the highest settings with playable frame rates, though the drop from Low to Ultra is significant at 67 FPS.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance scales down as expected. Low settings produce an average of 112 FPS, which is still very smooth. Medium settings average 80 FPS, with a minimum of 68 and a maximum of 92, showing a slight increase in frame time variance. High settings average 71 FPS, and Ultra settings drop to 62 FPS. At this resolution, the combo remains viable for most settings, but the margin for error at Ultra is thin, as 62 FPS is close to the edge of what is considered smooth.

At 3840x2160, the GPU's limitations become clear. Low settings average 76 FPS, which is still playable, but Medium settings drop to 54 FPS, with a minimum of 46 and a maximum of 62. High settings average 48 FPS, and Ultra settings fall to 42 FPS. These numbers indicate that 4K gaming is only feasible with Low settings, and even then, the experience may not be consistently smooth. The data shows a clear trend: as resolution increases, the average FPS drops, and the impact of settings becomes more pronounced.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT is a RDNA 2.0 architecture GPU with 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 432.0 GB/s. Its base clock is 2150 MHz, with a boost clock of 2600 MHz and a game clock of 2495 MHz. The GPU's 2560 shading units and 64 ROPs contribute to its pixel rate of 166.4 GPixel/s and texture rate of 416.0 GTexel/s. These specifications position the GPU as a solid mid-range option, but the data from Control shows that its 12 GB of VRAM and compute capabilities are not sufficient for 4K Ultra settings.

The GPU's average benchmark score of 26011 places it in the 71st percentile, which is lower than the CPU's 93rd percentile. This disparity is the key to understanding the combo's performance. At 1080p, the GPU can deliver high frame rates, as seen in the 148 FPS average at Low settings, but as resolution increases, the GPU's workload grows, and its performance drops off. The 12 GB of VRAM is likely sufficient for 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K, the memory bandwidth and compute power become limiting factors. The GPU's nearest rivals, such as the AMD Radeon R9 M395X with a delta of 0.5%, show that it is in a specific performance class, and the measured FPS data confirms that this class is not designed for 4K gaming.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS data, the best experience for this combo depends on the user's resolution preference. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset offers an average of 105 FPS, which is a good balance between visual quality and performance. The minimum FPS of 90 ensures that the experience remains smooth, and the maximum of 121 shows there is headroom. High settings at 1080p average 94 FPS, which is also excellent, but the 11 FPS difference between Medium and High may not be worth the visual upgrade for some users. Ultra settings at 81 FPS are still playable, but the drop from Medium is 24 FPS, which is significant.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset is the clear recommendation, with an average of 80 FPS and a minimum of 68 FPS. This provides a stable experience that is close to the 60 FPS target. High settings average 71 FPS, which is also acceptable, but the 9 FPS difference from Medium may not be justified. Ultra settings at 62 FPS are borderline, and the lack of a listed minimum FPS suggests potential instability. For a consistent experience, Medium is the safest choice at 1440p.

At 3840x2160, the data shows that only Low settings are viable, with an average of 76 FPS. Medium settings drop to 54 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target, and High and Ultra settings average 48 and 42 FPS, respectively. For 4K, the recommendation is to use Low settings if playable frame rates are a priority, but the experience may still have stutters. The data indicates that this combo is not suited for 4K gaming, and users should consider lowering the resolution to 1440p for a better experience.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K clearly illustrates the GPU's role as the limiting component. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 148 at 1080p to 112 at 1440p, a decrease of 36 FPS, and then to 76 at 4K, a further decrease of 36 FPS. This represents a 51% drop from 1080p to 4K, which is a significant reduction that aligns with the GPU's performance class. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 94 at 1080p to 71 at 1440p, a decrease of 23 FPS, and then to 48 at 4K, a further decrease of 23 FPS. This consistent pattern of FPS drops indicates that the GPU is being pushed to its limits as the pixel count increases.

The fact that the FPS drops are relatively consistent across settings suggests that the GPU is the primary bottleneck, as the CPU's performance is not changing with resolution. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect to see less of a drop at higher resolutions, but the data shows the opposite. The CPU's high benchmark scores, such as the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42216, indicate that it is not the constraint. Instead, the GPU's 12 GB of VRAM and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth are likely insufficient for the demands of 4K rendering in Control. The data implies that to achieve higher frame rates at 4K, a more powerful GPU is necessary, while the CPU can remain the same without causing additional bottlenecks.