Control

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT pairing produces a highly capable Control experience, with the data revealing a system that scales predictably across resolutions. The measured results show a clear performance hierarchy, from a playable 45 FPS at 4K Ultra to a fluid 162 FPS at 1080p Low. This analysis breaks down the specific FPS figures, the roles of the CPU and GPU, and how this particular combination ranks against other tested hardware.

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

The measured frames per second data for this combo shows a pronounced and consistent drop as resolution increases, a classic indicator of a GPU-bound workload. At 1080p High, the system produces an average of 102 FPS. Moving to 1440p High, that figure falls to 77 FPS, a reduction of 25 FPS. Pushing further to 4K High yields just 52 FPS, a substantial 50 FPS drop from the 1080p baseline. This pattern is not linear; the scaling from 1440p to 4K shows a steeper decline, suggesting the rendering load at 4K is particularly demanding on the Radeon RX 7700 XT.

The data implies that the AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT is the primary factor limiting performance at higher resolutions. The gap between Low and High settings at the same resolution provides further evidence. At 1080p, the jump from Low (162 FPS) to High (102 FPS) is a 60 FPS difference, showing that graphical settings have a massive impact on the frame rate. At 4K, the same settings comparison shows a 31 FPS difference (83 FPS Low vs 52 FPS High), a smaller absolute delta but a similar relative impact. This indicates that the GPU's compute and memory resources are being taxed heavily as both resolution and image quality increase.

The scaling suggests that users targeting 4K will need to make significant compromises in settings to achieve higher frame rates, while 1080p and 1440p offer more headroom. The 4K Low setting at 83 FPS is notably faster than 4K High at 52 FPS, showing that lowering settings can recover performance lost to resolution. The data points to a system where the GPU is the bottleneck, as the CPU's role remains relatively static across different resolutions; the consistent frame rate drops are directly attributable to the increasing pixel count and shading complexity handled by the RX 7700 XT.

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 based on the Arrow Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. In the context of Control, a game that is not typically known for extreme multi-threading demands, this processor provides substantial headroom. The benchmark results from the FACT PACK show a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42216 and a single-core score of 5960, indicating strong all-around performance. The high boost clock is particularly relevant for gaming, where single-threaded performance often dictates the minimum frame rate and overall responsiveness.

The data suggests that the CPU is not the limiting factor in this combo. Even at 1080p Low, where the GPU has the least work to do and the CPU would be most likely to bottleneck, the system achieves 162 FPS. This high frame rate indicates that the Core Ultra 7 265 can feed the Radeon RX 7700 XT with enough data to keep it busy, even in a best-case scenario for the CPU. The 30 MB of shared L3 cache and the dual-channel DDR5 memory support further contribute to reducing potential data bottlenecks that could hamper performance in a fast-paced action game.

Comparing its benchmark scores to its nearest rivals, the Core Ultra 7 265 is positioned right in the middle of a tight pack. It scores -0.3% lower than the AMD EPYC 4464P but +0.3% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F. This suggests that within this performance class, the CPU's gaming capabilities are consistent. The processor's 93rd percentile ranking among all CPUs reinforces that it is a high-end part, and for this game, the data indicates it is more than sufficient to avoid holding back the GPU. The CPU's role here is to provide a stable platform, and the measured FPS figures suggest it does so effectively without becoming a constraint.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT is the driving force behind the visual output in this combo, and its 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth is a key asset. The GPU's boost clock of 2544 MHz and game clock of 2171 MHz highlight its capacity for high throughput. In Control, which is known for its physics-heavy environments and detailed textures, the 12 GB VRAM buffer is likely sufficient to handle the game's assets at all tested settings, preventing texture swapping or stuttering that could impact the average FPS.

The GPU's benchmark performance places it in the 67th percentile of all GPUs, with an average score of 22549. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile, trails by 0.5%, while the RTX 4060 Mobile is 0.8% ahead. This indicates that the RX 7700 XT is a solid mid-to-high-range performer. The measured frame rates in Control, however, show that it struggles to maintain high refresh rates at 4K with maximum settings. The 4K Ultra average of 45 FPS is below the 60 FPS target many gamers prefer, indicating that the GPU's raw compute power (35.17 TFLOPS FP32) is being heavily taxed by the game's rendering engine at that resolution.

The data shows a clear performance tier for the GPU based on resolution. At 1080p, it is exceptionally strong, with even Ultra settings producing an average of 89 FPS. At 1440p, it remains highly capable, with High settings at 77 FPS and Ultra at 67 FPS. The transition to 4K is where the GPU's limitations become apparent, as it cannot maintain playable frame rates at High or Ultra without dropping below the 60 FPS threshold. This suggests that the RX 7700 XT is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming in Control, where it offers a large performance cushion. The 4K results show that while the GPU can handle the resolution, users will have to make significant compromises in graphical fidelity to get a smooth experience.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

In the database of tested hardware combinations for Control, this pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT ranks 1036 out of 2888 total combos. This places the system in the upper-middle tier of all tested configurations, indicating that it is a solid, mainstream high-performance setup. The rank reflects the balance between the CPU and GPU, and the data suggests that while the CPU is a top-tier component, the GPU's mid-range positioning brings the overall combo down slightly from the top echelons.

The 1036th rank out of 2888 combos means that this specific pairing outperforms a majority of other systems tested, but it is not among the elite. This is consistent with the GPU's 67th percentile ranking. The combo's performance is likely constrained by the RX 7700 XT's capability at higher resolutions, as the CPU could potentially support a more powerful GPU. The fact that the combo ranks higher than the individual GPU's percentile suggests that the CPU is providing a significant boost, ensuring that the GPU is not being held back and can operate at its full potential.

This ranking implies that for a user with this combo, the experience in Control will be very good but not the absolute best available. The data from the measured FPS supports this, as the system can hit high frame rates at 1080p and 1440p but falls short of a perfect 60 FPS experience at 4K Ultra. The combination of a top-tier CPU with a mid-to-high-end GPU creates a well-balanced system for 1440p gaming, which is likely the sweet spot for this hardware. The rank of 1036 indicates that there are other combos with more powerful GPUs that would achieve higher frame rates, but this pairing offers a strong performance level that will satisfy most gamers.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: What is the average FPS for this combo at 1440p with High settings?

A: The measured average FPS at 2560x1440 with High settings is 77 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU's multi-core performance compare to its nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 4464P?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 has an average benchmark score that is 0.3% lower than the AMD EPYC 4464P.

Q: What is the lowest average frame rate recorded for this system?

A: The lowest average frame rate is 45 FPS, which occurs at 3840x2160 (4K) resolution with Ultra settings.

Q: What is the GPU's memory bus width and bandwidth?

A: The GPU features a 192-bit memory bus with a bandwidth of 432.0 GB/s.

Q: At which resolution and settings does this combo achieve its highest average FPS?

A: The highest average FPS of 162 is achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: What is the boost clock speed of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265?

A: The boost clock speed of the CPU is 5.30 GHz.

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

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of how this hardware combo handles Control. The results are broken down by resolution and settings presets, revealing the system's performance envelope.

At 1920x1080, the system is clearly CPU-bound at lower settings and GPU-bound at higher ones. The average FPS figures are:

• Low: 162 FPS
• Medium: 115 FPS (with a min of 98 FPS and a max of 133 FPS)
• High: 102 FPS
• Ultra: 89 FPS

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates drop as the GPU takes on more work. The average FPS figures are:

• Low: 123 FPS
• Medium: 87 FPS (with a min of 74 FPS and a max of 100 FPS)
• High: 77 FPS
• Ultra: 67 FPS

At the demanding 3840x2160 resolution, the GPU becomes the definitive bottleneck. The average FPS figures are:

• Low: 83 FPS
• Medium: 59 FPS (with a min of 50 FPS and a max of 68 FPS)
• High: 52 FPS
• Ultra: 45 FPS

The data shows a consistent pattern. The Medium setting is the only one with recorded min/max values, which are 98/133 at 1080p, 74/100 at 1440p, and 50/68 at 4K. These figures help illustrate the frame time variance. The performance drop from Low to Ultra is significant at all resolutions, but the most dramatic absolute difference is at 1080p, where the gap is 73 FPS (162 to 89). At 4K, the gap narrows to 38 FPS (83 to 45), showing that the GPU is already so taxed that the settings have a slightly less pronounced effect on the absolute frame rate delta, though the relative impact remains clear.

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

The measured FPS data allows for clear recommendations on which settings preset provides the best experience for different priorities. For users with a 1080p monitor, the High preset at 102 FPS offers an excellent balance of visual quality and high refresh rate performance. However, for those seeking the smoothest possible experience, the Low preset at 162 FPS is ideal, though it sacrifices visual fidelity. The Ultra preset at 89 FPS is still well above 60 FPS and provides the best image quality, making it a viable option for gamers who prioritize graphics over raw speed.

At 1440p, the High preset at 77 FPS is the recommended choice for most users, as it delivers a smooth, immersive experience with good visual detail. The Ultra preset at 67 FPS is also playable and offers the best visuals, but the frame rate is closer to the 60 FPS threshold. The Medium preset at 87 FPS is a solid middle ground, but High provides a better visual upgrade for a modest FPS cost. For competitive play, the Low preset at 123 FPS offers a significant advantage, but this is less common for a single-player title like Control.

For 4K gaming, the data suggests that compromises are necessary. The Low preset at 83 FPS is the only setting that achieves a comfortable frame rate above 60 FPS. The Medium preset at 59 FPS is borderline playable, but it may not be smooth enough for all users. The High and Ultra presets at 52 FPS and 45 FPS, respectively, are below the 60 FPS target and are not recommended for a satisfying experience. Therefore, for a 4K display, the Low preset is the best choice for performance, while users who prefer higher fidelity should consider lowering the resolution to 1440p and using the High or Ultra preset, which offers a better overall experience. The data clearly indicates that the "sweet spot" for this combo is 1440p with High or Ultra settings.