Control

# Control with Intel Core Ultra 7 265 + AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT delivers a compelling 1440p and 4K experience in Control, with measured FPS ranging from 54 at 4K Ultra to 193 at 1080p Low. The combination ranks 670th out of 2,888 tested combos for this game, placing it in the top 23% of all configurations. This pairing leverages a 20-core, 20-thread Arrow Lake CPU with a 5.30 GHz boost clock alongside a Navi 48 GPU with 16 GB of GDDR6 memory, creating a system that scales predictably across resolutions and settings, though the data reveals interesting bottlenecks at different points.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and consistent pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases from 1080p to 4K. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 122 at 1920x1080 to 92 at 2560x1440, then further to 62 at 3840x2160. This represents a 24.6% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 32.6% further drop from 1440p to 4K, totaling a 49.2% reduction from 1080p to 4K. This scaling pattern is remarkably linear, suggesting that the GPU is becoming the primary limiting factor as pixel count increases.

At Low settings, the scaling is even more dramatic. The system achieves 193 FPS at 1080p, drops to 146 at 1440p (a 24.4% decrease), and then to 98 at 4K (a 32.9% decrease from 1440p). The total drop from 1080p to 4K at Low settings is 49.2%, which mirrors the High settings pattern almost exactly. This consistency across settings levels indicates that the performance scaling is driven primarily by resolution-dependent GPU workload rather than CPU limitations at any particular settings combination.

Medium settings show a similar trajectory: 137 FPS at 1080p, 103 at 1440p (24.8% drop), and 70 at 4K (32.0% drop from 1440p). The min FPS values at Medium settings also scale proportionally, from 116 at 1080p to 88 at 1440p to 59 at 4K. Ultra settings follow the same pattern with 106 FPS at 1080p, 80 at 1440p (24.5% drop), and 54 at 4K (32.5% drop from 1440p). The nearly identical percentage drops across all four settings levels strongly suggest that the limiting component at higher resolutions is the GPU, as the CPU headroom remains constant regardless of resolution.

The 4K to 1440p ratio at every settings level hovers around 0.67-0.68, meaning that 4K performance is roughly two-thirds of 1440p performance. For a game like Control, which features complex physics-based destruction and particle effects, this scaling indicates that the RX 9070 XT's 16 GB VRAM and 644.6 GB/s memory bandwidth are being taxed heavily at 4K, while the CPU's 20 cores and 30 MB of shared L3 cache remain underutilized at higher resolutions.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to play Control with this combo for a 60 FPS target?

A: At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 54, which falls short of 60 FPS. However, 4K High achieves 62 FPS average, and 4K Medium reaches 70 FPS. For a consistent 60+ FPS experience at 4K, High settings are the minimum viable option, while Medium provides more comfortable headroom.

Q: How much performance is gained by dropping from Ultra to Low settings?

A: At 1080p, Low settings deliver 193 FPS compared to 106 FPS at Ultra, representing an 82.1% performance increase. At 1440p, the gain is 146 FPS versus 80 FPS (82.5% faster), and at 4K, Low produces 98 FPS versus 54 FPS at Ultra (81.5% faster). The relative gain is nearly identical across all resolutions.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this configuration?

A: Benchmark results indicate the GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher resolutions, as evidenced by the consistent 32-33% FPS drop from 1440p to 4K across all settings. At 1080p Low with 193 FPS, the CPU's 20 cores and 5.30 GHz boost clock are likely keeping up, but the GPU's rendering workload dominates the scaling curve.

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

A: The measured data shows 103 FPS average at 2560x1440 Medium, with a minimum of 88 FPS and maximum of 119 FPS. This provides a smooth experience well above 60 FPS even in demanding scenes, as indicated by the min FPS floor.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to all other tested configurations?

A: The combination ranks 670th out of 2,888 tested combos for Control, placing it in the top 23.2% of all configurations tested. This indicates strong overall performance, though not elite-tier for this specific game.

Q: Does the 16 GB VRAM on the RX 9070 XT affect 4K performance?

A: The measured 4K results show playable frame rates at High (62 FPS) and Medium (70 FPS), suggesting that 16 GB of GDDR6 memory with 644.6 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient for Control at 4K. The drop to 54 FPS at Ultra indicates texture and effect quality demands, not VRAM capacity being exceeded.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture with a Navi 48 chip fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It features 4,096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 128 raster operation pipelines, delivering 48.66 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. The GPU operates with a base clock of 1660 MHz, a game clock of 2400 MHz, and a boost clock of 2970 MHz, while memory runs at 2518 MHz with 20.1 Gbps effective speed across a 256-bit bus, yielding 644.6 GB/s of bandwidth.

In Control, the GPU's role is critical across all resolutions, but the data shows its dominance grows with resolution. At 1080p, the gap between Low (193 FPS) and Ultra (106 FPS) settings is 87 FPS, while at 4K, the same settings gap narrows to 44 FPS (98 versus 54). This narrowing gap at higher resolutions suggests that even at Low settings, the GPU is becoming saturated at 4K, whereas at 1080p, there is more headroom for the CPU to push higher frame rates.

The RX 9070 XT's 64 ray tracing cores are relevant for Control's use of real-time ray tracing, though the measured FPS data does not specify whether ray tracing was enabled. The pixel rate of 380.2 GPixel/s and texture rate of 760.3 GTexel/s provide ample fill rate for Control's particle-heavy combat sequences. The GPU's 16 GB VRAM is a significant asset, as Control's detailed environments and destructible objects can consume substantial memory at Ultra settings, and the measured 54 FPS at 4K Ultra suggests the GPU is compute-limited rather than VRAM-limited.

The GPU's percentile ranking of 55th among all GPUs places it in the mid-range, yet its measured performance in Control exceeds what that ranking might suggest. The nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks include the AMD Radeon HD 7770M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570, but those comparisons are based on average benchmark scores, not game-specific performance. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 7,260 and Passmark G3D score of 26,795 indicate solid DirectX 12 performance, which aligns with Control's DX12 renderer.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 670th out of 2,888 tested combinations for Control, placing it in the top 23.2% of all configurations. This is a strong showing for a mid-to-high-end pairing, indicating that the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and RX 9070 XT work well together for this specific game. The rank suggests that while there are 669 combinations that perform better, the vast majority of tested systems (2,218 combos) deliver worse performance in Control.

This ranking is particularly notable given the CPU's 93rd percentile ranking among all CPUs and the GPU's 55th percentile ranking among all GPUs. The CPU is clearly above average, while the GPU sits closer to the median, yet their combination achieves a top-quartile result in Control. This implies that Control benefits disproportionately from the CPU's strengths, possibly due to its heavy physics simulation and AI workloads that leverage the 20 cores and 30 MB of L3 cache.

The gap between this combo's rank and what the individual component percentiles might predict suggests that Control is more CPU-sensitive than many other games. The CPU's nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks include the AMD EPYC 4464P (0.3% slower) and Intel Core Ultra 7 265F (0.3% faster), but these server and workstation processors would likely perform differently in gaming workloads. The combination's rank of 670 implies that there are 669 combos with better Control performance, likely featuring higher-tier GPUs or CPUs with stronger gaming-specific optimizations.

For context within the broader database, being in the top 23.2% means this combo outperforms over three-quarters of all tested systems in Control. This places it in a comfortable position for high-refresh-rate 1440p gaming and playable 4K, though not at the extreme enthusiast tier where 240+ FPS at 1080p or 100+ FPS at 4K would be expected.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a 20-core, 20-thread processor from the Core Ultra Series 2, based on the Arrow Lake architecture built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. It features a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, with a TDP of 65 watts. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is DDR5 with dual-channel configuration and 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth.

In Control, the CPU's role is most apparent at lower resolutions and settings where the GPU is less stressed. At 1080p Low with 193 FPS average, the CPU's 20 threads are likely being utilized to handle the game's physics-based destruction and enemy AI. The CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42,216 and single-core score of 5,960 indicate strong both multi-threaded and single-threaded performance, which is essential for Control's mixed workload.

The fact that FPS scales almost identically across settings levels at each resolution suggests the CPU maintains sufficient headroom even at Ultra settings. At 1080p Ultra, the system still delivers 106 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold, indicating the CPU is not a bottleneck at this resolution. Even at 4K Ultra with 54 FPS, the CPU is likely not the limiting factor, as the GPU is clearly saturated at that resolution.

The CPU's Passmark multi-thread score of 49,682 and single-thread score of 4,689 reinforce its balanced performance profile. The data compression score of 522,983 and floating-point math score of 172,776 suggest strong compute capabilities that could benefit Control's physics simulation. The 20 cores without hyper-threading (20 threads total) means each core is a physical core, which can be advantageous for games that scale well with physical cores rather than logical threads.

The CPU's 93rd percentile ranking among all CPUs puts it ahead of 93% of processors, with nearest rivals including the AMD EPYC 4464P (0.3% slower) and Intel Core Ultra 7 265F (0.3% faster). This high percentile explains why the combo achieves such strong results in Control, as the game appears to leverage the CPU's multi-core capabilities effectively.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured results show a clear progression across settings. Low settings deliver an average of 193 FPS, which is the highest measured frame rate in the entire dataset. Medium settings produce 137 FPS average with a minimum of 116 FPS and maximum of 157 FPS. High settings achieve 122 FPS average, while Ultra settings drop to 106 FPS average. The spread from Low to Ultra at 1080p is 87 FPS, representing an 82.1% improvement when dropping from Ultra to Low.

At 2560x1440, the performance scales down proportionally. Low settings maintain 146 FPS average, Medium delivers 103 FPS with a minimum of 88 FPS and maximum of 119 FPS, High achieves 92 FPS average, and Ultra produces 80 FPS average. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 66 FPS, which is an 82.5% improvement from Ultra to Low, nearly identical to the 1080p percentage.

At 3840x2160, the system still provides playable frame rates across all settings. Low settings yield 98 FPS average, Medium delivers 70 FPS with a minimum of 59 FPS and maximum of 80 FPS, High achieves 62 FPS average, and Ultra produces 54 FPS average. The Low to Ultra gap at 4K is 44 FPS, representing an 81.5% improvement, again consistent with the other resolutions.

The Medium settings measurements are the only ones with complete min/max data across all resolutions. At 1080p Medium, the minimum of 116 FPS and maximum of 157 FPS show a 41 FPS range. At 1440p Medium, the range narrows to 31 FPS (88 to 119), and at 4K Medium, it narrows further to 21 FPS (59 to 80). This tightening range at higher resolutions indicates that frame time consistency improves as the GPU becomes the bottleneck, reducing CPU-related frame spikes.

Settings Recommendations

For 4K gaming, the data clearly shows that High settings (62 FPS average) or Medium settings (70 FPS average) are the sweet spot for maintaining a smooth experience above 60 FPS. Ultra settings at 4K drop to 54 FPS average, which falls below the 60 FPS threshold and may result in noticeable stuttering during intense combat sequences. The Medium setting's minimum of 59 FPS at 4K indicates that even in the most demanding scenes, the frame rate stays close to 60 FPS, making Medium the safest choice for 4K.

At 1440p, all settings deliver well above 60 FPS, with even Ultra achieving 80 FPS average. For players with high-refresh-rate monitors, High settings (92 FPS) or Medium settings (103 FPS) provide excellent responsiveness, while Ultra at 80 FPS still offers a smooth experience. The Medium setting's minimum of 88 FPS at 1440p ensures consistent performance without drops below 60 FPS. For the best visual fidelity at 1440p, Ultra is recommended since 80 FPS average is still well within smooth territory.

At 1080p, every setting exceeds 100 FPS, making this resolution ideal for competitive play or maximum visual quality. Ultra at 106 FPS average provides the best visual experience while still maintaining triple-digit frame rates. For players with 144Hz or 165Hz monitors, Medium settings (137 FPS) or even Low settings (193 FPS) would better utilize the display's refresh rate. The High setting at 122 FPS offers a balanced compromise between visual quality and frame rate.

Across all resolutions, the data suggests that Medium settings provide the most consistent frame pacing, as evidenced by the complete min/max measurements showing relatively narrow ranges. The performance scaling from Ultra to Medium offers a 23-30% FPS improvement depending on resolution, while the jump from Medium to Low provides a 40-41% improvement. For the best overall experience, Medium at 1440p or High at 4K are recommended, as they balance visual fidelity with frame rate stability, ensuring the game remains fluid during Control's physics-heavy encounters.