Control

Control pairs Intel’s Core Ultra 7 265 with NVIDIA’s GeForce RTX 4090, a combination that lands at rank 106 out of 2,888 tested combos in this title. The data shows a system that is firmly in the top tier for Control, delivering frame rates that range from playable at 4K Ultra to exceptionally high at 1080p Low. The following analysis breaks down the CPU and GPU contributions, answers common questions, and provides a full measured FPS breakdown across resolutions and settings.

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, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. Its base clock is 2.40 GHz, and it boosts to 5.30 GHz, which are the two figures that most directly influence gaming performance. In this benchmark suite, the CPU’s single-threaded capabilities are strong, as evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 5,960 and a PassMark single-thread score of 4,689, both of which are critical for a game like Control that relies on a primary game thread for physics and game logic.

The CPU’s multi-core performance is equally robust, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42,216 and a PassMark multi-thread score of 49,682. This matters less for Control’s raw FPS, but it ensures that background tasks and modern OS overhead do not create stutters. The L3 cache is 30 MB shared, and the L2 cache is 3 MB per core, which helps with data locality in complex scenes. The processor’s memory bandwidth is rated at 102.4 GB/s via dual-channel DDR5, which is ample for feeding the GPU in a game that is not memory-bandwidth constrained.

In terms of overall CPU performance, the Core Ultra 7 265 sits in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs tested. Its nearest rivals in the aggregate benchmark scores are the AMD EPYC 4464P, which is 0.3% slower, and the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F, which is 0.3% faster. The AMD EPYC 7343 is 0.7% faster, and the AMD EPYC 9124 is 0.7% slower. These deltaPct values are negligible, meaning the 265 is essentially performance-equivalent to its closest competitors in synthetic tests. For Control, the practical implication is that the CPU is not the bottleneck; the measured FPS at 1080p Low (272 FPS average) shows that the processor can push frames far beyond what most displays can show, confirming that it is not holding back the RTX 4090.

The CPU’s boost clock of 5.30 GHz is the key enabler for high minimum FPS in Control. The game’s engine, which is known for its physics-heavy combat and destructible environments, scales well with raw core speed. The 20 cores and 20 threads do not provide a massive advantage over a 16-core part in this title, but they do ensure that the system remains responsive when the GPU is maxed out, particularly at 4K resolution where the CPU has to prepare frames for a very demanding rasterizer. The data shows that the Core Ultra 7 265 is more than adequate for this pairing, as even at 4K Ultra (76 FPS average), the frame rate is GPU-limited, not CPU-limited.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 is the flagship Ada Lovelace GPU, built on a 5 nm process with 76,300 million transistors on a 609 mm² die. Its base clock is 2,235 MHz, and it boosts to 2,520 MHz, with memory clocked at 1,313 MHz (21 Gbps effective). The 24 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 384-bit bus provides 1.01 TB/s of bandwidth, which is a massive amount of headroom for Control’s high-resolution textures and effects at 4K. The GPU’s 16,384 shading units, 512 TMUs, and 176 ROPs are the raw compute resources that drive the measured FPS, and its 128 RT cores and 512 tensor cores are available if the game’s ray tracing features are enabled (though the measured data here does not specify RT settings).

The RTX 4090’s benchmark scores are stellar, with a PassMark G3D score of 38,194 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 9,223. In terms of percentile ranking, it sits in the 88th percentile of all GPUs, which is high but not the absolute top, likely due to the inclusion of newer or specialized workstation cards. Its nearest rivals in the aggregate benchmark data are the Intel Arc Pro A60 (0% delta), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 (0.3% faster), and the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M (2.5% slower). These deltas are tiny, but they are based on synthetic workloads that do not reflect gaming performance; in Control, the RTX 4090 is clearly in a class of its own.

The GPU’s role in this game’s results is dominant. Looking at the measured FPS across resolutions, the RTX 4090 scales predictably with resolution and settings, which indicates it is the primary driver of performance. For example, at 4K High, the average FPS is 88, while at 1440p High, it jumps to 130, and at 1080p High, it reaches 172. This scaling is characteristic of a GPU that is not bottlenecked by the CPU at any point. The 24 GB VRAM is more than sufficient for Control, which is a 2019 title, so there is no risk of texture thrashing or memory-related performance dips, even at 4K Ultra with high-quality assets.

The RTX 4090’s 82.58 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 1,290.2 GTexel/s texture rate provide the brute force needed to maintain high frame rates in Control’s particle-heavy effects and physics simulations. The card’s 450 W TDP and triple-slot cooler are not relevant to the measured FPS, but the data confirms that the GPU has the thermal and power headroom to sustain its boost clock under sustained gaming load. For this combination, the GPU is the clear performance ceiling; the CPU is there to feed it, and the numbers show that the pairing is well-balanced for maximizing FPS in Control.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to play Control with this combo for the highest frame rate?

A: Based on the measured data, 1920x1080 at Low settings yields the highest average FPS at 272. This is the only setting that pushes beyond 270 FPS; 1080p Medium and High come in at 194 and 172 FPS, respectively.

Q: Can this system maintain a stable 60 FPS at 4K Ultra settings?

A: Yes, the measured average FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings is 76 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold. The data does not list a minimum FPS for this setting, but the average is comfortably high.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Core Ultra 7 265 is essentially tied with its closest competitors. It is 0.3% slower than the AMD EPYC 4464P and 0.3% faster than the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F. The AMD EPYC 7343 is 0.7% faster, and the AMD EPYC 9124 is 0.7% slower.

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

A: At 2560x1440, the average FPS drops from 206 on Low to 113 on Ultra, a difference of 93 FPS. This shows a significant performance cost for the higher visual fidelity settings.

Q: Is the RTX 4090’s 24 GB VRAM necessary for Control?

A: The data does not show VRAM usage, but the 24 GB capacity is far beyond what Control requires, as the game is from 2019. The measured FPS shows no signs of memory-related bottlenecks, even at 4K Ultra.

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

A: This specific combination ranks 106th out of 2,888 tested combos, placing it in the top 4% of all systems. This indicates that very few other CPU-GPU pairings achieve higher performance in this game.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides a clear picture of how settings and resolution affect performance. For players prioritizing the highest possible frame rate, the 1920x1080 Low preset delivers an average of 272 FPS, which is ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors. However, this setting sacrifices most visual effects. The 1080p Medium preset offers a more balanced experience at 194 FPS, which is still extremely high and likely to be limited by the display’s refresh rate rather than the hardware.

For 1440p users, the Medium preset at 146 FPS is the sweet spot, providing a significant visual upgrade over Low (206 FPS) while maintaining a frame rate that is well above the 144 Hz refresh rate common on many monitors. The High preset at 130 FPS is also viable, but the jump from Medium to High costs 16 FPS for marginal visual gains. At 1440p Ultra, the average drops to 113 FPS, which is still playable but starts to push the limits of a 120 Hz display.

For 4K resolution, the data shows that High settings at 88 FPS is the best choice for a smooth experience, as it stays above 60 FPS and provides most of the visual fidelity. The Medium preset at 99 FPS is actually faster than High, which suggests that the High preset may enable additional effects that are disproportionately expensive at 4K. Ultra at 4K drops to 76 FPS, which is still playable but may exhibit occasional dips below 60 FPS in heavy scenes, though the data does not list minimum FPS for this setting. The Low preset at 4K (139 FPS) is not recommended, as it defeats the purpose of 4K resolution. Overall, the best experience per the measured rows is 1440p Medium (146 FPS) for a balance of quality and speed, or 4K High (88 FPS) for maximum resolution without sacrificing smoothness.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 ranks 106th out of 2,888 tested combos in Control. This places it in the top 3.7% of all systems tested, which is a strong indicator of its high-end performance. The rank reflects the aggregate performance across all resolutions and settings, and the data shows that this combo excels particularly at 1080p and 1440p, where the CPU’s strong single-thread performance and the GPU’s massive compute power combine to deliver frame rates that are among the highest recorded.

The rank is influenced by the fact that there are 2,782 other combos that perform worse, but also 105 combos that perform better. These higher-ranked combos likely include more exotic or newer hardware, but the data does not specify what they are. Within the context of this benchmark database, the 106th rank is a very strong result, indicating that this pairing is well-suited for Control and will not struggle with any settings or resolution. The deltaPct values for the CPU and GPU rivals are negligible, meaning that swapping the 265 for a similarly performing EPYC or the RTX 4090 for a similar GPU would not meaningfully change the rank.

The fact that this combo is in the top 4% of all tested systems is significant, as it means that the hardware is not a limiting factor for this game. The data shows that the system is capable of producing frame rates that are limited by the display’s refresh rate in most scenarios, especially at 1080p and 1440p. At 4K, it remains well above the 60 FPS threshold for all settings tested, which confirms the RTX 4090’s raw power. The CPU’s 93rd percentile ranking ensures that it does not bottleneck the GPU, and the combo rank reflects this synergy.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following is the complete set of measured average FPS values for this combo in Control, broken down by resolution and settings. Where available, minimum and maximum FPS are also provided.

3840x2160 (4K)

• High: Average 88 FPS. No min/max data.
• Low: Average 139 FPS. No min/max data.
• Medium: Average 99 FPS, with a minimum of 84 FPS and a maximum of 114 FPS.
• Ultra: Average 76 FPS. No min/max data.

2560x1440 (1440p)

• High: Average 130 FPS. No min/max data.
• Low: Average 206 FPS. No min/max data.
• Medium: Average 146 FPS, with a minimum of 124 FPS and a maximum of 168 FPS.
• Ultra: Average 113 FPS. No min/max data.

1920x1080 (1080p)

• High: Average 172 FPS. No min/max data.
• Low: Average 272 FPS. No min/max data.
• Medium: Average 194 FPS, with a minimum of 165 FPS and a maximum of 223 FPS.
• Ultra: Average 149 FPS. No min/max data.

The data shows a consistent scaling pattern: FPS decreases as resolution and settings increase, with the largest performance gap occurring between Low and Ultra settings at each resolution. At 1080p, the difference between Low (272 FPS) and Ultra (149 FPS) is 123 FPS, while at 4K, the difference is 63 FPS (139 FPS vs 76 FPS). The min/max data for Medium settings shows that frame pacing is stable, with the minimum FPS staying within 15-20% of the average across all resolutions, indicating a consistent experience without major stutters. For example, at 4K Medium, the minimum of 84 FPS is only 15 FPS below the average of 99 FPS, and at 1440p Medium, the minimum of 124 FPS is 22 FPS below the average of 146 FPS. This suggests that the system maintains smooth performance even during demanding scenes.