Control

# Control with Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 delivers a mid-pack gaming experience in Control, ranking 2295th out of 2888 tested combos. This places the combination in the lower-mid tier of the database, with the CPU performing in the 93rd percentile overall while the GPU sits in the 66th percentile, creating a notable imbalance where processor headroom outstrips graphics capability in this title.

FAQ

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

A: The maximum recorded average FPS is 103, achieved at 1080p with Low settings. This drops to 78 at 1440p Low and 52 at 4K Low, showing a clear resolution-based scaling pattern.

Q: How does the RTX 5050 compare to its nearest GPU rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The RTX 5050 scores 17326 in Passmark G3D and 21035 average overall. It sits 0.6% behind the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL, 1% behind the AMD Radeon HD 8970M, and 1.6% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT, while trailing the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile by 1.6%.

Q: What is the best playable preset at 1440p based on measured data?

A: At 2560x1440, Medium settings deliver 55 FPS average with a minimum of 47 FPS, which is the highest preset that maintains a playable frame rate. High settings drop to 49 FPS average, while Ultra falls to 43 FPS.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck the GPU in this game?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the limiting factor. The Core Ultra 7 265HX ranks in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs with a multi-core Cinebench R23 score of 40642, while the RTX 5050 ranks in the 66th percentile among GPUs. FPS scales consistently with resolution changes, indicating graphics-bound performance.

Q: How much VRAM does the RTX 5050 have and what memory bandwidth does it provide?

A: The GPU features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 320.0 GB/s bandwidth. Memory clocks run at 2500 MHz with 20 Gbps effective speed.

Q: What are the core configuration details of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX?

A: This processor has 20 cores and 20 threads, with a base clock of 2.60 GHz and boost clock of 5.30 GHz. It features 30 MB of shared L3 cache, with 192 KB L1 and 3 MB L2 per core, built on TSMC's 3 nm process.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 operates with a base clock of 2317 MHz and boost clock of 2572 MHz, paired with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory across a 128-bit bus. Memory bandwidth measures 320.0 GB/s, which proves sufficient for Control's requirements at the tested settings, though the 8 GB capacity becomes a consideration at higher resolutions. The GPU's 2560 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output processors deliver a pixel rate of 82.30 GPixel/s and texture rate of 205.8 GTexel/s.

The RTX 5050's FP32 performance of 13.17 TFLOPS places it in the 66th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its Passmark G3D score of 17326 and average benchmark score of 21035 indicate a mid-range mobile graphics solution. The GPU's 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores support Blackwell 2.0 architecture features, though Control's measured results rely more on traditional rasterization performance.

In the measured FPS data, the GPU's capabilities manifest clearly. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 103 FPS average, demonstrating the GPU can handle light workloads easily. However, the transition to 4K Ultra drops performance to 29 FPS average, showing the GPU struggles when pixel throughput demands increase substantially. The GPU's 130 W TDP and dual-slot form factor suggest a mobile-class solution that prioritizes efficiency over absolute performance.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination ranks 2295th out of 2888 tested combos in Control, placing it in the 20.5th percentile of all tested configurations. This ranking reflects the RTX 5050's mid-tier positioning rather than the CPU's capabilities, as the processor's 93rd percentile standing among all CPUs indicates substantial headroom remains unused in this gaming workload.

The GPU's nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks provide context. The RTX 5050's average benchmark score of 21035 sits just 0.6% below the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL's 21153, and 1% below the AMD Radeon HD 8970M's 21237. It outperforms the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT by 1.6% with its 20713 score, while trailing the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile's 21379 by 1.6%. These narrow margins suggest the RTX 5050 performs competitively within its immediate peer group.

The CPU's nearest rivals in average benchmark scores include the Intel Core i7-13790F at 63080 (0.1% ahead), AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G at 63331 (0.2% behind), AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 at 62839 (0.5% ahead), and Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX at 62738 (0.7% ahead). The Core Ultra 7 265HX's average score of 63173 positions it within a tight cluster of processors, indicating consistent mid-to-high-end CPU performance.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its strongest results. Low settings produce 103 FPS average, Medium settings yield 73 FPS with a minimum of 62 and maximum of 84, High settings reach 65 FPS, and Ultra settings drop to 56 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 45.6% performance reduction, with each settings tier costing approximately 10-15% performance.

Moving to 2560x1440, performance scales downward. Low settings achieve 78 FPS average, Medium settings produce 55 FPS with a minimum of 47 and maximum of 63, High settings deliver 49 FPS, and Ultra settings fall to 43 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at this resolution is 44.9%, similar to the 1080p scaling. Medium settings provide the most balanced experience here, maintaining a 47 FPS minimum that stays above typical playability thresholds.

At 3840x2160, the GPU's limitations become pronounced. Low settings achieve 52 FPS average, Medium settings produce 37 FPS with a minimum of 32 and maximum of 43, High settings reach 33 FPS, and Ultra settings drop to 29 FPS. The 4K Ultra result of 29 FPS falls below smooth gameplay standards, while even Medium settings hover near the edge of playability with a 32 FPS minimum.

The measured data includes minimum and maximum FPS only for Medium settings across all resolutions. At 1080p Medium, the range spans from 62 to 84 FPS; at 1440p Medium, from 47 to 63 FPS; and at 4K Medium, from 32 to 43 FPS. These ranges indicate frame time consistency degrades as resolution increases, with the 4K Medium spread of 11 FPS representing the narrowest relative variance.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K follows a clear pattern across all settings. At Low settings, performance falls from 103 FPS at 1080p to 78 FPS at 1440p (24.3% reduction) and 52 FPS at 4K (49.5% reduction from 1080p). Medium settings decline from 73 to 55 to 37 FPS, representing reductions of 24.7% and 49.3% respectively. High settings drop from 65 to 49 to 33 FPS, with reductions of 24.6% and 49.2%. Ultra settings fall from 56 to 43 to 29 FPS, showing reductions of 23.2% and 48.2%.

The consistent scaling pattern across all settings — roughly 24-25% reduction from 1080p to 1440p and 48-49% reduction from 1080p to 4K — indicates the GPU is the primary limiting component. The pixel count increases by 78% from 1080p to 1440p and by 300% from 1080p to 4K, yet FPS does not decline proportionally. This suggests the game's engine and the GPU's memory bandwidth interact in ways that moderate the expected performance penalty.

The relatively linear scaling pattern also reveals that the CPU is not introducing bottlenecks at higher resolutions. If the processor were limiting performance, the FPS drop from 1080p to 4K would be less pronounced since higher resolutions shift more load onto the GPU. The observed 48-49% reduction from 1080p to 4K aligns with GPU-bound behavior for this title.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend heavily on target resolution and acceptable minimum frame rates. At 1080p, Ultra settings at 56 FPS average provide a playable experience, though High settings at 65 FPS offer more headroom for demanding scenes. The 1080p Medium setting provides 73 FPS average with a 62 FPS minimum, making it the safest choice for consistent performance.

At 1440p, Medium settings emerge as the recommended preset. The 55 FPS average with a 47 FPS minimum keeps gameplay fluid in most scenarios, while High settings at 49 FPS average risk dropping below comfortable thresholds during intense sequences. Ultra at 43 FPS average is playable but leaves minimal margin for frame time spikes. Low settings at 78 FPS sacrifice visual quality unnecessarily when Medium maintains playability.

At 4K, no setting provides ideal performance. Low settings at 52 FPS average represent the only preset that maintains a smooth experience, while Medium at 37 FPS average with a 32 FPS minimum falls below 60 FPS standards. High at 33 FPS and Ultra at 29 FPS are not recommended for gameplay. Users targeting 4K should consider lower resolutions or accept significant visual compromises.

The data suggests the best overall experience balances visual fidelity with frame rate stability. At 1080p, High settings provide strong visuals at 65 FPS average. At 1440p, Medium settings deliver the best trade-off with 55 FPS average and acceptable minimums. The 4K resolution remains challenging for this GPU, with only Low settings approaching playability.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX brings substantial processing power to this combination. With 20 cores and 20 threads, base clock of 2.60 GHz, and boost clock of 5.30 GHz, this Arrow Lake-HX processor delivers strong multi-threaded performance. The 30 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB L2 per core provide ample data locality for gaming workloads. Memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s through dual-channel DDR5 support ensures the CPU can feed data to the GPU efficiently.

Synthetic benchmarks confirm the CPU's capabilities. Cinebench R23 scores reach 40642 multi-core and 5737 single-core, while R20 results show 17069 multi-core and 2409 single-core. Passmark tests demonstrate particular strength in data compression (511817), integer math (126954), and floating-point math (161605). The CPU's 93rd percentile ranking among all processors places it firmly in the high-performance tier.

In Control, however, the CPU's extensive headroom goes largely unused. The measured FPS results scale consistently with resolution changes, indicating the GPU becomes the performance limiter well before CPU resources are exhausted. The processor's nearest rivals — the Intel Core i7-13790F, AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G, AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185, and Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX — all produce similar average benchmark scores within 0.7% of the 265HX, yet none of this processing power translates to higher frame rates in this title.

The CPU's 20 threads and high boost clock ensure that even the most demanding game physics and AI calculations are handled without introducing frame time stutters. The 5.30 GHz boost clock provides strong single-threaded performance for game logic, while the 20-core configuration handles background tasks and streaming without competing for resources. For Control specifically, the CPU's role is to maintain consistent frame delivery, which it does effectively given the GPU-limited nature of the measured results.