Control

Control, Remedy’s 2019 action-adventure, is a demanding title that stresses both the CPU and GPU heavily due to its physics-driven environments and real-time ray tracing options. This analysis examines the measured performance of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K paired with the Intel Arc B570 across three resolutions and four quality presets. The data reveals a configuration that is capable at 1080p but increasingly constrained by the graphics card as resolution climbs, with the CPU providing a robust foundation that never becomes the primary bottleneck in this specific set of results.

The dataset provides a clear picture of a system balancing a high-end processor with a mid-range graphics card. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K, a 20-core, 20-thread Arrow Lake-S desktop chip, sits in the 94th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Arc B570, based on the Xe2-HPG Battlemage architecture, finds itself in the 65th percentile of all GPUs. This pairing creates a predictable dynamic where the GPU's limits are reached before the CPU's capabilities are fully taxed, a conclusion directly supported by the resolution scaling data in the measured FPS.

Resolution Scaling

The most telling trend in the measured data is the steep performance penalty incurred when moving from 1080p to 4K. At 1920x1080 with High settings, the combo achieves an average of 63 FPS. Stepping up to 2560x1440 drops that average to 48 FPS, a 24% reduction. The jump to 3840x2160 is even more severe, with the average falling to 32 FPS, which is a 49% decrease from the 1440p figure and a 49% decrease from the 1080p figure. This pattern strongly indicates that the Intel Arc B570 is the limiting component; as the pixel count grows, the GPU's rendering workload increases exponentially, and its performance scales down accordingly.

This scaling behavior is consistent across all settings presets. For instance, on Medium settings, the average FPS goes from 71 at 1080p to 54 at 1440p, and finally to 36 at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 4K is a 49% reduction in performance. On the demanding Ultra preset, the numbers tell a similar story: 55 FPS at 1080p, 42 at 1440p, and 28 at 4K. The consistency of this ~50% performance loss from 1080p to 4K across different settings confirms that the resolution is the dominant variable, and the system's ability to maintain frame rate is fundamentally tied to the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth.

The data implies that while the Core Ultra 7 265K is more than capable of feeding the Arc B570 at lower resolutions, the GPU's 10 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus with 380.0 GB/s bandwidth becomes a significant hurdle at 4K. The 4K High preset's 32 FPS average is a clear indication that this resolution is not a viable target for a smooth experience with this configuration. The 4K Low preset is the only 4K option that approaches playability, with a 51 FPS average, suggesting that significant graphical compromises are necessary to operate at this resolution.

How This Combo Ranks

In the grand scheme of tested configurations, this specific pairing of the Core Ultra 7 265K and Arc B570 holds a modest position. The data shows a combo rank of 2307 out of 2888 total combos for Control. This places the system in the lower third of all tested hardware pairings, which is a surprising result given the individual component scores. The CPU alone ranks in the 94th percentile, but the GPU's 65th percentile ranking appears to drag the combined performance down significantly.

This ranking suggests that while the system is far from the bottom, it is also far from the top tier of performance. The low rank relative to the CPU's own standing reinforces the idea that the Arc B570 is the limiting factor. For a game like Control, which can be graphically intensive, the GPU's overall average benchmark score of 20556, which is only 0.1% higher than a NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile and 0.1% lower than an Intel Arc A750, places it in a competitive but not high-end bracket. The measured FPS results in this game appear to be in line with the GPU's general capabilities, and the combination's rank reflects this.

The deltaPct values from the CPU's nearest rivals show that the Core Ultra 7 265K is competitive within its own class, being 1% faster in average benchmark score than the Intel Core i7-14700KF and 1.3% faster than the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F. However, this processing power does not translate into a high combo rank, underscoring the fact that for this game, the graphics card is the primary arbiter of the final experience. The data suggests that pairing this powerful CPU with a more potent GPU would yield a much higher combo rank, but with the Arc B570, the system's overall performance is capped.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K is a formidable processor on paper, with 20 cores and 20 threads, a base clock of 3.90 GHz, and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. Its architecture is Arrow Lake-S, built on a 3 nm process from TSMC, and it features 30 MB of shared L3 cache. In synthetic benchmarks, it scores 35850 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 2020 in single-core, placing it in the 94th percentile of all CPUs. This level of performance suggests that the CPU is rarely the bottleneck in gaming scenarios, and Control is no exception.

In the measured FPS data, the CPU's role is implicit rather than explicit. The fact that performance drops so consistently with resolution is a classic sign of a GPU-bound scenario. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect to see less of a difference between 1080p and 1440p, as the CPU's workload (draw calls, physics calculations) would remain relatively constant while the GPU's workload increases. Instead, the steep drop-offs point to the GPU being saturated. The Core Ultra 7 265K, with its high multi-threaded and single-threaded scores, is evidently providing enough headroom to keep the Arc B570 fed with data, but it is not the component that determines the final frame rate.

The CPU's 20 threads are likely more than sufficient for Control, which is not known for being extremely CPU-intensive at lower resolutions. The data shows that even at 1080p Low, where the GPU workload is lightest, the average FPS is only 101. This is a good score, but it is not so high that it suggests the CPU is pushing against its own limits. A stronger CPU might push this number slightly higher, but the bottleneck appears to be the GPU's ability to render frames quickly. The high boost clock of 5.50 GHz ensures strong single-thread performance, which is often critical for game logic, and the 20 cores provide ample multi-threading headroom for background tasks and future game engines.

Measured FPS Breakdown

A detailed look at the measured FPS reveals a system that is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, with 4K being a stretch too far. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 101 FPS, which is very smooth. The Medium preset averages 71 FPS with a minimum of 61 FPS, ensuring a stable experience. The High preset averages 63 FPS, and the Ultra preset brings the average down to 55 FPS. This shows that at 1080p, all presets are playable, with Low and Medium offering the most headroom for high refresh rate monitors.

At 2560x1440, the system begins to show strain. The Low preset averages 76 FPS, which is still quite good. The Medium preset averages 54 FPS with a minimum of 46 FPS, which is acceptable for most players. The High preset averages 48 FPS, and the Ultra preset drops to 42 FPS. This resolution is a viable option, but players will need to make a choice between higher settings and higher frame rates. The 4K resolution is where the system struggles. At 3840x2160, the Low preset is the only one that breaks the 50 FPS barrier, averaging 51 FPS. The Medium preset averages 36 FPS with a minimum of 31 FPS, which can feel choppy. The High preset averages 32 FPS, and the Ultra preset can only manage 28 FPS. These numbers are below the 60 FPS target that most gamers prefer, making 4K a challenging resolution for this combo.

The data also provides min and max FPS for the Medium preset at all three resolutions. At 1080p, the frame time is relatively stable, with a min of 61 and a max of 82 FPS. At 1440p, the range widens slightly to 46-62 FPS. At 4K, the range is 31-42 FPS. This indicates that frame pacing is generally consistent, but the overall performance is simply too low at 4K for a comfortable gaming experience. The lack of min/max data for other presets makes it difficult to assess their frame time consistency, but the averages provide a solid baseline for expectations.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B570 is the clear limiting factor in this configuration. Its specifications include 10 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus, providing 380.0 GB/s of bandwidth. It has a base and boost clock of 2500 MHz, 2304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. In synthetic benchmarks, it scores 14195 in Passmark G3D and 96844 in Geekbench Vulkan, placing it in the 65th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile and the Intel Arc A750, are within 0.1% of its average score, showing that it is a solidly mid-range performer.

The GPU's 10 GB of VRAM is a crucial detail for Control. While 10 GB is generally sufficient for 1080p and 1440p, it can become a constraint at 4K with high-resolution textures. The measured performance at 4K, where even the High preset only achieves 32 FPS, suggests that the GPU is not only struggling with raw compute but may also be hitting memory bandwidth limits. The 380.0 GB/s bandwidth is respectable for a mid-range card, but it is not enough to sustain high frame rates at 4K in a game with Control's visual complexity.

The GPU's RT Cores (18) are present, but the data does not include any results with ray tracing enabled. This is a notable omission, as Control is famous for its ray-traced reflections and lighting. The absence of this data means that the analysis is limited to the standard rendering path. The GPU's FP32 performance of 11.52 TFLOPS is the theoretical ceiling for its traditional rendering capabilities, and the measured FPS shows that it is working hard to achieve the numbers seen in the dataset. The performance scaling from 1080p to 4K is a direct reflection of the GPU's fill rate and shading power, which are simply not sufficient for a high-end 4K experience.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combination depend heavily on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For players with a 1080p display, the High preset (63 FPS) offers a good balance between visual quality and performance, while the Medium preset (71 FPS) provides a smoother experience with a slight reduction in fidelity. The Ultra preset (55 FPS) is also viable for those who prioritize visual quality over a higher frame rate.

For 1440p, the Low preset (76 FPS) is the only one that consistently delivers a high frame rate. The Medium preset (54 FPS) is still playable, but the 46 FPS minimum might be noticeable in fast-paced action scenes. The High preset (48 FPS) and Ultra preset (42 FPS) are best suited for slower, more atmospheric gameplay. For the best experience at 1440p, the data suggests that Medium is the highest preset that can maintain a reasonably stable frame rate, but Low is the safest choice for a consistently smooth experience.

At 4K, the data is clear: only the Low preset (51 FPS) comes close to a playable frame rate. The Medium (36 FPS), High (32 FPS), and Ultra (28 FPS) presets all fall below the 30 FPS threshold that is often considered the minimum for a playable experience. Therefore, the recommendation is to either play at 4K with Low settings or, more sensibly, to drop the resolution to 1440p or 1080p to enjoy higher visual fidelity presets. The measured data strongly suggests that 1440p Medium or 1080p High are the sweet spots for this hardware combination, providing the best balance of visual quality and smooth performance without pushing the GPU beyond its limits.

FAQ

Q: Is this CPU and GPU combo capable of 4K gaming in Control?

A: The measured data shows that 4K gaming is only marginally possible with this combo. At 3840x2160, the Low preset achieves an average of 51 FPS, while Medium, High, and Ultra presets average 36, 32, and 28 FPS respectively. The frame rates at higher presets are not consistently smooth, suggesting that 4K is not a practical target for this configuration.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The data shows that the Core Ultra 7 265K has an average benchmark score that is 1% higher than the Intel Core i7-14700KF and 1.3% higher than the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F. It is 0.2% lower than the Intel Xeon 6511P and 0.7% lower than the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270.

Q: What is the best resolution to use for a smooth experience?

A: The data indicates that 1920x1080 is the best resolution for a smooth experience. At 1080p, the lowest average FPS is 55 on the Ultra preset, and the highest is 101 on the Low preset. All presets at 1080p are playable, whereas at 1440p and 4K, some presets fall below 60 FPS.

Q: Is the Intel Arc B570 a significant bottleneck for the Core Ultra 7 265K?

A: The data strongly suggests that the GPU is the limiting component. The performance drops significantly as resolution increases, which is a classic sign of a GPU bottleneck. The CPU's high benchmark scores and percentile ranking (94th) versus the GPU's (65th) further support this conclusion.

Q: What is the difference in performance between the Low and Ultra presets at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 76 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 42 FPS. This represents a 44.7% decrease in average frame rate when moving from the lowest to the highest quality preset.

Q: Does this system have enough video memory for Control?

A: The Intel Arc B570 has 10 GB of GDDR6 memory. While this is generally sufficient for 1080p and 1440p, the measured performance at 4K, where the average FPS drops below 50 on all presets except Low, suggests that the GPU's memory bandwidth and capacity may be contributing factors to the performance limitations at that resolution.