Control

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, running on the Intel Socket 1851 platform. Its base clock is 3.90 GHz, with a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, and it carries a 30 MB shared L3 cache. In synthetic benchmarks, this CPU demonstrates substantial multi-threaded capability, scoring 35,850 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 20,918 in Cinebench R20 multi-core. Single-thread performance is equally strong, with a Geekbench single-core score of 2,713 and a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,020. These figures place the processor in the 94th percentile among all CPUs tested, indicating it has ample headroom for gaming workloads. Its nearest rival, the Intel Xeon 6511P, posts an average score only 0.2% higher, while the Intel Core i7-14700KF trails by 1% and the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F by 1.3%. For a game like Control, which is not typically CPU-bound at high resolutions, this processor's 20 cores ensure that frame pacing and minimum frame rates remain stable, even when the GPU is under heavy load. The CPU's high boost clock of 5.50 GHz also helps in scenarios where a single core is the bottleneck, such as physics calculations or draw-call processing. However, the data suggests that in this specific pairing, the CPU is not the limiting factor; instead, the GPU dictates performance, as evidenced by the FPS scaling across resolutions.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K provides a robust foundation for gaming, but its influence on Control's frame rates is secondary to the GPU. The processor's 20 cores and 20 threads are more than sufficient to handle the game's logic, AI, and physics simulation, ensuring that the CPU does not introduce stutters or hitches. With a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, the 265K excels in single-threaded tasks, which is relevant for Control's rendering thread that often relies on one or two cores. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,020 and Geekbench single-core score of 2,713 confirm that this CPU can push high IPC, which helps maintain consistent frame times. In the context of the measured results, the CPU's capability is evident in the 1080p Low preset, where the average FPS reaches 118. This high frame rate indicates that the CPU can feed the GPU with enough data to exceed 100 FPS, but the GPU's limitations become apparent as settings increase. At 1080p Medium, the average drops to 84 FPS, and at High, it falls to 74 FPS, showing a linear scaling that is characteristic of GPU-bound scenarios. The 265K's 30 MB of shared L3 cache also reduces latency when accessing frequently used game assets, contributing to smoother gameplay. Compared to its nearest rivals, the 265K holds a slight edge over the Intel Core i7-14700KF by 1% in average benchmark scores, and it outperforms the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F by 1.3%. This margin is minor in real-world gaming, but it ensures that the CPU does not bottleneck the RTX 2060 SUPER, even at lower resolutions where CPU load is typically higher. The processor's 125 W TDP suggests it runs within a manageable thermal envelope, though the data does not include cooler specifications. Overall, the CPU's role in this combo is to provide a stable, high-frequency platform that allows the GPU to operate at its full potential, particularly in CPU-light scenes.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER is the primary performance driver in this pairing, and its specifications directly explain the measured FPS numbers. The GPU features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering a bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s. This memory configuration is adequate for Control at 1080p and 1440p, but it becomes a limiting factor at 4K, where the game's textures and effects demand more VRAM. The GPU's boost clock is 1650 MHz, and it houses 2176 shading units, 136 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. These specs yield a pixel rate of 105.6 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 224.4 GTexel/s, which are modest for modern standards but sufficient for a 2019 title like Control. The GPU's FP32 performance is 7.181 TFLOPS, placing it in the 62nd percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile, has an average score only 0.4% higher, while the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 is 0.5% higher. This indicates that the RTX 2060 SUPER is competitive with entry-level RTX 30-series mobile parts, but it is far from a high-end desktop GPU. In Control, the GPU's limitations are clear: at 1080p Low, it achieves 118 FPS, but at 1080p Ultra, it drops to 65 FPS. This 45% performance hit from Low to Ultra at the same resolution shows that the GPU's shading units and memory bandwidth are taxed by the game's advanced rendering features, such as ray tracing (though the data does not specify if RT is enabled). At 1440p, the GPU struggles further, with High settings yielding 56 FPS and Ultra at 49 FPS. The 4K results are particularly telling: High settings produce only 38 FPS, while Ultra drops to 33 FPS. The 8 GB VRAM is likely saturated at 4K, as the game's high-resolution textures and effects can exceed this capacity, leading to texture swapping and reduced performance. The GPU's 175 W TDP and dual-slot design are typical for this class, but the data suggests that for a smooth 60 FPS experience, the user must compromise on resolution or settings.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend heavily on the target resolution and desired frame rate. At 1080p, the Low preset delivers an average of 118 FPS, which is excellent for high-refresh-rate monitors, but it sacrifices visual fidelity. The Medium preset offers a balanced experience with 84 FPS average, and the High preset provides 74 FPS, which is still smooth for most players. The Ultra preset drops to 65 FPS, which is playable but may introduce noticeable frame drops in intense scenes. For a 60 FPS target, the High preset at 1080p is the sweet spot, as it maintains 74 FPS with better visuals than Medium. At 1440p, the situation changes: Low yields 89 FPS, Medium 63 FPS, and High 56 FPS. The High preset at 1440p is borderline for 60 FPS, but the Medium preset with 63 FPS average and a minimum of 54 FPS is more stable, making it the recommended choice for a consistent experience. The Ultra preset at 1440p falls to 49 FPS, which is not ideal for action sequences. At 4K, the options are limited: Low achieves 60 FPS exactly, Medium 43 FPS, High 38 FPS, and Ultra 33 FPS. The only way to hit 60 FPS at 4K is to use the Low preset, which severely compromises image quality. For a better visual experience at 4K, users would need to accept a frame rate in the 40s, which is suboptimal for a fast-paced game like Control. The data indicates that the best overall experience is achieved at 1440p with Medium settings, providing 63 FPS with a minimum of 54 FPS, which balances visual fidelity and smoothness. Alternatively, 1080p High at 74 FPS offers a higher frame rate with minimal visual downgrade compared to Ultra. The 4K Low preset at 60 FPS is technically playable, but the low settings likely reduce the game's atmospheric effects, making it less enjoyable.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER ranks 2650 out of 3720 tested combos in Control, placing it in the 28.8th percentile of all systems tested. This rank indicates that the combo is below average for this game, which is not surprising given the GPU's age and performance class. The CPU is a high-end part, as evidenced by its 94th percentile ranking among all CPUs, but the GPU's 62nd percentile ranking drags the overall combo down. In practical terms, this means that the system will struggle to maintain high frame rates at high resolutions and settings, as seen in the 4K data where even the Low preset only hits 60 FPS. The rank also suggests that many other GPU+CPU combinations deliver better performance in Control. For context, the GPU's nearest rivals, such as the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile and AMD Radeon Pro 5700, have similar average scores, but they are often paired with more balanced CPUs. The combo's rank of 2650 indicates that it is in the lower half of all tested systems, which aligns with the measured FPS results showing sub-60 FPS performance at 1440p Ultra and 4K High. However, the rank also reflects the CPU's capability to avoid bottlenecking, as the system still achieves playable frame rates at 1080p. If the user's goal is to play Control at high settings, this combo will require resolution scaling or settings compromises. The combination of a high-tier CPU with a mid-tier GPU creates an imbalance, where the CPU is underutilized in GPU-bound scenarios. This is a common pattern for older GPUs paired with newer CPUs, and it is reflected in the combo's rank. To improve performance, a GPU upgrade would be more beneficial than a CPU upgrade, but the data does not provide specific recommendations for that.

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

The FPS scaling across resolutions clearly identifies the GPU as the limiting component in this system. At 1080p High, the average FPS is 74; at 1440p High, it drops to 56; and at 4K High, it falls to 38. This represents a 24% decrease from 1080p to 1440p, and a 32% decrease from 1440p to 4K. The pattern is consistent across all settings presets. For example, at Medium settings, the FPS drops from 84 at 1080p to 63 at 1440p (a 25% reduction) and then to 43 at 4K (a 32% reduction). At Low settings, the drop is from 118 at 1080p to 89 at 1440p (a 25% reduction) and then to 60 at 4K (a 33% reduction). The consistent percentage drops across all presets indicate that the GPU's rendering throughput is the primary constraint, as the CPU's performance is relatively unaffected by resolution changes. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see similar FPS numbers at 1080p and 1440p, with a significant drop only at 4K. Instead, the FPS scales proportionally with the number of pixels, which is a classic sign of a GPU-bound system. The 4K Low preset at 60 FPS is particularly telling: it shows that even at the lowest settings, the GPU can only just manage 60 FPS at 4K, suggesting that the 8 GB VRAM and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for the higher pixel count. The 1440p Medium preset, with a minimum of 54 FPS, shows that the GPU can handle this resolution with some headroom, but it is close to the limit. The data also reveals that the gap between Low and Ultra settings widens at higher resolutions: at 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 53 FPS (118 vs 65), while at 4K, the difference is only 27 FPS (60 vs 33). This reduced gap at 4K implies that the GPU is hitting a memory bandwidth or fill-rate limit, where increasing settings has a smaller impact because the GPU is already saturated. In summary, the resolution scaling analysis confirms that the RTX 2060 SUPER is the limiting factor, and the CPU has ample headroom to support higher-end GPUs.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combo for a consistent 60 FPS experience?

A: Based on the data, 1440p Medium provides an average of 63 FPS with a minimum of 54 FPS, which is the closest to a stable 60 FPS. At 1080p, the High preset delivers 74 FPS, offering a higher frame rate with better visuals. For 4K, only the Low preset achieves 60 FPS exactly.

Q: How does the RTX 2060 SUPER compare to its nearest GPU rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The RTX 2060 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 18,093. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile, scores 18,159, which is 0.4% higher. The AMD Radeon Pro 5700 is 0.5% higher, and the AMD Radeon RX 460 is 1.5% higher. This indicates the RTX 2060 SUPER is competitive with these parts.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K overkill for this GPU?

A: The data suggests the CPU has significantly more power than needed for this GPU. The 265K ranks in the 94th percentile among CPUs, while the GPU is in the 62nd percentile. In Control, the GPU is the bottleneck, so the CPU's high multi-core and single-core scores are not fully utilized, but they do ensure no CPU-related stutters.

Q: What are the CPU's strong points in synthetic tests?

A: The 265K excels in multi-threaded workloads, scoring 35,850 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 20,918 in Cinebench R20 multi-core. It also performs well in single-thread tests, with a Geekbench single-core score of 2,713. Its Passmark multithread score is 58,594.

Q: Can this combo handle Control at 4K with playable frame rates?

A: Yes, but only at Low settings, which yields an average of 60 FPS. Medium settings produce 43 FPS, High 38 FPS, and Ultra 33 FPS. These lower frame rates are not ideal for a fast-paced action game, so 4K is only recommended with Low settings.

Q: How does the combo's overall rank reflect its performance in Control?

A: The combo ranks 2650 out of 3720 tested combos, placing it in the lower third of all systems. This rank is consistent with the measured FPS, which shows sub-60 FPS at 1440p High and 4K Medium, indicating that the GPU is a limiting factor for high-end gaming.