Control

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT is a combination that targets high-refresh 1080p gaming, but its performance in Control shows clear limits as resolution climbs. The data indicates a system where the CPU has ample headroom, but the GPU becomes the decisive factor at higher resolutions. This analysis examines the measured FPS data to provide practical settings and expectations for this specific hardware pairing.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution to use with this combo in Control?*

A: According to the measured FPS, 1920x1080 is the only resolution where the combo consistently delivers high frame rates. At Medium settings, it averages 87 FPS, and at High, it averages 77 FPS. At 2560x1440, the average drops to 66 FPS on Medium, making 1080p the most suitable target for smooth gameplay.

Q: How does the CPU's performance compare to its direct rivals?

A: The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has an average benchmark score of 93785. Its nearest rival, the Intel Xeon 6520P, scores 93786, a delta of 0%. The AMD EPYC 4564P is slightly ahead at 95183, which is 1.5% higher. The data shows the Ultra 7 is effectively at parity with the Xeon and trails the EPYC parts by a narrow margin.

Q: What is the GPU's performance percentile among all tested GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT holds a percentile rank of 65, meaning it performs better than 65% of all GPUs in the benchmark database. Its average benchmark score is 19765, placing it in the mid-range tier.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more likely to be the bottleneck in this game?

A: The FPS scaling suggests the GPU is the primary bottleneck. For example, at 1440p High, the average is 58 FPS, while at 4K High, it drops to 39 FPS, a significant reduction. The CPU's high benchmark scores (96th percentile) indicate it is not the limiting factor in this scenario.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 4K at High settings?

A: The average FPS at 1080p High is 77, which falls to 58 at 1440p and then to 39 at 4K. This represents a 49% drop in performance from 1080p to 4K, highlighting the GPU's struggle to maintain frame rates at higher pixel counts.

*Q: What is the GPU's memory configuration and how does it relate to Control?*

A: The RX 6650 XT features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering a bandwidth of 280.3 GB/s. This is sufficient for the game's textures, but the relatively small memory bus can be a limiting factor at 4K, where the measured FPS drops to 34 on Ultra settings.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of what settings are viable at each resolution. For the best balance of visual quality and frame rate, the Medium preset is the sweet spot. At 1920x1080, Medium delivers 87 FPS, which is a 10 FPS improvement over High (77 FPS) and a 20 FPS improvement over Ultra (67 FPS). The jump from Low to Medium costs only 35 FPS (from 122 to 87), but the visual improvement is substantial, making Medium the recommended starting point.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset averages 66 FPS, which is still playable. However, High drops to 58 FPS, and Ultra falls to 51 FPS. For a smoother experience on a 1440p monitor, Medium is the recommended preset, as it stays above the 60 FPS threshold. Low at 1440p yields 93 FPS, but this compromises the game's visual atmosphere, which is a key part of the Control experience.

At 3840x2160, the situation becomes more challenging. The Medium preset is the only option that approaches playability, with an average FPS of 44. High averages 39 FPS, and Ultra drops to 34 FPS. For 4K gaming, players should use the Medium preset and be prepared for frame rates in the 40s. Low at 4K provides 63 FPS, but this requires significant visual sacrifices, which may not be worth the performance gain for most users.

The data shows that the High preset is a poor middle ground. It offers only a marginal visual upgrade over Medium while costing 10 FPS at 1080p and 8 FPS at 1440p. The Ultra preset is similarly inefficient, providing diminishing returns for a 20 FPS hit at 1080p compared to Medium. The best experience is achieved by selecting Medium and adjusting individual settings like anti-aliasing and shadow quality, which are not individually measured but are likely the main contributors to the FPS differences between presets.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling across resolutions reveals a system heavily constrained by the GPU. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 77 at 1080p to 58 at 1440p and then to 39 at 4K. This is a consistent decline, with a 25% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 33% drop from 1440p to 4K. This pattern is characteristic of a GPU that is running out of pixel-pushing capability.

The scaling is even more pronounced at Ultra settings. The average FPS falls from 67 at 1080p to 51 at 1440p (a 24% drop) and then to 34 at 4K (a 33% drop). The Low preset shows the least severe scaling, with 122 FPS at 1080p, 93 FPS at 1440p, and 63 FPS at 4K. This indicates that even at the lowest settings, the GPU is still the limiting factor, as the CPU has the headroom to keep up.

The data suggests that the CPU is not a bottleneck at any resolution. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, with its 24 cores and 24 threads, has a benchmark percentile of 96, indicating top-tier performance. The FPS drops are almost entirely attributable to the RX 6650 XT's rendering limits. The GPU's 8 GB of VRAM and 128-bit memory bus become increasingly stressed as the pixel count rises.

For 1080p gaming, this combo is well-suited. The GPU can maintain high frame rates across all settings. At 1440p, the system is still viable, but users must choose between visual fidelity (High/Ultra) and frame rate (Medium/Low). At 4K, the combo is underpowered, with even the Medium preset struggling to stay above 45 FPS. The scaling pattern indicates that this is a 1080p-first configuration, with 1440p as a secondary option for less demanding titles or with settings compromises.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combos for Control, this pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT ranks at 1875 out of 2888 total combinations. This places it in the bottom 35% of all tested systems, a ranking that reflects the GPU's mid-range positioning rather than the CPU's high-end performance.

The rank of 1875 is directly correlated with the GPU's percentile of 65. While the CPU sits in the 96th percentile, the combo's overall rank is dragged down by the GPU. This is a classic example of a pairing where the CPU's potential is not fully utilized at higher resolutions, as the GPU becomes the limiting factor.

Compared to other combos, this system would be outclassed by those pairing the same CPU with a higher-tier GPU. The data shows that the CPU has significant headroom, as evidenced by its benchmark scores, but the RX 6650 XT caps the gaming performance. The ranking of 1875 suggests that for Control specifically, most other tested combos provide a better experience, likely due to having more powerful graphics cards.

The rank also indicates that this combo is not optimized for 4K gaming. The measured FPS at 4K Ultra (34 FPS) is below the playable threshold, and the ranking reflects this limitation. For 1080p gaming, the combo would likely rank higher, but the database aggregates performance across all tested resolutions, pulling the overall rank down.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT is the primary determinant of this combo's gaming performance. Its role is defined by its memory configuration and clock speeds, which directly impact the measured FPS in Control. The GPU features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 280.3 GB/s. This is a modest memory subsystem that struggles with the high-resolution textures and effects in Control.

The GPU's clocks are set at a base of 2055 MHz, a game clock of 2410 MHz, and a boost clock of 2635 MHz. These relatively high clocks help the GPU achieve its 10.79 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. In practice, this translates to strong 1080p performance, as seen in the 122 FPS average at Low settings. However, the 128-bit memory bus becomes a bottleneck at higher resolutions.

The 8 GB VRAM capacity is sufficient for Control at 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K, the game's texture requirements likely push the memory to its limits. The measured FPS at 4K Ultra is 34, which is well below playable. This is not just a raw compute issue but also a memory bandwidth issue. The 280.3 GB/s bandwidth is insufficient for the demands of 4K rendering, leading to the significant FPS drops seen in the data.

The GPU's RDNA 2.0 architecture, with 2048 shading units and 64 ROPs, is capable of handling Control's DirectX 12 rendering. The 32 ray tracing cores are present, but the data does not measure ray tracing performance. The GPU's overall percentile of 65 indicates it is a solid mid-range card, but it is not designed for high-end 4K gaming. The combo's performance is therefore heavily dependent on the GPU's ability to push pixels, which is limited by its memory bus and VRAM capacity.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of this combo's performance across all settings and resolutions.

1920x1080:

• Low: Average 122 FPS. This is the highest measured frame rate, indicating the CPU and GPU have no trouble at this resolution.
• Medium: Average 87 FPS, with a minimum of 74 and maximum of 100 FPS. This is the recommended preset for a balance of quality and speed.
• High: Average 77 FPS. A solid frame rate, but 10 FPS slower than Medium.
• Ultra: Average 67 FPS. The most demanding preset, still playable but with a noticeable drop from Medium.

2560x1440:

• Low: Average 93 FPS. A significant drop from 1080p, but still very playable.
• Medium: Average 66 FPS, with a minimum of 56 and maximum of 76 FPS. This just barely stays above 60 FPS, making it the best option for 1440p.
• High: Average 58 FPS. Below the 60 FPS threshold, requiring some compromises.
• Ultra: Average 51 FPS. This is on the edge of playability, with noticeable stuttering possible.

3840x2160:

• Low: Average 63 FPS. Surprisingly playable, but the visual quality is severely compromised.
• Medium: Average 44 FPS, with a minimum of 38 and maximum of 51 FPS. The only 4K preset that is marginally playable.
• High: Average 39 FPS. Below the playable threshold for most users.
• Ultra: Average 34 FPS. This is effectively unplayable, with significant frame pacing issues.

The data shows a consistent pattern: the Medium preset offers the best balance of performance and visual quality at all resolutions. The Low preset provides a substantial FPS boost but at a high visual cost. The High and Ultra presets offer diminishing returns, with the FPS dropping by 10-20 points compared to Medium. For 1080p, the combo excels, delivering over 60 FPS on all presets. For 1440p, users must stick to Medium or Low to maintain smooth gameplay. For 4K, the combo is not recommended, as even the Medium preset cannot maintain a consistent 45 FPS.