Control

# Control with Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus + AMD Radeon RX 7600

The pairing of Intel's 24-core Core Ultra 7 270K Plus with AMD's Radeon RX 7600 produces a distinctive performance curve in Control, one that shifts character dramatically as resolution climbs. At 1080p the combo delivers playable to very smooth frame rates across all settings, but the data reveals a system whose ceiling is defined almost entirely by the graphics card rather than the processor. The measured results show a 118 FPS average at 1080p Low, which collapses to 33 FPS at 4K Ultra — a 72% drop that tells a clear story about where the bottleneck lives. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS rows, contextualizes the combo's rank among 2,888 tested combinations, and examines what the CPU and GPU specifications imply for each resolution tier.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS deltas across resolutions are stark and consistent. At 1080p Low, the combo averages 118 FPS; at 1440p Low, that falls to 89 FPS (a 24.6% reduction); at 4K Low, it drops to 60 FPS (a further 32.6% reduction from 1440p). Low settings show the least severe scaling because the GPU is less burdened, yet even here the 4K result is exactly half of the 1080p figure. Medium settings tell a similar story: 84 FPS at 1080p, 64 FPS at 1440p (a 23.8% drop), and 43 FPS at 4K (a 32.8% drop from 1440p). High settings follow the same pattern: 75 FPS at 1080p, 56 FPS at 1440p (a 25.3% drop), and 38 FPS at 4K (a 32.1% drop). Ultra settings show the steepest absolute decline: 65 FPS at 1080p, 49 FPS at 1440p (a 24.6% drop), and 33 FPS at 4K (a 32.7% drop).

The consistency of these percentage drops — hovering around 24-25% between 1080p and 1440p, and 32-33% between 1440p and 4K — indicates a purely GPU-bound scenario. If the CPU were a limiting factor, the scaling between 1080p and 1440p would show a smaller relative drop, because the processor would struggle to feed the GPU even at lower resolutions. Instead, the smooth, predictable degradation suggests the RX 7600's rendering throughput is the sole constraint. The 4K numbers are particularly telling: even at Low settings, the combo only reaches 60 FPS, which is borderline for smooth gameplay. At 4K Ultra, the 33 FPS average falls well below the 60 FPS threshold that most action games target. The data implies that 4K is only viable at Low settings, and even then, it barely achieves acceptable frame rates.

How This Combo Ranks

Among 2,888 tested CPU-GPU combinations for Control, this pairing ranks 2,028th. That places it in the 29.8th percentile — meaning roughly 70% of tested combos deliver higher average frame rates in this game. This ranking is notable because the CPU itself is exceptionally strong: the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus sits in the 96th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 93,785. The GPU, however, is far more modest, ranking in the 57th percentile among all GPUs with an average score of 15,171. The combo's low position in Control's rankings, despite a top-tier processor, underscores that the RX 7600 is the performance anchor.

The GPU's nearest rivals in the database reinforce this interpretation. The RX 7600's average benchmark score of 15,171 is nearly identical to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM (15,199, a 0.2% difference), the AMD Radeon Pro 560X (15,082, a 0.6% difference), and the AMD Radeon 680M (15,270, a 0.7% difference). These are all mid-range or integrated-class GPUs, confirming that the RX 7600's placement in the 57th percentile is accurate. Meanwhile, the CPU's nearest rivals are enterprise-class server processors — the Intel Xeon 6520P (93,786, 0% delta), AMD EPYC 4564P (95,183, -1.5%), AMD EPYC 9175F (95,615, -1.9%), and AMD EPYC 4565P (95,764, -2.1%) — all of which are within 2% of the Core Ultra 7's score. This contrast between CPU and GPU peer groups explains the combo's ranking: a 96th-percentile CPU paired with a 57th-percentile GPU yields a result closer to the GPU's tier than the CPU's.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus brings substantial compute resources to Control. It features 24 cores and 24 threads — note that this processor has no hyperthreading, so core count equals thread count. The base clock is 3.70 GHz, boosting to 5.50 GHz. The L3 cache is 36 MB shared, with 3 MB L2 per core and 192 KB L1 per core. The CPU's benchmark results are impressive: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44,253 and single-core score of 2,439, plus a PassMark multithread score of 68,574 and single-thread score of 5,068. These numbers indicate a processor that excels at both heavily threaded workloads and lightly threaded tasks.

However, Control's measured FPS data shows no evidence that the CPU is a limiting factor at any resolution or settings level. At 1080p Low, the combo reaches 118 FPS — a frame rate that, while not exceptionally high, is well above the 60 FPS target and suggests the GPU is still doing most of the work. If the CPU were struggling to feed the GPU, we would expect to see a plateau in FPS as resolution decreases, with the 1080p Low result being similar to the 1080p Medium result. Instead, the data shows a clear progression: 118 FPS at Low, 84 FPS at Medium, 75 FPS at High, and 65 FPS at Ultra. This 53 FPS spread across settings at 1080p indicates that the GPU is responding to workload changes, not being held back by the processor.

The CPU's single-thread performance (5,068 PassMark single-thread score, 354 Cinebench R15 single-core) is more than adequate for a game like Control, which was released in 2019 and does not demand the latest multi-core optimizations. The 24 cores provide massive headroom for background tasks and future titles, but for this specific game, the CPU's role is largely to stay out of the way — which it does, based on the measured results. The data suggests that users could pair this CPU with a much stronger GPU and see substantial FPS gains in Control, as the processor would not become a bottleneck until frame rates reach much higher levels.

FAQ

*Q: Can this combo run Control at 4K smoothly?*

A: Only at Low settings, where it averages 60 FPS. At Medium, High, and Ultra, the averages are 43, 38, and 33 FPS respectively, all below the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo?

A: 1080p is the strongest tier. At High settings it averages 75 FPS, and at Medium it reaches 84 FPS. 1440p is playable but requires Medium settings (64 FPS) or lower to stay above 60 FPS.

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

A: The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has an average benchmark score of 93,785, which is within 2.1% of the AMD EPYC 4565P (95,764) and essentially tied with the Intel Xeon 6520P (93,786, 0% delta).

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RX 7600's average score of 15,171 is within 0.7% of the AMD Radeon 680M (15,270) and 0.2% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM (15,199), indicating very similar overall performance.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The GPU. The measured FPS scaling across resolutions (roughly 24-33% drops per step) is consistent with a GPU-bound scenario, and the CPU's 96th-percentile ranking versus the GPU's 57th-percentile ranking confirms the imbalance.

Q: What is the combo's rank among tested configurations?

A: It ranks 2,028th out of 2,888 tested combos for Control, placing it in the 29.8th percentile of all tested CPU-GPU pairings.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7600 is the decisive component in this pairing. Built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 33 chip, it has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU's clocks are 1720 MHz base, 2250 MHz game, and 2655 MHz boost. It contains 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 32 ray accelerators. The compute capabilities include 21.75 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 (1:1 ratio), with a pixel rate of 169.9 GPixel/s and texture rate of 339.8 GTexel/s. The GPU's benchmark scores include a PassMark G3D score of 16,634 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,310.

These specifications explain the measured FPS patterns. The 8 GB VRAM is sufficient for Control at 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K with High or Ultra settings, memory capacity and bandwidth become strained, contributing to the sub-40 FPS results. The 128-bit memory bus, while adequate for the GPU's mid-range positioning, limits bandwidth-heavy scenarios like 4K texture streaming. The GPU's 57th-percentile ranking among all GPUs is consistent with its performance class — it is a capable 1080p card that can handle 1440p with settings compromises, but 4K is beyond its comfortable envelope.

The GPU's nearest rivals in the database — all within 0.7% of its average score — confirm that the RX 7600 performs in a narrow band alongside the RTX 3050 OEM, Radeon Pro 560X, and Radeon 680M. None of these are known for high-end 4K performance, and the measured data for Control reflects this reality. The GPU's 8 GB memory, while standard for its tier, is a limiting factor at 4K Ultra where the 33 FPS average suggests the card is overwhelmed by both compute and memory demands.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings depend heavily on resolution and target frame rate. For 60 FPS gameplay, the data shows that 1080p High (75 FPS) and 1080p Medium (84 FPS) both comfortably exceed the target, with 1080p Low (118 FPS) offering headroom for high-refresh-rate displays. At 1440p, Medium (64 FPS) is the only setting that stays above 60 FPS, while Low (89 FPS) provides additional margin and High (56 FPS) falls just short. At 4K, no setting achieves 60 FPS — Low (60 FPS) is the only option that reaches exactly 60, while Medium (43 FPS), High (38 FPS), and Ultra (33 FPS) are all below playable thresholds for most users.

For the best balance of visual quality and performance, 1080p High is the strongest recommendation: it delivers 75 FPS average, which is 25% above the 60 FPS target, while retaining higher visual fidelity than Medium or Low. At 1440p, Medium is the sweet spot — 64 FPS average, with a minimum of 54 FPS and maximum of 73 FPS, indicating acceptable frame pacing. For users prioritizing frame rate over visuals, 1080p Low at 118 FPS is ideal for competitive or fast-paced play. The data does not support 4K gaming with this combo for quality-focused experiences, as even Low settings barely hit 60 FPS and higher settings fall to 33-43 FPS, which would result in noticeable stuttering in a game like Control with its physics-heavy combat and destruction.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1080p, the combo's performance is strong across all settings. Low averages 118 FPS, Medium averages 84 FPS with a range of 71 to 97 FPS, High averages 75 FPS, and Ultra averages 65 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 53 FPS spread, with each settings tier costing roughly 10-34 FPS. The Medium setting's minimum of 71 FPS indicates that even in demanding scenes, the frame rate stays above 70 FPS, which is excellent for smooth gameplay.

At 1440p, the performance drops are consistent but manageable. Low averages 89 FPS, Medium averages 64 FPS with a range of 54 to 73 FPS, High averages 56 FPS, and Ultra averages 49 FPS. The Medium setting's minimum of 54 FPS is below the 60 FPS target, suggesting occasional dips in combat-heavy scenes. The 40 FPS spread from Low to Ultra is proportionally similar to 1080p, confirming the GPU-bound nature of the workload.

At 4K, the results are disappointing for high settings but usable at Low. Low averages 60 FPS, Medium averages 43 FPS with a range of 36 to 49 FPS, High averages 38 FPS, and Ultra averages 33 FPS. The Medium setting's minimum of 36 FPS would result in noticeable stuttering, and the 27 FPS spread from Low to Ultra shows that even the quality settings have limited headroom at this resolution. The data clearly indicates that 4K is only viable at Low settings, and even then, the 60 FPS average is a bare minimum for acceptable gameplay.