Control

Control pairs the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus with the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT, and in Control the data shows a system that scales predictably across resolutions and settings, with the GPU becoming the primary constraint as pixel count rises. The measured frame rates, ranging from 49 FPS at 4K Ultra to 174 FPS at 1080p Low, indicate a configuration capable of high-refresh 1080p play and comfortable 1440p performance, while 4K requires compromises in quality to stay smooth.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and consistent across all settings, pointing to a GPU-bound scenario at higher resolutions. At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 110 FPS at 1920x1080 to 83 FPS at 2560x1440, a 24.5% reduction, then to 56 FPS at 3840x2160, another 32.5% drop from 1440p. This pattern of diminishing returns as resolution increases is classic evidence that the Radeon RX 7800 XT's rendering throughput, rather than the CPU's geometry or draw-call processing, is the limiting factor at 4K.

The scaling behavior is even more pronounced at Low settings, where the system jumps from 174 FPS at 1080p to 132 FPS at 1440p and then down to 89 FPS at 4K. The 4K Low result is still 10 FPS higher than 1440p High, which suggests that while the GPU is stressed at 4K, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has ample headroom to feed it frames, even at lower quality presets where the CPU load per frame is typically lighter. At Medium settings, the 4K average of 63 FPS with a minimum of 54 FPS shows the system holding above the 50 FPS threshold, but the gap between 1080p Medium (124 FPS) and 4K Medium is a 49.2% reduction, reinforcing the GPU bottleneck.

Ultra settings amplify the resolution scaling effect. At 1080p Ultra, the system manages 96 FPS, which drops to 72 FPS at 1440p and then to 49 FPS at 4K. The 4K Ultra result is the only measured configuration that falls below 50 FPS, and the scaling from 1440p to 4K (a 32% loss) is steeper than from 1080p to 1440p (a 25% loss), indicating that the RX 7800 XT's 16 GB of memory and bandwidth are not the limiting factor, but rather its raw pixel fill rate at extreme resolutions. The data suggests that for a locked 60 FPS experience at 4K, users should target High or Medium settings, as Ultra is consistently 7-14 FPS short of that target.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT is the dominant component in this pairing for Control, and its specifications explain the measured FPS distribution. Built on the Navi 32 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, the GPU features 3840 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 96 raster output pipelines. Its boost clock of 2430 MHz and game clock of 2124 MHz drive a pixel rate of 233.3 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 583.2 GTexel/s, which directly correlate with the frame rates seen at 4K where pixel throughput is paramount.

The 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 624.1 GB/s of bandwidth, a figure that is more than sufficient for Control's visual effects at 4K, as evidenced by the fact that the 4K Medium and High results (63 and 56 FPS) are not dramatically lower than what memory-limited cards would show. The GPU's FP32 performance of 37.32 TFLOPS is the raw compute horsepow that handles the game's physics and particle effects, and the benchmark results indicate it scales linearly with resolution until it hits the 4K Ultra wall.

The GPU's benchmark scores place it in the 51st percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 11627. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 (0.5% faster) and the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M (0.9% slower), which is surprising given the architectural gap, but it suggests that the PassMark G3D score of 24176 is weighted toward compute tasks that don't fully represent gaming performance. In Control specifically, the GPU's DirectX 12 benchmark score of 93 (from PassMark) is low in isolation, but the measured FPS in this game shows the card punching well above that synthetic metric, particularly at 1080p and 1440p.

The GPU's role becomes clearer when examining the 4K results: at Low settings it hits 89 FPS, which is 81.6% faster than at Ultra (49 FPS). This 40 FPS swing from Low to Ultra at 4K is larger than the 38 FPS swing at 1080p (174 to 96 FPS), confirming that the GPU's shading units and ROPs are the primary drivers of the quality preset impact. The RX 7800 XT's 60 ray tracing cores are present, but Control's ray-traced reflections and shadows are not separately benchmarked here, so the data reflects only the standard rasterization pipeline.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus provides the computational backbone for this system, and while it is not the bottleneck in Control's higher resolutions, its capabilities set the ceiling for the 1080p results. With 24 cores and 24 threads (no hyper-threading), a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, this Arrow Lake Refresh processor offers substantial single-thread and multi-thread performance. Its Cinebench R23 scores of 44253 multi-core and 2439 single-core place it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 93785.

The CPU's nearest rivals are server-class parts: the Intel Xeon 6520P (0% delta), AMD EPYC 4564P (1.5% faster), AMD EPYC 9175F (1.9% faster), and AMD EPYC 4565P (2.1% faster). This positioning indicates that the 270K Plus is a high-end desktop chip that trades blows with enterprise silicon in synthetic workloads, but in Control, the game's engine is not heavily multi-threaded, so the 24 cores are less relevant than the 5.50 GHz boost clock for single-threaded game logic.

The measured FPS at 1080p Low (174 FPS) and 1080p High (110 FPS) shows that the CPU can feed the GPU well beyond the 144 Hz refresh rate at lower settings, but the scaling from Low to High at 1080p (a 36.8% reduction) suggests that the GPU is already becoming the limiter at that resolution. At 4K, the CPU's role is minimal, as the FPS drops of 37-45% from 1080p are entirely attributable to the GPU's pixel throughput. The CPU's 36 MB of shared L3 cache and 115.2 GB/s memory bandwidth (DDR5 dual-channel) provide sufficient data delivery to avoid stutter, as evidenced by the consistent min FPS of 54 at 4K Medium, which is only 14% below the average.

The PassMark single-thread score of 5068 and multi-thread score of 68574 further confirm that the CPU is not a limiting factor; the multi-thread score is 13.5x the single-thread score, but Control rarely scales beyond a few cores. The 125W TDP and 3 nm process node (TSMC) mean the chip runs efficiently, but the data does not show any thermal throttling impact on frame rates, as the 1080p Low result of 174 FPS is near the theoretical maximum for this GPU at that resolution.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its highest frame rates across all presets. Low settings produce an average of 174 FPS, Medium drops to 124 FPS with a minimum of 105 FPS and maximum of 142 FPS, High reaches 110 FPS, and Ultra manages 96 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 78 FPS, a 44.8% reduction, which indicates that the RX 7800 XT has enough headroom at 1080p to absorb the extra shading load of Ultra settings without falling below 90 FPS.

Moving to 2560x1440, the averages drop but remain playable. Low hits 132 FPS, Medium averages 94 FPS with a minimum of 80 FPS and maximum of 108 FPS, High reaches 83 FPS, and Ultra settles at 72 FPS. The gap between Medium and High at 1440p is 11 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is also 11 FPS, showing a linear degradation as quality increases. The 1440p Medium minimum of 80 FPS is particularly noteworthy, as it indicates the system never dips below the 60 FPS threshold even during demanding scenes.

At 3840x2160, the results are the most constrained. Low averages 89 FPS, Medium averages 63 FPS with a minimum of 54 FPS and maximum of 73 FPS, High drops to 56 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 49 FPS. The 4K Medium result is the only configuration with recorded min/max data, showing a 19 FPS variance between the fastest and slowest frames, which is tighter than the 37 FPS variance at 1080p Medium, suggesting that 4K is more consistent in frame pacing despite lower averages.

Across all resolutions, the Medium preset consistently offers the best balance of performance and visual quality, with the 4K Medium average of 63 FPS being just 7 FPS above the 4K High average. The Ultra preset at 4K is the only configuration that falls below 50 FPS, making it marginal for smooth gameplay. The data also shows that Low settings at 4K (89 FPS) outperform High settings at 1440p (83 FPS), which is an interesting crossover point for players who prefer higher resolutions over higher quality.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution for a 60 FPS experience in Control with this hardware?*

A: At 2560x1440, all presets from Low to Ultra exceed 60 FPS, with Ultra averaging 72 FPS. At 3840x2160, Medium (63 FPS) and High (56 FPS) are the only presets near the 60 FPS target, while Ultra falls to 49 FPS.

Q: How much of a performance hit does Ultra settings cause compared to High?

A: At 1080p, Ultra is 14 FPS slower than High (96 vs 110 FPS). At 1440p, the gap is 11 FPS (72 vs 83 FPS). At 4K, the gap narrows to 7 FPS (49 vs 56 FPS), showing that the relative cost of Ultra decreases as resolution increases.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this game?

A: The GPU is the bottleneck at 4K, as evidenced by the 71 FPS drop from 1080p to 4K at High settings. At 1080p Low, the 174 FPS result suggests the CPU can feed the GPU well beyond typical refresh rates, so the GPU is also the limiter at lower resolutions.

*Q: Does the RX 7800 XT's 16 GB VRAM matter for Control at 4K?*

A: The 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 624.1 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient for 4K, as the 4K Medium result (63 FPS) does not show signs of memory-related stuttering, and the minimum FPS of 54 stays close to the average.

*Q: How does this combo rank among all tested configurations for Control?*

A: This combo ranks 899th out of 2888 total combinations, placing it in the top 31% of all tested systems. The CPU's 96th percentile ranking is notably higher than the GPU's 51st percentile, indicating the GPU is the weaker link.

Q: What is the expected frame rate at 1080p Medium settings?

A: The measured average is 124 FPS, with a minimum of 105 FPS and a maximum of 142 FPS, making it suitable for high-refresh 144 Hz monitors without dropping below the 100 FPS mark.

Settings Recommendations

For 1080p gaming, Ultra settings are viable with an average of 96 FPS, which is above the 90 FPS threshold for smooth high-refresh play, but Medium offers a 29% higher average (124 FPS) with a minimum of 105 FPS that guarantees no drops below 100 FPS. Given that Control's visual difference between Medium and Ultra is often subtle in fast action, Medium at 1080p provides the best experience for competitive or high-refresh play, while Ultra is acceptable for those who prioritize image quality over frame rate.

At 1440p, the Medium preset is the sweet spot, averaging 94 FPS with a minimum of 80 FPS and maximum of 108 FPS. This configuration stays comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold and approaches the 100 FPS mark, making it ideal for 1440p 144Hz monitors. High settings at 1440p (83 FPS) are also viable, but the 11 FPS loss from Medium may not justify the marginal visual gains. Ultra at 1440p (72 FPS) is playable but starts to approach the 60 FPS floor, so it is only recommended for slower-paced exploration.

For 4K, the data strongly favors Medium settings, which average 63 FPS with a minimum of 54 FPS, ensuring a mostly smooth experience above 50 FPS. High settings (56 FPS) are borderline, and Ultra (49 FPS) should be avoided for any gameplay that requires precision or timing. The 4K Low setting (89 FPS) is an option for players who prefer resolution over detail, but Medium offers three times the visual fidelity for a 26 FPS cost. The overall recommendation is Medium at 4K, Medium at 1440p, and Medium at 1080p for the best balance of frame rate and visual quality, with the caveat that 1080p Ultra is a reasonable choice for those with adaptive sync displays.