Control

Control is an action-adventure title from 2019 that stresses both the rendering pipeline and the CPU’s ability to manage complex physics and destruction. This analysis focuses on the combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX, using measured frame rate data to understand how the system scales across resolutions and settings. The data shows a clear pattern: the GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions, while the CPU’s strength becomes more apparent at 1080p, where frame rates climb significantly.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a consistent and predictable drop in performance as resolution increases, which is a classic sign of GPU-bound rendering. At the High preset, the average frame rate falls from 142 FPS at 1920x1080 to 107 FPS at 2560x1440, and then to 72 FPS at 3840x2160. This represents a 24.6% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a further 32.7% drop from 1440p to 4K. The scaling is not linear, with the jump to 4K being particularly punishing, indicating that the Radeon RX 7900 XTX’s compute resources are being saturated by the pixel count.

Looking at the Low preset, the same trend holds but with higher absolute numbers. The system produces 225 FPS at 1080p, 170 FPS at 1440p, and 115 FPS at 4K. The percentage drops here are steeper on a relative basis (24.4% and 32.4% respectively), but the absolute deltas are larger, suggesting that even at low settings, the GPU is still the limiting factor. The fact that 4K Low (115 FPS) is still higher than 1080p Ultra (123 FPS) is telling; it shows that the GPU has enough headroom to run the game at a higher resolution with reduced visual fidelity.

The Medium preset provides the only complete dataset with min and max FPS values. At 1080p Medium, the average is 160 FPS with a min of 136 and a max of 184. Moving to 1440p Medium, the average drops to 121 FPS, with min and max at 103 and 139. At 4K Medium, the average falls to 82 FPS, with a min of 69 and a max of 94. The spread between min and max FPS remains relatively consistent across resolutions (about 48 FPS at 1080p, 36 FPS at 1440p, and 25 FPS at 4K), but the lower bound at 4K (69 FPS) is still comfortably above playable thresholds for most users.

The scaling pattern indicates that the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is not a limiting factor in this game until you reach very high frame rates. At 1080p Low, the system hits 225 FPS, which is a demanding target for any CPU. The fact that it achieves this suggests that the 24-core processor is providing sufficient instruction throughput to feed the GPU. However, the steep drop-offs at higher resolutions show that the RX 7900 XTX’s 24 GB of VRAM and 960.0 GB/s of bandwidth are working hard, and the game’s visual effects at High and Ultra presets are what push the GPU to its limits.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded for this combo in Control?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 225 FPS at 1920x1080 with the Low preset. This is significantly higher than the 123 FPS at 1080p Ultra, showing a 82.9% performance uplift from lowering settings.

Q: How does the system perform at 4K Ultra settings?

A: At 3840x2160 with the Ultra preset, the system averages 63 FPS. This is the lowest recorded average across all tested configurations, but it remains above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the main bottleneck at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the GPU is the primary bottleneck. The frame rate drops from 107 FPS at High to 93 FPS at Ultra, a 13.1% reduction, while the CPU’s workload does not increase proportionally. The data suggests the RX 7900 XTX is being fully utilized at this resolution.

Q: What is the difference between Low and Ultra presets at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset averages 225 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 123 FPS. This 102 FPS difference (or 82.9% higher performance on Low) illustrates the massive impact of graphical settings on frame rates.

Q: Does the system maintain a stable frame rate at 4K Medium?

A: At 3840x2160 with Medium settings, the system records an average of 82 FPS, with a minimum of 69 FPS and a maximum of 94 FPS. The minimum is well above 60 FPS, indicating a stable experience.

Q: How does the combo rank against other tested systems?

A: This combination ranks 362nd out of 2888 tested combos for Control. This places it in the top 12.5% of all systems tested, indicating strong overall performance.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX is the dominant component in this pairing for Control, as the resolution scaling data clearly shows. The GPU features 24 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 960.0 GB/s. This memory capacity is more than sufficient for Control’s textures and effects, even at 4K Ultra, where the game’s assets are fully loaded. The high bandwidth helps maintain consistent frame delivery, as seen in the 4K Medium min FPS of 69, which is close to the average of 82.

The GPU’s clock speeds also play a role in its performance. The base clock is 1929 MHz, with a boost clock of 2498 MHz and a game clock of 2365 MHz. These clocks are relatively high, and the boost behavior is reflected in the scaling between presets. For instance, moving from Medium to High at 1440p reduces the average FPS from 121 to 107, a drop of 11.6%. This is not a linear relationship, suggesting that the GPU’s power management is affecting clock speeds under load, but the overall performance remains strong.

The RX 7900 XTX’s compute capabilities are substantial, with 6144 shading units and 192 ROPs. These specifications translate into a pixel rate of 479.6 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 959.2 GTexel/s. In Control, which uses heavy post-processing and particle effects, these numbers are critical. The data shows that at 4K High, the system averages 72 FPS, which is a 12.5% drop from 4K Medium’s 82 FPS. This suggests that the higher preset’s additional effects are taxing the GPU’s shading units, but the architecture handles the load without catastrophic frame drops.

The GPU’s FP32 performance of 61.39 TFLOPS is also relevant. Control’s physics simulation and lighting calculations benefit from raw compute throughput. The benchmark results show that the RX 7900 XTX scores 31238 in Passmark G3D and 85612 in Geekbench Vulkan, indicating strong DirectX and Vulkan performance. In this game, the GPU’s role is clear: it is the primary driver of frame rates at all resolutions above 1080p Low, and its architecture is well-suited to the game’s demands.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations, this specific pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus with the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX ranks 362nd out of 2888 total combos for Control. This puts it in the 87.5th percentile of all tested systems, which is a strong showing. The rank reflects the balance between the CPU and GPU, where the CPU’s high single-thread performance complements the GPU’s raw power.

To contextualize this rank, consider the CPU’s overall standing. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has a percentile of 96 against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 93785. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 6520P (score 93786, delta 0%), the AMD EPYC 4564P (score 95183, delta -1.5%), and the AMD EPYC 9175F (score 95615, delta -1.9%). This indicates the CPU is performing at the top of its class, but the combo rank of 362 suggests that the GPU is holding the system back slightly in Control.

The GPU, on the other hand, has a percentile of 64 against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 19410. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB (score 19334, delta 0.4%), the NVIDIA Quadro K5200 (score 19602, delta -1%), and the AMD FirePro D300 (score 19637, delta -1.2%). This is a lower percentile than the CPU, which explains why the combo ranks in the 87th percentile rather than higher. The GPU is not the absolute fastest, but it is paired with one of the fastest CPUs, resulting in a system that is well above average for this game.

The rank of 362 out of 2888 is a strong indicator of overall capability. It suggests that this system can handle Control at high settings across all resolutions, which is confirmed by the measured FPS data showing playable frame rates at 4K Ultra (63 FPS). The data shows that the system is not held back by a weak link; rather, it is a high-end pairing that delivers a consistent experience.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus plays a supporting but crucial role in this system’s Control performance. With 24 cores and 24 threads, the CPU has ample parallel processing power for the game’s background tasks, but Control is not heavily multi-threaded. The CPU’s base clock is 3.70 GHz, with a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, which is where the single-thread performance matters most for gaming.

In the Cinebench R23 benchmark, the CPU scores 44253 in multi-core and 2439 in single-core. The single-core score is particularly important for Control, as the game’s main thread handles most of the logic and draw calls. The high boost clock of 5.50 GHz helps ensure that this thread is processed quickly, reducing CPU-side bottlenecks. This is evident in the 1080p Low results, where the system achieves 225 FPS; if the CPU were slower, this number would be lower.

The CPU’s cache hierarchy also supports gaming performance. It has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. This large L3 cache helps keep frequently accessed data close to the cores, reducing memory latency. The CPU supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. While this is lower than the GPU’s bandwidth, it is sufficient for feeding the CPU’s cores with game data.

The CPU’s performance in other benchmarks corroborates its gaming strength. It scores 68574 in Passmark Multithread and 5068 in Passmark Single Thread. The single-thread score is in the top tier of processors, which is why the system can push frame rates above 200 FPS at 1080p Low. The CPU’s role is not to render pixels but to manage the game state, physics, and AI. The data shows that it performs this role without becoming a bottleneck, as the frame rates scale consistently with GPU load.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of how this system handles Control across all settings and resolutions. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers 225 FPS average, which is the highest recorded. Medium settings reduce this to 160 FPS, with a minimum of 136 and a maximum of 184. High settings further reduce the average to 142 FPS, and Ultra brings it down to 123 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra at 1080p shows a 45.3% reduction in average FPS, which is expected given the increased graphical fidelity.

At 2560x1440, the same trend continues but with lower absolute numbers. Low settings average 170 FPS, Medium averages 121 FPS (min 103, max 139), High averages 107 FPS, and Ultra averages 93 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings is 24.4%, which is less than the 32.4% drop from 1440p to 4K at the same preset. This suggests that the GPU is still capable of handling the increased pixel count at 1440p, but the gap widens at 4K.

At 3840x2160, the system produces its lowest frame rates. Low settings average 115 FPS, Medium averages 82 FPS (min 69, max 94), High averages 72 FPS, and Ultra averages 63 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra at 4K is 12.5%, which is a smaller percentage drop than at 1080p (13.4%) or 1440p (13.1%). This indicates that at 4K, the GPU is so heavily loaded that the additional settings in Ultra have diminishing returns on visual quality relative to the performance cost.

The data shows a clear pattern: the system is capable of high refresh rate gaming at 1080p and 1440p, and it can handle 4K at playable frame rates. The Medium preset at 4K, with its 82 FPS average and 69 FPS minimum, is a sweet spot for balanced performance and visual quality. The High preset at 1440p, with 107 FPS average, is also a strong option for those with 144Hz monitors.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and refresh rate. For users with a 1080p monitor at 144Hz or 165Hz, the High preset is the best choice, delivering 142 FPS average. This provides a smooth experience with good visual fidelity. The Ultra preset at 123 FPS is also viable for 120Hz displays, but the 15.4% performance drop from High may not justify the marginal visual improvements.

For 1440p, the High preset is again the recommended choice, averaging 107 FPS. This is suitable for 100Hz or 120Hz monitors. The Medium preset offers 121 FPS, which is a 13.1% increase over High, but it comes with reduced visual effects. For users prioritizing frame rate over graphics, Medium is a solid option. The Ultra preset at 93 FPS is still playable but may not fully utilize a 120Hz display.

At 4K, the Medium preset is the clear winner. It averages 82 FPS with a minimum of 69 FPS, providing a consistent experience above 60 FPS. The High preset at 72 FPS is also acceptable for 60Hz displays, but the Medium preset’s higher minimum frame rate makes it more stable. The Ultra preset at 63 FPS is borderline; it is above 60 FPS, but the margin is slim, and any demanding scene could cause noticeable dips.

The data suggests that the Low preset is only necessary for achieving the absolute highest frame rates, such as 225 FPS at 1080p for competitive play. For most users, Medium or High will provide the best balance of visual quality and performance. The key takeaway is that this system has enough headroom to prioritize visual fidelity at 1080p and 1440p, while at 4K, Medium settings are the recommended default to maintain a stable frame rate.