Control

The pairing of Intel’s Core Ultra 7 270K Plus with NVIDIA’s GeForce GTX 1070 presents a stark study in generational imbalance within Control. The CPU is a modern 24-core powerhouse, while the GPU is a Pascal-era veteran from 2016. Benchmark results show that this combo ranks 2395th out of 2888 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 17% of all tested systems — a direct consequence of the graphics card being the limiting factor at every measurable setting.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K reveals a classic GPU-bound scenario. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 97 FPS at 1920x1080 to 73 FPS at 2560x1440, a reduction of 24.7%. Pushing further to 3840x2160 drops the average to 49 FPS, which is a 49.5% decline from the 1080p baseline. This steep curve indicates that pixel throughput is the dominant constraint — the GTX 1070’s 256.3 GB/s memory bandwidth and 6.463 TFLOPS of FP32 compute are being saturated long before the CPU’s 24 threads can show any advantage.

The Medium preset tells a similar story with slightly lower absolute numbers. At 1080p Medium, the average is 69 FPS; at 1440p it drops to 52 FPS (-24.6%); and at 4K it falls to 35 FPS (-49.3%). This consistent ~25% penalty per resolution step up to 1440p, followed by a further ~33% drop from 1440p to 4K, is characteristic of a GPU that is running out of fillrate and bandwidth. The 1070’s 64 ROPs and 107.7 GPixel/s pixel rate are simply not enough to feed the pixel demand of 4K, even at Medium quality.

High settings amplify the bottleneck. The 1080p High average is 61 FPS, which drops to 46 FPS at 1440p and 31 FPS at 4K. The scaling from 1440p to 4K is a 32.6% loss, while the 1080p-to-1440p step costs 24.6%. Ultra settings are the most punishing: 53 FPS at 1080p, 40 FPS at 1440p, and just 27 FPS at 4K. The pattern is unmistakable — each resolution increase imposes a near-linear load on the GPU, with no sign of CPU limitation even at 1080p Ultra, where the 270K Plus could theoretically push far more frames if the GPU allowed it.

What the data does not show is any resolution where the CPU becomes the bottleneck. Even at 1080p Low with 97 FPS average, the gap to the 1440p result (73 FPS) is too large to suggest CPU headroom exhaustion. If the CPU were limiting, the 1440p and 4K numbers would cluster closer together. Instead, the consistent 20-30 FPS drops across every resolution step confirm that the GTX 1070 is the sole constraint. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, with its 36 MB of L3 cache and 115.2 GB/s memory bandwidth, is effectively idle waiting on the GPU’s 8 GB GDDR5 frame buffer.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination ranks 2395th out of 2888 tested combos in Control, placing it in the 17th percentile of all systems. This is a low position that reflects the GPU’s age more than the CPU’s capability. The 270K Plus alone scores in the 96th percentile versus all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 93785. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 6520P (avg score 93786, 0% delta), AMD EPYC 4564P (95183, -1.5%), AMD EPYC 9175F (95615, -1.9%), and AMD EPYC 4565P (95764, -2.1%). These are all enterprise-class server processors, which tells you the CPU is performing at a top-tier level for desktop workloads.

The GPU, however, is a different story. The GTX 1070 ranks in the 47th percentile versus all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 9780. Its nearest rivals are the AMD FirePro W5000 (9803, -0.2%), NVIDIA Quadro M2000M (9832, -0.5%), NVIDIA Tesla M10 (9724, +0.6%), and NVIDIA Tesla C2070 (9716, +0.7%). These are professional and workstation cards, not gaming GPUs, and the 1070 sits right in the middle of them — a mid-pack performer that is nearly a decade old.

The disparity between CPU percentile (96th) and GPU percentile (47th) is the root cause of the low combo rank. In a game like Control, which is heavily GPU-bound at the tested settings, the combo’s rank is dragged down by the graphics card. The data suggests that if the same CPU were paired with a modern GPU, the rank would improve dramatically — but as tested, the 1070 caps the experience at 1080p Medium/High territory. The 2395th rank out of 2888 is not a reflection of a broken system; it is a reflection of a severely imbalanced pairing where the CPU has roughly double the relative performance headroom of the GPU.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 is built on the Pascal architecture using the GP104 chip, fabricated on a 16 nm process at TSMC. It packs 7,200 million transistors on a 314 mm² die. Its memory configuration is 8 GB of GDDR5 across a 256-bit bus, yielding 256.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU has 1920 shading units, 120 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. Its base clock is 1506 MHz with a boost clock of 1683 MHz, and the memory runs at 2002 MHz (8 Gbps effective).

In Control, these specs translate to a clear ceiling. The 64 ROPs and 107.7 GPixel/s pixel rate are the first bottleneck at 4K, where even Low settings only manage 49 FPS. The 120 TMUs and 202.0 GTexel/s texture rate handle the game’s surfaces adequately at 1080p, but the 6.463 TFLOPS of FP32 compute is insufficient for the game’s physics and particle effects at higher resolutions. The 8 GB VRAM is not explicitly the limiting factor in the measured results — there are no outliers or sudden drops that would indicate memory capacity issues — but the 256.3 GB/s bandwidth is likely constraining texture streaming during fast camera movements.

The GPU’s benchmark profile corroborates its mid-range status. Its best scores come in Geekbench OpenCL (44700) and Vulkan (22121), with a Passmark G3D score of 13498. The Passmark DX12 score of 48 is notably low, which aligns with Control’s DX12 workload. The GPU’s average benchmark score of 9780 places it just below the AMD FirePro W5000 and NVIDIA Quadro M2000M, and just above the Tesla M10 and Tesla C2070. These are not gaming cards, but the 1070’s position among them suggests it is now a legacy product — the production status is listed as End-of-life, and its successor is the GeForce 20-series.

The clock behavior is worth noting. The boost clock of 1683 MHz is only 11.8% above the base clock of 1506 MHz, which is typical for Pascal. The card maintains these clocks without thermal throttling in the measured data, as the FPS numbers are consistent. The 150 W TDP and dual-slot design are modest by modern standards, but the performance is what it is: a 47th-percentile GPU that cannot keep up with a 96th-percentile CPU.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the best experience for this combo is at 1920x1080 with High settings, where the average FPS is 61. This is above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. The Medium preset at 1080p offers 69 FPS, which is smoother but visually less rich. The Low preset at 1080p hits 97 FPS, but that sacrifices too much visual fidelity for a game like Control that relies on atmosphere.

At 2560x1440, the situation changes. High settings drop to 46 FPS, which is below the ideal 60 FPS target. Medium at 1440p yields 52 FPS, and Low hits 73 FPS. For 1440p, the Low preset is the only one that consistently stays above 70 FPS, making it the playable option if you need smoothness over detail. The Medium preset at 1440p is borderline playable with 52 FPS, but the min FPS of 44 suggests occasional dips that could be noticeable.

At 3840x2160, no preset is truly comfortable. Low averages 49 FPS, Medium averages 35 FPS with a min of 30, High averages 31 FPS, and Ultra averages 27 FPS. The 4K Low preset is the only one that approaches playability, and even then, the 49 FPS average is below the 60 FPS ideal. If you own a 4K display, the data suggests dropping to 1440p for a better experience.

The Ultra preset is not recommended at any resolution. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 53 FPS, which is 13% slower than High. The visual uplift from High to Ultra does not justify the frame rate penalty, especially when High at 1080p already delivers 61 FPS. The measured data clearly shows that High at 1080p is the sweet spot, offering a balance of 61 FPS average and presumably better IQ than Medium or Low.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the results are as follows: Low averages 97 FPS, Medium averages 69 FPS with a min of 58 and max of 79, High averages 61 FPS, and Ultra averages 53 FPS. This is a tight spread of 44 FPS between the lowest and highest settings, which indicates that the GPU is handling 1080p adequately but not overwhelmingly. The Medium preset’s min of 58 FPS is the only sub-60 dip in the entire 1080p range, suggesting that High is more consistent even though its average is lower.

At 2560x1440, the numbers are: Low averages 73 FPS, Medium averages 52 FPS with a min of 44 and max of 60, High averages 46 FPS, and Ultra averages 40 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 28.8%, while the drop from Medium to High is 11.5%, and High to Ultra is 13.0%. The 1440p Medium min of 44 FPS is a significant dip that could cause stutter in intense combat scenes. The 1440p Low preset is the only one that stays comfortably above 60 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the results are stark: Low averages 49 FPS, Medium averages 35 FPS with a min of 30 and max of 40, High averages 31 FPS, and Ultra averages 27 FPS. The 4K Medium preset’s min of 30 FPS is the absolute floor of playability — anything below that is a slideshow. The step from Low to Medium costs 28.6% performance, and Medium to High costs 11.4%, with High to Ultra costing 12.9%. None of these 4K presets reach the 60 FPS target, and only Low approaches a console-like 50 FPS average.

The overall pattern across all resolutions is consistent: Low is always the fastest, followed by Medium, High, and Ultra in descending order. The relative gaps between presets are similar at each resolution, confirming that the GPU is uniformly stressed by the game’s rendering pipeline. The min FPS data is only available for Medium presets, showing 58 FPS at 1080p, 44 FPS at 1440p, and 30 FPS at 4K — these are the only measured minimums, and they align with the average FPS trends.

FAQ

*Q: Is this combo better suited for 1080p or 1440p gaming in Control?*

A: The data shows 1080p is clearly better. At 1080p High, the average FPS is 61, while at 1440p High it drops to 46. Even 1080p Ultra (53 FPS) outperforms 1440p High (46 FPS). For a consistent 60+ FPS experience, 1080p is the target resolution.

Q: What is the biggest performance bottleneck in this system?

A: The GPU is the clear bottleneck. The GTX 1070 ranks in the 47th percentile versus all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 9780, while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus ranks in the 96th percentile with an average score of 93785. The FPS drops from 1080p to 4K are consistent with GPU-bound scaling, not CPU limitations.

*Q: Can this system run Control at 4K?*

A: Technically yes, but only at Low settings where the average FPS is 49. Medium averages 35 FPS, High averages 31 FPS, and Ultra averages 27 FPS. None of these reach the 60 FPS ideal, and the Medium preset’s min FPS is 30, which is the edge of playability.

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

A: The 270K Plus has an average benchmark score of 93785. The Intel Xeon 6520P scores 93786 (0% delta), the AMD EPYC 4564P scores 95183 (-1.5%), the AMD EPYC 9175F scores 95615 (-1.9%), and the AMD EPYC 4565P scores 95764 (-2.1%). The 270K Plus is essentially tied with the Xeon, and slightly behind the EPYC parts.

Q: What is the best settings preset for a smooth 60 FPS experience?

A: The only preset that achieves 60+ FPS average is 1080p Low (97 FPS) and 1080p Medium (69 FPS). The 1080p High preset averages 61 FPS, which is just above the threshold, making it the best visual quality option that still hits 60 FPS. At 1440p, only Low (73 FPS) clears 60 FPS.

Q: Is the GPU’s VRAM capacity a limiting factor?

A: The measured data does not indicate VRAM capacity issues. The 8 GB of GDDR5 is sufficient for the resolutions tested, as there are no sudden performance collapses that would suggest memory swapping. However, the 256.3 GB/s bandwidth is likely a performance limiter at 4K, given the consistent FPS drops at that resolution.