Control

Control, Remedy’s 2019 action-adventure, scales in a highly predictable manner across the tested resolutions and presets when paired with the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER. The measured data reveals a system that is overwhelmingly GPU-bound at higher settings, while the processor’s capabilities only become relevant at the lower presets where frame rates climb dramatically. This analysis breaks down the 12 measured data points, placing them in context against the component’s synthetic benchmarks and its rank among thousands of other tested combinations.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate progression from 1080p to 4K demonstrates classic GPU-bound behavior, with the RTX 4080 SUPER being the primary limiter at higher resolutions. At High settings, the average frame rate drops from 155 FPS at 1920x1080 to 117 FPS at 2560x1440, a 24.5% reduction, and then to 79 FPS at 3840x2160, a further 32.5% reduction. This steep decline at 4K indicates that the pixel fill rate and memory bandwidth are being heavily taxed, which aligns with the GPU’s 736.3 GB/s bandwidth and 112 ROPs.

The scaling pattern becomes more revealing at Low settings. Here, the performance gap between 1080p and 1440p is substantial — 245 FPS versus 185 FPS, a 24.5% delta — but the drop from 1440p to 4K is only from 185 FPS to 125 FPS, a 32.4% reduction. The fact that the 1080p Low result of 245 FPS is nearly double the 4K Ultra result of 69 FPS shows that resolution is the dominant factor in this configuration.

Interestingly, the Medium preset shows the most consistent scaling curve. The frame rates of 174 FPS (1080p), 132 FPS (1440p), and 89 FPS (4K) represent a nearly linear progression with resolution. Each step up in resolution costs roughly 24-33% performance, which is more uniform than the High and Ultra presets. This suggests that Medium settings hit a sweet spot where the GPU’s compute units are efficiently utilized without hitting memory bandwidth walls.

The Ultra preset reveals the most severe 4K penalty. The 102 FPS at 1440p drops to 69 FPS at 4K, a 32.4% loss, while the 1080p Ultra result of 134 FPS drops to 102 FPS at 1440p, a 23.9% loss. This pattern shows diminishing returns at higher resolutions — the GPU’s 52.22 TFLOPS of FP32 compute becomes the bottleneck, not the CPU. The data indicates that the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, with its 24 cores and 24 threads, is never the limiting factor in these tests; even at 1080p Low, the system reaches 245 FPS, which is far below the CPU’s theoretical capability as suggested by its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44,253.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data suggests that Medium offers the most balanced experience across all three resolutions. At 1080p, Medium delivers 174 FPS with a minimum of 148 FPS and maximum of 200 FPS, which is a 12.2% improvement over High’s 155 FPS. At 1440p, Medium’s 132 FPS (with 112 min / 152 max) is 12.8% faster than High’s 117 FPS, while at 4K, Medium’s 89 FPS (76 min / 102 max) is 12.7% faster than High’s 79 FPS. This consistent 12-13% uplift across resolutions makes Medium the most predictable choice.

High settings are viable for those prioritizing visual fidelity over raw frame rates. The 79 FPS average at 4K High is above the 60 FPS threshold, and the 117 FPS at 1440p is smooth for most displays. However, the data shows that High only offers marginal gains over Medium in visual terms while costing a significant 12-13% performance. The frame time data for High is incomplete (no min/max values), but the averages suggest it is less stable than Medium.

Ultra is only recommended for 1080p displays. The 134 FPS average at 1080p Ultra is still high, but the 102 FPS at 1440p and 69 FPS at 4K make it less compelling. The 4K Ultra result of 69 FPS is the only measured point below 70 FPS, and it represents a 22.5% drop from High’s 79 FPS at the same resolution. This is a substantial visual quality cost for diminishing returns.

Low settings are not recommended for this hardware combination. While the 245 FPS at 1080p Low is impressive, the jump to 185 FPS at 1440p and 125 FPS at 4K shows that the GPU is still the bottleneck. The system could likely push even higher frame rates with a less demanding CPU, but the Core Ultra 7’s Passmark single-thread score of 5,068 suggests it is more than capable of handling the game’s physics and AI at these frame rates. For a 240Hz 1080p monitor, Low is the only preset that approaches that refresh rate, but Medium’s 174 FPS is a more reasonable trade-off.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and RTX 4080 SUPER combination ranks 203rd out of 2,888 tested combos in Control, placing it in the top 7% of all configurations. This is a strong result, though not top-tier, which makes sense given the RTX 4080 SUPER’s percentile of 86 among all GPUs and the CPU’s percentile of 96 among all CPUs.

The GPU’s synthetic benchmarks provide context for this ranking. The RTX 4080 SUPER scores 34,245 in Passmark G3D, which is 86th percentile, and its nearest rival is the standard RTX 4080 with an average score of 54,247, a negligible -0.1% difference. This means the SUPER variant is essentially on par with the non-SUPER model in synthetic tests, yet the combo still ranks highly due to the CPU’s strength.

The CPU’s nearest rivals are all server-class processors: the Intel Xeon 6520P (0% delta), AMD EPYC 4564P (-1.5%), AMD EPYC 9175F (-1.9%), and AMD EPYC 4565P (-2.1%). This is unusual for a gaming-focused combo, as the Core Ultra 7’s 3 nm process and Arrow Lake Refresh architecture provide high single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,439) that rivals cannot match in gaming workloads.

The rank of 203 suggests that while this combo is excellent, there are 202 other configurations that perform better in Control. These likely include combinations with higher-end GPUs like the RTX 4090 or newer 50-series cards, given that the RTX 4080 SUPER is marked as end-of-life with the GeForce 50 as its successor. The data shows that this combo is firmly in the enthusiast tier, but not at the absolute top.

Measured FPS Breakdown

1920x1080: The full range of presets shows a wide spread. Low delivers 245 FPS average, Medium 174 FPS (148 min / 200 max), High 155 FPS, and Ultra 134 FPS. The Medium preset’s min/max range of 52 FPS indicates some frame time variance, but the average is solid. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 45.3% performance drop, which is significant but expected given the visual quality differences.

2560x1440: Low leads with 185 FPS, followed by Medium at 132 FPS (112 min / 152 max), High at 117 FPS, and Ultra at 102 FPS. The Medium preset’s 40 FPS range (112-152) is tighter than at 1080p, suggesting better frame pacing. The gap between Low and Ultra narrows to 44.9%, which is nearly identical to the 1080p delta, indicating that resolution scaling is consistent across presets.

3840x2160: Low produces 125 FPS, Medium 89 FPS (76 min / 102 max), High 79 FPS, and Ultra 69 FPS. The Medium preset’s min/max range of 26 FPS is the tightest of all resolutions, showing that 4K Medium is the most stable configuration. The drop from Low to Ultra is 44.8%, again consistent with the other resolutions. The 4K results show that the GPU is working hardest here — the 736.3 GB/s memory bandwidth is likely saturated at Ultra settings.

The data reveals that the RTX 4080 SUPER’s 16 GB of GDDR6X memory is sufficient for all tested configurations. Even at 4K Ultra, there are no signs of texture thrashing or memory-related stutters, as the average FPS of 69 is stable. The 256-bit memory bus, combined with the high bandwidth, provides ample headroom for Control’s destructible environments and physics-based combat.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER is the clear performance driver in this combo. Its Ada Lovelace architecture, built on TSMC’s 5 nm process, packs 45,900 million transistors into a 379 mm² die. The GPU operates at a base clock of 2,295 MHz and boosts to 2,550 MHz, which is relatively modest but efficient. The 16 GB of GDDR6X memory runs at 1,438 MHz with a 23 Gbps effective rate, delivering 736.3 GB/s of bandwidth across a 256-bit bus.

In synthetic benchmarks, the GPU scores 34,245 in Passmark G3D (86th percentile) and 19,822 in GPU Compute. Its DirectX 12 performance in Passmark is 134, which is lower than DirectX 11 (301) and DirectX 10 (193), suggesting that Control’s DX12 renderer may not fully exploit the GPU’s capabilities. However, the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 6,600 indicates strong raw performance.

The GPU’s nearest rival is the standard RTX 4080 with a -0.1% delta, meaning the SUPER variant offers negligible performance gains in this title. The data shows that Control is not particularly sensitive to the extra CUDA cores or higher clocks of the SUPER — the 52.22 TFLOPS FP32 performance is more than sufficient for this game’s requirements.

The VRAM capacity of 16 GB is never a limiting factor in the measured data. Even at 4K Ultra, the average FPS of 69 shows that the GPU has enough memory to handle Control’s textures and effects without spilling into slower memory tiers. The 320 TMUs and 112 ROPs provide a balanced texture and pixel throughput, which is reflected in the consistent scaling across resolutions.

FAQ

Q: Is this combo capable of 4K gaming in Control?

A: Yes, the data shows playable frame rates at 4K across all presets. Medium delivers 89 FPS average, High 79 FPS, and Ultra 69 FPS. Only the Low preset exceeds 120 FPS at 4K, hitting 125 FPS.

Q: How does the RTX 4080 SUPER compare to the standard RTX 4080 in this game?

A: The synthetic benchmark data shows a negligible difference of -0.1% in average score between the two GPUs. The SUPER variant’s higher clocks and additional cores do not translate into meaningful gains in Control.

Q: What is the best preset for a 144Hz 1440p monitor?

A: Medium is the only preset that consistently exceeds 144 FPS at 1440p, with an average of 132 FPS. High (117 FPS) and Ultra (102 FPS) fall short of the 144 FPS target, while Low (185 FPS) provides headroom but sacrifices visual quality.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck this GPU at any point?

A: The data suggests no CPU bottleneck exists. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 245 FPS, which is the highest measured value. The Core Ultra 7’s Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,439 and multi-core score of 44,253 indicate ample processing headroom.

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

A: It ranks 203rd out of 2,888 tested combos, placing it in the top 7.03% of all configurations tested for Control.

Q: Is the 16 GB VRAM sufficient for Ultra settings at 4K?

A: Yes, the 4K Ultra result of 69 FPS average shows no memory-related issues. The GDDR6X memory bandwidth of 736.3 GB/s is adequate for the game’s demands.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture, manufactured on TSMC’s 3 nm process. It operates at a base clock of 3.70 GHz and boosts to 5.50 GHz, with a 125 W TDP. The 36 MB of shared L3 cache and 192 KB L1 per core provide low-latency access to game data, while the 115.2 GB/s memory bandwidth from DDR5 dual-channel support ensures the GPU is fed with data.

In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44,253 and a single-core score of 2,439. The Passmark multithread score of 68,574 and single-thread score of 5,068 place it in the 96th percentile among all CPUs. Its nearest rival, the Intel Xeon 6520P, has an identical average score (0% delta), while AMD EPYC processors trail by 1.5-2.1%.

The game’s measured frame rates suggest that Control is not heavily threaded. The CPU’s 24 cores are likely underutilized, as the game’s physics and AI systems typically scale to 4-8 cores. The high single-thread performance is more relevant, and the 5.50 GHz boost clock ensures that the primary game thread runs without bottlenecking. The Passmark physics score of 4,064 indicates strong computational physics performance, which benefits Control’s destructible environments.

The CPU’s memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s is sufficient for the GPU’s needs, as evidenced by the high frame rates at 1080p. The 24 threads provide headroom for background tasks, but the data shows that the GPU is the primary determinant of performance across all tested settings. The CPU’s 96th percentile ranking confirms it is not a weak link in this configuration, even when paired with a GPU that ranks in the 86th percentile.