Control

The Intel Core Ultra 9 185H and AMD Radeon 8060S combination delivers a playable, though not flawless, experience in Control, with performance scaling predictably across resolutions and settings. The data reveals a system where the integrated GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions, while the capable 16-core CPU ensures frame rates remain fluid at 1080p.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core Ultra 9 185H is a 16-core, 22-thread mobile processor based on the Meteor Lake architecture. With a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, this chip provides substantial processing headroom for a title like Control, which is known for its physics-driven combat and destructible environments. The CPU's 24 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory support (with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth) ensure that game logic and asset streaming are handled without introducing stutter in the measured frame times.

In the broader context of CPU performance, the Ultra 9 185H sits at the 85th percentile among all tested processors. Its average benchmark score of 35670 places it in a tight cluster with its nearest rivals. The data shows it is statistically tied with the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 (deltaPct: -0.1), the Intel Core 7 250H (deltaPct: -0.2), and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 (deltaPct: -0.4). Even the desktop-class AMD Ryzen 7 7700X is only 0.7% ahead in average score, which suggests that this mobile chip does not hold back the GPU in most gaming scenarios.

Looking at specific workloads, the processor's multi-threaded prowess is evident in Cinebench R23, where it scores 17984.5 points, and in Geekbench multicore, where it achieves 11657 points. Single-thread performance is strong as well, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1810.5 and a Geekbench single-core score of 1794. These figures are relevant because Control relies on a mix of heavy physics calculations and AI routines, which benefit from both high core counts and strong per-core throughput. The CPU's Passmark physics score of 1956 further underscores its ability to handle the game's dynamic object interactions.

However, the benchmark results in Control indicate that the CPU is rarely the limiting factor. For instance, at 1080p Low, the combo achieves 130 FPS, which is a very high frame rate that suggests the processor can feed the GPU efficiently. Even at 4K Ultra, where the average FPS drops to 36, the bottleneck shifts almost entirely to the graphics solution. The CPU's 45W TDP and active production status confirm it is a modern, power-conscious part designed for thin-and-light gaming laptops, but its performance class is more than adequate for this 2019 title.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

*Q: What is the best resolution to run Control with this combo for a smooth 60 FPS experience?*

A: The data shows that 2560x1440 on High settings yields an average of 62 FPS, making it the highest tested configuration that clears the 60 FPS threshold. At 1920x1080, all settings from Low to Ultra average above 60 FPS, with Low hitting 130 FPS and Ultra hitting 71 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU's average benchmark score compare to its closest rival?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 185H has an average benchmark score of 35670, which is just 0.1% lower than the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350's score of 35719. This places the two chips in a virtual tie for performance.

Q: Does the GPU support hardware ray tracing, and what is its DirectX feature level?

A: Yes, the AMD Radeon 8060S features 40 dedicated ray accelerators and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), indicating full hardware support for ray-traced effects in Control.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded in the entire dataset, and at which settings does it occur?

A: The lowest minimum FPS recorded is 40, which occurs at 4K resolution with Medium settings (avg 47 FPS). This is the only test row that includes a minimum FPS below 59.

Q: Is the GPU's performance closer to a desktop card or a mobile chip?

A: Based on average benchmark scores, the Radeon 8060S (55757) is 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB (55698) and only 0.6% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 (56083). This indicates desktop-class performance despite being an integrated graphics processor.

Q: How much L3 cache does the CPU have, and does it appear to be a bottleneck?

A: The CPU has 24 MB of shared L3 cache. Given that frame rates scale consistently with resolution and settings rather than showing erratic dips, there is no evidence in the data that the cache size negatively impacts Control's performance.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured frame rates in Control reveal a classic GPU-bound scaling pattern. Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 and then to 3840x2160 produces consistent performance declines that align with the increase in pixel count. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 82 at 1080p to 62 at 1440p (a 24.4% decrease) and then to 42 at 4K (a 32.3% decrease from 1440p). This steep falloff is the signature of a graphics processor struggling to fill an increasing number of pixels.

The scaling becomes even more pronounced at Ultra settings. The average FPS goes from 71 at 1080p to 54 at 1440p (a 23.9% drop) and then to 36 at 4K (a 33.3% drop). These percentage declines are remarkably consistent, suggesting that the Radeon 8060S's compute throughput is the primary limiter, rather than memory bandwidth or CPU overhead. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see a smaller relative drop between 1440p and 4K, as the GPU would have more time to render each frame while waiting for the processor.

At Low settings, the resolution scaling tells a slightly different story. The 1080p Low result is 130 FPS, which drops to 98 FPS at 1440p and 66 FPS at 4K. The gap between 1080p and 1440p is 24.6%, while the gap between 1440p and 4K is 32.7%. This pattern holds even at the lowest settings, indicating that the GPU's raw pixel throughput—its 185.6 GPixel/s pixel rate and 14.85 TFLOPS of FP32 performance—is the determining factor.

The data implies that users seeking high refresh rates should stay at 1080p, where the combo can push past 100 FPS on lighter settings. For 1440p, the experience is playable but requires dropping from Ultra to High to maintain a 60 FPS average. At 4K, the system is firmly in 30-45 FPS territory across all settings, which suggests that Control at this resolution is only viable for players who prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate smoothness.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

Within the database of tested hardware combinations for Control, this specific pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H and AMD Radeon 8060S ranks 1632nd out of 2888 total combos. This places it in the 43rd percentile of all tested systems, meaning roughly 57% of other combinations deliver higher average frame rates in this specific game.

This mid-pack ranking is somewhat surprising given the individual component scores. The CPU sits at the 85th percentile among all processors, and the GPU is at the 87th percentile among all graphics cards. Yet, when paired together in Control, they do not achieve a top-tier result. The discrepancy can be attributed to the integrated nature of the GPU, which shares system memory. While the Radeon 8060S is a powerful iGPU, it lacks the dedicated VRAM bandwidth of discrete solutions, and Control's demands on memory throughput likely cap its performance below what the raw compute numbers suggest.

The rank also reflects the game's release date. Control launched in 2019, and modern hardware combinations—particularly those with high-end discrete GPUs—are likely overrepresented in the upper echelons of the ranking. The 2888 combos tested include many desktop systems with far more powerful graphics cards, which naturally push this mobile, integrated solution down the list. However, the ranking is not a measure of absolute inadequacy; it is a relative position among all systems tested. In absolute terms, the combo still delivers 130 FPS at 1080p Low, which is a smooth experience. The 1632nd rank simply indicates that for players with this hardware, there are many faster options available, but the experience is far from unplayable.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Radeon 8060S is an integrated graphics processor built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 4 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 1295 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz, which is a significant boost ratio that allows the GPU to ramp up under load. The chip contains 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 raster output units, along with 40 ray accelerators for hardware-accelerated ray tracing.

One of the most defining characteristics of this GPU is its memory configuration. The Radeon 8060S uses "System Shared" memory, meaning it relies on the CPU's DDR5 system RAM rather than dedicated VRAM. The memory bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent," which in this configuration is tied to the CPU's dual-channel memory bus rated at 89.6 GB/s. This shared memory setup is a double-edged sword. It allows for a large pool of available memory (limited only by system RAM), but it also introduces latency and bandwidth contention that can hurt performance in memory-intensive scenes.

In Control, this memory sharing likely contributes to the performance drops at higher resolutions. At 4K, the game requires more memory bandwidth to handle the increased texture and geometry data. The 89.6 GB/s available is far below what a discrete GPU with dedicated GDDR6 or GDDR6X would offer. This is reflected in the measured FPS: at 4K Medium, the average is only 47 FPS with a minimum of 40 FPS, whereas at 1080p Medium, the average is 92 FPS. The 45 FPS absolute drop between these resolutions is steeper than what would be expected from pure pixel-count scaling alone, suggesting the memory subsystem is a contributing bottleneck.

Despite this, the GPU's raw compute capabilities are substantial. The 14.85 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 464.0 GTexel/s texture rate are impressive for an integrated solution. The GPU's benchmark scores reinforce this: it achieves a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2162, a Geekbench OpenCL score of 84626, and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 80483. In the broader GPU landscape, the Radeon 8060S ranks at the 87th percentile and its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB (deltaPct: 0.1) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 (deltaPct: -0.6). This places it in the same performance class as desktop graphics cards, which is remarkable for an iGPU, yet the shared memory architecture remains its Achilles' heel in memory-heavy titles like Control.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The dataset provides average FPS for twelve distinct combinations of resolution and settings, with minimum and maximum FPS recorded for the Medium preset at each resolution. At 1920x1080, the performance ranges from a low of 71 FPS on Ultra to a high of 130 FPS on Low. The High preset averages 82 FPS, while Medium averages 92 FPS with a minimum of 78 and a maximum of 106. This indicates that 1080p is the most comfortable territory for this combo, with all presets maintaining average frame rates above 70 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the average FPS drops across all settings. Low produces 98 FPS, High produces 62 FPS, Medium produces 70 FPS (min 59, max 80), and Ultra produces 54 FPS. The Medium preset's minimum of 59 FPS is notable, as it is just shy of the 60 FPS target. This suggests that 1440p Medium is borderline for a locked 60 FPS experience, while High and Ultra will see occasional dips below that threshold.

At 3840x2160, the performance becomes more constrained. Low averages 66 FPS, which is still playable, but Medium drops to 47 FPS (min 40, max 54), High to 42 FPS, and Ultra to 36 FPS. The 4K results show that this combo is best suited for Low settings if a stable experience is desired, while Medium and above will require a tolerance for 30-45 FPS gameplay. The minimum FPS of 40 at 4K Medium is the lowest recorded in the entire dataset, highlighting the performance pressure at this resolution.

The data shows a clear tiered structure: 1080p is fully playable at all settings, 1440p is playable at Low and Medium with compromises at High and Ultra, and 4K is only viable at Low settings. The absence of minimum FPS data for most presets means we cannot fully assess frame time consistency, but the Medium preset data suggests that stutter is present at 1440p (min 59) and more pronounced at 4K (min 40).

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based strictly on the measured average FPS, the optimal settings hinge on the target frame rate. For players with a 60 Hz display, the 2560x1440 High preset (62 FPS) is the highest visual quality option that maintains an average above 60 FPS. However, the lack of minimum FPS data for the High preset means we cannot guarantee it will never dip below 60. To ensure a more consistent experience, the 1440p Medium preset (70 FPS average, 59 FPS minimum) is a safer choice, as the recorded minimum is within a single frame of the 60 FPS target.

For 1080p displays, the Ultra preset (71 FPS) is the recommended choice for maximum visual fidelity, as it stays above the 60 FPS threshold. Players prioritizing higher refresh rates can drop to Medium (92 FPS) or Low (130 FPS) to unlock smoother motion, but the visual compromise may not be worth it given that Ultra already delivers a solid experience.

At 4K, the recommendation is more nuanced. The Low preset (66 FPS) is the only option that averages above 60 FPS, making it the clear choice for players who prioritize frame rate. The Medium preset (47 FPS) offers a better visual experience but requires a tolerance for sub-60 FPS gameplay. The High (42 FPS) and Ultra (36 FPS) presets are best reserved for players who value image quality over smoothness and are willing to play at 30-40 FPS.

The data suggests that Control's settings scaling is not linear. The jump from Low to Medium costs roughly 19 FPS at 4K (66 to 47), while the jump from Medium to High costs only 5 FPS (47 to 42). This indicates that the Medium preset provides a reasonable balance of visual improvements and performance cost, while the High and Ultra presets offer diminishing returns. For the best overall experience on this hardware, the 1440p Medium preset appears to strike the optimal balance, delivering a playable frame rate with a minimum above 55 FPS and a visual quality that is only one tier below the maximum.