Control

The Intel Core Ultra 9 185H paired with the AMD Radeon 880M integrated graphics produces a highly constrained gaming experience in Control, with performance firmly limited by the GPU at every resolution and settings level. The data shows a combo that ranks 2817 out of 2888 tested configurations, placing it in the bottom 2.5% of all combos for this title. The measured frame rates reveal a system that is functional for low-resolution play but collapses entirely at higher demands, making this a configuration suited only for the most modest gaming scenarios.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate degradation from 1080p to 4K is steep and reveals a system that is almost entirely GPU-bound. At Low settings, the transition from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 drops the average from 55 FPS to 42 FPS, a reduction of 13 frames or roughly 23.6%. Moving from 1440p to 4K at Low settings further reduces the average from 42 FPS to 28 FPS, another 33.3% decline. The full 1080p-to-4K scaling at Low settings shows a drop from 55 FPS to 28 FPS, meaning 4K performance is only 50.9% of 1080p performance.

The scaling pattern at Medium settings follows a similar trajectory but with lower absolute numbers. At 1080p Medium, the average is 39 FPS; at 1440p Medium, it falls to 30 FPS (a 23.1% reduction); and at 4K Medium, it plummets to 20 FPS (a 33.3% reduction from 1440p). The 4K Medium result of 20 FPS represents only 51.3% of the 1080p Medium performance, confirming that the scaling penalty is consistent regardless of quality preset.

High settings show the same proportional decline. From 35 FPS at 1080p High to 26 FPS at 1440p High (a 25.7% drop), and then to 18 FPS at 4K High (a 30.8% drop from 1440p). The 4K High result is 51.4% of the 1080p High figure. Ultra settings are the most punishing: 30 FPS at 1080p, 23 FPS at 1440p, and 15 FPS at 4K. The 4K Ultra average is exactly half of the 1080p Ultra average.

The consistency of these scaling ratios — hovering near 50% when going from 1080p to 4K — indicates that the limiting component is the GPU's raw pixel throughput. The Radeon 880M's 16 ROPs and 46.40 GPixel/s pixel rate are simply insufficient for 4K workloads. The frame rate drops are not caused by CPU limitations; if the CPU were the bottleneck, the scaling from 1440p to 4K would show a much smaller performance gap. Instead, the near-linear relationship between pixel count and frame rate confirms a pure GPU constraint.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 880M is an integrated graphics processor based on the RDNA 3.5 architecture, built on a 4 nm process by TSMC. It features 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The GPU operates at a base clock of 400 MHz and boosts up to 2900 MHz, producing 4.454 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. The memory configuration is entirely system-shared, with bandwidth described as "System Dependent," meaning performance scales with the host system's RAM speed and configuration.

The GPU's benchmark profile places it in the 43rd percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 8436. Its nearest rivals in the database are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX (8427, 0.1% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 (8458, 0.3% higher), and the AMD Radeon HD 8870M (8462, 0.3% higher). These are all older discrete mobile GPUs, which puts the 880M's performance into context: it competes with dedicated graphics solutions from roughly a decade ago, not with modern discrete cards.

In Control, the GPU's limitations are evident across all measured settings. The highest average frame rate achieved at any resolution is 55 FPS at 1080p Low. At 1080p Medium, the average drops to 39 FPS, and at 1080p High, it falls to 35 FPS. The 1080p Ultra setting yields 30 FPS. These numbers indicate that the GPU can handle the game only at its most reduced settings at 1080p, and even then with no headroom for demanding scenes.

The 12 ray tracing cores present in the 880M are largely irrelevant for this title at playable settings, as enabling any form of ray tracing would further degrade the already marginal frame rates. The DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) is a hardware capability, but the 4.454 TFLOPS compute throughput is insufficient to leverage advanced rendering features meaningfully. The GPU's 46.40 GPixel/s pixel rate and 139.2 GTexel/s texture rate are the physical limits that govern the frame rates seen in the measured results.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured data, the only acceptable experience is at 1920x1080 with Low settings, where the average frame rate reaches 55 FPS. This is the sole configuration that approaches the 60 FPS target commonly associated with smooth gameplay. The 1080p Medium preset delivers 39 FPS on average, which is playable but noticeably less fluid, while 1080p High (35 FPS) and 1080p Ultra (30 FPS) progressively sacrifice smoothness for visual fidelity.

At 2560x1440, no settings preset achieves a truly playable frame rate. The best result is 42 FPS at Low settings, which is marginal for action-oriented gameplay. The 1440p Medium (30 FPS), High (26 FPS), and Ultra (23 FPS) results are all below the threshold for comfortable play. At 4K, all settings produce averages between 15 and 28 FPS, which is unusable for a game like Control that requires responsive controls during combat sequences.

The data clearly indicates that the optimal configuration is 1080p Low. This setting provides the largest performance buffer, with 55 FPS average, and avoids the sub-40 FPS territory that dominates all other options. The difference between 1080p Low (55 FPS) and 1080p Medium (39 FPS) is 16 frames, a 41% improvement for the Low preset. By contrast, the jump from Medium to High at 1080p costs only 4 FPS (39 to 35), suggesting that Medium offers diminishing returns over Low without approaching smoothness.

Users who prioritize visual quality over frame rate might consider 1080p Medium as a compromise, accepting 39 FPS for better textures and effects. However, the measured minimum frame rate at 1080p Medium is 33 FPS, which indicates occasional dips that could be noticeable during intense action. The 1080p Low setting has no reported minimum frame rate, implying consistent performance without severe drops.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full settings spectrum is as follows: Low produces an average of 55 FPS with no reported minimum or maximum; Medium produces 39 FPS average with a minimum of 33 FPS and a maximum of 45 FPS; High produces 35 FPS average; Ultra produces 30 FPS average. The spread between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 25 FPS, with each settings tier costing roughly 4-5 FPS on average.

At 2560x1440, the results shift downward significantly. Low yields 42 FPS average, Medium yields 30 FPS average with a minimum of 25 FPS and maximum of 34 FPS, High yields 26 FPS average, and Ultra yields 23 FPS average. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 19 FPS, with the percentage reduction from Low to Ultra being 45.2%. The 1440p Medium minimum of 25 FPS indicates that frame timing can become unstable under load.

At 3840x2160, all settings produce sub-30 FPS averages. Low delivers 28 FPS, Medium delivers 20 FPS average with a minimum of 17 FPS and maximum of 23 FPS, High delivers 18 FPS, and Ultra delivers 15 FPS. The 4K results are uniformly unplayable, with even the best case (Low at 28 FPS) falling well below acceptable thresholds for a third-person action game. The 4K Medium minimum of 17 FPS suggests that the system can occasionally dip to near-slideshow levels.

The minimum frame rate data, where available, provides insight into consistency. At 1080p Medium, the minimum of 33 FPS is 84.6% of the average, indicating moderate variance. At 1440p Medium, the minimum of 25 FPS is 83.3% of the average. At 4K Medium, the minimum of 17 FPS is 85% of the average. These ratios suggest that the GPU maintains relatively stable output, but the absolute values are too low for comfortable gameplay at 1440p and above.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H and AMD Radeon 880M ranks 2817 out of 2888 tested combos in Control, placing it in the bottom 2.5% of all configurations. This ranking reflects the fundamental mismatch between the CPU's capabilities and the GPU's limitations for this particular title. The Core Ultra 9 185H is a high-end mobile processor, but the Radeon 880M is an integrated GPU that cannot deliver the frame rates required for a demanding action game.

The CPU's average benchmark score is 35670, placing it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 (35719, 0.1% higher), the Intel Core 7 250H (35728, 0.2% higher), the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 (35802, 0.4% higher), and the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X (35909, 0.7% higher). These scores show that the CPU is competitive with modern mid-range and high-end processors, yet the system's gaming performance is dragged down entirely by the GPU.

The GPU's average benchmark score is 8436, placing it in the 43rd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX (8427, 0.1% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 (8458, 0.3% higher), the AMD Radeon HD 8870M (8462, 0.3% higher), and the AMD Radeon R9 M375X (8325, 1.3% lower). The 880M's performance is essentially equivalent to these older discrete GPUs, which explains why the combo ranks so poorly in a modern game with substantial graphical demands.

The disparity between the CPU's 85th percentile ranking and the GPU's 43rd percentile ranking is the defining characteristic of this combo. In Control, the GPU is the limiting factor, and the CPU's substantial compute headroom (16 cores, 22 threads, 5.10 GHz boost) goes largely unused. The combo rank of 2817 out of 2888 is consistent with what would be expected from an integrated GPU solution attempting to run a graphically intensive title.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 185H is a 16-core, 22-thread processor based on the Meteor Lake architecture, manufactured on Intel's 7 nm process. It has a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, with a 45 W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The CPU supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s.

In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU demonstrates strong multi-threaded performance: Cinebench R23 multicore scores 17984.5, while single-core scores 1810.5. Geekbench multicore reaches 11657, and single-core reaches 1794. Passmark multithread scores 29376, with single-thread at 3697. These figures place the CPU in the 85th percentile of all CPUs, indicating it is well above average for processing tasks.

However, in Control, the CPU's role is minimal because the GPU is the bottleneck. The measured frame rates show no evidence of CPU limitation; if the CPU were restricting performance, the scaling from 1080p to 4K would show smaller frame rate differences, as the GPU would be less stressed at lower resolutions. Instead, the consistent ~50% performance drop from 1080p to 4K across all settings confirms that the GPU's pixel throughput is the sole constraint.

The CPU's 24 MB of L3 cache and 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth are more than sufficient for this game's requirements. The 16 cores and 22 threads provide ample processing power for game logic, physics, and AI, but Control at these frame rates does not demand significant CPU resources. The data indicates that the CPU is effectively idle while the GPU struggles to maintain even 30 FPS at 1080p Ultra.

The CPU's nearest rivals in terms of average benchmark score — the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 (35719), Intel Core 7 250H (35728), AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 (35802), and AMD Ryzen 7 7700X (35909) — all fall within 0.7% of the Core Ultra 9 185H's score. This clustering suggests that any of these CPUs would perform identically in Control when paired with the same GPU, reinforcing that the CPU is not a differentiating factor in this combo's poor ranking.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for this system in Control?*

A: The measured data shows that 1920x1080 with Low settings produces the highest average frame rate of 55 FPS. This is the only configuration that approaches smooth, playable performance. All other settings at this resolution yield averages between 30 and 39 FPS, while 1440p and 4K results are below 42 FPS at any settings level.

Q: Why does the frame rate drop so significantly from 1080p to 4K?

A: The average frame rate at 4K is roughly half of the 1080p average across all settings. For example, at Low settings, 1080p produces 55 FPS while 4K produces 28 FPS. This near-linear scaling with pixel count indicates that the AMD Radeon 880M's 46.40 GPixel/s pixel rate is the limiting factor, with no CPU involvement in the bottleneck.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon 880M compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score is 8436, placing it in the 43rd percentile. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX (8427, 0.1% higher), NVIDIA GeForce MX330 (8458, 0.3% higher), AMD Radeon HD 8870M (8462, 0.3% higher), and AMD Radeon R9 M375X (8325, 1.3% lower). These are all older discrete GPUs with comparable performance.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H powerful enough for this game?

A: Yes, the CPU is more than adequate. It scores 17984.5 in Cinebench R23 multicore and ranks in the 85th percentile of all CPUs. However, the CPU's performance is irrelevant in Control because the GPU is the bottleneck. The frame rates are consistently limited by the Radeon 880M regardless of CPU capability.

Q: What is the highest average frame rate achievable at 1440p?

A: The best 1440p result is 42 FPS at Low settings. At Medium settings, the average drops to 30 FPS with a minimum of 25 FPS. High settings yield 26 FPS, and Ultra yields 23 FPS. None of these 1440p configurations provide a consistently smooth experience.

*Q: How does this system rank compared to all tested combinations in Control?*

A: This combo ranks 2817 out of 2888 tested configurations, placing it in the bottom 2.5% of all combos. The low ranking is attributed entirely to the GPU, as the CPU's average benchmark score of 35670 is competitive with modern processors, while the GPU's score of 8436 is far below what the game requires.