Control

# Control with Intel Core Ultra 9 185H + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080

This combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H mobile processor and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 graphics card achieves a rank of 730 out of 2888 tested combos in Control, placing it in the 74.7th percentile of all tested system configurations. The pairing sits comfortably in the upper quartile of results, though the data reveals some interesting bottlenecks that prevent it from climbing higher. The RTX 5080, which ranks at the 87th percentile among all GPUs, is clearly the dominant component here, while the Core Ultra 9 185H's 85th percentile CPU ranking suggests a slight imbalance that becomes more apparent at lower resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 730 out of 2888 tested combinations in Control places it in the top quarter of all systems tested for this game. This is a strong showing, but the percentile gap between the GPU's 87th percentile and the combo's 74.7th percentile indicates that something is holding the system back from fully expressing the RTX 5080's potential. The CPU's 85th percentile ranking is closer to the GPU's standing, yet the combo rank still falls short of what either component's individual percentile might suggest.

Looking at the CPU's nearest rivals provides context for its performance ceiling. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 sits just 0.1% behind in average benchmark score, while the Intel Core 7 250H trails by 0.2%. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 is 0.4% behind, and the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X lags by 0.7%. These are remarkably tight margins — the Core Ultra 9 185H is essentially performance-identical to several competing mobile and desktop chips, which means the combo's ranking depends heavily on how Control utilizes the system's resources rather than raw CPU dominance.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals tell a similar story of tight competition. The AMD Radeon 8060S is only 0.6% behind in average score, the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB trails by 0.7%, and the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X is 2.3% behind. However, the AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE sits 2.2% ahead. This clustering suggests that the RTX 5080 is in a competitive performance tier where small architectural differences and driver optimizations can shift rankings significantly.

The data implies that this combo's rank is primarily determined by the GPU's performance in Control, with the CPU providing sufficient support to avoid being a major limiting factor. The question becomes whether the Core Ultra 9 185H's 16 cores and 22 threads are fully utilized by Control's engine, or if the game's demands are modest enough that a weaker CPU would yield nearly identical results.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 brings substantial hardware to Control. With 16 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus, the card offers 960.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth — a figure that becomes relevant when considering how the game handles textures and effects at higher resolutions. The GPU's 10752 shading units, 336 texture mapping units, and 112 raster output pipelines provide the raw compute throughput needed for Control's particle-heavy physics and destructible environments.

Clock speeds show a base of 2295 MHz and a boost of 2617 MHz, with memory running at 1875 MHz (30 Gbps effective). These clocks, combined with the 56.28 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, suggest the GPU has headroom for demanding scenarios. The 84 ray tracing cores and 336 tensor cores are particularly relevant for Control, which was one of the earliest titles to feature ray-traced reflections and lighting effects. The data does not specify whether ray tracing was enabled in the measured FPS results, but the presence of these dedicated cores means the hardware is capable of handling such workloads.

The GPU's benchmark scores reinforce its position. A PassMark G3D score of 36565 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 255450 indicate strong DirectX 12 and Vulkan performance, which matters for Control's modern rendering pipeline. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 8637 provides another reference point for how the card handles current-generation graphics workloads.

The measured FPS in Control shows the GPU scaling as expected with settings changes. At 4K, the difference between Low (97 FPS) and Ultra (53 FPS) settings represents a 83% performance drop, demonstrating that the higher preset levels impose significant rendering costs. The GPU's 16 GB VRAM capacity appears sufficient even at 4K Ultra, as no memory-related stutters or anomalies are evident in the FPS data — though the minimum FPS readings are only available for Medium settings at each resolution.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS progression from 1080p to 4K reveals how this system's performance scales with resolution and where the bottleneck shifts. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 120 at 1080p to 91 at 1440p (a 24.2% decrease), then to 61 at 4K (a 33.0% decrease from 1440p). This scaling pattern suggests the GPU is increasingly becoming the limiting factor as resolution rises, which is expected given the RTX 5080's compute capabilities.

Low settings show a steeper relative drop: 190 FPS at 1080p, 144 FPS at 1440p (a 24.2% decrease), and 97 FPS at 4K (a 32.6% decrease from 1440p). The fact that the percentage drops are nearly identical between High and Low settings across resolutions indicates that the rendering workload scales similarly regardless of quality preset — the GPU is handling the additional pixels in a linear fashion.

Medium settings provide the only complete FPS data with minimum and maximum readings. At 1080p, the average is 135 FPS with a range of 115 to 155. At 1440p, the average drops to 102 FPS with a range of 87 to 117. At 4K, the average falls to 69 FPS with a range of 59 to 79. The consistent 33 FPS drop between each resolution step suggests a predictable GPU-bound scaling curve.

The 4K to 1080p ratio at Medium settings is 69/135, or roughly 51% — meaning 4K performance is about half of 1080p performance. This halving of FPS from 1080p to 4K is typical for a GPU-bound scenario, where pixel count quadruples but other factors like memory bandwidth and cache efficiency partially offset the expected 75% performance reduction. The data indicates that at 1080p, the CPU may be starting to limit performance, as the FPS figures approach what the Core Ultra 9 185H can sustain in terms of frame generation.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its highest frame rates. Low settings produce an average of 190 FPS, which represents the ceiling for this configuration. Medium settings average 135 FPS with a minimum of 115 and maximum of 155, providing a 20 FPS spread that suggests some scene-to-scene variability. High settings average 120 FPS, while Ultra settings average 104 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 86 FPS, or 45.3% of the Low setting's performance.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance drops become more pronounced. Low settings average 144 FPS, Medium averages 102 FPS (minimum 87, maximum 117), High averages 91 FPS, and Ultra averages 79 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra is 65 FPS, representing a 45.1% reduction — a similar proportional drop to what was observed at 1080p, indicating that the GPU is scaling consistently with resolution.

At 3840x2160, the system remains playable across all settings. Low settings average 97 FPS, Medium averages 69 FPS (minimum 59, maximum 79), High averages 61 FPS, and Ultra averages 53 FPS. The Low to Ultra gap is 44 FPS, or 45.4% of the Low figure. This consistency across resolutions — roughly a 45% performance penalty from Low to Ultra regardless of resolution — suggests the settings presets impose similar relative costs whether the GPU is rendering 2 million or 8 million pixels.

The Medium settings data is the most complete, showing that at every resolution, the minimum FPS stays above 59 — meaning the system never drops below a playable threshold even at 4K. The maximum FPS readings at Medium settings show headroom: 155 at 1080p, 117 at 1440p, and 79 at 4K. These ranges indicate that Control's performance is relatively stable, with the spread between minimum and maximum being about 30% of the average at each resolution.

CPU Role

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

For a game like Control, which was released in 2019 and is primarily GPU-intensive, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and physics calculations. The Core Ultra 9 185H's benchmark results show strong multi-threaded performance: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 17984.5 and a Geekbench multi-core score of 11657. Single-thread performance is also solid, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1810.5 and a Geekbench single-core score of 1794. These scores indicate the CPU can handle Control's single-threaded game logic while still having multi-core headroom for background tasks.

The PassMark results provide additional context. A multi-thread score of 29376 and a single-thread score of 3697 suggest balanced performance. The physics score of 1956 is particularly relevant for Control's destructible environments and physics-based combat. The data compression score of 339489 and encryption score of 19827 are less relevant for gaming but indicate the CPU's general compute capabilities.

The key observation is that at 1080p Low settings, the system reaches 190 FPS, which approaches the practical limit for many displays. The CPU's 85th percentile ranking among all processors means it outperforms the majority of CPUs on the market, yet the combo's 74.7th percentile rank in Control suggests the game may not fully utilize all 16 cores. Control's engine is known to scale across multiple threads, but the 22 threads of the Core Ultra 9 185H may exceed what the game can effectively use.

The nearest rival comparison shows the CPU is essentially tied with the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 and Intel Core 7 250H, both of which are also mobile processors. The fact that the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X — a desktop processor — is only 0.7% ahead in average benchmark score indicates that the Core Ultra 9 185H is performing at the level of capable desktop CPUs despite its mobile form factor. This suggests the CPU is not a limiting factor in this combo's Control performance, and the rank is more influenced by the GPU's interaction with the game's rendering demands.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to play Control with this combo?

A: The data shows that at 2560x1440 with High settings, the system averages 91 FPS, while at 4K with High settings it averages 61 FPS. At 1080p with High settings, it reaches 120 FPS. The 1440p resolution appears to offer the best balance of visual quality and performance, staying well above 60 FPS even at High settings.

Q: How much performance is lost when going from Ultra to Low settings?

A: At 1080p, Low settings average 190 FPS compared to 104 FPS at Ultra, representing a 45.3% performance reduction. At 1440p, the drop is 45.1% (144 to 79 FPS), and at 4K it is 45.4% (97 to 53 FPS). The consistent proportional drop indicates that Ultra settings impose a similar relative cost at all resolutions.

Q: Is the RTX 5080's 16 GB of VRAM sufficient for Control at 4K?

A: The measured data shows no indication of VRAM limitations at 4K. The system maintains an average of 53 FPS at 4K Ultra settings and 61 FPS at 4K High settings, with no reported stutters or frame drops that would suggest memory constraints. The 16 GB GDDR7 capacity appears adequate for this game.

Q: How does this combo compare to the RTX 5080's nearest GPU rivals in Control?

A: The GPU's nearest rivals are all within 2.3% of its average benchmark score. The AMD Radeon 8060S is 0.6% behind, the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB is 0.7% behind, and the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X is 2.3% behind. Only the AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE sits ahead at 2.2%. These margins are small enough that game-specific optimizations could shift the relative performance in Control.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck the GPU at any resolution?

A: The data suggests the CPU may impose some limitation at 1080p, where the system reaches 190 FPS at Low settings. At higher resolutions, the GPU becomes the clear bottleneck, as evidenced by the consistent 45% performance drop from Low to Ultra settings regardless of resolution. The CPU's 85th percentile ranking and strong single-thread scores indicate it has sufficient headroom for Control's demands.

Q: What is the minimum FPS this combo can deliver?

A: The only minimum FPS readings are available for Medium settings. At 1080p, the minimum is 115 FPS; at 1440p, it is 87 FPS; and at 4K, it is 59 FPS. These figures indicate the system never drops below playable frame rates, even at 4K with Medium settings.

Settings Recommendations

The data points to Medium settings as the optimal balance between visual quality and performance for this combo. At 4K Medium, the system averages 69 FPS with a minimum of 59 FPS, staying just above the 60 FPS target for smooth gameplay. At 1440p Medium, the average rises to 102 FPS with a minimum of 87 FPS, providing a comfortable margin above refresh rate thresholds. At 1080p Medium, the system averages 135 FPS, which exceeds the capability of most 120 Hz displays.

High settings offer a reasonable alternative for users prioritizing visual fidelity. At 1440p High, the average of 91 FPS remains above 60 FPS, while at 4K High the 61 FPS average sits right at the edge of smoothness. The lack of minimum FPS data for High settings makes it difficult to assess worst-case scenarios, but the Medium settings data suggests the system has enough headroom to avoid major dips.

Ultra settings are only recommended for users with variable refresh rate displays who prioritize image quality over raw frame rates. The 4K Ultra average of 53 FPS and 1440p Ultra average of 79 FPS are playable but do not provide the consistency that competitive or action-oriented gameplay might require. Low settings provide the highest frame rates — 190 FPS at 1080p, 144 FPS at 1440p, and 97 FPS at 4K — but sacrifice significant visual quality for performance that most displays cannot fully utilize.

Given that Control is a single-player action-adventure game with a strong emphasis on atmosphere and visual effects, Medium settings at 1440p appear to be the sweet spot. This configuration delivers 102 FPS average with a minimum of 87 FPS, ensuring smooth gameplay while maintaining the visual effects that define the game's aesthetic. For 4K displays, Medium settings at 69 FPS average provide the best compromise, keeping frame rates above 60 FPS while preserving the game's visual identity.