Control

Control is a demanding action-adventure title that stresses both the CPU and GPU heavily, and the combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX and AMD Radeon 8050S produces a specific performance profile that varies significantly with resolution and settings. The data shows a system that can deliver smooth frame rates at 1080p but struggles to maintain playability at 4K, making it a configuration best suited for high-refresh-rate gaming at lower resolutions. This analysis breaks down the measured results, contextualizes them against rival hardware, and provides clear guidance on how to optimize the experience.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX is a 24-core, 24-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, with a TDP of 55 W. The processor features a substantial cache hierarchy, including 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. This mobile chip is designed for high-end laptops, evidenced by its Intel BGA 2114 socket and support for DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus providing 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth.

In the context of Control, the CPU's role is primarily to feed the GPU with draw calls and manage game logic, physics, and AI. The benchmark results indicate that the Ultra 9 275HX is a very capable processor, ranking in the 94th percentile of all CPUs. Its multi-threaded performance is particularly strong, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 35,589 and a Geekbench multi-core score of 20,795. Single-thread performance is also solid, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,204 and a Geekbench single-core score of 2,458, which is crucial for games that rely on a few primary threads.

The closest rivals to this CPU, based on average benchmark scores, include the Intel Xeon w5-3525, which scores 67,673 on average (a 0.3% difference), and the AMD EPYC 4484PX, which scores 67,822 (a 0.5% difference). These are workstation-class chips, and the Ultra 9 275HX sits right alongside them in raw compute power. Given the high core count and strong single-thread performance, the data suggests that the CPU is unlikely to be a bottleneck in Control at most settings, as the game's engine is well-optimized for multi-core processors. However, at high frame rates and lower resolutions, the CPU's performance in handling game logic can become more relevant, though the measured FPS figures suggest the GPU is the limiting factor in most scenarios.

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

The AMD Radeon 8050S is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) based on the RDNA 3.5 architecture, using the Strix Halo chip built on a 4 nm process by TSMC. It features 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 raster output units, along with 32 ray tracing cores. The GPU has a base clock of 1295 MHz and a boost clock of 2800 MHz. A key characteristic of this GPU is its memory configuration: it uses "System Shared" memory, meaning it relies on the system's DDR5 RAM rather than dedicated VRAM. This makes its memory bandwidth "System Dependent," which has significant implications for performance in a game like Control.

The GPU's raw compute power is rated at 11.47 TFLOPS for FP32 operations. In benchmark tests, the Radeon 8050S achieves a Geekbench OpenCL score of 65,818 and a Vulkan score of 58,398, placing it in the 89th percentile of all GPUs. Its closest rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M, which scores 61,896 (a 0.3% difference), and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56, which scores 63,693 (a 2.5% difference). The reliance on shared system memory is a critical factor; while the GPU has access to a large pool of memory, the bandwidth is shared with the CPU and is dependent on the system's memory speed and configuration. This can lead to performance dips in scenarios with high memory pressure, such as high-resolution textures and complex scenes.

In Control, the GPU is the primary driver of frame rate. The measured FPS data shows a clear pattern: the Radeon 8050S performs admirably at 1080p but sees a sharp decline as resolution increases. At 1080p with Low settings, it achieves 116 FPS, but at 4K with Ultra settings, it drops to just 32 FPS. This performance scaling suggests that the GPU's compute capabilities are sufficient for lower resolutions, but the memory bandwidth limitations and the sheer pixel count at higher resolutions overwhelm it, leading to the observed frame rate drops.

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 275HX and AMD Radeon 8050S ranks 2127 out of 2888 combos. This places it in the lower-middle tier of all tested systems, indicating that while it is not a low-end performer, it is far from the top of the charts. The rank reflects the overall average performance across all tested resolutions and settings, and it is heavily influenced by the GPU's struggles at higher resolutions.

This ranking is somewhat surprising given the high individual percentile scores of both the CPU (94th) and GPU (89th). The discrepancy highlights that the combination of a top-tier CPU with a mid-to-high-tier integrated GPU does not necessarily translate to top-tier gaming performance, especially in a game like Control that is graphically intensive. The combo's rank suggests that many other systems, likely with dedicated graphics cards, achieve higher average frame rates across the board. The data implies that the CPU's potential is largely untapped in this game, as the GPU becomes the bottleneck in most scenarios, particularly at 1440p and 4K resolutions.

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

The measured FPS data provides a detailed look at how this combo performs across three resolutions and four quality presets.

1920x1080:

• Low: The average FPS is 116, which is excellent for competitive or high-refresh-rate play.
• Medium: The average FPS drops to 82, with a minimum of 70 and a maximum of 94, showing good consistency.
• High: The average FPS is 73, which remains playable and smooth.
• Ultra: The average FPS is 63, which is still playable but begins to show the GPU's limits.

2560x1440:

• Low: The average FPS is 87, which is very good and indicates the GPU can handle the resolution at lower settings.
• Medium: The average FPS is 62, with a minimum of 53 and a maximum of 71, which is acceptable for most players.
• High: The average FPS is 55, which starts to feel less smooth, especially in action-heavy scenes.
• Ultra: The average FPS is 48, which is borderline playable but may result in noticeable stutters.

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: The average FPS is 59, which is just about playable but not ideal for a smooth experience.
• Medium: The average FPS is 42, with a minimum of 36 and a maximum of 48, indicating significant performance dips.
• High: The average FPS is 37, which is not smooth and would be a poor experience for most users.
• Ultra: The average FPS is 32, which is below the threshold for comfortable play.

The data reveals a clear pattern: the performance is highly dependent on resolution. The difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p is 53 FPS, while at 4K it is only 27 FPS, indicating that the GPU is saturated at higher resolutions regardless of settings.

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

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to achieve a smooth 60+ FPS experience?

A: At 1920x1080, the combo achieves over 60 FPS on all settings except Ultra, which hits 63 FPS. At 2560x1440, only the Low setting (87 FPS) and Medium setting (62 FPS) achieve 60 FPS or higher. At 4K, no setting achieves 60 FPS.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX compare to its nearest rival, the Intel Xeon w5-3525?

A: The Ultra 9 275HX has an average benchmark score of 67,469, while the Xeon w5-3525 scores 67,673. This represents a 0.3% difference, indicating they perform nearly identically in synthetic benchmarks.

Q: What is the GPU's performance percentile and how does it compare to the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M?

A: The AMD Radeon 8050S is in the 89th percentile of all GPUs. Its average benchmark score is 62,108, which is 0.3% higher than the Radeon Pro W6600M's score of 61,896.

Q: Does the combo's ranking in Control reflect the individual strengths of its components?

A: No. The combo ranks 2127 out of 2888 tested combos, which is in the lower-middle tier. This is despite the CPU being in the 94th percentile and the GPU in the 89th percentile, suggesting that the integrated GPU's performance in this specific game is the limiting factor.

Q: What are the minimum and maximum FPS recorded at 2560x1440 with Medium settings?

A: At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the combo achieves an average FPS of 62, with a minimum of 53 FPS and a maximum of 71 FPS.

Q: Is the GPU's memory configuration a potential factor in its performance?

A: Yes, the GPU uses System Shared memory with System Dependent bandwidth. This means it relies on the system's DDR5 RAM, and its performance can be affected by the system's memory configuration, unlike a dedicated GPU with its own VRAM.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution and the user's preference for visual quality versus frame rate.

For 1920x1080: The High preset offers a strong balance, delivering an average of 73 FPS. This provides a significant visual upgrade over Low (116 FPS) while remaining well above the 60 FPS threshold. For users with high-refresh-rate monitors (120Hz+), the Low preset at 116 FPS is the only way to fully utilize the display's potential. The Ultra preset at 63 FPS is also viable for players who prioritize visual fidelity over a higher frame rate buffer.

For 2560x1440: The Low preset (87 FPS) is the clear choice for a smooth experience, as it is the only setting that provides a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. The Medium preset (62 FPS) is acceptable, but the minimum of 53 FPS indicates potential dips below 60 FPS in demanding scenes. The High (55 FPS) and Ultra (48 FPS) presets are not recommended for a consistently smooth experience, as they fall below the 60 FPS threshold.

For 3840x2160: None of the presets achieve a consistently smooth 60 FPS. The Low preset (59 FPS) is the only one that approaches playability, but it will likely have occasional drops. The Medium (42 FPS), High (37 FPS), and Ultra (32 FPS) presets are all below the playable threshold and would result in a subpar experience. The data suggests that 4K gaming is not a viable option for this hardware combination in Control.

In summary, the best experience is achieved by prioritizing lower resolutions and adjusting settings to maintain a frame rate above 60 FPS. The data indicates that the sweet spot for this combo is 1080p with High settings, offering a good mix of visual quality and performance. At 1440p, users must compromise on visual quality to achieve smooth gameplay, while 4K should be avoided due to unplayable frame rates across all presets.