Control

# Control: Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile — Benchmark Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile delivers a playable but constrained experience in Control, with the combination ranking 2,983rd out of 3,720 tested configurations. The data indicates a system that is heavily GPU-bound at higher resolutions, while the CPU's substantial 24-core/24-thread architecture becomes increasingly relevant only at lower settings where frame rates climb. Measured results span from 29 FPS at 4K Ultra to 103 FPS at 1080p Low, revealing a performance envelope that favors 1080p and 1440p gaming over 4K.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and consistent drop as resolution increases from 1080p to 4K across all settings presets. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 103 FPS at 1920x1080 to 78 FPS at 2560x1440, then to 52 FPS at 3840x2160 — a 49.0% reduction from 1080p to 4K. The Medium preset follows a similar trajectory: 73 FPS at 1080p, 55 FPS at 1440p, and 37 FPS at 4K, representing a 49.3% drop. High settings show 65 FPS at 1080p, 49 FPS at 1440p, and 33 FPS at 4K, a 49.2% decline. Ultra settings produce 56 FPS at 1080p, 43 FPS at 1440p, and 29 FPS at 4K, a 48.2% reduction.

The consistency of these percentage drops — all hovering near 49% — indicates that the scaling penalty from 1080p to 4K is nearly uniform regardless of quality preset. This uniformity suggests the GPU is the primary limiting factor throughout the resolution range. The RTX 5050 Mobile's 8 GB GDDR7 memory on a 128-bit bus with 384.0 GB/s bandwidth handles the pixel throughput demands, but the 7.680 TFLOPS FP32 compute capacity constrains frame generation at higher resolutions.

The transition from 1080p to 1440p costs roughly 25-27% of the frame rate across all presets, while the 1440p to 4K step costs an additional 30-33%. This non-linear scaling pattern is characteristic of a GPU reaching its fillrate and compute limits. The pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s become increasingly strained as pixel count quadruples from 1080p to 4K.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX brings substantial processing resources to this pairing: 24 cores and 24 threads based on the Arrow Lake-HX architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC. The base clock of 2.70 GHz boosts to 5.40 GHz, with a 55 W TDP. The CPU's L3 cache totals 36 MB shared, with 192 KB L1 and 3 MB L2 per core. Memory bandwidth is rated at 102.4 GB/s over a dual-channel DDR5 interface.

Benchmark scores position this CPU in the 94th percentile of all processors tested. Cinebench R23 results show 35,589 multi-core and 2,204 single-core points. Geekbench scores are 20,795 multi-core and 2,458 single-core. The PassMark multithread score of 55,759 and single-thread score of 4,713 further document its capability. The nearest rivals in aggregate CPU score include the Intel Xeon w5-3525 at -0.3%, AMD EPYC 4484PX at -0.5%, AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5955WX at -0.6%, and Intel Xeon 6515P at +0.7%.

In Control, the CPU's role is most visible at 1080p Low, where the system achieves 103 FPS. At this setting, the GPU is less burdened, and the CPU's high boost clock of 5.40 GHz helps sustain frame delivery. However, the game's demands at higher settings and resolutions shift the bottleneck firmly to the GPU. At 4K Ultra, the frame rate drops to 29 FPS, a figure far below what the CPU's capabilities would permit if the workload were processor-bound.

The 24-thread configuration provides ample headroom for background tasks and future titles, but Control's measured results indicate the game does not heavily leverage the multi-core advantage. The 36 MB L3 cache helps maintain consistent frame pacing, as evidenced by the Medium preset showing minimum FPS of 62 at 1080p, 47 at 1440p, and 32 at 4K — suggesting stable frame delivery without severe stuttering.

Settings Recommendations

Examining the measured rows across all resolutions and presets, the Medium settings preset offers the best balance of visual quality and performance. At 1920x1080, Medium delivers 73 FPS average with a minimum of 62 FPS and maximum of 84 FPS. This frame rate comfortably exceeds the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay while maintaining reasonable visual fidelity. The 1440p Medium result of 55 FPS average, with a 47 FPS minimum, remains playable for most users, though those seeking higher refresh rates may prefer Low settings.

Low settings at 1080p produce 103 FPS, which is the only measured configuration to exceed 100 FPS. This setting is recommended for competitive play or for users with high-refresh displays. At 1440p Low, the 78 FPS average still provides smooth gameplay. The High preset at 1080p yields 65 FPS, which is acceptable but offers only marginal visual improvements over Medium while costing 8 FPS. Ultra settings at any resolution are difficult to recommend: 56 FPS at 1080p, 43 FPS at 1440p, and 29 FPS at 4K all fall short of the Medium preset's performance-per-quality ratio.

For 4K displays, the data suggests Medium settings at 37 FPS average are borderline playable, while Low at 52 FPS is the only 4K configuration approaching smoothness. The 4K Ultra result of 29 FPS falls below the generally accepted minimum for action games. Given the RTX 5050 Mobile's specifications — 2,560 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs — the GPU's compute resources are better allocated to lower resolutions where the 7.680 TFLOPS FP32 throughput can maintain higher frame rates.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile ranks 2,983rd out of 3,720 tested combos in Control, placing it in the lower 20% of all configurations. This ranking reflects the GPU's position in the broader performance hierarchy: the RTX 5050 Mobile sits in the 83rd percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 43,268. Its nearest rivals in aggregate GPU score are the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB at 0.0% delta, NVIDIA Quadro M6000 at -0.1%, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER at +0.1%, and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile at -0.9%.

The CPU's strong 94th percentile ranking does not compensate for the GPU's mid-tier positioning in this game. Control's measured frame rates at 4K — 29 to 52 FPS depending on settings — demonstrate that the RTX 5050 Mobile's 8 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory interface cannot sustain high frame rates at ultra-high resolutions. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,365 and Geekbench OpenCL score of 84,171 quantify the GPU's overall compute capability, which is modest relative to higher-tier GeForce 50-series parts.

The combo rank of 2,983 out of 3,720 indicates that 80.2% of tested configurations perform better in Control. This places the system in the lower quintile, though the CPU's capabilities mean the bottleneck is almost entirely the GPU. Users considering this combination for Control should focus on 1080p gaming, where the system's relative performance improves substantially compared to its 4K showing.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture using the GB207 chip, manufactured on a 5 nm process by TSMC with 16,900 million transistors on a 149 mm² die. The GPU operates at a 1,020 MHz base clock and 1,500 MHz boost clock, with memory running at 1,500 MHz (24 Gbps effective). The 8 GB GDDR7 frame buffer on a 128-bit bus provides 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU's 50 W TDP reflects its mobile, integrated form factor (designated as IGP slot width with no power connectors).

In Control, the GPU's role is dominant across all measured configurations. The scaling analysis shows that reducing resolution from 4K to 1080p nearly doubles frame rates at every preset, confirming GPU-bound behavior. The RTX 5050 Mobile's 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores provide hardware support for ray tracing and DLSS, though the measured data does not include ray-traced scenarios. The DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) API support ensures compatibility with modern rendering features.

The GPU's 7.680 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 48.00 GPixel/s pixel rate explain the 4K limitations. At 3840x2160, the GPU must process 8.3 million pixels per frame; at 29 FPS Ultra, this equates to approximately 240 million pixels per second, approaching the pixel rate ceiling. The 120.0 GTexel/s texture rate similarly constrains detailed surface rendering at high resolutions. The 8 GB VRAM capacity is sufficient for Control's textures at 1080p and 1440p, but 4K Ultra textures may approach the memory limit, potentially contributing to the sub-30 FPS result.

The GPU's aggregate benchmark score of 43,268 places it near the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB (43,262, 0.0% delta) and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER (43,223, +0.1% delta), while trailing the RTX 4090 Mobile (43,667, -0.9% delta) by a narrow margin. These proximity scores suggest the RTX 5050 Mobile delivers performance comparable to desktop GPUs from previous generations, but the 50 W TDP limits sustained performance in demanding titles like Control.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for playing Control with this hardware?

A: The measured data shows 1920x1080 is the most capable resolution, with frame rates ranging from 56 FPS at Ultra to 103 FPS at Low. At 2560x1440, the range is 43 to 78 FPS, while 3840x2160 produces 29 to 52 FPS depending on settings. The 1080p Medium configuration offers 73 FPS average with a 62 FPS minimum.

Q: Can this system achieve 60 FPS in Control?

A: Yes, at 1080p with Low settings, the system reaches 103 FPS average. At 1080p Medium, it delivers 73 FPS average with a 62 FPS minimum, maintaining 60+ FPS throughout. At 1080p High, the average drops to 65 FPS. At 1440p, only the Low preset at 78 FPS exceeds 60 FPS; Medium produces 55 FPS, High 49 FPS, and Ultra 43 FPS.

Q: How does the RTX 5050 Mobile compare to other GPUs in the database?

A: The GPU ranks in the 83rd percentile of all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 43,268. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB (43,262, 0.0% delta), NVIDIA Quadro M6000 (43,301, -0.1% delta), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER (43,223, +0.1% delta), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile (43,667, -0.9% delta). The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 2,365.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX a bottleneck in Control?

A: The CPU is not the bottleneck in most configurations. The 24-core/24-thread processor ranks in the 94th percentile of all CPUs with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 35,589 and single-core score of 2,204. The uniform ~49% frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K across all presets indicates the GPU is the limiting component. The CPU's 5.40 GHz boost clock supports high frame rates at lower resolutions.

Q: What is the performance difference between Medium and Ultra settings?

A: At 1080p, Medium produces 73 FPS while Ultra produces 56 FPS, a 17 FPS difference. At 1440p, the gap is 12 FPS (55 vs 43). At 4K, the difference narrows to 8 FPS (37 vs 29). The Medium preset consistently delivers approximately 23-30% higher frame rates than Ultra across all resolutions.

Q: Does the system maintain stable frame pacing in Control?

A: The Medium preset data includes minimum FPS readings: 62 at 1080p, 47 at 1440p, and 32 at 4K. These minimums represent 84.9%, 85.5%, and 86.5% of their respective averages, indicating relatively stable frame delivery. The maximum FPS readings of 84 at 1080p, 63 at 1440p, and 43 at 4K show a consistent frame rate range without severe spikes or drops.

Measured FPS Breakdown

1920x1080 Ultra: Average 56 FPS. This is the highest quality preset at the most common gaming resolution, delivering playable frame rates though falling short of 60 FPS.

1920x1080 High: Average 65 FPS. A modest improvement of 9 FPS over Ultra, providing smoother gameplay while maintaining high visual quality.

1920x1080 Medium: Average 73 FPS, minimum 62 FPS, maximum 84 FPS. The best balance of quality and performance, with the minimum FPS staying above 60.

1920x1080 Low: Average 103 FPS. The only measured configuration exceeding 100 FPS, ideal for high-refresh displays or competitive play.

2560x1440 Ultra: Average 43 FPS. The frame rate drops below the 60 FPS threshold, making this configuration more suited to slower-paced exploration.

2560x1440 High: Average 49 FPS. A 6 FPS improvement over Ultra, but still below smooth gameplay standards.

2560x1440 Medium: Average 55 FPS, minimum 47 FPS, maximum 63 FPS. The minimum FPS dips below 50, indicating occasional frame drops during intense scenes.

2560x1440 Low: Average 78 FPS. The only 1440p configuration exceeding 60 FPS, providing smooth gameplay with reduced visual fidelity.

3840x2160 Ultra: Average 29 FPS. The most demanding configuration, producing frame rates at the edge of playability for action games.

3840x2160 High: Average 33 FPS. Marginal improvement over Ultra, still below 30 FPS for extended periods.

3840x2160 Medium: Average 37 FPS, minimum 32 FPS, maximum 43 FPS. The best 4K preset for maintaining playable frame rates, though the minimum FPS approaches the lower bound of acceptable performance.

3840x2160 Low: Average 52 FPS. The only 4K configuration approaching smooth gameplay, sacrificing most visual quality for performance.