Control

The pairing of Intel’s flagship Core Ultra 9 290K Plus processor with AMD’s Radeon RX 570 graphics card is an extreme mismatch in raw compute potential. The CPU is a top-tier desktop part, sitting in the 96th percentile of all processors tested, while the GPU is a legacy Polaris part from the RX 500 series. In Control, a game that demands strong GPU throughput for its physics-heavy action, this combination yields playable frame rates only at lower resolutions and settings. The data shows a system where the graphics card is the definitive bottleneck, and the high-end CPU is largely left waiting for work.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, which places it among the fastest desktop processors in the database. Its benchmark scores reflect that position: it achieves 51,731 points in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 7,303 points in single-core. The processor’s average benchmark score is 84,003, placing it just 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and 1.1% ahead of the AMD EPYC 4584PX, while being 1.3% behind the AMD EPYC 7F72. This is a CPU that excels in both heavily threaded workloads and light, latency-sensitive tasks.

However, in this specific game benchmark, those CPU capabilities are almost entirely unused. Control is an action-adventure title that relies on real-time physics and particle effects, but at the frame rates measured here, the CPU is never the limiting factor. For example, at 1080p with Low settings, the system averages 57 FPS. That is the highest frame rate recorded across all tests, but it is still a modest number for a CPU that can push hundreds of frames per second in less GPU-bound scenarios. The processor’s 24 threads and 36 MB of shared L3 cache are more than sufficient to feed the RX 570’s output; the data indicates the GPU is saturated long before the CPU breaks a sweat.

The processor’s other specifications, such as support for DDR5 memory with dual-channel bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s and PCIe Gen 5 lanes, are forward-looking, but they do not translate into higher frame rates when paired with a 2017-era GPU. The CPU’s 125 W TDP and unlocked multiplier make it a versatile part for other workloads, but in this pairing, its role is simply to not hold the GPU back. Benchmark results show that even the most demanding CPU tests, like Passmark’s data compression at 698,346 points, have no bearing on the final FPS numbers here. The bottleneck is clearly elsewhere.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 570 is built on the Polaris 20 chip with GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process. It has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock is 1168 MHz with a boost clock of 1244 MHz, and it offers 2048 shading units. In terms of raw compute, it peaks at 5.095 TFLOPS FP32. The GPU’s average benchmark score is 28,766, placing it just 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6800M and 0.8% behind the AMD Radeon RX 470, while sitting 0.7% ahead of the AMD Radeon R9 M295X. This places it in the 74th percentile of all GPUs, which is respectable for its age but nowhere near the level required for high-refresh gaming.

In Control, the RX 570’s limitations are immediately apparent. At 1080p with Low settings, the card produces an average of 57 FPS. Dropping to Medium settings reduces that to 40 FPS, and at High settings it falls to 36 FPS. The 4 GB VRAM buffer is likely a contributing factor, as Control’s textures and effects can exceed that capacity at higher settings, leading to stutter or reduced performance. The data shows a clear pattern: each step up in settings costs roughly 15-20% of the frame rate. At Ultra settings, the average drops to 31 FPS, which is below the threshold for smooth playability.

The GPU’s memory bandwidth of 224.0 GB/s is a bright spot for its class, but it is insufficient for Control’s demanding scenes at higher resolutions. The card’s pixel rate of 39.81 GPixel/s and texture rate of 159.2 GTexel/s are decent for 1080p, but they struggle to keep up with the game’s visual complexity at 1440p and beyond. The data suggests that the RX 570 is only viable for this game at 1080p with Low or Medium settings, where it can maintain frame rates above 40 FPS. Any higher settings or resolutions result in averages that dip into the 20s or lower, which is not a pleasant experience for an action game.

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

The measured FPS data across resolutions tells a clear story about where the bottleneck lies. At 1080p with Low settings, the system averages 57 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops that to 43 FPS, a 24.6% decrease. At 4K Low, the average falls to 29 FPS, a further 32.6% decrease from 1440p. This scaling pattern is typical of a GPU-limited scenario: as resolution increases, the GPU must render more pixels, and the frame rate drops proportionally. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see similar frame rates across resolutions, because the CPU’s workload does not scale with pixel count.

The same pattern holds for Medium settings. At 1080p Medium, the system averages 40 FPS, with a minimum of 34 and maximum of 46. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 30 FPS (min 26, max 35), and at 4K Medium, it falls to 21 FPS (min 17, max 24). The consistent ~10 FPS drop for each resolution step confirms that the GPU is working at full capacity. At High settings, the trend continues: 36 FPS at 1080p, 27 FPS at 1440p, and 18 FPS at 4K. Ultra settings are the least playable, with 31 FPS at 1080p, 24 FPS at 1440p, and 16 FPS at 4K.

The data strongly indicates that the RX 570 is the limiting component. The Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is capable of far higher frame rates, as evidenced by its top-tier CPU benchmarks, but it is constrained by the GPU’s inability to render frames quickly enough. The fact that 1080p Low is the only configuration that breaks the 60 FPS barrier—and it barely does so at 57 FPS—reinforces this conclusion. For any resolution above 1080p, the system is firmly in slideshow territory, with 4K averages ranging from 16 to 29 FPS depending on settings. Users seeking higher performance would need to pair this CPU with a significantly more powerful GPU.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings for this combo to achieve playable frame rates?

A: The data shows that 1080p with Low settings produces the highest average FPS at 57. Medium settings at 1080p yield 40 FPS, which is still playable for many users. Any resolution above 1080p or settings above Medium result in averages below 36 FPS, which is suboptimal for an action game.

Q: How does the RX 570 compare to its nearest rivals in terms of average benchmark score?

A: The RX 570 has an average benchmark score of 28,766. It is 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6800M and 0.8% behind the AMD Radeon RX 470, while being 0.7% ahead of the AMD Radeon R9 M295X and 1.2% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus overkill for this GPU?

A: Benchmark results indicate yes. The CPU sits in the 96th percentile and has an average score of 84,003, while the GPU is in the 74th percentile. In this game, the GPU is the bottleneck, meaning the CPU’s extra performance is not utilized at the measured frame rates.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between 1080p and 4K at High settings?

A: At 1080p High, the average FPS is 36. At 4K High, the average drops to 18 FPS, which is exactly half. This 50% reduction illustrates the GPU’s inability to handle higher pixel counts.

Q: Does the RX 570 have enough VRAM for Control at Ultra settings?

A: The card has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 16, and at 1080p Ultra, it is 31. The low frame rates at Ultra settings suggest the GPU is struggling with both compute and memory capacity, though the data does not isolate VRAM usage.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested configurations in Control?

A: This combo ranks 2768th out of 2888 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 4% of all systems tested for this game. This is consistent with the GPU being a legacy part that is not suited for modern titles at high settings.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combos for Control, this pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and AMD Radeon RX 570 ranks 2768th out of 2888 combinations. That places it in the bottom 4% of all tested systems, which is a poor result for a CPU that is otherwise a top-tier performer. The ranking is almost entirely dragged down by the GPU. The CPU’s 96th percentile standing has no positive effect on the game’s performance, because the RX 570 cannot produce enough frames to leverage the processor’s strength.

The measured FPS data confirms this ranking. The best-case scenario is 57 FPS at 1080p Low, which is below the 60 FPS target that many players consider the minimum for a smooth experience. At more realistic settings like 1080p High, the average falls to 36 FPS, which is playable but far from ideal for a fast-paced action game. At 1440p or 4K, the system is effectively unplayable, with averages ranging from 16 to 29 FPS depending on settings. This combo is a textbook example of a CPU-GPU imbalance, where the processor’s capabilities are wasted due to the graphics card’s limitations.

For context, the CPU’s nearest rivals—the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and AMD EPYC 4584PX—would likely perform identically in this game, as the GPU is the limiting factor. The GPU’s nearest rivals, such as the RX 470, would also produce similar results, as they are within 1% of the RX 570’s average score. This ranking suggests that upgrading the GPU would be the only meaningful way to improve performance in Control, as the CPU has ample headroom.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the only configuration that approaches a smooth experience is 1080p with Low settings, which averages 57 FPS. This is the highest frame rate recorded for this combo, and it is the only setting that stays above 50 FPS. For players who prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity, this is the recommended preset. It sacrifices most of Control’s graphical effects but provides a playable experience.

If visual quality is more important, the next best option is 1080p with Medium settings, which averages 40 FPS with a minimum of 34 and maximum of 46. This is still playable, though it may have noticeable dips during intense combat sequences. The 34 FPS minimum is above the 30 FPS threshold that many consider the absolute floor for playability, making this a viable compromise. At 1440p, the Medium preset drops to 30 FPS average, which is borderline, and the Low preset at 1440p yields 43 FPS, which is acceptable for slower-paced exploration but risky for action scenes.

High and Ultra settings are not recommended for this combo. At 1080p High, the average is 36 FPS, and at 1080p Ultra, it is 31 FPS. These are below the 40 FPS target that most players prefer for an action-adventure game. At 1440p and 4K, High and Ultra settings produce averages in the teens and low 20s, which are unplayable. The data suggests that this system is best suited for 1080p gaming with Low or Medium presets. Pushing beyond that results in a degraded experience that does not justify the visual gains. For a game like Control, which relies on atmosphere and physics, the Medium preset at 1080p offers the best balance of performance and fidelity, provided the player can tolerate occasional frame rate dips.