Control

Control, Remedy’s 2019 action-adventure, places heavy demands on the graphics subsystem, and the pairing of an Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus with an AMD Radeon RX 580 produces a dataset that is clearly GPU-bound across all measured configurations. The benchmark results show a consistent pattern where frame rates scale almost linearly with the number of pixels rendered, indicating that the CPU has ample headroom to feed the graphics card. This analysis examines the measured FPS rows, the GPU’s characteristics, and the overall ranking of this combo against other tested configurations.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a steep and predictable drop as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At High settings, the average frame rate declines from 40 FPS at 1080p to 30 FPS at 1440p, and finally to 20 FPS at 4K. This represents a 25% reduction when moving from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 33% reduction from 1440p to 4K. The pattern is nearly identical across all settings presets, suggesting that the rendering pipeline is consistently bottlenecked by the GPU’s pixel throughput rather than any CPU-side limitation.

Looking at the Low preset, the scaling is even more pronounced in absolute terms: 63 FPS at 1080p, 48 FPS at 1440p, and 32 FPS at 4K. The percentage drop from 1080p to 4K is roughly 49%, which is substantial but still falls short of the theoretical 4x pixel count increase, indicating that the CPU and memory subsystem are keeping pace. The Medium preset shows 45 FPS, 34 FPS, and 23 FPS across the three resolutions, while Ultra drops to 35 FPS, 26 FPS, and 18 FPS respectively. The Ultra preset at 4K, with an average of 18 FPS, is the lowest recorded frame rate in the entire dataset.

The fact that the frame rate scaling is not perfectly proportional to pixel count (e.g., 1080p to 4K is a 4x pixel increase but frame rates do not drop by 4x) suggests that other factors, such as memory bandwidth or driver overhead, are partially mitigating the load. However, the dominant trend is clear: this is a resolution-bound scenario where the RX 580’s 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 32 ROPs become the limiting factors. At 1080p, the GPU can sustain playable frame rates on Low and Medium, but at 4K, every preset falls below 32 FPS, making the experience largely unplayable for smooth action.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 580 is built on the Polaris 20 chip with a GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process. Its specifications include 2304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1257 MHz with a boost clock of 1340 MHz, and the 8 GB of GDDR5 memory runs at 2000 MHz with a 256-bit bus, yielding a memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. The pixel rate is 42.88 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 193.0 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance rated at 6.175 TFLOPS.

These specifications directly explain the measured FPS results. The RX 580’s pixel rate of 42.88 GPixel/s is modest by modern standards, and at 3840x2160 (approximately 8.3 million pixels), the theoretical fill rate would allow for around 5.2 full-screen passes per frame at 60 FPS, but the actual frame rates are far lower due to shading and memory latency. The 32 ROPs are particularly strained at 4K, where the demand for color and depth buffer writes increases quadratically with resolution. This is why the Ultra preset at 4K achieves only 18 FPS — the ROPs and memory bandwidth are saturated.

The VRAM capacity of 8 GB is sufficient for Control’s textures at 1080p and 1440p, but the bandwidth becomes a bottleneck at higher resolutions. The measured data shows that at 4K Ultra, the frame rate drops to 18 FPS, which is consistent with the GPU running out of memory bandwidth to feed the shaders. The GPU’s benchmark scores corroborate this: it holds a 53rd percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 12928. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER (deltaPct -0.4%) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (deltaPct -0.1%), indicating that the RX 580 performs on par with those mid-range parts, none of which are designed for 4K gaming.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS achieved by this combo at any resolution and settings preset?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 63 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with the Low settings preset.

Q: At which resolution and settings does the combo fail to reach a playable 30 FPS average?

A: At 3840x2160, the combo fails to reach 30 FPS on all presets: High (20 FPS), Low (32 FPS is the only exception above 30), Medium (23 FPS), and Ultra (18 FPS). At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset also falls below 30 FPS, averaging 26 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU’s benchmark performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has an average benchmark score of 84003, which is 0.2% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K (83807) and 1.1% higher than the AMD EPYC 4584PX (83090). It trails the AMD EPYC 7F72 by 1.3% (85072).

Q: What is the GPU’s memory configuration and how does it affect 4K performance?

A: The GPU has 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. At 4K, this bandwidth is insufficient, as evidenced by the average FPS ranging from 18 (Ultra) to 32 (Low), indicating memory throughput is a limiting factor.

Q: Does the combo perform better at 1080p Medium or 1440p High?

A: The combo achieves 45 FPS at 1080p Medium, whereas it achieves 30 FPS at 1440p High. The 1080p Medium setting provides a 50% higher frame rate.

Q: What is the combo’s rank among all tested combinations for this game?

A: The combo ranks 2633 out of 2888 tested combinations, placing it in the lower 9% of all configurations.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The dataset provides average FPS for all combinations of four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) and three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, 3840x2160), with some entries including minimum and maximum frame times. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers 63 FPS average, which is the only entry in the entire dataset that approaches a high-refresh-rate experience. The Medium preset at 1080p yields 45 FPS average, with a minimum of 38 FPS and a maximum of 51 FPS, indicating moderate frame pacing consistency. High at 1080p drops to 40 FPS average, while Ultra at 1080p averages 35 FPS. The range from Low to Ultra at 1080p is 28 FPS, showing that the GPU’s headroom shrinks significantly as settings increase.

Moving to 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 48 FPS, which is still playable but noticeably lower than 1080p. Medium at 1440p averages 34 FPS (minimum 29, maximum 39), while High averages 30 FPS and Ultra averages 26 FPS. The 1440p results show a tighter spread of 22 FPS across presets, indicating that the GPU is becoming the primary constraint. At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 32 FPS, which is the only 4K entry above the 30 FPS threshold. Medium at 4K averages 23 FPS (minimum 19, maximum 26), High averages 20 FPS, and Ultra averages 18 FPS. The 4K spread is just 14 FPS, showing that even lowering settings to Low cannot overcome the resolution bottleneck.

The minimum FPS values, where available, provide additional context. At 1080p Medium, the minimum of 38 FPS suggests that even in demanding scenes, the frame rate stays above 30 FPS, but at 1440p Medium, the minimum of 29 FPS dips below the playable threshold. At 4K Medium, the minimum of 19 FPS indicates significant stuttering potential. These minimums are crucial for understanding the gameplay experience, as average FPS can mask severe frame drops.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal experience for this combo depends on the target resolution. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset offers the best balance, with an average of 45 FPS and a minimum of 38 FPS. This provides a smooth, consistent frame rate that stays above the 30 FPS playability threshold, while High and Ultra (40 FPS and 35 FPS) offer diminishing returns with less headroom. The Low preset at 1080p achieves 63 FPS, which is ideal for competitive play, but it sacrifices visual fidelity. For most players, Medium at 1080p is the sweet spot.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset (48 FPS) is the only option that maintains a comfortable margin above 30 FPS. The Medium preset (34 FPS average, 29 FPS minimum) is borderline, and High (30 FPS) and Ultra (26 FPS) fall below the playable threshold. Therefore, for 1440p gaming, Low is recommended for consistent performance, while Medium is acceptable if the player can tolerate occasional drops below 30 FPS. The Ultra preset at 1440p should be avoided, as the 26 FPS average makes the game feel sluggish.

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves a fully playable experience. The Low preset’s 32 FPS average is the only entry above 30 FPS, but it lacks minimum FPS data, implying potential dips. Medium (23 FPS), High (20 FPS), and Ultra (18 FPS) are all below 30 FPS, making 4K gaming impractical with this combo. If the player insists on 4K, the Low preset is the only viable choice, but even then, the experience will be compromised. For this combo, 1080p Medium is the recommended preset for the best overall experience, as it balances visual quality with a stable frame rate.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a high-end desktop processor with 24 cores and 24 threads, based on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture. It operates at a base clock of 3.70 GHz with a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, and it features a 36 MB shared L3 cache. The CPU’s benchmarks are exceptionally strong: it scores 51731 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 7303 in single-core, with a Passmark single-thread score of 4823. Its percentile ranking against all CPUs is 96, indicating it outperforms the vast majority of processors.

Given these specifications, the CPU is not the limiting factor in Control’s performance. The measured FPS data shows that frame rates scale with resolution, which is a classic sign of GPU bottlenecking. For instance, at 1080p Low, the CPU could theoretically push more frames, but the RX 580 caps the output at 63 FPS. The CPU’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K (deltaPct 0.2%) and AMD EPYC processors, all within a narrow performance band, but none of this matters for this game because the GPU is the constraint. The CPU’s 24 threads are more than sufficient for Control’s multi-threaded rendering workload, and its high single-core speed (5.80 GHz boost) ensures that draw call submission and physics calculations are not bottlenecks.

The data confirms that even at 4K Ultra, where the frame rate drops to 18 FPS, the CPU is not holding back the GPU. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect frame rates to remain relatively flat across resolutions, but instead, they drop proportionally to pixel count. The CPU’s memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s and PCIe Gen 5 interface provide ample bandwidth for the GPU to fetch textures and geometry, further reinforcing that the RX 580 is the sole performance limiter in this configuration.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and the AMD Radeon RX 580 ranks 2633 out of 2888 tested combinations for Control, placing it in the bottom 9% of all configurations. This low ranking is directly attributable to the GPU’s mid-range performance, as the CPU is among the top 4% of all processors (96th percentile). The data shows a stark contrast: the CPU’s average benchmark score of 84003 places it ahead of most rivals, while the GPU’s average score of 12928 places it in the 53rd percentile, with nearest rivals like the GTX 1660 SUPER and RTX 3050 Ti Mobile.

The ranking reflects the fact that Control is a GPU-intensive title, and the RX 580 is simply not powerful enough to deliver high frame rates at modern resolutions. The combo’s performance at 1080p Medium (45 FPS) is acceptable, but at 1440p and 4K, it falls short. Compared to other combos, this pairing is likely outperformed by any configuration with a stronger GPU, even if paired with a weaker CPU, because the game’s performance is so heavily GPU-bound. The CPU’s high core count and clock speeds do not translate into higher FPS in this scenario, as evidenced by the frame rate scaling across resolutions.

In the context of all tested combos, this pairing represents a mismatched configuration: a top-tier CPU paired with a mid-range GPU. The data suggests that users would achieve better overall performance by reallocating budget from the CPU to the GPU, but the benchmark results are clear — this specific combo ranks 2633rd, meaning 255 other tested combinations deliver higher frame rates in Control. The only scenario where this combo excels is at 1080p Low, where the 63 FPS average is respectable, but that is a narrow use case in a game that supports much higher visual fidelity.