Control

Control pairs Intel’s flagship 24-core Arrow Lake Refresh desktop processor with NVIDIA’s Turing-based RTX 2070 SUPER, a combination that lands in the 56th percentile of all tested CPU+GPU pairings for this 2019 Action Adventure title. The measured frame rates across three resolutions and four quality presets reveal a system that is firmly GPU-limited at higher settings, yet shows surprising headroom at 1080p Low where the CPU’s strength becomes apparent. This analysis breaks down the scaling behavior, comparative standing, and practical settings guidance based solely on the measured data.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and consistent, pointing to the RTX 2070 SUPER as the primary bottleneck in most configurations. At High settings, the average FPS falls from 82 at 1920x1080 to 62 at 2560x1440, then to 42 at 3840x2160. That is a 24% reduction going from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 32% drop moving to 4K. The scaling is not linear, which suggests the GPU’s memory bandwidth and compute resources are being saturated progressively as pixel count rises.

Low settings tell a similar story but with a different starting point. The 1080p Low average of 130 FPS drops to 98 at 1440p and 66 at 4K. The percentage declines are 25% and 33% respectively, nearly identical to High. This consistency across quality presets indicates that resolution, not graphical complexity, is the dominant factor limiting performance. The GPU’s 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth appears adequate for 1080p but becomes strained at 4K, where the pixel throughput demands more than the 9.062 TFLOPS of FP32 compute can deliver.

Ultra settings amplify the resolution penalty. The 1080p Ultra average of 71 FPS drops to 54 at 1440p and 36 at 4K. The 4K figure represents roughly half the 1080p performance, a typical pattern for a mid-range GPU from the GeForce 20-series. Notably, the gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is 30 FPS (66 vs 36), while at 1080p it is 59 FPS (130 vs 71). This narrowing at higher resolutions confirms that the GPU becomes the sole limiting factor, with CPU headroom unused.

The data indicates no scenario where the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus becomes the bottleneck in this game. Even at 1080p Low with 130 FPS average, the CPU’s 24 cores and 5.80 GHz boost clock are not challenged by Control’s workload. The scaling pattern suggests that users seeking higher frame rates at 4K would need a more powerful GPU, as the current combination leaves performance on the table due to the graphics card’s limitations.

How This Combo Ranks

Among 2,888 tested CPU+GPU combinations for Control, this pairing ranks 1,632nd. That places it in the bottom half of all configurations, which is expected given the RTX 2070 SUPER’s age and mid-range positioning. The GPU itself sits in the 65th percentile of all graphics cards, while the CPU ranks in the 96th percentile of all processors. This mismatch explains the combo’s middling rank: the processor is elite, but the graphics card holds the system back.

Comparing to the GPU’s nearest rivals, the RTX 2070 SUPER’s average benchmark score of 20,282 is only 1% below the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M (20,480) and 1.2% below the RTX 3070 Mobile (20,534). It is also 1.3% behind the Intel Arc B570 (20,556) and 1.5% behind the Arc A750 (20,582). These small deltas indicate that the 2070 SUPER performs within a tight band of similar GPUs, none of which would dramatically alter the combo ranking in this game.

On the CPU side, the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus’s average benchmark score of 84,003 is 0.2% ahead of the Core Ultra 9 285K (83,807) and 1.1% ahead of the AMD EPYC 4584PX (83,090). It trails the EPYC 7F72 by 1.3% (85,072). These margins are negligible for gaming, reinforcing that the GPU is the deciding factor in this combo’s rank. The CPU’s 96th percentile standing suggests it would pair far better with a high-end graphics card, but with the 2070 SUPER, the system lands near the middle of the pack.

The rank of 1,632 out of 2,888 means roughly 56% of tested combos outperform this setup in Control. That is a sobering figure for a system with a flagship CPU, but it aligns with the measured FPS. At 4K Ultra, the average of 36 FPS is below the 60 FPS threshold many players target, while even 1440p High at 62 FPS only barely clears it. The data shows that this combination is best suited for 1080p gaming, where it can achieve playable frame rates across all settings.

Settings Recommendations

For 1080p, the sweet spot is High settings, which delivers an average of 82 FPS. This is comfortably above the 60 FPS standard and provides a meaningful visual upgrade over Medium’s 92 FPS and Low’s 130 FPS. Ultra at 71 FPS is also playable, but the 13% drop from High may not justify the extra graphical load. Given that 1080p High shows no min FPS data (only the average is listed), it appears stable enough for consistent performance.

At 1440p, High settings at 62 FPS is the recommended choice. This matches the 60 FPS target and represents the best balance between visual fidelity and smoothness. Medium at 70 FPS offers more headroom, with a recorded min of 59 FPS and max of 80 FPS, making it the safer option for users who prioritize frame consistency. Low at 98 FPS is overkill for most displays and sacrifices too much quality. Ultra at 54 FPS dips below the 60 FPS threshold, so it is only viable for users who accept sub-60 performance.

At 4K, no setting achieves 60 FPS. Low averages 66 FPS, which is the only playable option for smooth gameplay, but it requires significant visual compromises. Medium at 47 FPS (min 40, max 54) is borderline, with frame drops below 45 FPS likely noticeable in action sequences. High at 42 FPS and Ultra at 36 FPS are both too slow for comfortable play. The data suggests that 4K is not a realistic target for this combination unless the user is willing to drop to Low settings and accept the visual hit.

Overall, the best experience per the measured rows is 1080p High, offering 82 FPS average with no recorded dips. For users with 1440p monitors, Medium provides the most consistent frame delivery at 70 FPS average with a 59 FPS minimum. The 4K results are best avoided except for Low settings, where 66 FPS is achievable but visually underwhelming.

Measured FPS Breakdown

1920x1080: Low settings produce the highest average at 130 FPS. Medium follows at 92 FPS, with a minimum of 78 FPS and maximum of 106 FPS. High settings average 82 FPS. Ultra drops to 71 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 59 FPS, indicating substantial scaling with quality presets.

2560x1440: Low averages 98 FPS. Medium averages 70 FPS, with a minimum of 59 FPS and maximum of 80 FPS. High settings average 62 FPS. Ultra averages 54 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra narrows to 44 FPS compared to 1080p, reflecting increased GPU pressure.

3840x2160: Low averages 66 FPS. Medium averages 47 FPS, with a minimum of 40 FPS and maximum of 54 FPS. High averages 42 FPS. Ultra averages 36 FPS. The Low-to-Ultra delta shrinks further to 30 FPS, confirming that the GPU is fully saturated at this resolution.

The only settings with min/max data are Medium across all three resolutions. At 1080p, the 78-106 FPS range shows a 28 FPS variance, which is moderate. At 1440p, the 59-80 FPS range has a 21 FPS variance. At 4K, the 40-54 FPS range has a 14 FPS variance. This tightening of variance as resolution increases suggests that frame pacing becomes more consistent when the GPU is the bottleneck, as CPU-induced stutters are masked.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 1080p High settings?

A: The measured average is 82 FPS at 1920x1080 with High settings. This is the recommended preset for 1080p gaming, as it balances visual quality with performance.

Q: Can this system run Control at 4K?

A: At 4K, only Low settings achieve a playable average of 66 FPS. Medium averages 47 FPS, High averages 42 FPS, and Ultra averages 36 FPS. None of the higher presets reach the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How does the RTX 2070 SUPER compare to its nearest rival GPU?

A: The RTX 2070 SUPER’s average benchmark score of 20,282 is 1% below the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M (20,480) and 1.2% below the RTX 3070 Mobile (20,534). It also trails the Intel Arc B570 by 1.3% and the Arc A750 by 1.5%.

Q: What is the combo’s rank among all tested systems in Control?

A: This CPU+GPU pairing ranks 1,632nd out of 2,888 tested combinations. This places it in the 56th percentile, meaning most other combos perform better in this game.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck the GPU in this game?

A: No. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus ranks in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU ranks in the 65th percentile. The frame rate scaling indicates the RTX 2070 SUPER is the limiting component in all tested scenarios.

Q: What is the best settings preset for a 1440p monitor?

A: Medium settings at 2560x1440 deliver a 70 FPS average with a 59 FPS minimum, making it the safest choice for consistent performance. High settings average 62 FPS, which is also acceptable but offers less headroom.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, with a 125 W TDP. The L3 cache is 36 MB shared, and memory support is dual-channel DDR5 with a bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 84,003 places it in the 96th percentile of all processors, with nearest rivals including the Core Ultra 9 285K (0.2% lower) and the EPYC 4584PX (1.1% lower).

In Control, this CPU’s role is to feed frames to the GPU without becoming a constraint. The measured data shows no evidence of CPU limitation: even at 1080p Low with 130 FPS average, the system does not exhibit the kind of performance ceiling that would indicate processor bottlenecking. The 24 cores and high boost clock are far more than this game requires, as Control is not a heavily multi-threaded title that would leverage the full core count. The single-thread performance, evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 7,303, is what matters most for gaming, and it is more than sufficient here.

The CPU’s 96th percentile ranking stands in stark contrast to the GPU’s 65th percentile, creating an imbalance that is visible in the combo’s 56th percentile rank. In every resolution and settings combination, the RTX 2070 SUPER is the limiting factor. The CPU’s performance headroom means that upgrading the graphics card would yield substantial frame rate improvements without requiring a processor change. The data shows that this CPU is effectively wasted in this pairing for Control, as it never approaches its limits in any measured scenario.