Control

Control is a 2019 Action Adventure title that stresses both the CPU and GPU heavily, and the data for the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 shows a system that delivers strong, consistent frame rates across the board. The measured results across three resolutions and four settings presets reveal a combination that is well-balanced, though the scaling behavior indicates that the graphics card becomes the primary constraint as resolution increases. This analysis draws exclusively from the measured FPS data, the hardware specifications, and the benchmark scores provided, offering a clear picture of what this specific configuration can achieve in Remedy’s supernatural thriller.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to maintain 60 FPS at the highest settings?

A: At Ultra settings, the combo achieves an average of 101 FPS at 1920x1080, 77 FPS at 2560x1440, and 52 FPS at 3840x2160. This means that 1440p Ultra is well above the 60 FPS threshold, while 4K Ultra dips below it, so the best resolution for Ultra settings is 2560x1440.

Q: How much of a performance jump is there from High to Low settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the average FPS increases from 117 on High to 185 on Low, representing a 68 FPS uplift. This is a substantial gain, showing that Low settings nearly eliminate the graphical load and allow the hardware to run at much higher frame rates.

Q: Does the RTX 3080 have enough VRAM for Control at 4K?

A: The GPU features 10 GB of GDDR6X memory with a 320-bit bus and 760.3 GB/s bandwidth. The measured data shows that at 3840x2160, the average FPS ranges from 52 on Ultra to 94 on Low, indicating that the 10 GB frame buffer is sufficient to run the game without any reported issues, as all presets produce playable results.

Q: How does this combo rank against other tested combinations in the database?

A: The combo ranks 771st out of 2888 tested combos, placing it in the top 26.7% of all configurations tested for this game. This indicates a strong performance level relative to the broader database.

Q: What is the limiting component when moving from 1080p to 4K?

A: The data shows that FPS drops significantly with resolution, from 185 FPS at 1080p Low to 94 FPS at 4K Low. This heavy scaling points to the GPU as the primary limiting factor, as the CPU’s performance remains constant while the graphics load increases.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus a fast processor for gaming?

A: The processor scores 51731 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 7303 in single-core, with a 96th percentile ranking among all CPUs. It is 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K in average benchmark score, confirming it as a high-end chip that will not bottleneck the RTX 3080 in most scenarios.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is the graphics engine in this test, built on the Ampere architecture with a GA102 chip manufactured on Samsung’s 8 nm process. It carries 8704 shading units, 272 texture mapping units, and 96 raster output units, along with 68 RT cores and 272 tensor cores for ray tracing and DLSS workloads. The card operates at a base clock of 1440 MHz and a boost clock of 1710 MHz, with memory running at 1188 MHz, translating to 19 Gbps effective on 10 GB of GDDR6X memory. The 320-bit memory interface delivers 760.3 GB/s of bandwidth, which is critical for a game like Control that loads detailed textures and complex particle effects.

In this game, the GPU’s role is decisive. The measured FPS data shows that the RTX 3080 handles Control well, but the margins between settings presets reveal its limits. At 1920x1080, the average frame rate ranges from 185 on Low to 101 on Ultra, a spread of 84 FPS. At 2560x1440, the range narrows to 140 FPS on Low and 77 FPS on Ultra, a 63 FPS difference. At 3840x2160, the range compresses further to 94 FPS on Low and 52 FPS on Ultra, a 42 FPS gap. This compression at higher resolutions is a classic sign of GPU saturation, where the card’s compute and memory resources are fully utilized, and lowering settings has diminishing returns.

The VRAM allocation is also relevant. With 10 GB of GDDR6X, the card has enough capacity for Control’s assets at all tested presets, as evidenced by the fact that even Ultra settings at 4K produce an average of 52 FPS without stutter or crash data in the pack. The memory bandwidth of 760.3 GB/s helps maintain throughput when the game streams in high-resolution textures, which is a common bottleneck in open-ended action games. The GPU’s FP32 performance of 29.77 TFLOPS and pixel rate of 164.2 GPixel/s provide the raw compute needed for the game’s physics-heavy combat and destructible environments.

The RTX 3080’s benchmark scores further contextualize its role. It scores 25086 in Passmark G3D, with a 68th percentile ranking among all GPUs. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 4407, and in Geekbench OpenCL it scores 152423. These figures place it as a mid-to-high-tier card in the database, and the measured Control results align with that positioning. The GPU’s nearest rivals in average benchmark score are the NVIDIA P106-100, AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16, AMD Radeon RX 6600M, and AMD Radeon R9 M290X, all within 0.4% of its score, yet none of those cards are likely to match the RTX 3080’s real-world gaming performance due to architectural differences, but the data only allows for score comparisons.

The card’s power draw is listed at 320 W TDP with a suggested 700 W PSU, and it uses a single 12-pin power connector. This is a power-hungry component, but the data shows that it delivers the necessary performance to push Control to high frame rates. The GPU is dual-slot and measures 285 mm in length, which is typical for a high-end card of its generation. The production status is end-of-life, but that does not diminish its current performance in this title.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured FPS data, the optimal settings preset depends on the user’s resolution and frame rate target. At 1920x1080, all presets are highly playable. Low settings produce an average of 185 FPS, Medium delivers 131 FPS, High hits 117 FPS, and Ultra still maintains 101 FPS. For competitive play or high refresh rate monitors, Low or Medium is ideal, but for visual fidelity, Ultra at 1080p is entirely viable with an average above 100 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the picture is similar but with lower headroom. Low settings average 140 FPS, Medium reaches 99 FPS, High achieves 88 FPS, and Ultra drops to 77 FPS. All of these are above 60 FPS, making 1440p a sweet spot for this combo. The Medium preset offers a good balance, with a 99 FPS average and a minimum of 84 FPS, ensuring smooth gameplay even in demanding scenes. High and Ultra are also excellent if the user prioritizes image quality, as they remain well above the 60 FPS threshold.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the limiting factor. Ultra averages 52 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS standard but still playable on a VRR display. High settings average 60 FPS, hitting the exact target, while Medium averages 67 FPS with a minimum of 57 FPS and a maximum of 77 FPS. Low settings jump to 94 FPS, offering a much smoother experience at the cost of visual quality. For 4K users, the recommended preset is High, as it provides the 60 FPS average without sacrificing too much in the way of graphical detail. Medium is a viable alternative for those who want a small FPS buffer, while Ultra is only advisable for users who can tolerate sub-60 frame rates.

The data suggests that the Medium preset is the most balanced overall across all resolutions. At 1080p, it delivers 131 FPS; at 1440p, it delivers 99 FPS; and at 4K, it delivers 67 FPS. The minimum FPS figures for Medium are also provided, with 111 FPS at 1080p, 84 FPS at 1440p, and 57 FPS at 4K, indicating that the frame pacing remains stable even in heavy scenes. For users with 144 Hz or 165 Hz monitors at 1080p, Low settings are the only way to fully saturate the display, but for the majority of users, Medium or High will provide the best experience in terms of both performance and visuals.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 combination ranks 771st out of 2888 tested combos for Control. This places it in the 73rd percentile, meaning it outperforms roughly 73% of all configurations in the database. The rank is a composite measure that considers the average FPS across all tested resolutions and settings, and it reflects the balanced nature of this pairing. The CPU is a top-tier part, with a 96th percentile ranking among all CPUs and an average benchmark score of 84003. The GPU, while not top-tier, still holds a 68th percentile ranking among all GPUs with an average score of 23172.

The CPU’s nearest rivals in benchmark score are the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K (deltaPct 0.2%), AMD EPYC 4584PX (deltaPct 1.1%), AMD EPYC 9135 (deltaPct 1.2%), and AMD EPYC 7F72 (deltaPct -1.3%). The 290K Plus sits just 0.2% ahead of the 285K, making them nearly identical in synthetic performance. This means that swapping to a 285K would have negligible impact on Control’s frame rates, as the game is not likely CPU-bound at most settings. The GPU’s nearest rivals are all within 0.4% of its average score, including the NVIDIA P106-100 (deltaPct -0.3%), AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 (deltaPct -0.3%), AMD Radeon RX 6600M (deltaPct -0.4%), and AMD Radeon R9 M290X (deltaPct -0.4%). These are not gaming equivalents, but the score proximity shows that the RTX 3080 sits in a crowded performance band.

The combo rank of 771 out of 2888 is influenced by the fact that many higher-ranked combos likely feature newer GPUs like the RTX 40-series or AMD’s RDNA 3 cards, which have higher raw performance. However, for a last-generation GPU paired with a current-generation CPU, this rank is respectable. The data indicates that the combo is well-suited for 1440p gaming, where it achieves frame rates above 77 FPS on all presets, and it can handle 4K with adjusted settings. The rank also reflects the CPU’s ability to feed the GPU without becoming a bottleneck, as evidenced by the strong scaling from 1080p to 1440p and the more pronounced drop at 4K, which is typical of GPU-bound scenarios.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K reveals the limiting component in this system. At Low settings, the average FPS goes from 185 at 1920x1080 to 140 at 2560x1440, a 24.3% decrease, and then to 94 at 3840x2160, a 32.9% decrease from 1440p. At Ultra settings, the progression is from 101 FPS at 1080p to 77 FPS at 1440p (23.8% drop) and then to 52 FPS at 4K (32.5% drop). This consistent pattern across all settings presets indicates that the GPU is the primary constraint. The CPU’s performance does not change with resolution, so if the CPU were the bottleneck, we would see similar FPS across resolutions. Instead, the frame rate scales inversely with pixel count, which is the hallmark of a GPU-bound workload.

The scaling factor is also telling. Moving from 1080p to 4K (a 4x increase in pixel count) results in roughly a 49% reduction in FPS at Low settings (185 to 94) and a 48.5% reduction at Ultra (101 to 52). This is less than the theoretical 75% drop one might expect if the GPU were fully saturated, which suggests that there is some headroom in the GPU’s architecture, likely due to memory bandwidth and cache efficiency. The RTX 3080’s 760.3 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient to feed the 10 GB frame buffer, and the card’s 29.77 TFLOPS FP32 compute helps maintain higher frame rates than a purely linear scaling model would predict.

The data also shows that the difference between Low and Ultra settings shrinks as resolution increases. At 1080p, the gap between Low and Ultra is 84 FPS (185 vs 101). At 1440p, the gap is 63 FPS (140 vs 77). At 4K, the gap is 42 FPS (94 vs 52). This compression is another indicator of GPU saturation; at higher resolutions, the GPU is already working near its limit, so reducing settings has less impact on overall FPS. Conversely, at 1080p, the GPU has spare capacity, so lowering settings yields larger gains.

For this combo, the limiting component is clearly the graphics card. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus, with 24 cores and 24 threads, a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, and a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51731, is more than capable of handling Control’s CPU demands. The CPU’s single-thread score of 7303 in Cinebench R23 and 4823 in Passmark single-thread indicate strong per-core performance, which is crucial for game logic and physics. The data suggests that at 1080p, the system is partially CPU-bound, as the GPU is not fully utilized, but at 4K, the GPU becomes the sole bottleneck.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS across all settings is as follows: Low delivers 185 FPS, Medium delivers 131 FPS with a minimum of 111 and maximum of 151, High delivers 117 FPS, and Ultra delivers 101 FPS. The Medium preset has the only min/max data at this resolution, showing a stable frame window. The 185 FPS at Low is exceptionally high, indicating that the combination of the 290K Plus and RTX 3080 can easily drive high refresh rate monitors at 1080p in Control. The step-down from Low to Medium is 54 FPS, which is substantial, while the step from Medium to High is 14 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 16 FPS. This suggests that Medium settings are where the GPU starts to engage more seriously, and the diminishing returns from Medium to Ultra are noticeable.

At 2560x1440, the average FPS figures are 140 for Low, 99 for Medium (with a minimum of 84 and maximum of 114), 88 for High, and 77 for Ultra. The Medium preset again provides the only min/max data, and the 84 FPS minimum is still well above 60, ensuring smooth gameplay. The drop from Low to Medium is 41 FPS, from Medium to High is 11 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 11 FPS. Compared to 1080p, the Low setting takes a 45 FPS hit, while the Ultra setting takes a 24 FPS hit, showing that higher resolutions disproportionately affect lower settings. This resolution is the best balance for this combo, as even Ultra maintains a 77 FPS average, which is comfortable for most displays.

At 3840x2160, the average FPS figures are 94 for Low, 67 for Medium (with a minimum of 57 and maximum of 77), 60 for High, and 52 for Ultra. The Medium preset’s minimum of 57 FPS is just below 60, indicating that there can be brief dips, but the average is solid. High settings hit exactly 60 FPS on average, which is the standard target for console-like performance. Ultra drops to 52 FPS, which may be acceptable on VRR displays but is below the ideal threshold. The gap between Low and Medium is 27 FPS, between Medium and High is 7 FPS, and between High and Ultra is 8 FPS. This shows that at 4K, the GPU is heavily loaded, and the differences between Medium, High, and Ultra are minor, making Medium or High the most sensible choices for 4K play.

The complete dataset shows a clear trend: this combo is capable of excellent performance at 1080p and 1440p, with all presets exceeding 60 FPS. At 4K, users must compromise by choosing Medium or High settings to maintain a playable frame rate. The measured data is consistent with the hardware’s specifications, and the combo rank of 771 out of 2888 reflects a strong, balanced system that will satisfy most gamers playing Control.