Control

Control is a demanding action-adventure title, and the numbers for this particular Intel Core Ultra X7 368H + AMD Radeon 880M combo tell a clear story about its capabilities at various resolutions. The data indicates that this is a configuration designed for 1080p playability, with performance falling off sharply as resolution increases. The measured frames per second (FPS) show a system that is consistently GPU-limited, meaning the integrated graphics are the primary constraint on the experience.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS data reveals a steep and predictable decline as resolution scales from 1920x1080 up to 3840x2160. At the most common gaming resolution, 1920x1080, the combo achieves a playable average of 35 FPS on High settings. Dropping to Low settings at 1080p yields a much more fluid 55 FPS average, which is the highest performance tier recorded for this pairing. This clearly establishes 1080p as the only viable resolution for a smooth experience, and even then, settings management is critical.

Moving up to 2560x1440, the performance cost is substantial. The High preset average FPS falls from 35 at 1080p to 26 at 1440p, a reduction of roughly 26%. The Low preset sees a similar proportional drop, going from 55 FPS down to 42 FPS. At this resolution, even the Low preset struggles to maintain the 60 FPS that many players consider ideal, though it remains technically playable. The 26 FPS average on High highlights that this resolution is pushing the AMD Radeon 880M beyond its comfortable operating range.

The jump to 4K (3840x2160) renders the game essentially unplayable for most standards. The High preset manages only an 18 FPS average, and even the Low preset can only muster 28 FPS. The Medium preset at 4K shows an average of 20 FPS with a minimum of 17 and a maximum of 23, indicating constant sub-30 FPS performance. This data confirms that 4K is not a practical target for this hardware in Control, as the frame rate drops into a range that severely impacts responsiveness and visual fluidity.

The scaling pattern is a textbook example of a GPU-bound scenario. The frame rate drops nearly linearly with the increase in pixel count, which points directly to the AMD Radeon 880M's rendering throughput as the limiting factor. The CPU, with its 16 cores and 5.00 GHz boost clock, is not the bottleneck here; otherwise, we would see less variation between resolution presets. The data suggests that players should consider 1080p as their primary target and view 1440p as a stretch goal that requires significant compromises to visual quality.

How This Combo Ranks

The performance data places this specific combination in a very specific context. Out of 2888 tested combos for Control, this pairing ranks 2817th. This places it in the bottom percentile of all tested systems, indicating that it is a low-performance option for this particular game. The percentile ranking of 43 for the GPU against all GPUs reinforces this, showing that the Radeon 880M is a modest performer in the broader landscape.

This ranking is not a surprise given the measured FPS. A rank of 2817 out of 2888 means that 2816 other combinations of CPUs and GPUs delivered higher average frame rates in this game. This is a strong signal that while the CPU is a competent modern part, the integrated graphics solution holds the entire platform back in a demanding title like Control. The frame rate data and this ranking are consistent, painting a picture of a system that is adequate for less demanding games but struggles with AAA action-adventure titles.

For context, the CPU alone sits at the 87th percentile, with an average benchmark score of 40518. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core 7 253PE, which is 0.1% slower, and the AMD Ryzen 9 7940H, which is 0.2% faster. This shows the processor is a very strong performer, but its potential is completely untapped when paired with an integrated GPU of this class. The massive gap between the CPU's high percentile ranking and the combo's low game-specific ranking underscores that the graphics processor is the sole determinant of this system's gaming capabilities.

In practical terms, this combo sits at the bottom of the pile for Control. The 2817th rank out of 2888 combos is a definitive statement that this is not a configuration for high-refresh-rate or high-resolution gaming in this title. It is a system that can run the game, but only just barely, and only at the lowest resolutions and settings. The data shows that any expectation of a smooth, high-fidelity experience should be tempered significantly.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 880M is the defining component in this system's gaming performance. This integrated GPU, based on the RDNA 3.5 architecture, has a boost clock of 2900 MHz and features 768 shading units. Its performance in 3DMark Steel Nomad is 535 points, and it scores 7615 in Passmark's G3D benchmark, placing it at the 43rd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in raw benchmark score are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX, which is 0.1% faster, and the NVIDIA GeForce MX330, which is 0.3% slower.

The GPU's memory configuration is a critical factor, as it uses "System Shared" memory. This means the graphics card relies on the system's main memory rather than dedicated VRAM, and its bandwidth is "System Dependent." In a game like Control, which features complex environments and effects, this shared memory arrangement can be a significant bottleneck, potentially limiting texture streaming and overall data throughput.

The 12 RT cores are present, supporting DirectX 12 Ultimate features, but the processing power to drive them effectively is limited. The 4.454 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is a modest figure for modern gaming. The measured frame rates directly reflect this: the 18 FPS average at 4K High and 35 FPS at 1080p High are a direct result of the GPU's rendering capabilities. The boost clock of 2900 MHz is high for an integrated part, but it cannot compensate for the limited number of shading units and the shared memory bandwidth.

The data shows a GPU that is capable of running the game, but not with any headroom. The pixel rate of 46.40 GPixel/s and texture rate of 139.2 GTexel/s are the theoretical limits that dictate the observed performance. In this case, the GPU is unambiguously the limiting component. The CPU is not the issue; the Radeon 880M simply does not have the raw throughput to maintain high frame rates at higher resolutions in Control.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average frame rate this combo can achieve in Control?

A: The highest average frame rate recorded in the data is 55 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with the Low settings preset.

Q: Is this system capable of playing Control at 4K resolution?

A: Technically, yes, but not comfortably. At 3840x2160, the High preset yields an average of only 18 FPS, and even the Low preset only reaches 28 FPS, which is below the threshold for a smooth gaming experience.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H compare to its closest rival?

A: The CPU has an average benchmark score of 40518. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core 7 253PE, scores 40557, which is a 0.1% difference, making the two processors effectively identical in synthetic performance.

Q: What is the performance difference between the Low and High settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves an average of 55 FPS, while the High preset achieves an average of 35 FPS. This represents a significant 20 FPS drop for the higher visual fidelity.

Q: Does the GPU have dedicated video memory?

A: No, the AMD Radeon 880M uses "System Shared" memory, meaning it relies on the main system RAM for its graphics memory needs, with its bandwidth being "System Dependent."

Q: Where does this combo rank among all tested systems for Control?

A: It ranks 2817th out of 2888 total combos tested, placing it in the bottom 2.5% of all systems for performance in this specific game.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is a powerful processor that is not the limiting factor in this gaming configuration. With 16 cores and 16 threads, a base clock of 2.00 GHz, and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, it has substantial computational power. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score is 28221 points, and its single-core score is 3984 points. These scores place the CPU at the 87th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 40518, indicating it is a high-end mobile processor.

In the context of Control, the CPU's role is to handle game logic, physics, and AI. The benchmark results suggest it performs this task with ease. Its Passmark physics score of 2857 and multithread score of 32956 are strong indicators of its ability to handle complex simulations. The 18 MB of shared L3 cache and 2.5 MB per core L2 cache provide ample fast storage for game data, likely preventing stutters that could occur from cache misses.

The fact that the combo rank is so low (2817th) despite the CPU's high percentile (87th) is definitive proof that the GPU is the bottleneck. The data shows that the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU with data far faster than the Radeon 880M can process it. The frame rates are consistently low across all resolutions, but they scale with resolution, which is the classic sign of a GPU-bound workload.

This CPU is a future-proof component. It has the processing headroom to support a more powerful dedicated graphics card, should the user ever choose to upgrade. The 16 cores and high boost clock ensure that it will not hold back a more capable GPU. For this specific integrated graphics configuration, however, the CPU's potential is untapped, and its performance is essentially irrelevant to the final frame rate in Control.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend entirely on the user's priorities for frame rate versus visual quality. The data shows a clear trade-off at every resolution. For a playable experience, 1920x1080 is the only sensible choice. At this resolution, the Low preset delivers a 55 FPS average, which is the best performance recorded and offers a reasonably fluid experience. This is the recommended setting for players who prioritize smoothness and responsiveness.

If visual fidelity is more important than raw frame rate, the Medium preset at 1920x1080 is a viable option. It provides an average of 39 FPS with a minimum of 33 FPS, which is still within the bounds of playability for a slower-paced action-adventure game. The High preset at 1080p drops to 35 FPS, and the Ultra preset falls to 30 FPS, which begins to feel sluggish. The jump from Low to Medium is a 16 FPS drop (from 55 to 39), but it likely offers a significant improvement in texture detail and effects.

At 2560x1440, the data does not support any settings for a good experience. The Low preset manages 42 FPS, which is acceptable, but the Medium and High presets fall to 30 and 26 FPS, respectively. These frame rates are on the edge of playability and will likely result in a less enjoyable experience. The Ultra preset at 1440p is not recommended, as it yields only 23 FPS.

The 4K resolution data suggests avoiding this resolution entirely. The best-case scenario at 3840x2160 is the Low preset at 28 FPS, which is too low for a smooth experience. The Medium preset offers a 20 FPS average, and the High and Ultra presets are in the 15-18 FPS range, which is effectively a slideshow. The recommendation is to play at 1920x1080 with Low settings for the best performance, or Medium settings if visual quality is prioritized over hitting the 50 FPS mark. The Ultra preset should be avoided at all resolutions, as it provides the lowest frame rates without a proportionate benefit in stability.