Control

# Control — Intel Core Ultra X7 368H + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 delivers a playable but resolution-sensitive experience in Control, with the measured data showing a clear progression from smooth 1080p performance to borderline 4K results. At 1920x1080, the combo averages 103 FPS on Low settings and 56 FPS on Ultra, while at 3840x2160 those figures drop to 52 FPS and 29 FPS respectively. The benchmark dataset places this combination at rank 2295 out of 2888 tested combos, indicating that while the hardware handles the game adequately at lower resolutions, it falls behind a substantial portion of the tested field when pushed to higher fidelity targets.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS degradation from 1080p to 4K follows a steep curve that reveals where the bottleneck lies. At Medium settings, the average frame rate drops from 73 FPS at 1920x1080 to 55 FPS at 2560x1440, a 24.7% reduction, and then further to 37 FPS at 3840x2160, representing a 49.3% total decrease from the 1080p baseline. This scaling pattern is typical of a GPU-bound scenario, as the pixel count quadruples from 1080p to 4K while the frame rate does not halve proportionally, indicating some headroom remains in the rendering pipeline.

The Low settings preset shows the most dramatic absolute drop, falling from 103 FPS at 1080p to 78 FPS at 1440p (24.3% decrease) and then to 52 FPS at 4K (49.5% total decrease from 1080p). This consistent ~50% reduction across presets suggests the RTX 5050's rendering throughput is the primary limiter at higher resolutions, rather than any CPU-side constraint. The gap between 1440p and 4K is proportionally similar to the gap between 1080p and 1440p, indicating a linear relationship between pixel count and performance loss.

At Ultra settings, the 4K result of 29 FPS falls below the 30 FPS threshold typically considered minimally playable, while the 1440p Ultra result of 43 FPS remains usable. The High preset at 4K delivers 33 FPS, barely crossing that same threshold. These numbers suggest that as resolution increases, the GPU's 8 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory interface — providing 320.0 GB/s of bandwidth — become increasingly strained, particularly with the higher texture and effect workloads that Ultra settings impose.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with a 5 nm process from TSMC, featuring 2,560 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Its boost clock of 2572 MHz and base clock of 2317 MHz drive a peak FP32 throughput of 13.17 TFLOPS, which the measured data shows is sufficient for 1080p gaming but struggles at 4K. The GPU's 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus delivers 320.0 GB/s of bandwidth, a configuration that appears to be a limiting factor in Control at higher resolutions and settings.

The GPU's benchmark scores place it in the 66th percentile among all tested GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 21,035. Its closest rivals in aggregate performance include the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL (delta of -0.6%), the AMD Radeon HD 8970M (delta of -1%), and the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (delta of +1.6%), indicating the RTX 5050 sits in a competitive mid-range tier. However, in Control specifically, the measured FPS data shows the GPU consistently delivering lower frame rates at 4K Ultra (29 FPS) than at 1080p Low (103 FPS), a 71.8% reduction that underscores the GPU's resolution scaling limits.

The 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores present in the RTX 5050 are architectural features that Control can leverage for ray tracing effects, though the measured data provided does not include ray tracing-specific benchmarks. The GPU's DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4 compatibility ensure full API feature coverage for modern titles. The 130 W TDP and dual-slot design with a single 8-pin power connector suggest this is a mobile-oriented GPU, and its performance in Control reflects a design balanced for 1080p and 1440p gaming rather than 4K.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal experience depends heavily on the target resolution. At 1920x1080, the High preset delivers 65 FPS average, which is smooth for most action sequences, while Medium achieves 73 FPS and Low reaches 103 FPS. The Ultra preset at 56 FPS remains playable but offers diminishing returns over High — only a 12.5% FPS cost for the jump from High to Ultra, which may be worthwhile for visual fidelity.

At 2560x1440, the High preset produces 49 FPS, which is acceptable for a title like Control but not ideal for fast-paced combat. Medium at 55 FPS provides a better balance, and Low at 78 FPS ensures fluid gameplay. The Ultra preset at 43 FPS is borderline, and given the minimal FPS gain from Medium to High (6 FPS or 10.9%), the Medium preset appears to be the sweet spot for 1440p.

For 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS. The Low preset at 52 FPS is the only option above 50 FPS, while Medium drops to 37 FPS and High to 33 FPS. Ultra at 29 FPS falls below playable thresholds. The data suggests 4K gaming on this combo requires accepting Low settings or reducing the resolution. The measured minimum FPS values — only provided for Medium settings, showing 32 FPS at 4K, 47 FPS at 1440p, and 62 FPS at 1080p — indicate that even the averages can dip lower during demanding scenes, reinforcing the recommendation to prefer Medium over High at higher resolutions.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Control?*

A: The measured data shows 1920x1080 provides the most comfortable frame rates, with all presets above 56 FPS. At 2560x1440, only Low and Medium presets exceed 55 FPS, while 3840x2160 drops below 52 FPS even on Low.

Q: How does the RTX 5050 compare to its nearest GPU rivals in aggregate benchmarks?

A: The RTX 5050 has an average benchmark score of 21,035, placing it 0.6% below the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL, 1% below the AMD Radeon HD 8970M, and 1.6% above the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT.

Q: Is the CPU a bottleneck at any resolution?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H, with 16 cores and 16 threads boosting to 5.00 GHz, shows no signs of limiting the GPU in the measured data — the FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K is consistent with GPU-bound behavior.

Q: What FPS can I expect at 1080p Ultra settings?

A: The measured average is 56 FPS at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings, which is playable but lower than the 65 FPS achieved on High settings.

Q: Does the game run at 4K on this hardware?

A: Yes, but only on Low settings (52 FPS average). Medium produces 37 FPS, High 33 FPS, and Ultra 29 FPS, with the latter falling below typical playability thresholds.

Q: How much faster is 1080p compared to 4K on Medium settings?

A: At Medium settings, 1920x1080 averages 73 FPS, while 3840x2160 averages 37 FPS — a 49.3% reduction in frame rate when moving from 1080p to 4K.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is a 16-core, 16-thread processor based on the Panther Lake architecture, manufactured on Intel's 3 nm process. With a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, it delivers strong single-threaded and multi-threaded performance that supports the GPU effectively in Control. The CPU's benchmark results — including a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 28,221 and single-core score of 3,984 — place it in the 87th percentile among all tested CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 40,518.

The CPU's nearest rivals in aggregate performance include the Intel Core 7 253PE (delta of -0.1%), Intel Core 5 223PE (delta of -0.2%), AMD Ryzen 9 7940H (delta of +0.2%), and Intel Xeon 6507P (delta of +0.2%). These tight deltas indicate the Core Ultra X7 368H sits in a well-populated performance tier, neither significantly ahead nor behind its direct competitors. Its 18 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel LPDDR5X memory support with 153.6 GB/s of bandwidth provide adequate data throughput for gaming workloads.

In Control, the CPU's role appears secondary to the GPU, as evidenced by the resolution scaling patterns. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 103 FPS, which could potentially stress the CPU in complex scenes, but the absence of min FPS data for Low settings makes it difficult to assess CPU-induced frame dips. The measured min FPS values for Medium settings — 62 FPS at 1080p, 47 FPS at 1440p, and 32 FPS at 4K — show a consistent relationship with average FPS, suggesting no CPU bottleneck that would cause erratic frame delivery. The CPU's PassMark multi-thread score of 32,956 and single-thread score of 4,005 indicate robust processing capability that should handle Control's physics and AI workloads without issue.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured FPS values across settings show a clear tiered structure. Low settings produce an average of 103 FPS, the highest in the entire dataset. Medium settings average 73 FPS with a minimum of 62 FPS and maximum of 84 FPS, providing a balanced experience. High settings average 65 FPS, while Ultra settings drop to 56 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 47 FPS, indicating that settings adjustments can nearly double the frame rate at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the performance tiers compress. Low settings average 78 FPS, Medium averages 55 FPS (min 47, max 63), High averages 49 FPS, and Ultra averages 43 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 35 FPS, a narrower spread than at 1080p, suggesting the GPU becomes more of a limiting factor. Medium settings at 1440p deliver 75.3% of the 1080p Medium FPS, while Ultra at 1440p retains 76.8% of its 1080p counterpart.

At 3840x2160, the results are the most constrained. Low settings average 52 FPS, Medium averages 37 FPS (min 32, max 43), High averages 33 FPS, and Ultra averages 29 FPS. The total spread from Low to Ultra is only 23 FPS, indicating that at 4K, even the lowest settings cannot fully alleviate the GPU's rendering burden. The Medium settings min FPS of 32 at 4K is particularly notable, as it shows frame rates dipping below the 33 FPS High average, suggesting inconsistent frame pacing under load.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 combination ranks 2295 out of 2888 tested combos in Control, placing it in the bottom 20.5% of the field. This rank reflects the GPU's mid-tier positioning (66th percentile among all GPUs) combined with the CPU's strong showing (87th percentile among all CPUs), but the game's GPU-intensive nature means the RTX 5050's limitations dominate the overall experience. The combo's rank suggests that while the CPU is capable of driving higher frame rates with a more powerful GPU, the RTX 5050 holds the pairing back from competitive standing.

The GPU's aggregate benchmark average of 21,035 places it near the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (20,713, 1.6% lower) but below the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile (21,379, 1.6% higher), indicating the RTX 5050 is competitive within its tier. However, in Control, the measured FPS data shows the combo struggling to maintain 60 FPS at 1080p Ultra (56 FPS) and falling well short at 4K, which explains the low ranking relative to other tested configurations. The CPU's performance — with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 28,221 and 87th percentile ranking — suggests that pairing this processor with a higher-tier GPU would likely yield significantly better results in Control, but as tested, the combo's overall rank of 2295 reflects the GPU-bound nature of the game and the RTX 5050's mid-range position.