Control

# Control with Intel Core Ultra X7 368H + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 delivers a mid-pack performance profile in Control, ranking 1551st out of 2888 tested combos. The CPU, with 16 cores and 16 threads at a 2.00 GHz base and 5.00 GHz boost, sits at the 87th percentile against all CPUs, while the GPU, featuring 6144 shading units and 12 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 192-bit bus, reaches the 82nd percentile against all GPUs. The measured frame rates show a system that can handle 1080p comfortably but struggles to maintain smooth gameplay at 4K, with the gap between Low and Ultra settings widening significantly as resolution increases.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is substantial across every settings tier, but the magnitude of that drop reveals which component is the bottleneck. At Low settings, the system delivers 137 FPS at 1920x1080, 104 FPS at 2560x1440, and 70 FPS at 3840x2160. That represents a 24% reduction from 1080p to 1440p, and a 49% reduction from 1080p to 4K. The scaling from 1440p to 4K alone cuts performance by 33% — a steep decline that points to GPU limitations at higher pixel counts.

At High settings, the pattern shifts. The system produces 87 FPS at 1080p, 66 FPS at 1440p, and 44 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 24%, identical to the Low settings percentage, but the drop from 1440p to 4K is 33%, again matching the Low settings trend. This consistency suggests that resolution scaling follows a predictable curve regardless of quality preset, with the GPU becoming the limiting factor as pixel count rises.

Medium settings tell a similar story, with 98 FPS at 1080p, 74 FPS at 1440p, and 50 FPS at 4K. The 1440p to 4K transition costs 32% of performance. Ultra settings show 75 FPS at 1080p, 57 FPS at 1440p, and 39 FPS at 4K, with the 1440p to 4K drop reaching 32% as well. The consistent 32-33% penalty from 1440p to 4K across all settings is a classic sign of GPU-bound rendering, where the RTX 5070's 672.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 30.87 TFLOPS of FP32 compute are simply insufficient to maintain frame rates at 4K.

Interestingly, the 1080p to 1440p penalty is also uniform at 24% for Low and High, and 25% for Medium and Ultra. This uniformity indicates that the game's rendering pipeline scales predictably with resolution, and the system's overall performance ceiling is set by the GPU rather than the CPU. The CPU, with a boost clock of 5.00 GHz and an 18 MB shared L3 cache, appears to have headroom at lower resolutions, but the GPU's workload becomes the dominant constraint as resolution climbs.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is a 16-core, 16-thread mobile processor built on Intel's 3 nm Panther Lake architecture. Its 2.00 GHz base clock and 5.00 GHz boost clock position it well for gaming, though the lack of hyperthreading — 16 threads matching 16 cores — is notable. In benchmark tests, the CPU achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 28221 and a single-core score of 3984, placing it at the 87th percentile against all CPUs. Its average benchmark score of 40518 is nearly identical to its nearest rivals: the Intel Core 7 253PE (40557, -0.1% delta), the Intel Core 5 223PE (40585, -0.2% delta), the AMD Ryzen 9 7940H (40431, 0.2% delta), and the Intel Xeon 6507P (40426, 0.2% delta).

In Control, the CPU's role is secondary at higher resolutions but becomes more relevant at 1080p. At Low settings with 1080p, the system hits 137 FPS, which is high enough that CPU overhead could start to matter, though the measured data does not indicate a CPU bottleneck at any resolution. The PassMark single-thread score of 4005 suggests strong per-core performance, which is beneficial for a game like Control that relies on consistent frame pacing. The CPU's 153.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, paired with LPDDR5X memory support, provides adequate data throughput for the game's physics and particle effects.

The fact that the CPU and GPU both sit at high percentiles — 87th and 82nd, respectively — but the combo ranks only 1551st out of 2888 suggests that Control may not be fully utilizing the available CPU resources, or that the game's engine is more sensitive to GPU performance than CPU performance. The Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 11852 and PassMark multi-thread score of 32956 indicate a capable processor, but the measured FPS data shows that the GPU is the primary constraint, especially at 1440p and 4K.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 1551 out of 2888 tested combinations places it in the 46th percentile of all tested systems in Control. This is a below-average ranking for two components that individually perform well above average, which suggests that the pairing may not be optimal for this specific title. The CPU's 87th percentile and GPU's 82nd percentile do not translate into a proportional in-game ranking, indicating that Control may have specific engine characteristics that limit the benefit of this particular hardware combination.

The GPU's nearest rivals based on average benchmark scores include the AMD Radeon Pro 580 (40318, 0.1% delta), the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 (40063, 0.8% delta), the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 (40870, -1.2% delta), and the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile (39568, 2% delta). None of these are gaming-focused GPUs, which highlights that the RTX 5070's average benchmark score of 40377 is competitive across a broad range of workloads, but in Control specifically, the combination with the Core Ultra X7 368H does not produce top-tier results.

The CPU's nearest rivals cluster tightly around its average score of 40518, with deltas of only -0.1% to 0.2%. This tight grouping indicates that the Core Ultra X7 368H is well-matched against its direct competitors, but the in-game ranking of 1551 suggests that the CPU choice has less impact on Control's frame rates than the GPU. The data shows that the combo's ranking is driven more by the GPU's performance at higher resolutions, where the RTX 5070's 12 GB VRAM and 192-bit memory bus become limiting factors.

FAQ

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

A: Based on the measured FPS data, 1920x1080 is the only resolution where all settings tiers maintain playable frame rates. At 1080p, even Ultra settings deliver 75 FPS, while at 2560x1440, Ultra drops to 57 FPS, and at 3840x2160, Ultra falls to 39 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its direct rivals?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has an average benchmark score of 40518, which is nearly identical to the Intel Core 7 253PE (40557, -0.1% delta), the Intel Core 5 223PE (40585, -0.2% delta), the AMD Ryzen 9 7940H (40431, 0.2% delta), and the Intel Xeon 6507P (40426, 0.2% delta). Performance differences are negligible.

Q: Is the GPU the bottleneck at 4K?

A: Yes. The FPS drop from 1440p to 4K is consistently 32-33% across all settings, indicating GPU-bound rendering. At 4K Ultra, the system only achieves 39 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay.

Q: What settings provide the best experience at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Medium settings deliver 74 FPS average with a minimum of 63 FPS, which offers a good balance of visual quality and performance. High settings at 66 FPS are also viable, but Ultra drops to 57 FPS.

Q: How does the combo's ranking compare to the individual component rankings?

A: The CPU ranks at the 87th percentile and the GPU at the 82nd percentile, but the combo ranks 1551st out of 2888, which is approximately the 46th percentile. This indicates that the pairing underperforms relative to what the individual component scores might suggest.

Q: What is the GPU's memory configuration?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 features 12 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 192-bit bus with 672.0 GB/s bandwidth. This configuration is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p but constrains 4K performance.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 is a Blackwell 2.0 architecture GPU built on TSMC's 5 nm process, with 31,100 million transistors on a 263 mm² die. Its 2325 MHz base clock and 2512 MHz boost clock drive 6144 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 80 raster output units. The GPU also includes 48 ray tracing cores and 192 tensor cores, which are relevant for Control's ray-traced reflections and DLSS support, though the measured FPS data does not specify whether these features were enabled.

The GPU's 12 GB GDDR7 memory operates at 1750 MHz with an effective speed of 28 Gbps, delivering 672.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a substantial amount of memory bandwidth, but the 192-bit bus width limits the total throughput compared to wider-bus GPUs. The 30.87 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 482.3 GTexel/s texture rate are strong on paper, yet the 4K performance in Control suggests that the GPU's raw compute is insufficient for the game's demanding rendering at high pixel counts.

The GPU's benchmark results are mixed. It scores 29137 in PassMark G3D, 172660 in Geekbench OpenCL, and 178923 in Geekbench Vulkan. The PassMark DirectX 12 score of 108 is low, but the DirectX 11 score of 277 is higher, which may reflect the game's API usage. The GPU's average benchmark score of 40377 places it at the 82nd percentile, with nearest rivals including the AMD Radeon Pro 580 (40318, 0.1% delta), AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 (40063, 0.8% delta), AMD Radeon Pro 5300 (40870, -1.2% delta), and NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile (39568, 2% delta).

In Control, the GPU's performance scales predictably with settings and resolution. At 1080p Low, the system hits 137 FPS, which drops to 75 FPS at Ultra — a 45% reduction. At 4K, the spread is narrower: 70 FPS at Low versus 39 FPS at Ultra, a 44% reduction. This consistency suggests that the GPU is the primary driver of performance across all settings, with the CPU providing sufficient headroom to avoid becoming a limiting factor.

Settings Recommendations

For the best balance of visual quality and frame rate, Medium settings at 1920x1080 provide the most consistent experience. The measured data shows 98 FPS average with a minimum of 83 FPS and a maximum of 112 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold and leaves room for demanding scenes. The minimum FPS of 83 indicates that even the heaviest moments in Control remain smooth, making this the safest choice for a stable gameplay experience.

At 2560x1440, Medium settings at 74 FPS average with a 63 FPS minimum are the recommended choice. The minimum of 63 FPS is just above the 60 FPS target, but the average of 74 FPS provides enough headroom for most scenarios. High settings at 66 FPS average are also acceptable, though the lower minimum is not specified in the data, making Medium the more reliable option. Ultra settings at 57 FPS average are borderline, and the lack of a minimum FPS figure makes it riskier for players who prioritize consistent frame pacing.

At 3840x2160, no settings tier achieves a 60 FPS average. Low settings deliver 70 FPS average, which is the only 4K option above the 60 FPS threshold, but the visual quality tradeoff is significant. Medium settings at 50 FPS average with a 42 FPS minimum are playable but may exhibit stutter in action-heavy sequences. High settings at 44 FPS and Ultra at 39 FPS are below the smooth gameplay threshold and should be avoided for competitive or fast-paced play. For 4K, Low settings are the only recommendation that meets the 60 FPS target, though players seeking higher visual fidelity may accept the Medium preset's 50 FPS average.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its best performance across all settings. Low settings achieve 137 FPS average, Medium settings reach 98 FPS average with a minimum of 83 FPS and a maximum of 112 FPS, High settings produce 87 FPS average, and Ultra settings drop to 75 FPS average. The spread from Low to Ultra is 62 FPS, representing a 45% reduction in performance as visual quality increases.

At 2560x1440, the performance drops predictably. Low settings hit 104 FPS average, Medium settings deliver 74 FPS average with a minimum of 63 FPS and a maximum of 85 FPS, High settings reach 66 FPS average, and Ultra settings fall to 57 FPS average. The spread from Low to Ultra is 47 FPS, which is a 45% reduction, matching the 1080p percentage almost exactly.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles to maintain high frame rates. Low settings achieve 70 FPS average, Medium settings produce 50 FPS average with a minimum of 42 FPS and a maximum of 57 FPS, High settings drop to 44 FPS average, and Ultra settings bottom out at 39 FPS average. The spread from Low to Ultra is 31 FPS, a 44% reduction, again consistent with the lower resolutions. The minimum FPS figures at 4K Medium (42 FPS) and the maximum of 57 FPS indicate that even the Medium preset can dip below 45 FPS, making 4K gaming a challenging proposition for this combo.