Control

Control is a 2019 Action Adventure title that stresses both the CPU and GPU, and the measured data for the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H paired with the AMD Radeon 760M shows a system that is heavily constrained by its integrated graphics. This combination ranks 2878th out of 2888 tested combos in this game, placing it in the bottom percentile of all systems in the database. The benchmark results indicate a fundamental imbalance: the processor is a high-end mobile part, while the graphics solution is an integrated unit that struggles to maintain playable frame rates even at the lowest settings.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate data shows a steep drop as resolution increases, which is a classic indicator of a GPU-bound system. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves an average of 40 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops the average to 30 FPS, and at 4K Low, the average falls to 21 FPS. This represents a 25% performance loss from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 30% loss from 1440p to 4K. The scaling is consistent with the GPU being the limiting factor, as the rendering workload per pixel increases dramatically with resolution.

The pattern holds across all quality presets. With High settings, the averages are 25 FPS at 1080p, 19 FPS at 1440p, and 13 FPS at 4K. The consistent proportional drop indicates that the AMD Radeon 760M's shading units, texture units, and render output units are saturated at every resolution. The CPU is not the bottleneck here; if it were, we would expect to see smaller differences between resolutions as the GPU would have spare capacity at lower resolutions. Instead, the data shows that every resolution increase directly taxes the GPU, confirming that the integrated graphics are the primary constraint.

The gap between Low and Ultra settings at the same resolution is also telling. At 1080p, the difference between Low (40 FPS) and Ultra (22 FPS) is 18 FPS, or 45% lower performance. At 4K, the same settings comparison shows 21 FPS versus 11 FPS, a 48% reduction. This suggests that the GPU is not only limited by pixel count but also by the complexity of the shaders and effects at higher presets. The Radeon 760M's 512 shading units and 16 render output units are simply insufficient for the demands of Control at high resolutions and detail levels.

FAQ

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

A: The highest average frame rate recorded is 40 FPS, which occurs at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Control?

A: No. At 3840x2160, the average frame rates range from 21 FPS on Low to 11 FPS on Ultra, all of which are below playable thresholds for a fast-paced action game.

Q: How does the CPU's performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H has an average benchmark score of 44466. It is 0.2% behind the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D, 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core i9-13950HX, 0.4% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385, and 0.5% ahead of the Intel Core i5-13600.

Q: What is the GPU's average benchmark score and percentile ranking?

A: The AMD Radeon 760M has an average benchmark score of 6019 and ranks in the 35th percentile of all GPUs, indicating it is a lower-performing part.

Q: Which settings provide the most consistent frame times at 1080p?

A: The Medium preset at 1920x1080 has a measured average of 29 FPS with a minimum of 24 FPS and a maximum of 33 FPS, showing a narrower range than other presets.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the limiting factor. The frame rates drop significantly with both increasing resolution and increasing quality settings, which is characteristic of a graphics-bound workload.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H and AMD Radeon 760M combination ranks 2878th out of 2888 tested combos in Control. This places it in the bottom 0.3% of all systems in the database for this specific game. The rank is a direct reflection of the GPU's limited capabilities. While the CPU is a strong performer, ranking in the 88th percentile of all CPUs, the overall system performance is dragged down by the integrated graphics solution.

The vast gap between the CPU's high percentile (88) and the GPU's low percentile (35) highlights the mismatch in this pairing. In Control, which is a demanding title with complex physics and particle effects, the GPU cannot keep up with the CPU's ability to feed it data. The result is a system that is severely bottlenecked by its graphics component. The rank of 2878 indicates that almost any discrete GPU on the market would provide a better experience in this game, and even other integrated solutions with higher performance would rank significantly better.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the combo delivers its best results. With Low settings, the average frame rate is 40 FPS. This is the only settings/resolution combination that approaches playability, though it still falls short of the 60 FPS target for smooth action. The Medium preset at 1080p yields an average of 29 FPS, with a minimum of 24 FPS and a maximum of 33 FPS. High settings at 1080p produce an average of 25 FPS, while Ultra settings drop to 22 FPS.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance degrades further. Low settings average 30 FPS, which is a significant drop from the 40 FPS at 1080p. Medium settings average 22 FPS, with a minimum of 18 FPS and a maximum of 25 FPS. High settings at 1440p average 19 FPS, and Ultra settings average just 17 FPS. None of these results are suitable for a responsive gaming experience, as the frame rates are consistently below 30 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the highest resolution tested, the system is overwhelmed. Low settings average 21 FPS, Medium settings average 15 FPS (with a minimum of 12 FPS and a maximum of 17 FPS), High settings average 13 FPS, and Ultra settings average 11 FPS. These frame rates are well below the threshold for playable action and would result in a stuttering, unresponsive experience. The data shows a clear linear degradation from 1080p to 4K, with no settings combination at 1440p or above reaching a playable average.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 760M is an integrated graphics processor based on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with a 4 nm process node. It has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units. The GPU operates at a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2599 MHz, with a pixel rate of 41.58 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 83.17 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 5.323 TFLOPS.

These specifications explain the measured performance in Control. The 16 ROPs are a critical bottleneck for a game that relies heavily on resolution-dependent effects. The GPU's memory bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent," meaning it shares the system memory, which further limits performance. The GPU's benchmark scores reflect this: a Passmark G3D score of 5310 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 400 place it in the 35th percentile of all GPUs.

In Control, the GPU is the definitive limiting factor. The data shows that increasing resolution from 1080p to 4K reduces frame rates by nearly half at every settings level. This is a direct consequence of the GPU's limited pixel throughput and memory bandwidth. The GPU's nearest rivals, such as the AMD Radeon RX 6400 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M, have similar average benchmark scores, which confirms that the 760M is in the entry-level performance tier. The game's demanding visual effects at higher presets quickly saturate the GPU's capabilities, leading to the low frame rates observed.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is a 16-core, 16-thread processor from the Panther Lake architecture, built on Intel's 3 nm process. It has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The CPU features a total of 18 MB of shared L3 cache, with 192 KB of L1 cache and 3 MB of L2 cache per core. It supports LPDDR5X memory on a dual-channel bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s.

The CPU's benchmark scores are strong. It achieves a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 18911 and a single-core score of 2200.5, placing it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs. Its average benchmark score of 44466 is nearly identical to its nearest rivals, including the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D and Intel Core i9-13950HX. This indicates that the CPU is more than capable of handling the computational demands of Control, including its physics and AI systems.

However, the CPU's performance is irrelevant in this configuration because the GPU cannot keep up. The frame rates in the measured data are almost entirely determined by the GPU's rendering speed. The CPU is not the bottleneck; it is waiting for the GPU to complete its work. The high CPU performance only serves to highlight the imbalance. In a system with a more powerful discrete GPU, the Core Ultra X9 388H would likely enable much higher frame rates, as its 5.10 GHz boost clock and 16 cores provide ample headroom for game logic and draw calls.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the only viable settings for this combo are at 1920x1080 resolution. At this resolution, the Low preset provides an average of 40 FPS, which is the most playable experience available. The Medium preset at 1080p offers an average of 29 FPS, which is below the 30 FPS threshold often considered the minimum for playability, but it may be acceptable for slower-paced segments. The frame time data for Medium shows a range from 24 to 33 FPS, indicating some instability.

For a better visual experience, the High preset at 1080p averages 25 FPS, but the drop from Low is substantial. The Ultra preset at 1080p averages 22 FPS, which is too low for a game like Control that requires precise timing. At 1440p and 4K, all settings presets produce average frame rates below 30 FPS, making them unsuitable for gameplay.

The recommendation is to play at 1920x1080 with Low settings to achieve the highest average frame rate of 40 FPS. If visual fidelity is a priority and the player can tolerate lower frame rates, the Medium preset at 1080p provides a balance with an average of 29 FPS. For any other resolution or higher settings, the system will not provide a smooth experience. The data clearly shows that this combo is best suited for 1080p gaming with reduced graphical details.