Control

Control, the 2019 action-adventure from Remedy, is a demanding title that stresses both the CPU and GPU heavily due to its physics-driven environments and real-time ray tracing options. In this analysis, the combination of the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 produces a fascinating performance profile. The benchmark data reveals a system that is overwhelmingly GPU-bound at higher resolutions, yet still capable of delivering extremely high frame rates at 1080p. This pairing ranks 612th out of 2,888 tested combos in this specific game, placing it in the top 21% of all configurations. The results show a clear hierarchy: the RTX 4090 is the dominant force, while the mobile-class Ultra X9 388H provides sufficient, but not unlimited, headroom for the game's computational demands. The measured FPS across resolutions and settings paints a picture of a system that excels at high-refresh 1440p gaming and remains entirely playable at 4K, provided settings are adjusted from the absolute maximum. This analysis will break down the resolution scaling, the CPU's role, and provide a detailed look at the measured frame rates to help you understand exactly what this hardware combo delivers in Control.

Resolution Scaling

The data shows a very clear and predictable trend in how average FPS scales with resolution. At 1920x1080, the system delivers extremely high frame rates, with the Low preset hitting 194 FPS and the High preset at 122 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440, these numbers drop to 147 FPS and 93 FPS respectively, representing a 24% reduction in performance for the Low preset and a 24% reduction for High. The scaling continues as we move to 3840x2160, where the Low preset yields 99 FPS and the High preset drops to 62 FPS. This is a 33% decrease from 1440p Low to 4K Low, and a 33% decrease from 1440p High to 4K High.

This pattern strongly indicates that the system is becoming progressively more GPU-bound as resolution increases. The RTX 4090, despite its immense power, is the limiting factor at 4K. The 54 FPS average at 4K Ultra further confirms this, as the GPU is simply unable to maintain the high frame rates seen at lower resolutions. The CPU's role here is secondary; the Ultra X9 388H provides enough performance to feed the GPU at 1080p and 1440p, but the sheer pixel count and shading workload at 4K overwhelms the graphics card. The performance drop from 1080p to 1440p is substantial but expected, and the drop to 4K is even more pronounced, reinforcing that this is a high-resolution gaming setup where the GPU is the primary bottleneck.

The data also reveals that the FPS delta between settings presets grows with resolution. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 88 FPS (194 vs 106). At 1440p, that difference narrows to 67 FPS (147 vs 80). At 4K, the difference is 45 FPS (99 vs 54). This is a classic sign of GPU limitation. At lower resolutions, the CPU can push more frames, and the GPU is under less stress, allowing for a wider spread between settings. As resolution climbs, the GPU becomes saturated, and the impact of changing graphics settings becomes relatively smaller in absolute FPS terms, though still significant. The data shows that the RTX 4090 is a formidable 4K card in this game, but it is not one that can max out every setting at that resolution and maintain a 60+ FPS average without compromise.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is a 16-core, 16-thread mobile processor based on the Panther Lake architecture. It has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. In the context of Control, the CPU's role is to handle game logic, physics simulations, and draw calls. The benchmark scores for this CPU are strong, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 18,911 and a single-core score of 2,200.5. Its Passmark single-thread score of 4,280 and multithread score of 36,811 place it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs, indicating it is a high-performance part, especially for a mobile chip.

In this game, the CPU's impact is most visible at 1080p, where the system can achieve very high frame rates. The 194 FPS average on Low settings at 1080p suggests the CPU has enough headroom to feed the RTX 4090. However, it is not the primary performance limiter. The data shows that the Ultra X9 388H is closely matched in overall benchmark average score with rivals like the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D (deltaPct of -0.2%) and the Intel Core i9-13950HX (deltaPct of 0.3%). This places it in a performance tier where it can handle modern games without being a significant bottleneck in most scenarios.

The CPU's 18 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel LPDDR5X memory support with 153.6 GB/s of bandwidth are adequate for feeding the GPU. In Control, which is known for its physics-heavy combat and destructible environments, the CPU's multi-core performance is important. The 16 cores and 16 threads are likely more than sufficient for the game's demands, as the game generally scales well with multiple cores. The data suggests that the CPU is not the limiting factor in this pairing, except perhaps in the most extreme low-resolution, high-FPS scenarios where the GPU has very little work to do per frame. For instance, at 1080p Low, the GPU is capable of 194 FPS, and the CPU must keep up with that level of frame generation. If the CPU were weaker, we would likely see a smaller performance gap between 1080p and 1440p. The fact that the performance drops consistently with resolution indicates the GPU is the primary constraint.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to play Control with this hardware combo for a high-refresh-rate experience?

A: Based on the measured data, 2560x1440 is the sweet spot. The High preset at this resolution delivers an average of 93 FPS, which is well above 60 and suitable for high-refresh monitors. The Low preset at 1440p achieves 147 FPS, and even the Ultra preset maintains an 80 FPS average, making it a more balanced choice than 4K for high frame rates.

Q: Can this system maintain 60 FPS at 4K in Control?

A: Yes, but not on the highest settings. The measured data shows a 62 FPS average on the High preset at 3840x2160. The Medium preset also holds at a 70 FPS average with a minimum of 60 FPS. However, the Ultra preset drops to a 54 FPS average, which falls below the 60 FPS threshold. Therefore, to stay above 60 FPS at 4K, you should select the High or Medium preset.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H compare to its nearest rivals in overall CPU performance?

A: The Ultra X9 388H has an average benchmark score of 44,466. This is nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D, which scores 44,573 and is only 0.2% slower. It is also 0.3% faster than the Intel Core i9-13950HX (44,342) and 0.4% faster than the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 (44,309). In terms of raw compute, it is a very competitive part, sitting at the 88th percentile of all CPUs.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between the Low and Ultra presets at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset produces an average of 194 FPS, while the Ultra preset produces 106 FPS. This is a difference of 88 FPS, indicating a significant performance cost for the higher visual fidelity. The High preset sits between these at 122 FPS.

Q: Is the RTX 4090's performance in Control typical for its class?

A: The RTX 4090 has an average benchmark score of 60,347, placing it in the 88th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the Intel Arc Pro A60, has a score of 60,326, making the RTX 4090 effectively identical in this metric. The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M is 2.5% faster, while the AMD Radeon PRO V710 is 2.9% slower. This indicates that the card's raw compute performance is in the top tier, but its in-game performance is also dependent on the specific game engine and drivers.

Q: Can the CPU limit the GPU in this game at any resolution?

A: The data suggests the CPU is not a significant bottleneck, even at 1080p. The RTX 4090 is the primary limiting factor as resolution increases. At 1080p Low, the system hits 194 FPS, which is very high. If the CPU were a major constraint, the frame rate would likely plateau at a lower value. The consistent scaling of FPS with resolution points to a GPU-bound scenario in most cases, with the CPU providing sufficient headroom.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data for this combo provides a complete picture of performance across three resolutions and four quality presets.

At 1920x1080, the system is exceptionally fast. The Low preset achieves an average of 194 FPS, making it ideal for competitive play or maximum refresh rates. The Medium preset delivers an average of 138 FPS, with a minimum of 117 FPS and a maximum of 158 FPS, ensuring a smooth experience on high-refresh displays. The High preset averages 122 FPS, a solid result. The Ultra preset, while the most demanding, still averages 106 FPS, which is very playable and visually rich. The performance range from Low to Ultra spans a 88 FPS delta, showing the impact of graphical settings at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, performance remains high. The Low preset averages 147 FPS, a 24% reduction from 1080p Low. The Medium preset averages 104 FPS, with a minimum of 89 FPS and a maximum of 120 FPS. The High preset delivers 93 FPS, which is still above 60 and suitable for most high-refresh monitors. The Ultra preset averages 80 FPS, providing a visually impressive experience without sacrificing playability. The delta between Low and Ultra is 67 FPS, narrower than at 1080p, but still significant.

At 3840x2160, the RTX 4090's limits become apparent. The Low preset averages 99 FPS, which is a 33% drop from 1440p Low. The Medium preset averages 70 FPS, with a minimum of 60 FPS and a maximum of 81 FPS, making it the lowest preset that consistently holds above 60 FPS. The High preset averages 62 FPS, which is just barely above the 60 FPS target. The Ultra preset averages 54 FPS, dropping below the 60 FPS threshold and indicating that this setting is too demanding for a locked 60 FPS experience at 4K. The performance delta between Low and Ultra here is 45 FPS, showing that the GPU is the primary constraint.

The data shows a clear pattern: the system is capable of very high frame rates at 1080p and 1440p with all presets, but at 4K, only the Low, Medium, and High presets are able to maintain an average above 60 FPS. The Ultra preset at 4K is the only configuration that fails to do so.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested hardware combinations for Control, this specific pairing of the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 ranks 612th out of 2,888 total combos. This places it in the top 21% of all tested systems, which is a strong showing. Given that the RTX 4090 is one of the most powerful consumer GPUs available, a top-quartile ranking is expected. The CPU, while not the absolute fastest, is a high-end mobile part that complements the GPU well.

The rank is likely influenced by the fact that the Ultra X9 388H is a mobile processor. While it has a high average benchmark score, desktop CPUs with higher power limits and faster memory may provide slightly better performance in CPU-bound scenarios, such as very high frame rate 1080p gaming. However, the overall combo rank shows that this is a very capable system for Control. The GPU's raw performance is the dominant factor, and the CPU is more than adequate to avoid being a major liability. This ranking suggests that users can expect a top-tier gaming experience in Control, with the primary compromise being the inability to run the Ultra preset at 4K with a 60 FPS average.

The data from the combo rank, when compared to the measured FPS, indicates that the system is well-balanced for high-resolution gaming. The rank is a holistic measure, but the FPS data provides the granular detail needed for specific settings and resolution choices. The 612th rank out of 2,888 is a solid endorsement of this pairing's capabilities in Control, putting it ahead of the vast majority of other configurations.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this hardware combo depend heavily on your display's resolution and refresh rate.

For 1920x1080 displays: The High preset, at 122 FPS, is an excellent choice for a 120Hz or 144Hz monitor, providing a great balance of visual quality and performance. If you have a 240Hz monitor, the Low preset at 194 FPS will allow you to take full advantage of its refresh rate. The Medium preset at 138 FPS is also a strong option for 144Hz displays. The Ultra preset is playable at 106 FPS, but the visual gains over High may not justify the 16 FPS loss for some users.

For 2560x1440 displays: The High preset at 93 FPS is the recommended starting point. It delivers high visual fidelity and remains above 60 FPS, making it suitable for most high-refresh monitors. If you desire higher frame rates, the Medium preset at 104 FPS is even better, with only a minor visual compromise. The Ultra preset at 80 FPS is also viable for a 60Hz or 75Hz monitor, offering the best image quality. For competitive play, the Low preset at 147 FPS is available, but it sacrifices a lot of visual detail.

For 3840x2160 displays: To maintain a smooth 60+ FPS experience, the Medium preset is the best choice, with a 70 FPS average and a 60 FPS minimum. The High preset is also viable, at 62 FPS, but it leaves very little headroom for demanding scenes. The Low preset at 99 FPS is an option if you prioritize frame rate over all else, but the visual fidelity will be noticeably reduced. The Ultra preset is not recommended for 4K, as the 54 FPS average falls below the standard 60 FPS target.

In summary, for the best overall experience, the High preset at 2560x1440 offers an excellent combination of visual quality and performance. For 4K gaming, the Medium preset is the safest choice to ensure a consistent frame rate. This system is best utilized at 1080p or 1440p, where it can deliver high frame rates with all settings, including Ultra.