Control

Control on the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile combination shows a clear pattern of GPU-bound scaling as resolution increases. At 1080p Low, the system produces 103 FPS, but moving to 1440p Low drops that to 78 FPS, a 24% reduction. Pushing to 4K Low yields 52 FPS, which is another 33% drop from the 1440p figure. This steep decline is typical of a workload where the RTX 5050 Mobile's rendering throughput becomes the limiting factor well before the CPU's headroom is exhausted. The Core Ultra X9 388H, with its 16 cores and 5.10 GHz boost clock, is not the bottleneck here; the data suggests that the GPU's 7.680 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 384.0 GB/s memory bandwidth are what dictate the framerate ceiling at higher resolutions.

The scaling from Medium to High settings further illustrates this point. At 1080p, Medium averages 73 FPS while High averages 65 FPS, a modest 11% penalty for the quality increase. At 1440p, the same settings gap shrinks to 11% as well (55 to 49 FPS), but at 4K it narrows to 11% (37 to 33 FPS). This consistent relative penalty across resolutions indicates that the GPU is equally stressed by the additional shading and texture work at every pixel count, rather than the CPU causing a secondary bottleneck. The Ultra preset, however, tells a different story: at 1080p Ultra, the system drops to 56 FPS, which is 14% lower than High. At 1440p Ultra, it falls to 43 FPS, and at 4K Ultra, it bottoms out at 29 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra widens as resolution climbs, suggesting that the Ultra preset's extra effects, likely including more demanding ray tracing or post-processing, heavily tax the GPU's 8 GB of GDDR7 memory and its 20 RT cores.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals how Control's demands shift across the three primary resolutions. Starting at 1920x1080, the system is clearly capable of high refresh rates on lower presets. The Low preset delivers 103 FPS, which is excellent for fast-paced action, and even Medium holds at 73 FPS with a minimum of 62 FPS, indicating smooth gameplay. High drops to 65 FPS, still playable, but Ultra falls to 56 FPS, which begins to feel less fluid for a game that rewards precise timing.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance hit is significant but expected. Low drops to 78 FPS, a 24% reduction from 1080p, which remains a solid playable framerate. Medium averages 55 FPS with a minimum of 47 FPS, which is borderline for a smooth experience but manageable on a 60Hz display. High slides to 49 FPS, and Ultra drops to 43 FPS. At this resolution, the RTX 5050 Mobile is working harder, and the 8 GB VRAM buffer starts to become a consideration, though the data shows no catastrophic frame time spikes at Medium (min 47 FPS) that would indicate a memory capacity failure.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles to maintain playable framerates on most presets. Low is the only setting that stays above 50 FPS, averaging 52 FPS. Medium drops to 37 FPS with a minimum of 32 FPS, which is below the threshold for smooth gameplay. High averages 33 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 29 FPS. The scaling from 1440p to 4K at Low is a 33% drop, but from Medium to 4K Medium is a 33% drop as well, showing that the GPU is uniformly saturated at this resolution regardless of the preset. The limiting component is unambiguously the GPU, as the CPU's single-thread performance (2200.5 in Cinebench R23) and multi-core scores (18911) are far beyond what Control requires at these settings.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Control at 4K smoothly?

A: No. At 4K, the highest average FPS is 52 on Low, which is playable but not smooth for a game requiring precision. Medium averages 37 FPS with a minimum of 32 FPS, and High/Ultra fall to 33 and 29 FPS respectively. For a consistent 60 FPS experience, 4K is not achievable on this hardware.

Q: What is the best preset for 1080p gaming?

A: Medium is the sweet spot, averaging 73 FPS with a minimum of 62 FPS. High is also viable at 65 FPS, but the drop to Ultra (56 FPS) sacrifices too much frame rate for the visual gain. Low at 103 FPS is only useful for competitive play where framerate trumps visuals.

Q: How does the RTX 5050 Mobile's VRAM affect performance?

A: The 8 GB GDDR7 memory on a 128-bit bus provides 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth. At 1440p Medium, the minimum FPS of 47 suggests the memory bandwidth is sufficient. At 4K, the lower averages (33-52 FPS) are more likely due to raw compute limits rather than VRAM capacity, as the 8 GB buffer is adequate for this game's textures at these settings.

Q: Is the CPU holding back the GPU in this game?

A: No. The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H has a boost clock of 5.10 GHz and a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2200.5, which places it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs. The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K is strictly linear with GPU load, indicating no CPU bottleneck at any resolution.

Q: What difference does the Ultra preset make over High?

A: Ultra costs roughly 14% of the average FPS at 1080p (65 to 56 FPS), 12% at 1440p (49 to 43 FPS), and 12% at 4K (33 to 29 FPS). This preset likely enables additional effects that stress the GPU's RT cores and shading units, reducing performance across the board.

Q: How does this combo compare to other tested configurations?

A: This combo ranks 2983 out of 3720 tested combinations for Control, placing it in the bottom 20% of all systems. This is below average for a modern setup, reflecting the RTX 5050 Mobile's position as an entry-level 50-series GPU.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile is the primary driver of performance in Control, and its specifications align closely with the measured results. The GPU features 2560 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with a boost clock of 1500 MHz. This configuration yields a pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s, which govern how quickly the GPU can fill the screen with rendered geometry. The FP32 performance of 7.680 TFLOPS is the raw compute figure that determines how fast it can process the game's physics and visual effects.

The memory subsystem is crucial for Control's large environments. The 8 GB GDDR7 memory on a 128-bit bus provides 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a modest figure compared to higher-tier GPUs, but it is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p at Medium settings, as evidenced by the stable minimum FPS of 62 at 1080p Medium and 47 at 1440p Medium. At 4K, the bandwidth becomes a limiting factor, as the GPU must stream more texture data to fill the 3840x2160 frame buffer, contributing to the sub-60 FPS averages.

The GPU's architecture, Blackwell 2.0 on a 5 nm TSMC process, includes 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores. Control is known for its use of ray tracing for reflections and lighting, and the RT core count directly impacts how well the Ultra preset performs. The drop from High to Ultra at 1080p (65 to 56 FPS) indicates that the Ultra preset likely enables more intensive ray-traced effects, which the 20 RT cores handle at a cost of 9 FPS. At 4K, the same transition costs 4 FPS (33 to 29 FPS), showing that the GPU is already saturated and the additional RT work compounds the rendering load.

The GPU's percentile ranking of 83 places it above average among all GPUs, but its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile, which is 0.9% faster in average benchmark score. This context explains why the combo ranks low in-game: the RTX 5050 Mobile is positioned as an entry-level mobile GPU, and Control's demanding visuals expose its limits at higher resolutions. The 50 W TDP also suggests thermal constraints in a laptop chassis, which may further cap sustained clock speeds during long gaming sessions.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested CPU and GPU combinations for Control, this setup ranks 2983 out of 3720 total combos. This places it in the bottom 20% of systems, which is a surprising result given the CPU's strong performance. The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is a high-end mobile processor, ranking in the 88th percentile of all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 44466. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D, scores 44573, a negligible 0.2% difference, and the Intel Core i9-13950HX is 0.3% slower. This CPU is not the weak link.

The GPU, however, tells a different story. The RTX 5050 Mobile ranks in the 83rd percentile of all GPUs, but its average benchmark score of 43268 is nearly identical to the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 (0% delta) and the RTX 4070 SUPER (0.1% delta). Critically, it is 0.9% slower than the RTX 4090 Mobile, which is a much more capable gaming GPU. This mismatch between a top-tier CPU and an entry-level GPU is why the combo ranks so low: the GPU becomes the bottleneck in a game like Control, which is graphically intensive.

The rank of 2983 out of 3720 means that roughly 737 other combos perform worse, but the vast majority of tested systems do better. This is not a reflection of poor engineering but rather a mismatch in component tiers. For a system built around this CPU, pairing it with a higher-tier GPU would yield significantly better results, as the CPU has ample headroom to feed a more powerful graphics card. The data shows that the combo's performance is entirely GPU-limited, so any upgrade path should focus on the GPU first.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured FPS across presets shows a clear hierarchy. Low averages 103 FPS, which is the highest recorded for this combo. Medium averages 73 FPS with a minimum of 62 FPS and a maximum of 84 FPS, indicating consistent frame times. High averages 65 FPS, and Ultra averages 56 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 47 FPS, demonstrating that Control's settings have a significant impact on performance at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the numbers scale down proportionally. Low averages 78 FPS, which is still smooth for most displays. Medium averages 55 FPS with a minimum of 47 FPS and a maximum of 63 FPS, which is playable but may show minor stutters in heavy scenes. High averages 49 FPS, and Ultra averages 43 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p at each setting is consistent: 24% for Low, 25% for Medium, 25% for High, and 23% for Ultra. This uniformity reinforces that the GPU is the sole limiting factor.

At 3840x2160, the performance falls below playable thresholds for most presets. Low averages 52 FPS, which is borderline. Medium averages 37 FPS with a minimum of 32 FPS, indicating that the GPU is struggling to maintain a stable frame rate. High averages 33 FPS, and Ultra averages 29 FPS. The minimum FPS data is only available for Medium, which shows a 32 FPS floor, but the lack of min/max data for other presets suggests that frame times are likely less stable at these lower averages.

Settings Recommendations

For the best balance of visual quality and frame rate, the Medium preset at 1920x1080 is the clear recommendation. The measured 73 FPS average with a 62 FPS minimum provides a smooth experience that is responsive enough for the game's action sequences. Upgrading to High at 1080p yields 65 FPS, which is still playable, but the 8 FPS loss is not justified by the modest visual improvements unless the player prioritizes fidelity over fluidity.

At 2560x1440, Medium is again the best choice, averaging 55 FPS with a 47 FPS minimum. This is acceptable on a 60Hz monitor, though players sensitive to frame pacing may want to drop to Low (78 FPS) for a more consistent experience. High at 1440p averages 49 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target and may feel less responsive. Ultra at 1440p (43 FPS) is not recommended.

At 3840x2160, no preset delivers a consistently smooth experience. Low averages 52 FPS, which is the only option that approaches playability, but the lack of min FPS data means frame drops could be significant. Medium (37 FPS) and High (33 FPS) are too slow for a game that requires quick reactions, and Ultra (29 FPS) is effectively unplayable. For 4K, players should consider lowering the resolution or accepting a lower preset with a sacrifice in visual detail.

The overall takeaway is that this combo excels at 1080p Medium, handles 1440p Medium adequately, and struggles at 4K. Users with a 1440p monitor should target the Medium preset, while those with a 1080p display can comfortably use High if they prefer better visuals. The Ultra preset is best avoided at all resolutions, as the performance cost outweighs the visual benefits on this GPU.