Control

How This Combo Ranks

The database places this AMD Ryzen 7 5700X and Intel Arc B390 pairing at rank 3311 out of 3720 tested combinations for Control. That puts it in the bottom 11% of all recorded combos, a position that reflects a severe imbalance between the two components. The CPU is far stronger than the GPU in this pairing, and the recorded frame rates show exactly where that imbalance becomes the limiting factor.

The CPU's own benchmark standing is respectable. Its average benchmark score of 27578 places it at the 79th percentile against all CPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-12600K with an identical average score of 27578, the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X at 27636 (0.2% higher), the AMD Ryzen 7 5800 at 27535 (0.2% lower), and the Intel Core Ultra 5 125H at 27507 (0.3% lower). That cluster of scores is tight, meaning the 5700X sits in a well-populated performance tier where no nearby competitor offers a meaningful edge.

The GPU tells a different story. The Intel Arc B390 scores just 1482 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, which places it at the 9th percentile against all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are all older NVIDIA parts: the GeForce GT 520MX at 1463 (1.3% lower), GeForce 800M at 1460 (1.5% lower), GeForce GT 625 OEM at 1446 (2.5% lower), and GeForce GT 710 at 1443 (2.7% lower). The B390 leads these by small margins, but the entire group sits in a low-performance tier. That 9th percentile ranking explains why the combo rank is so poor despite a capable CPU.

The recorded data shows a system where the GPU is the clear bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the CPU has enough headroom to push the GPU to 65 FPS average, but raising settings or resolution quickly exposes the GPU's limits. The result is a combo that ranks poorly overall but still manages to clear the playable threshold at one specific configuration.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals a system where the GPU dominates performance scaling across all resolutions and presets. Start with resolution scaling at identical settings. At High settings, moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 drops the average from 41 FPS to 31 FPS, a reduction of roughly 24%. Moving further to 3840x2160 drops it to 21 FPS, another 32% reduction. At Low settings, the same resolution climb goes from 65 FPS to 50 FPS to 33 FPS. These are large, consistent drops that indicate the GPU is fully saturated at every step.

The CPU's role becomes clearer when looking at settings scaling within a fixed resolution. At 1920x1080, Low produces 65 FPS, Medium produces 46 FPS, High produces 41 FPS, and Ultra produces 36 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 19 FPS, a 29% penalty. Between Medium and High it is 5 FPS, and between High and Ultra it is another 5 FPS. This pattern suggests the CPU is not the constraint at lower settings; the GPU is simply running out of shading power as the render load increases.

At 2560x1440, the same settings ladder shows Low at 50 FPS, Medium at 35 FPS, High at 31 FPS, and Ultra at 27 FPS. The Low-to-Medium penalty is 15 FPS, again the largest step. At 3840x2160, Low sits at 33 FPS, Medium at 24 FPS, High at 21 FPS, and Ultra at 18 FPS. The consistency of these drops across all three resolutions points to a GPU that is the sole performance gate. The CPU, with its 8 cores and 16 threads, is never the limiting factor in any recorded configuration.

The min and max FPS data reinforces this. At Medium settings across all resolutions, the spread between min and max is narrow: 7 FPS at 1080p (40 to 53), 10 FPS at 1440p (30 to 40), and 7 FPS at 4K (20 to 27). That tight range indicates the GPU is producing frames at a steady, saturated pace rather than being interrupted by CPU stalls. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the min-to-max variance would typically be wider.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the recorded averages are 65 FPS on Low, 46 FPS on Medium, 41 FPS on High, and 36 FPS on Ultra. Medium is the only preset with full min/max data: a minimum of 40 FPS and a maximum of 53 FPS. Low clears the playable threshold of 60 FPS by 5 FPS, making it the only playable setting at this resolution. Medium falls 14 FPS short of 60, High falls 19 FPS short, and Ultra falls 24 FPS short.

At 2560x1440, the averages drop to 50 FPS on Low, 35 FPS on Medium, 31 FPS on High, and 27 FPS on Ultra. Medium shows a minimum of 30 FPS and a maximum of 40 FPS. No preset at this resolution reaches 60 FPS. The closest is Low at 50 FPS, which is 10 FPS below the playable threshold. The gap widens quickly: Medium is 25 FPS short, High is 29 FPS short, and Ultra is 33 FPS short.

At 3840x2160, the averages fall further to 33 FPS on Low, 24 FPS on Medium, 21 FPS on High, and 18 FPS on Ultra. Medium records a minimum of 20 FPS and a maximum of 27 FPS. Every preset at this resolution is well below 60 FPS. Low is 27 FPS short, Medium is 36 FPS short, High is 39 FPS short, and Ultra is 42 FPS short. The data shows a hard performance ceiling that no settings change can overcome at this resolution.

The overall pattern is linear and predictable. Each resolution step up costs roughly 30% of the frame rate at a given preset, and each settings step up costs roughly 10 to 20% at a given resolution. The GPU simply does not have the throughput to maintain 60 FPS at 1440p or 4K under any preset, and at 1080p it only manages that target on the lowest settings.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU's nearest rivals in the database are all within a 0.3% performance band. The Intel Core i5-12600K matches the 5700X exactly at 27578. The AMD Ryzen 5 7600X scores 27636, just 0.2% higher. The AMD Ryzen 7 5800 scores 27535, 0.2% lower. The Intel Core Ultra 5 125H scores 27507, 0.3% lower. Any of these CPUs would produce nearly identical frame rates in Control when paired with the same GPU, because the GPU is the limiting factor in every measured configuration.

The GPU's nearest rivals are a much older group. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX scores 1463, which is 1.3% lower than the B390's 1482. The GeForce 800M scores 1460, 1.5% lower. The GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446, 2.5% lower. The GeForce GT 710 scores 1443, 2.7% lower. These deltas are small enough that swapping the B390 for any of these GPUs would yield nearly identical frame rates in Control. The B390 leads its closest rival by just 1.3%, which translates to roughly 1 FPS at 1080p Low and less than 1 FPS at higher settings.

The practical implication is that this combo sits in a performance tier where hardware swaps within the rival group would not change the playability verdict. No rival CPU would push the frame rate higher, because the GPU caps it. No rival GPU would offer a meaningful improvement either, because the entire group sits at the same low performance level. The only way to reach 60 FPS at higher resolutions or settings would require moving to a completely different GPU tier, which the database does not list among these rivals.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Control at 1080p?

A: Yes, but only at Low settings. The recorded average at 1920x1080 Low is 65 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold. All other presets at this resolution fall below 60 FPS: Medium averages 46 FPS, High averages 41 FPS, and Ultra averages 36 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or the GPU the bottleneck?

A: The GPU is the bottleneck in every recorded configuration. The Intel Arc B390 sits at the 9th percentile among all GPUs, while the AMD Ryzen 7 5700X sits at the 79th percentile among all CPUs. The frame rates scale heavily with resolution and settings, both of which load the GPU, and the min-to-max variance is narrow, indicating steady GPU saturation rather than CPU stalls.

Q: How does this combo rank against other tested systems?

A: It ranks 3311 out of 3720 combos for Control, placing it in the bottom 11% of the database. The CPU is competitive with rivals like the Intel Core i5-12600K and AMD Ryzen 5 7600X, but the GPU's 9th percentile standing drags the overall combo rank down.

Q: What settings should I use at 1440p?

A: None of the recorded presets at 2560x1440 reach 60 FPS. Low averages 50 FPS, Medium averages 35 FPS, High averages 31 FPS, and Ultra averages 27 FPS. The best option is Low if you want the highest frame rate, but it still falls 10 FPS short of the playable threshold.

Q: Is the Intel Arc B390 better than its nearest GPU rivals?

A: Marginally. The B390 scores 1482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, which is 1.3% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, 1.5% higher than the GeForce 800M, 2.5% higher than the GeForce GT 625 OEM, and 2.7% higher than the GeForce GT 710. These differences are small enough that real-world frame rates would be nearly identical.

Q: What is the highest preset that stays at or above 60 FPS at 1080p?

A: Low is the only preset at 1920x1080 that stays at or above 60 FPS, with an average of 65 FPS. Medium falls to 46 FPS, so there is no higher preset that clears the threshold.

The Verdict

This PC can run Control, but only within a narrow window. The verdict by resolution is clear: at 1920x1080, Low settings produce an average of 65 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold. That is the only configuration in the entire measured set that reaches playable performance.

At 2560x1440, no preset reaches 60 FPS. The best case is Low at 50 FPS, which is 10 FPS short. At 3840x2160, the situation is worse: Low averages 33 FPS, and Ultra drops to 18 FPS. The database lists no playable settings for either 1440p or 4K, meaning the GPU cannot sustain a playable experience at those resolutions under any of the four tested presets.

The CPU is not the problem. The Ryzen 7 5700X is a solid performer that sits comfortably among its rivals, but the Intel Arc B390 is a low-tier GPU that cannot keep up with the demands of Control at higher resolutions. The data shows a system that is playable only at 1080p Low, and even then with only 5 FPS of headroom above the threshold. For anyone considering this combo, the takeaway is simple: stick to 1080p and the lowest settings, or expect frame rates well below 60.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Low, with an average of 65 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall below the threshold at 46, 41, and 36 FPS respectively. There is no headroom to raise settings while keeping playable performance.

At 2560x1440, the database records no preset that clears 60 FPS. Low comes closest at 50 FPS, but that is still 10 FPS short of the playable threshold. Medium averages 35 FPS, High averages 31 FPS, and Ultra averages 27 FPS. The recommendation is Low if you want the best frame rate, but the experience will not be smooth by the 60 FPS standard.

At 3840x2160, no preset is playable. Low averages 33 FPS, Medium averages 24 FPS, High averages 21 FPS, and Ultra averages 18 FPS. The best option is Low at 33 FPS, but that is far below the 60 FPS threshold and would feel noticeably stuttery in a fast-paced action game. The data suggests avoiding 4K entirely with this hardware pairing.