Control

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700X paired with the Intel Arc B370 lands at rank 3436 out of 3720 tested combos in the database for Control. This places the combination in the bottom 8% of all recorded system pairings, a position that reflects the GPU's severe limitation rather than any deficiency in the processor. The Arc B370 sits at the 5th percentile among all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 1184. Its nearest rivals include the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, ATI Radeon HD 5770, AMD Radeon HD 7650M, and AMD FirePro M2000, all within a 1.4% delta of its score. These are legacy parts from a different era of gaming, which contextualizes why this modern CPU and GPU combination struggles so profoundly.

The CPU, by contrast, is an elite performer. The Ryzen 7 7700X sits at the 85th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 35909. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845, Intel Core 7 250H, AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350, and Intel Core Ultra 9 185H, all within a 0.7% delta. The processor's multi-threaded might is evident in its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 19088 and Geekbench multi-core score of 12451. Single-thread performance is equally strong, with a Passmark single-thread score of 4190. This is a desktop-class Zen 4 chip with 8 cores and 16 threads, capable of boosting to 5.40 GHz, yet the Arc B370's integrated graphics architecture (Xe3-LPG, Panther Lake) cannot translate that CPU capability into playable frame rates.

The disparity between component classes is stark. The CPU ranks near the top of the database while the GPU ranks near the bottom, and the measured FPS data reflects this imbalance. At no resolution does this combo reach the 60 FPS playable threshold, and the verdict by resolution lists no playable settings for any resolution. The combination rank of 3436 out of 3720 signals a system that is fundamentally mismatched for this title, with the GPU acting as the overwhelming bottleneck.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Control at 1920x1080 with any settings?

A: No. The highest average FPS recorded at 1920x1080 is 59 FPS on Low settings. The playable threshold is 60 FPS, and the verdict by resolution lists no playable settings at 1080p. The system falls one frame short of playability at the lowest preset.

Q: What is the best average FPS this combo achieves in Control?

A: The best result is 59 FPS average at 1920x1080 with Low settings. Every other configuration produces lower averages, including 45 FPS at 2560x1440 Low and 30 FPS at 3840x2160 Low.

Q: How does the GPU compare to similar hardware in the database?

A: The Intel Arc B370 has an average benchmark score of 1184, placing it at the 5th percentile. Its nearest rival is the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 with a score of 1186, a 0.2% difference. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190 (0.5% higher), the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192 (0.7% higher), and the AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168 (1.4% lower).

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more responsible for the low frame rates?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the primary constraint. The Ryzen 7 7700X scores at the 85th percentile among CPUs, while the Arc B370 scores at the 5th percentile among GPUs. The CPU's nearest rivals are all within 0.7% performance, suggesting the processor is not the limiting factor.

Q: What frame rate variance is recorded at Medium settings?

A: At 3840x2160 Medium, the combo averages 21 FPS with a minimum of 18 and maximum of 25. At 2560x1440 Medium, the average is 32 FPS with a range of 27 to 37. At 1920x1080 Medium, the average is 42 FPS with a range of 36 to 48.

Q: Does lowering resolution to 4K improve the situation?

A: The opposite occurs. At 3840x2160, even Low settings only yield 30 FPS average, which is half the playable threshold. The highest preset at 4K, Ultra, produces just 17 FPS average.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU side, the Ryzen 7 7700X performs nearly identically to several other processors in the database. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 is the closest match with an average score of 35802, a mere 0.3% difference. The Intel Core 7 250H and AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 both score around 35728 and 35719 respectively, each 0.5% off. The Intel Core Ultra 9 185H trails by 0.7% with a score of 35670. Any of these CPUs paired with the same Arc B370 would produce essentially the same frame rates in Control, since the GPU is the limiting factor at all tested resolutions.

For the GPU side, the Arc B370's nearest performance equivalents are all legacy discrete parts. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186, 0.2% higher. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190, 0.5% higher. The AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192, 0.7% higher. The AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168, 1.4% lower. Swapping the Arc B370 for any of these would produce a similar experience in Control: sub-60 FPS at every resolution and preset combination. The delta between these GPUs is under 2%, meaning the frame rate differences would be within a few FPS at most.

A user considering alternative hardware should note that the CPU has substantial headroom. The Ryzen 7 7700X's benchmark scores, such as 19088 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 8859 in 3DMark 16-thread, are far beyond what Control requires at these frame rates. The bottleneck is entirely the GPU's integrated-class performance, which tops out at 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 and 48.00 GPixel/s pixel rate. The nearest GPU rivals all fall within the same performance band, so no incremental GPU upgrade in this class would change the outcome meaningfully.

The Verdict

This PC cannot run Control at a playable level according to the database's 60 FPS threshold. The verdict by resolution lists no playable settings for any resolution: 3840x2160, 2560x1440, and 1920x1080 all return empty playable settings arrays. The measured FPS data confirms this across the board. At 1920x1080, which is typically the most forgiving resolution, the best average is 59 FPS on Low settings, one frame below the playable line. Medium drops to 42 FPS average, High to 37 FPS, and Ultra to 32 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the situation worsens. Low settings produce 45 FPS average, High produces 28 FPS, Medium produces 32 FPS, and Ultra produces 25 FPS. At 3840x2160, the results are even more constrained: Low averages 30 FPS, Medium averages 21 FPS, High averages 19 FPS, and Ultra averages 17 FPS. The gap between the best 1080p result (59 FPS) and the 60 FPS threshold is exactly one frame, indicating that this system is tantalizingly close to playability at the lowest preset but fails to clear the bar.

The conclusion is unambiguous: this combination does not meet the playable threshold at any resolution or preset. Gamers seeking to play Control would need either a more powerful GPU or to accept frame rates well below 60 FPS. The data shows a system that is CPU-rich but GPU-poor, and the GPU's limitations dominate every measured result.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the highest average FPS is 30 on Low settings, with no minimum or maximum recorded. Medium settings yield 21 FPS average, with a minimum of 18 and maximum of 25. High settings produce 19 FPS average, and Ultra produces 17 FPS average. The spread from Low to Ultra is 13 FPS, showing that preset selection has a meaningful but limited impact at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, Low settings deliver 45 FPS average. Medium settings produce 32 FPS average, with a range of 27 to 37. High settings yield 28 FPS average, and Ultra produces 25 FPS average. The delta between Low and Ultra here is 20 FPS, a wider spread than at 4K, indicating the GPU has slightly more headroom at lower pixel counts.

At 1920x1080, Low settings nearly reach the playable threshold with 59 FPS average. Medium settings produce 42 FPS average, with a range of 36 to 48. High settings yield 37 FPS average, and Ultra produces 32 FPS average. The difference between Low and Ultra is 27 FPS, the largest spread across all resolutions. This suggests that at 1080p, the GPU is less pixel-bound and preset choice matters more.

The pattern across resolutions is consistent: lowering settings improves FPS, but never enough to reach 60 FPS. Even the best case scenario (1080p Low at 59 FPS) falls short. The minimum FPS values, where recorded, show that dips below the average are common: 18 FPS at 4K Medium, 27 FPS at 1440p Medium, and 36 FPS at 1080p Medium.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves 60 FPS. The best result is Low settings at 30 FPS average, which is exactly half the playable threshold. Medium, High, and Ultra all produce lower averages (21, 19, and 17 FPS respectively). The database records no best settings for this resolution, as none clear the threshold.

At 2560x1440, the same situation applies. No preset reaches 60 FPS. Low settings give the highest average at 45 FPS, followed by Medium at 32 FPS, High at 28 FPS, and Ultra at 25 FPS. Again, no best settings are recorded.

At 1920x1080, Low settings come closest with 59 FPS average, but this still misses the 60 FPS threshold by one frame. Medium produces 42 FPS, High produces 37 FPS, and Ultra produces 32 FPS. The verdict by resolution lists no playable settings for this resolution either.

The data implies that if the playable threshold were 58 FPS instead of 60, the 1080p Low preset would be the recommended configuration. However, at the defined threshold of 60 FPS, there is no optimal setting to recommend. The most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS does not exist for this combo at any resolution.

CPU and GPU Roles

The division of labor between the Ryzen 7 7700X and the Arc B370 is heavily skewed toward the GPU as the limiting factor. The CPU's benchmark scores place it at the 85th percentile, with a Passmark multi-thread score of 35686 and a 3DMark max-thread score of 8852. These are strong results that indicate ample processing headroom. The GPU, by contrast, sits at the 5th percentile with a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184. The GPU's integrated design, with 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs, simply cannot sustain high frame rates in a demanding action-adventure title like Control.

The scaling between resolutions provides evidence of GPU-bound behavior. Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 (a 1.78x increase in pixel count) drops the Low preset average from 59 FPS to 45 FPS, a 24% reduction. Moving from 2560x1440 to 3840x2160 (another 2.25x pixel increase) drops Low from 45 FPS to 30 FPS, a 33% reduction. These proportional decreases align with GPU-bound workload scaling, where performance degrades as pixel throughput demands rise.

Preset scaling further confirms the GPU's dominance. At 1920x1080, going from Low to Ultra reduces FPS from 59 to 32, a 46% drop. At 2560x1440, the same preset change reduces FPS from 45 to 25, a 44% drop. At 3840x2160, Low to Ultra drops from 30 to 17, a 43% drop. The consistency of these percentages across resolutions suggests that the GPU's fixed shading and ROP capabilities are the constant constraint, regardless of resolution.

The CPU's role in this equation is to feed the GPU with data, and it does so without becoming a bottleneck. If the CPU were limiting, we would expect frame rates to remain more constant across resolutions, since the CPU workload in Control does not scale linearly with pixel count. Instead, the steep FPS drops at higher resolutions point squarely at the GPU's pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s. These figures, while modest, are the practical ceiling for this combo. The Ryzen 7 7700X, with its 8 cores and 16 threads, is never the constraint in this pairing.