Control

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the highest preset that maintains an average of at least 60 FPS is Low, which records 59 FPS on average. This is just 1 FPS below the playable threshold of 60 FPS, so the data indicates this combination cannot fully clear the target at any preset in this resolution. The Medium preset drops to 42 FPS average, High falls to 37 FPS, and Ultra reaches only 32 FPS.

At 2560x1440, no settings preset reaches the 60 FPS threshold. The closest result is Low at 45 FPS average, followed by Medium at 32 FPS, High at 28 FPS, and Ultra at 25 FPS. The gap between the best result and the playable target is 15 FPS, which is substantial.

At 3840x2160, the situation is more constrained. Low settings produce 30 FPS average, Medium drops to 21 FPS, High to 19 FPS, and Ultra to 17 FPS. None of these results approach the 60 FPS threshold.

The verdict data confirms this pattern: the recorded playable settings list is empty for all three resolutions, meaning the combination of AMD Ryzen 9 9900X and Intel Arc B370 does not achieve 60 FPS at any resolution and preset pairing tested.

CPU and GPU Roles

The performance scaling across resolutions reveals that the GPU is the dominant constraint for this game. When moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 at the same settings, average FPS drops consistently: Low goes from 59 to 45 (a 24% reduction), Medium from 42 to 32 (a 24% reduction), High from 37 to 28 (a 24% reduction), and Ultra from 32 to 25 (a 22% reduction). This near-uniform proportional decline across all presets indicates resolution scaling is the primary factor, which points to GPU-bound behavior.

Moving from 2560x1440 to 3840x2160 shows a similar pattern: Low drops from 45 to 30 (a 33% reduction), Medium from 32 to 21 (a 34% reduction), High from 28 to 19 (a 32% reduction), and Ultra from 25 to 17 (a 32% reduction). The slightly larger percentage drop at higher absolute resolutions further confirms that pixel throughput, not CPU processing, limits performance.

The CPU in this combination is a 12-core, 24-thread Zen 5 processor with a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. Its benchmark scores place it in the 92nd percentile among all CPUs, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32172 and a single-core score of 2253. These are strong results that would not typically bottleneck a game like Control, which is an action-adventure title from 2019.

The GPU, however, is an integrated graphics solution with 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster output units. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184 places it in the 5th percentile among all GPUs. The pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s are modest figures that align with the observed frame rates.

The measured data shows that even at Low settings and 1080p, where CPU load would be relatively higher compared to GPU load, the system only reaches 59 FPS. This suggests that the GPU is the limiting factor even in the most favorable scenario for the CPU. The consistent pattern of FPS dropping proportionally with resolution increases, while preset changes at a fixed resolution produce smaller incremental changes, reinforces this interpretation.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Control at 1080p with 60 FPS?

A: No. The best result at 1920x1080 is Low settings with 59 FPS average, which is 1 FPS below the 60 FPS threshold. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall further behind at 42, 37, and 32 FPS respectively.

Q: What is the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS at any resolution?

A: None. The database records no settings preset at any of the three tested resolutions that reaches 60 FPS. The closest is 1080p Low at 59 FPS, but this still misses the threshold.

Q: How does the CPU compare to other processors in the database?

A: The Ryzen 9 9900X ranks in the 92nd percentile among all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 9015, which is 0.1% slower, and the Intel Core i9-14900, which is 1.1% faster. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 32172.

Q: How does the GPU compare to other graphics cards in the database?

A: The Intel Arc B370 ranks in the 5th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (0.2% faster), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (0.5% faster), and AMD FirePro M2000 (1.4% slower). Its single benchmark score is 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12.

Q: What happens to frame rates when moving from 1080p to 1440p?

A: Average FPS drops by approximately 24% across all settings. Low goes from 59 to 45, Medium from 42 to 32, High from 37 to 28, and Ultra from 32 to 25.

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

A: The data points to the GPU. The CPU is a high-end 12-core processor in the 92nd percentile, while the GPU is an integrated solution in the 5th percentile. Frame rates scale proportionally with resolution, which is characteristic of GPU-bound performance.

The Verdict

This computer cannot run Control at a playable level according to the database's 60 FPS threshold. The verdict by resolution is clear: at 3840x2160, 2560x1440, and 1920x1080, the playable settings list is empty. No preset at any resolution achieves 60 FPS average.

The closest result is 1080p Low at 59 FPS, which is marginally below the target. For a game released in 2019, this is a surprisingly weak showing. The 12-core CPU with a 92nd percentile ranking is more than capable for gaming workloads, but the integrated Intel Arc B370 GPU, which sits in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, cannot keep up with the demands of Control's rendering.

At 1440p, the best case is 45 FPS on Low settings, and at 4K the best case is 30 FPS on Low. Users who require 60 FPS would need to lower the resolution below 1080p, which was not tested in this dataset, or consider a different GPU configuration.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the nearest rivals in the database are all within a narrow performance band. The AMD EPYC 9015 scores 57555 on average, which is 0.1% lower than the Ryzen 9 9900X. The AMD EPYC 7313 scores 57399, 0.2% higher. The Intel Core i9-14900 scores 58115, 1.1% higher, and the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M scores 58323, 1.4% higher. These processors would deliver nearly identical CPU-bound performance in Control, meaning the frame rates would remain unchanged if the GPU stayed the same.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals are all older or lower-tier parts. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186, 0.2% higher than the Arc B370. 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. Any of these GPUs would produce essentially the same frame rates in Control as the Arc B370, given the small score differences.

It is important to note that the Arc B370 is an integrated graphics processor with system-shared memory. Its performance characteristics are fundamentally different from discrete GPUs, and the nearest rivals in the database reflect this low-end positioning. Users considering this combination should expect similar results to what the measured data shows.

How This Combo Ranks

Among all 3720 CPU and GPU combinations tested in the database for Control, this pairing ranks 3436th. This places it in the bottom 8% of all tested configurations. The ranking reflects the severe GPU bottleneck: while the CPU is in the 92nd percentile, the GPU is in the 5th percentile, and the overall combination suffers accordingly.

The rank of 3436 out of 3720 means that 3435 other combinations performed better in this game, while only 284 performed worse. This is a low position that aligns with the measured frame rates, which never reach the playable threshold at any tested resolution or preset.

For context, the CPU alone would rank much higher if paired with a capable discrete GPU. The 12-core Zen 5 processor with a 5.60 GHz boost clock and 64 MB of L3 cache has ample headroom for gaming. The limitation is entirely on the graphics side, where the integrated solution cannot deliver the rendering performance that Control requires.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the recorded data shows the following averages: Low settings produce 59 FPS, Medium produces 42 FPS with a minimum of 36 and maximum of 48, High produces 37 FPS, and Ultra produces 32 FPS. The Medium preset is the only one with recorded min and max values, indicating a range of 12 FPS between the lowest and highest frame rates.

At 2560x1440, Low settings produce 45 FPS average, Medium produces 32 FPS with a minimum of 27 and maximum of 37, High produces 28 FPS, and Ultra produces 25 FPS. The Medium preset again shows a range of 10 FPS between min and max.

At 3840x2160, Low settings produce 30 FPS average, Medium produces 21 FPS with a minimum of 18 and maximum of 25, High produces 19 FPS, and Ultra produces 17 FPS. The Medium preset shows a range of 7 FPS between min and max.

The min and max values for Medium settings across all resolutions show that frame times are relatively stable, with the range shrinking as resolution increases. At 1080p the range is 12 FPS, at 1440p it is 10 FPS, and at 4K it is 7 FPS. This suggests that at higher resolutions, where the GPU is more consistently saturated, frame pacing becomes more uniform even though average performance is lower.

The overall pattern across all resolutions and settings is one of consistently sub-60 FPS performance. The single closest result is 1080p Low at 59 FPS, which misses the threshold by 1 FPS. All other configurations fall further behind, with the gap widening as resolution and preset quality increase. The data does not include any configuration that reaches the playable threshold of 60 FPS.