Control

Measured FPS Breakdown

Starting with 4K, the data records a narrow band of frame rates across all four settings. At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 33 FPS, Medium drops to 24 FPS with a minimum of 20 and a maximum of 27, High averages 21 FPS, and Ultra averages 18 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 15 FPS, which shows that even reducing the preset to its lowest state cannot lift this combination into a comfortable range at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, the same settings hierarchy appears but with slightly better headroom. Low averages 50 FPS, Medium averages 35 FPS with a recorded range of 30 to 40, High averages 31 FPS, and Ultra averages 27 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 15 FPS, while the gap between Medium and High is only 4 FPS, indicating that the steepest performance penalty occurs when moving from Low to Medium at this resolution.

At 1920x1080, the picture changes materially. Low averages 65 FPS, which is the only recorded average above the 60 FPS playable threshold. Medium averages 46 FPS with a minimum of 40 and a maximum of 53, High averages 41 FPS, and Ultra averages 36 FPS. The delta between Low and Medium is 19 FPS, the largest single-step drop in the entire dataset, while Medium to High costs only 5 FPS and High to Ultra costs another 5 FPS. The minimum values recorded at Medium across all resolutions (20 FPS at 4K, 30 FPS at 1440p, 40 FPS at 1080p) show that frame pacing becomes more consistent as resolution decreases.

Across all three resolutions, only one configuration clears the 60 FPS threshold: 1920x1080 with Low settings. Every other preset and resolution combination falls short, with the highest non-1080p result being the 50 FPS average at 1440p Low.

CPU and GPU Roles

The recorded data shows that this game, when paired with this specific CPU and GPU combination, is heavily limited by the graphics component at higher resolutions. The 4K Ultra result of 18 FPS and the 4K Low result of 33 FPS demonstrate a 15 FPS swing purely from preset changes, while the CPU remains constant. This scaling pattern indicates that the GPU is the primary constraint at 3840x2160, because reducing graphical load produces a meaningful frame rate increase.

At 2560x1440, the same pattern holds. Low averages 50 FPS versus Ultra at 27 FPS, a 23 FPS swing from settings alone. The GPU still dominates the bottleneck at this resolution. However, the relative scaling between 1440p Low (50 FPS) and 1080p Low (65 FPS) is 15 FPS, while the scaling between 1440p Ultra (27 FPS) and 1080p Ultra (36 FPS) is 9 FPS. This suggests that at lower presets, resolution changes have a larger absolute impact, which points to the GPU becoming less saturated as pixel count drops.

At 1920x1080, the CPU begins to matter more, but the data still shows the GPU carrying most of the load. The 1080p Low result of 65 FPS is only 15 FPS higher than the 1440p Low result of 50 FPS, despite a 56% reduction in total pixels. If the CPU were the limiting factor, this gap would be smaller. The Intel Core i5-12600KF, with its 10 cores and 16 threads, records a 3dmark_max_threads score of 7952 and a single-thread score of 1016, which places it in the 79th percentile among all CPUs. That level of CPU throughput is not the constraint here; the Intel Arc B390, which sits in the 9th percentile among all GPUs, clearly is.

The GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482 is the only graphics benchmark recorded, and it aligns with the low frame rates observed. The nearest GPU rivals, all with scores within 2.7% of the Arc B390, reinforce the conclusion that this is a low-end graphics part. The CPU is not the limiting factor at any resolution in this dataset; the GPU is.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the database places the Intel Core i5-12600KF at an average benchmark score of 27799. The nearest rivals are all within a fraction of a percent. The Intel Core i9-10900K scores 27872, which is 0.3% higher. The AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D scores 27896, also 0.3% higher. The AMD Ryzen 7 6800U scores 27887, 0.3% higher. The AMD Ryzen 5 8500GE scores 27712, 0.3% lower. Any of these CPUs would deliver effectively identical CPU-bound behavior in this game, meaning the frame rates recorded here would not change in a meaningful way if the i5-12600KF were swapped for one of these parts.

For the GPU, the situation is more pronounced. The Intel Arc B390 has an average benchmark score of 1482. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, scores 1463, which is 1.3% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce 800M scores 1460, 1.5% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446, 2.5% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 scores 1443, 2.7% lower. All four of these rivals are older, low-end parts, and the performance deltas are small enough that a system using any of them would land in the same general frame rate territory as the Arc B390 in Control. In practical terms, a gamer moving from a GT 710 to this Arc B390 would see roughly a 2.7% improvement in GPU compute performance, which is within measurement noise for this game.

The CPU and GPU neighborhoods tell very different stories. The CPU is surrounded by capable desktop and mobile parts, including a high-end gaming CPU like the 5800X3D, while the GPU is surrounded by decade-old entry-level cards. This mismatch explains why the frame rates in this dataset are so low despite a strong processor.

How This Combo Ranks

The database ranks this combination at 3311 out of 3720 tested combos for Control. That places it in the bottom 11% of all tested systems, meaning roughly 89% of recorded combinations deliver higher frame rates in this game. The rank reflects the GPU's position in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, not the CPU's 79th percentile standing.

A rank of 3311 with 3720 total combos means only 409 combinations are slower. This is not a mid-pack result; it is firmly in the lower tail of the distribution. The verdict data confirms why: no playable settings exist at 1440p or 4K, and only the 1080p Low preset clears the 60 FPS bar. A system ranked this low is not going to provide a smooth experience at higher visual quality levels.

The data also shows that the CPU is not pulling the combo down. The i5-12600KF's 79th percentile ranking among all CPUs, combined with the GPU's 9th percentile ranking, produces a net result that is heavily weighted toward the weak link. Swapping the GPU for a stronger part would move the combo rank substantially; swapping the CPU for one of its nearest rivals would barely move it.

The Verdict

Can this PC run Control? Yes, but only at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The verdict data lists exactly one playable configuration: 1080p Low, which averages 65 FPS. At every other setting and resolution combination, the average frame rate falls below the 60 FPS playable threshold.

At 3840x2160, there are no playable settings. The best recorded average is 33 FPS at Low, which is 27 FPS short of the threshold. At 2560x1440, the best recorded average is 50 FPS at Low, which is 10 FPS short. At 1920x1080, Low clears the bar with 65 FPS, but Medium drops to 46 FPS, a 19 FPS penalty that pushes the system below playable.

The 4K and 1440p verdict entries show empty playable settings lists, confirming that no preset at those resolutions reaches 60 FPS. The 1080p entry shows Low as the only playable setting and names Low as the best settings with an average of 65 FPS. For a game like Control, an action adventure title, 60 FPS at 1080p Low is technically playable, but the margin above the threshold is only 5 FPS, so any demanding scene could push the average lower.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS, so there is no recommended setting. The highest average recorded is 33 FPS at Low, but that is below the playable threshold.

At 2560x1440, the same situation applies. The highest average is 50 FPS at Low, which is below 60 FPS. No settings recommendation can be made because the playable threshold is not met.

At 1920x1080, the Low preset is the only option that maintains at least 60 FPS. It averages 65 FPS. Medium averages 46 FPS, High averages 41 FPS, and Ultra averages 36 FPS, all below the threshold. For users who insist on 1080p, Low is the only viable choice. The 19 FPS drop from Low to Medium is severe enough that even a compromise preset is not sustainable.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Control at 4K?

A: No. The highest average at 3840x2160 is 33 FPS on Low settings, and the verdict data lists no playable settings at this resolution.

Q: What is the best playable setting at 1080p?

A: Low settings at 1920x1080, which averages 65 FPS. It is the only configuration in the dataset that clears the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How close is the GPU to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Arc B390 scores 1482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, scores 1463, which is 1.3% lower, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 scores 1443, which is 2.7% lower.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this game?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU ranks in the 79th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU ranks in the 9th percentile of all GPUs. Preset changes produce large frame rate swings, while the CPU remains constant.

Q: What frame rate does 1440p Medium produce?

A: 35 FPS average, with a minimum of 30 and a maximum of 40. This is below the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested systems?

A: It ranks 3311 out of 3720 tested combinations for Control, placing it in the bottom 11% of the database.