Control

Similar Performance Alternatives

The Intel Core i5-14600K sits in a tightly contested performance cluster according to the database. Its average benchmark score of 48618 places it within 1% of several comparable processors. The Intel Xeon Gold 5318H scores 48698, a mere 0.2% higher, making it effectively indistinguishable in multi-threaded workloads. The AMD EPYC 4345P trails by 0.3% with a score of 48470, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX comes in at 48287, or 0.7% behind. On the other side, the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 posts 48995, leading the i5-14600K by 0.8%. These deltas are so small that day-to-day application performance would feel identical across all four alternatives. The i5-14600K's 90th percentile ranking among all CPUs reinforces that this processor is firmly in the upper tier of available hardware, though its nearest rivals show just how dense the competition is at this performance level.

The Intel Arc B390 presents a very different picture. With an average benchmark score of 1482, it ranks in the 9th percentile among all GPUs, placing it near the bottom of the performance distribution. Its nearest rivals are all legacy NVIDIA parts: the GeForce GT 520MX scores 1463 (1.3% lower), the GeForce 800M scores 1460 (1.5% lower), the GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446 (2.5% lower), and the GeForce GT 710 scores 1443 (2.7% lower). The Arc B390 leads this group, but the margins are thin. This is a GPU whose measured performance aligns with entry-level parts from more than a decade ago, despite its modern architecture and feature set. The gap between the CPU's elite standing and the GPU's modest output is the defining characteristic of this pairing.

CPU and GPU Roles

Benchmark results across resolutions reveal that the Intel Arc B390 is the dominant constraint in this system. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo achieves 65 FPS, which is the only configuration that clears the 60 FPS threshold. Moving to Medium at the same resolution drops the average to 46 FPS, a 29% reduction. High settings yield 41 FPS, and Ultra falls to 36 FPS. The pattern is consistent: each step up in graphical fidelity exacts a significant toll, which points to the GPU being saturated before the CPU can demonstrate any meaningful influence.

Raising the resolution to 2560x1440 compounds the GPU bottleneck. Low settings produce 50 FPS, Medium drops to 35 FPS, High manages 31 FPS, and Ultra falls to 27 FPS. At 3840x2160, the numbers become marginal: Low delivers 33 FPS, Medium 24 FPS, High 21 FPS, and Ultra 18 FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings is a 23% performance loss, and from 1440p to 4K at Low it is another 34% loss. These steep declines are characteristic of a system where the GPU is working at its absolute limit. If the CPU were the limiting factor, resolution scaling would produce much smaller frame rate differences, since higher resolutions shift more work onto the graphics hardware. Instead, the data shows a GPU that struggles as pixel count rises, while the i5-14600K, with its 14 cores and 20 threads, almost certainly has headroom to spare.

The preset scaling at each resolution tells the same story. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 29 FPS; at 1440p it is 23 FPS; at 4K it is 15 FPS. The shrinking spread at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU is becoming progressively more overwhelmed, leaving less room for preset adjustments to matter. The CPU is not the limiting factor here. Its benchmark scores, particularly the Cinebench R23 multi-core result of 24491 and the single-core score of 2064, demonstrate ample compute capacity. The recorded frame rates are almost entirely a function of the Arc B390's output.

FAQ

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

A: No. The average frame rate at 1080p High is 41 FPS, which falls short of the 60 FPS playable threshold. Only the Low preset at 1080p, with an average of 65 FPS, achieves playable performance.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B390 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B390 leads its closest competitors by small margins. It scores 1.3% higher than the 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. All five GPUs occupy the bottom tier of the performance distribution.

Q: What is the best resolution and preset combination for this system?

A: The only combination that clears 60 FPS is 1920x1080 with Low settings, which averages 65 FPS. No settings at 2560x1440 or 3840x2160 reach the playable threshold.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-14600K hold back the Arc B390?

A: The data does not indicate CPU limitation. The i5-14600K ranks in the 90th percentile among all CPUs, while the Arc B390 ranks in the 9th percentile among GPUs. The frame rates scale steeply with resolution and preset, which is the signature of a GPU-bound system.

Q: What frame rates can be expected at 2560x1440?

A: The best result at 1440p is 50 FPS on Low settings. Medium averages 35 FPS, High averages 31 FPS, and Ultra averages 27 FPS. None of these reach the 60 FPS target.

Q: Is the Arc B390's 1536 shading units and 12 RT cores relevant to Control's performance?

A: The measured frame rates suggest that raw throughput is the limiting factor. The GPU's FP32 throughput of 7.680 TFLOPS and its 9th percentile ranking indicate that the hardware cannot sustain high frame rates in this title, regardless of architectural features.

The Verdict

The verdict is unambiguous: this system cannot run Control at a consistently playable level except in one narrow configuration. At 3840x2160, no preset achieves 60 FPS; the best recorded average is 33 FPS on Low settings. At 2560x1440, the situation is similar, with Low settings averaging 50 FPS and every other preset falling further behind. Only at 1920x1080 does the system find success, and only on the Low preset, which averages 65 FPS. Medium at 1080p drops to 46 FPS, High to 41 FPS, and Ultra to 36 FPS, all below the playable threshold.

The database's verdict confirms this reading. For 3840x2160 and 2560x1440, there are no playable settings listed. For 1920x1080, the playable settings list contains only Low, with a best average of 65 FPS. Gamers who insist on higher resolutions or more demanding presets will need to look elsewhere. The combination of a top-tier CPU and a bottom-tier GPU creates a system that is only viable at the lowest graphical fidelity and the most common resolution.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, there is no preset that reaches 60 FPS. The best available option is Low settings, which produces an average of 33 FPS, but this falls well short of the playable threshold. The database records no best settings for this resolution because none qualify.

At 2560x1440, the same conclusion applies. Low settings yield 50 FPS, which is the highest average at this resolution, but it still misses the 60 FPS target by a substantial margin. No settings are marked as best because none are playable.

At 1920x1080, Low settings is the only playable configuration. It averages 65 FPS, clearing the 60 FPS threshold with a small buffer. The database designates Low as the best settings for this resolution. Medium, High, and Ultra all fail to reach 60 FPS, with averages of 46, 41, and 36 FPS respectively.

How This Combo Ranks

Among the 3720 tested combinations in the database for Control, this pairing of Intel Core i5-14600K and Intel Arc B390 ranks 3311th. That places it in the bottom 11% of all tested configurations, a poor showing driven almost entirely by the GPU. The CPU is a high performer, but the Arc B390's 9th percentile standing among all GPUs drags the overall ranking down. The measured frame rates reflect this lopsided pairing. The system is capable of clearing 60 FPS only at 1080p Low, and its performance degrades quickly as resolution and preset demands increase. For a game like Control, which is known for its heavy graphical effects, this combo is positioned far down the leaderboard.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the recorded averages are as follows: Low settings average 33 FPS, Medium averages 24 FPS with a minimum of 20 and a maximum of 27, High averages 21 FPS, and Ultra averages 18 FPS. No minimum or maximum values are recorded for Low, High, or Ultra at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, Low settings average 50 FPS, Medium averages 35 FPS with a minimum of 30 and a maximum of 40, High averages 31 FPS, and Ultra averages 27 FPS. As with 4K, minimum and maximum values are only recorded for the Medium preset.

At 1920x1080, Low settings average 65 FPS, which is the highest recorded result for this combo. Medium averages 46 FPS with a minimum of 40 and a maximum of 53, High averages 41 FPS, and Ultra averages 36 FPS. The Medium preset is the only one with complete min/max data at this resolution.

The complete data set shows a consistent pattern. Every resolution follows the same ordering: Low performs best, followed by Medium, then High, with Ultra trailing. The gap between Low and Ultra grows as resolution decreases, from 15 FPS at 4K to 23 FPS at 1440p and 29 FPS at 1080p. This suggests that at lower resolutions, preset choices have more impact, while at 4K the GPU is so constrained that even dropping to Low cannot produce a playable experience. The only configuration that hits the 60 FPS target is 1080p Low at 65 FPS, and even that margin is modest. For anyone considering this pairing, the data is clear: the Arc B390 is the decisive factor, and it limits the system to the most basic settings at 1080p.