Control

The Intel Core i5-14600K paired with the Intel Arc B580 lands in the 77th percentile of tested combos for Control, ranking 2847 out of 3720. That placement signals a capable but not elite pairing: it clears the 60 FPS playability bar at every tested resolution, but only at specific settings. At 4K the combo scrapes past 60 FPS on Low, while at 1440p it needs Low to stay comfortable. The real story is at 1080p, where this system is fully playable across every preset, peaking at 112.7 FPS on Low and holding 62.6 FPS on Ultra. The data indicates a system that is more than enough for high-refresh 1080p, acceptable for 1440p with compromises, and only marginally viable at 4K.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 2847 out of 3720 tested combinations places it below the median of the database’s pool. That percentile position is driven more by the GPU than the CPU; the Arc B580 sits at the 68th percentile among all GPUs, while the i5-14600K ranks at the 90th percentile among all CPUs. The gap between those two percentiles explains why the pairing does not crack the top half of combos for this game: the CPU has headroom that the GPU cannot consistently exploit at higher resolutions. In practical terms, the combo is positioned for 1080p dominance rather than 4K capability, and the measured FPS data supports that interpretation. At 1080p, even the Ultra preset delivers 62.6 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS playable threshold. At 1440p and 4K, only the Low preset stays above that threshold, with averages of 84.5 and 61 FPS respectively. This is a system that ranks in the lower-middle of the database but performs exactly where its component strengths suggest it should: strong at low resolutions, weaker as pixel count climbs.

CPU and GPU Roles

The scaling data reveals that the GPU is the limiting factor in this pairing for Control, and the CPU’s role diminishes as resolution increases. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra settings is a 50.1 FPS swing (112.7 to 62.6), which indicates the GPU is being stressed by higher presets but still keeping pace. At 1440p, the same Low-to-Ultra range shrinks to 36.8 FPS (84.5 to 47.7), showing the GPU is already hitting a wall. At 4K, the range collapses to 30.1 FPS (61 to 30.9), meaning the GPU is saturated regardless of settings. The CPU, with its high single-core and multi-core benchmark scores (2064 in Cinebench R23 single-core, 24491 in multi-core), is not the bottleneck at any resolution. The evidence is in the 4K numbers: dropping from Ultra to Low raises FPS from 30.9 to 61, a near-doubling that can only come from relieving GPU load. If the CPU were the constraint, the FPS would stay flat across settings. The i5-14600K’s 90th percentile ranking among all CPUs supports the conclusion that it is feeding the Arc B580 adequately at all tested resolutions. The GPU’s 68th percentile ranking, meanwhile, aligns with its role as the performance ceiling. For 1080p gaming, the CPU has enough headroom that the GPU dictates the experience; for 4K, the GPU is so overburdened that even the CPU’s strong performance cannot compensate.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals to the Intel Core i5-14600K in CPU benchmark scores are all within a narrow band. The Intel Xeon Gold 5318H scores 48698, which is 0.2% lower than the i5-14600K’s average of 48618. The AMD EPYC 4345P scores 48470, 0.3% higher. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX scores 48287, 0.7% higher, and the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 scores 48995, 0.8% lower. For Control specifically, any of these CPUs would produce nearly identical frame rates when paired with the same Arc B580, because the game’s performance at higher resolutions is GPU-bound. The CPU benchmark deltas are negligible in gaming terms; a 0.8% difference in CPU score would translate to less than a 1 FPS change in the measured averages. On the GPU side, the Arc B580’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP (score 23061, 0.2% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (score 22895, 0.6% lower), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 (score 23172, 0.7% higher), and the NVIDIA P106-100 (score 23249, 1% higher). The RTX 3080 being this close in average benchmark score is notable: despite its higher tier in the market, the data shows it behaves similarly to the Arc B580 in synthetic tests. For Control, swapping the Arc B580 for any of these rivals would yield FPS differences within roughly 1% of the measured values. That means the 1080p Ultra result of 62.6 FPS would remain above 60 FPS with any of these GPUs, while the 4K Low result of 61 FPS could dip just below the threshold with the RTX 2080, given its slightly lower score.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Control at 4K with playable frame rates?

A: Yes, but only at Low settings. The measured average at 3840x2160 with Low settings is 61 FPS, which is just above the 60 FPS playable threshold. Medium drops to 39.3 FPS, High to 35.7 FPS, and Ultra to 30.9 FPS, all unplayable.

Q: What is the best setting for 1440p gaming with this hardware?

A: The data shows that Low is the only playable setting at 2560x1440, delivering 84.5 FPS. Medium (58.9 FPS), High (55.8 FPS), and Ultra (47.7 FPS) all fall below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-14600K bottleneck the Intel Arc B580 in this game?

A: No. The CPU ranks at the 90th percentile among all CPUs, and the FPS scaling across resolutions indicates GPU saturation. At 4K, reducing settings from Ultra to Low nearly doubles the frame rate (30.9 to 61 FPS), which would not happen if the CPU were the limiting factor.

Q: How does the Arc B580 compare to the RTX 3080 for this game?

A: According to the benchmark data, the RTX 3080 scores 23172 in average benchmark score, which is 0.7% higher than the Arc B580’s 23021. In Control, that translates to a negligible FPS difference, meaning the RTX 3080 would perform effectively identically to the Arc B580 at the same settings and resolution.

Q: Is 1080p Ultra playable with this combo?

A: Yes. The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings is 62.6 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold. This is the most demanding preset that remains playable at 1080p.

Q: What is the combo’s overall rank in the database for Control?

A: The combo ranks 2847 out of 3720 tested combinations, placing it in the lower-middle portion of the database but still capable of playable frame rates at lower resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its best performance. Low settings produce an average of 112.7 FPS, Medium drops to 82.7 FPS, High to 69.3 FPS, and Ultra to 62.6 FPS. All four presets are above the 60 FPS playable threshold, with Ultra being the only one that is close to the line. The step from Low to Medium is a 30 FPS drop, while the step from Medium to High is 13.4 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 6.7 FPS. This diminishing-returns pattern suggests the GPU is progressively more stressed by each preset tier.

At 2560x1440, the picture changes. Low settings average 84.5 FPS, which is still comfortably playable, but Medium falls to 58.9 FPS, just below the threshold. High averages 55.8 FPS, and Ultra drops to 47.7 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 25.6 FPS, indicating a steep performance cost for the first step up in quality. From Medium to High, the drop is 3.1 FPS, and from High to Ultra, it is 8.1 FPS. The 1440p results show that this resolution is playable only when the GPU load is minimized.

At 3840x2160, the combo is barely viable. Low settings average 61 FPS, exactly at the playable threshold. Medium falls to 39.3 FPS, High to 35.7 FPS, and Ultra to 30.9 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 21.7 FPS, which is the largest single-step penalty in the entire dataset. High and Ultra are within 4.8 FPS of each other, suggesting the GPU is completely saturated at those settings. The 4K results confirm that this pairing is not designed for high-resolution gaming; it only crosses the playable line by a single FPS on the lowest preset.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the only playable setting is Low, which delivers an average of 61 FPS. This is exactly at the 60 FPS threshold, so the margin is thin. Medium (39.3 FPS), High (35.7 FPS), and Ultra (30.9 FPS) are all unplayable. The data indicates that 4K should be considered a last resort for this combo, and only with minimal visual quality.

At 2560x1440, the best playable setting is also Low, with an average of 84.5 FPS. This provides a comfortable margin above the threshold. Medium (58.9 FPS) misses the threshold by 1.1 FPS, which is close enough that slight scene variations could push it over, but the data does not classify it as playable. High (55.8 FPS) and Ultra (47.7 FPS) are clearly below the line. For 1440p users, Low is the only recommended preset.

At 1920x1080, the situation is reversed. All four settings are playable, and the most demanding one, Ultra, averages 62.6 FPS. This is above the threshold, making Ultra the best choice for visual quality. High (69.3 FPS) and Medium (82.7 FPS) offer higher frame rates for those who prefer smoother motion, while Low (112.7 FPS) is the option for maximum refresh rate. The verdict by resolution is clear: this combo is a 1080p machine for Control, with 1440p and 4K requiring significant graphical sacrifices to remain playable.