Control

FAQ

Q: What is the Intel Core i5-14600KF's position in the overall CPU benchmark rankings?

A: The processor sits in the 90th percentile among all CPUs tested in the database. Its average benchmark score is 49,394, placing it within 0.8% of the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 and Intel Core Ultra 5 245, and within 0.4% of the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G.

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

A: The Arc B390's average benchmark score is 1,482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. This is 1.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, 1.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 800M, 2.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM, and 2.7% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710. The GPU sits in the 9th percentile of all GPUs tested.

Q: Can this system achieve 60 FPS at 1920x1080 in Control?

A: Yes, but only at Low settings. The measured average FPS at 1080p Low is 65, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold. At Medium, the average drops to 46 FPS, below the threshold.

Q: What is the best playable setting at 2560x1440?

A: None of the tested settings at 1440p reach 60 FPS. The highest average FPS recorded at this resolution is 50 at Low settings, with Medium at 35, High at 31, and Ultra at 27.

Q: What is the best playable setting at 3840x2160?

A: No setting at 4K reaches 60 FPS. The best recorded average is 33 FPS at Low settings, followed by 24 at Medium, 21 at High, and 18 at Ultra.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested PC configurations in Control?

A: The combination of the Intel Core i5-14600KF and Intel Arc B390 ranks 3,311th out of 3,720 tested combos in Control, placing it in the lower portion of the database's results for this game.

CPU and GPU Roles

The recorded data for Control shows a clear pattern: the GPU is the dominant constraint across all resolutions and settings. The Intel Core i5-14600KF is a high-end desktop processor with a 90th percentile ranking, while the Intel Arc B390 is an integrated GPU in the 9th percentile. This massive gap in relative performance means the system's frame rates are almost entirely bound by the graphics solution.

Evidence for GPU-bound behavior comes from the scaling between resolutions. At 1920x1080 Low, the system produces 65 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 Low drops the average to 50 FPS, a 23% reduction. Moving further to 3840x2160 Low yields 33 FPS, another 34% drop. This consistent degradation as resolution increases is characteristic of GPU-limited workloads. A CPU-bound scenario would show much smaller frame rate differences across resolutions, since the processor's workload does not scale with pixel count.

The same pattern appears when comparing presets at a fixed resolution. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 29 FPS (65 down to 36). At 1440p, the difference is 23 FPS (50 down to 27). At 4K, the difference is 15 FPS (33 down to 18). The shrinking gap between Low and Ultra as resolution increases further confirms that the GPU is saturated. At 4K, even Low settings push the GPU to its limits, so the incremental cost of higher presets is compressed.

The CPU's role in this pairing is effectively to keep up with the GPU's output. With 14 cores, 20 threads, and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, the i5-14600KF has substantial headroom for game logic, physics, and draw call processing. The benchmark results indicate that the CPU is not the limiting factor in any measured configuration. The GPU's low percentile ranking (9th) versus the CPU's high ranking (90th) underscores this imbalance.

For players seeking higher frame rates, the data suggests that reducing resolution or lowering settings will yield meaningful gains, but the ceiling is low. The GPU simply cannot deliver 60 FPS at 1440p or 4K under any tested preset. At 1080p, only Low settings reach the playable threshold. The CPU would likely support much higher frame rates if paired with a more capable GPU, but with the Arc B390, the graphics pipeline is the bottleneck in every scenario.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The database contains recorded average, minimum, and maximum FPS values for Control across three resolutions and four settings presets. Not all cells include min/max values; only the Medium preset at each resolution has full min/max data.

1920x1080:

At Low settings, the average FPS is 65, which is the highest recorded result for this combo. At Medium, the average drops to 46, with a minimum of 40 and a maximum of 53. At High, the average is 41. At Ultra, the average falls to 36. The spread from Low to Ultra is 29 FPS, indicating that each preset tier costs roughly 7 to 10 FPS on average.

2560x1440:

At Low settings, the average FPS is 50. At Medium, the average is 35, with a minimum of 30 and a maximum of 40. At High, the average is 31. At Ultra, the average is 27. The spread from Low to Ultra is 23 FPS, slightly compressed compared to 1080p. The minimum recorded value at Medium (30 FPS) is exactly half of the 60 FPS playable threshold, which illustrates the performance gap at this resolution.

3840x2160:

At Low settings, the average FPS is 33. At Medium, the average is 24, with a minimum of 20 and a maximum of 27. At High, the average is 21. At Ultra, the average is 18. The spread from Low to Ultra is 15 FPS, the smallest of all three resolutions. The minimum FPS at Medium (20) is only one-third of the playable threshold.

The data shows that the Medium preset at each resolution is the only one with recorded min/max values. At 1080p Medium, the variance is 13 FPS (40 to 53). At 1440p Medium, the variance is 10 FPS (30 to 40). At 4K Medium, the variance is 7 FPS (20 to 27). The narrowing variance at higher resolutions is consistent with the GPU being fully saturated, leaving less headroom for frame time fluctuations.

The Verdict

Based on the recorded measurements, this system can run Control at 60 FPS only under one configuration: 1920x1080 with Low settings, where the average FPS is 65. This clears the playable threshold of 60 FPS by 5 FPS, but the margin is thin. Players should expect occasional dips in demanding scenes, though no minimum FPS data is recorded for Low settings to quantify that risk.

At 1920x1080 Medium, the average FPS is 46, which is 14 FPS below the threshold. At High, it is 41, and at Ultra, it is 36. None of these are playable under the 60 FPS standard.

At 2560x1440, the verdict is unambiguous: no preset reaches 60 FPS. The best case is Low at 50 FPS, which is 10 FPS short. Medium, High, and Ultra yield 35, 31, and 27 FPS respectively. The minimum FPS at Medium is 30, which is exactly half the threshold.

At 3840x2160, the system falls well short of playable performance. Low averages 33 FPS, Medium averages 24, High averages 21, and Ultra averages 18. The minimum FPS at Medium is 20, which is one-third of the threshold.

The verdict by resolution is therefore: playable only at 1080p Low. The database classifies 1440p and 4K as not playable for this game with this hardware combo. Players who want to experience Control at higher resolutions or quality presets would need a different GPU.

Best Settings per Resolution

1920x1080: The most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Low, with an average FPS of 65. Medium drops to 46 FPS, so it does not qualify. Low is the only playable setting at this resolution.

2560x1440: No preset reaches 60 FPS. The closest is Low at 50 FPS, but it falls short of the threshold. There is no best setting because none are playable.

3840x2160: No preset reaches 60 FPS. The closest is Low at 33 FPS, which is far below the threshold. There is no best setting because none are playable.

For players who prioritize frame rate over visual quality, 1080p Low is the only viable configuration. The data shows that even dropping to the lowest preset at higher resolutions does not yield playable results.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database's ranking for Control, the Intel Core i5-14600KF paired with the Intel Arc B390 ranks 3,311th out of 3,720 tested combinations. This places the combo in the bottom 11% of all tested systems for this game. The rank reflects the GPU's severe performance limitation, despite the CPU's strong standing.

The i5-14600KF itself scores in the 90th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 49,394. The Arc B390, by contrast, scores in the 9th percentile among all GPUs, with an average score of 1,482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. The combination of a top-tier CPU with a bottom-tier GPU results in a system that is heavily imbalanced for gaming. In Control, the GPU's low rank dominates the overall outcome.

The 3,720 combos tested include a wide range of hardware pairings. A rank of 3,311 means there are 409 tested configurations that perform worse in this game. However, the vast majority of tested combos outperform this one, which aligns with the GPU's low percentile ranking.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the Intel Core i5-14600KF are all within 0.8% of its average benchmark score. The AMD Ryzen 9 7900 scores 49,228, which is 0.3% lower. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G scores 49,196, which is 0.4% lower. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 scores 48,995, which is 0.8% lower. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scores 49,796, which is 0.8% higher. Any of these CPUs would behave nearly identically to the i5-14600KF in this game, since the GPU is the bottleneck.

The nearest rivals for the Intel Arc B390 are all older or low-end NVIDIA GPUs with similar benchmark scores. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX scores 1,463, which is 1.3% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce 800M scores 1,460, which is 1.5% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1,446, which is 2.5% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 scores 1,443, which is 2.7% lower. Any of these GPUs would produce frame rates in Control that are within a few percent of the Arc B390's results, meaning they would also fall short of 60 FPS at 1440p and 4K, and would only achieve playable performance at 1080p Low.

For players considering alternatives, the data suggests that upgrading the GPU would provide the largest performance gain in Control. Swapping the CPU for any of the listed rivals would have a negligible effect, since the GPU is the limiting factor. The recorded frame rates would remain nearly identical regardless of which CPU from this group is used.