Control

Similar Performance Alternatives

The Intel Core i5-9400 sits in a narrow performance band where its closest rivals are separated by less than one percent. The nearest comparable CPU is the Intel Core i3-10305, which scores 2264 in the database's average benchmark, a mere 0.4% advantage over the i5-9400's 2254. The Intel Core i7-1068NG7 lands at 2259, just 0.2% ahead, while the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 2246, a 0.4% deficit. The Intel Core i7-10710U trails by 0.3% with a score of 2248. In practical terms, any of these processors would deliver nearly identical frame pacing in Control, with differences well below the threshold of perceptible variance. The i5-9400's 47th percentile ranking among all CPUs places it squarely in the middle of the desktop processor distribution, meaning it will not be the limiting factor in most gaming scenarios, but neither will it provide headroom for heavily threaded workloads.

For the Intel Arc B370, the situation is more precarious. This GPU scores 1184 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, placing it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are all legacy or low-power parts: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186 (0.2% ahead), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190 (0.5% ahead), the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192 (0.7% ahead), and the AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168 (1.4% behind). The delta percentages here are small, but the absolute performance level is what matters: this is entry-level graphics territory. Any of these alternatives would produce similar frame rates in Control, meaning the Arc B370 should be treated as a low-end solution for this title. The 5th percentile ranking signals that the GPU will struggle at higher resolutions and demanding presets, and the measured data confirms this expectation.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark data reveals that the GPU is the dominant constraint at every resolution tested. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the system achieves 59 FPS on average, while at 3840x2160 with Low settings, the average drops to 30 FPS. This 49% reduction in frame rate from a 2.25x increase in pixel count indicates that the Arc B370's fill rate and shading throughput are the primary bottlenecks. The CPU's role is secondary, as evidenced by the fact that even at the lowest resolution and preset, the system still cannot exceed 59 FPS, which is just shy of the 60 FPS playable threshold. If the i5-9400 were the limiting factor, we would expect to see frame rates plateau at higher resolutions, but instead the scores continue to fall consistently as resolution increases.

Preset scaling further confirms GPU dominance. At 1920x1080, moving from Low to Medium costs 17 FPS (59 to 42), from Medium to High costs 5 FPS (42 to 37), and from High to Ultra costs 5 FPS (37 to 32). At 2560x1440, the same preset progression yields 45, 32, 28, and 25 FPS respectively, showing a similar pattern of diminishing returns at higher quality levels. At 3840x2160, the progression is 30, 21, 19, and 17 FPS. The consistent pattern across resolutions indicates that the GPU's compute resources are being saturated by each preset tier, while the CPU maintains enough headroom to feed the graphics pipeline without introducing additional frame time variance. The min and max FPS values recorded at Medium settings across all resolutions show a narrow band (for example, 36 to 48 FPS at 1080p, 27 to 37 at 1440p, and 18 to 25 at 4K), which suggests stable frame pacing rather than CPU-induced stutter.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves the 60 FPS playable threshold. The highest recorded average is 30 FPS at Low settings, which is exactly half of the target. The Medium preset delivers 21 FPS, High delivers 19 FPS, and Ultra delivers 17 FPS. Since the verdict data lists no playable settings at this resolution, the recommendation is that 4K gaming is not viable with this configuration.

At 2560x1440, the situation improves but remains below the threshold. Low settings produce 45 FPS, Medium 32 FPS, High 28 FPS, and Ultra 25 FPS. None of these reach 60 FPS, so the verdict data again lists no playable settings. The best option is Low at 45 FPS, but this still falls 15 FPS short of playability.

At 1920x1080, the closest approach to 60 FPS comes at Low settings, which averages 59 FPS. This is 1 FPS below the playable threshold, so the verdict data correctly lists no playable settings at this resolution either. Medium averages 42 FPS, High 37 FPS, and Ultra 32 FPS. The recorded data shows that even the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS does not exist for this combination. The best achievable configuration is Low at 1080p with a 59 FPS average, which is effectively at the edge of playability but technically below the 60 FPS cutoff used in the database.

The Verdict

This PC cannot run Control at 60 FPS at any resolution or preset combination. The verdict data is unambiguous: all three resolutions list empty playable settings arrays. At 3840x2160, no preset reaches even half the target frame rate, with the best option being Low at 30 FPS. At 2560x1440, Low delivers 45 FPS, which is playable in a general sense but falls 15 FPS short of the database's 60 FPS threshold. At 1920x1080, Low averages 59 FPS, a single frame below the cutoff. The system's rank of 3436 out of 3720 tested combinations places it in the 8th percentile for this game, meaning the vast majority of other hardware configurations perform better. The Arc B370's 5th percentile GPU ranking is the primary cause, as the i5-9400's 47th percentile CPU ranking is adequate for gaming. Users who accept frame rates below 60 FPS can play at 1080p Low with a 59 FPS average, but the database's strict playability criterion is not met at any setting.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the recorded data shows a clear hierarchy across presets. Low settings produce an average of 30 FPS with no min or max values recorded. Medium settings average 21 FPS with a minimum of 18 and a maximum of 25. High settings average 19 FPS with no range data. Ultra settings average 17 FPS with no range data. The spread between Low and Ultra is 13 FPS, which represents a 43% performance penalty for the highest quality preset. The Medium preset's range (18 to 25 FPS) indicates that frame times are relatively consistent, but the overall level is far below playability.

At 2560x1440, Low settings average 45 FPS. Medium averages 32 FPS with a range of 27 to 37. High averages 28 FPS. Ultra averages 25 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 20 FPS, a 44% reduction. The Medium range of 10 FPS shows slightly more variance than at 4K, but still within acceptable bounds for frame pacing. None of these presets approach the 60 FPS target, and even the best case, Low at 45 FPS, is 15 FPS short.

At 1920x1080, Low settings produce an average of 59 FPS, which is the single best result in the entire dataset. Medium averages 42 FPS with a range of 36 to 48. High averages 37 FPS. Ultra averages 32 FPS. The reduction from Low to Ultra is 27 FPS, a 46% penalty. The Medium range of 12 FPS is the widest recorded across all resolutions, suggesting that at this resolution, the GPU is working closer to its limits and frame times become less predictable. The 59 FPS average at Low is tantalizingly close to the 60 FPS threshold, but the database does not round partial values, so it remains below the playability cutoff.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Control at 1920x1080 with Medium settings?

A: No. The recorded average FPS at 1080p Medium is 42 FPS, which is 18 FPS below the 60 FPS playable threshold. The min and max values are 36 and 48 FPS respectively.

Q: What is the best frame rate this configuration can achieve?

A: The highest recorded average across all tests is 59 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is 1 FPS below the database's playable threshold of 60 FPS.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B370 scores 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186 (0.2% ahead), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190 (0.5% ahead), the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192 (0.7% ahead), and the AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168 (1.4% behind).

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more responsible for the low frame rates?

A: The GPU is the dominant bottleneck. Evidence comes from the fact that even at 1080p Low, the system cannot reach 60 FPS, and frame rates scale consistently downward as resolution increases, which is characteristic of GPU-limited performance.

Q: What is the best preset for 2560x1440?

A: Low settings provide the highest average at 45 FPS. Medium delivers 32 FPS, High delivers 28 FPS, and Ultra delivers 25 FPS. None of these reach the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How does the i5-9400 compare to its nearest CPU rivals?

A: The i5-9400 has an average benchmark score of 2254. The Intel Core i3-10305 scores 2264 (0.4% ahead), the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 scores 2259 (0.2% ahead), the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 2246 (0.4% behind), and the Intel Core i7-10710U scores 2248 (0.3% behind).