Control

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Control at 1920x1080 with playable performance?

A: Yes. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the Intel Core i5-9400 and Intel Arc B390 combination delivers an average of 65 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold. Higher presets at this resolution fall below 60 FPS.

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

A: None. The recorded data shows no preset at 2560x1440 reaches 60 FPS. The closest is Low at 50 FPS average, followed by Medium at 35 FPS, High at 31 FPS, and Ultra at 27 FPS. All fall short of the playable threshold.

Q: How does the Arc B390 compare to its nearest GPU rivals in raw benchmark score?

A: The Arc B390 scores 1482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. It sits within 2.7% of four close rivals: the GT 520MX (1463, 1.3% slower), GeForce 800M (1460, 1.5% slower), GT 625 OEM (1446, 2.5% slower), and GT 710 (1443, 2.7% slower). The Arc B390 leads them all by a slim margin.

Q: What is the CPU's percentile rank among all tested processors?

A: The Core i5-9400 ranks in the 47th percentile across all CPUs in the database. Its average benchmark score is 2254, placing it near the middle of the field, with rivals like the Core i7-1068NG7 (2259) and Core i3-10305 (2264) scoring within 0.4% higher, while the Core i7-10710U (2248) and Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 (2246) score slightly lower.

Q: Does the game run at 4K with any settings?

A: No. At 3840x2160, every preset falls well below 60 FPS. Low averages 33 FPS, Medium 24 FPS, High 21 FPS, and Ultra 18 FPS. The system cannot achieve playable frame rates at 4K in Control.

Q: How many other tested combos does this system outperform in Control?

A: This combo ranks 3311 out of 3720 tested combinations, meaning it sits in the lower portion of the database, outperforming roughly 409 combos (about 11% of the field) while trailing the majority.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves playable performance. The most demanding setting that comes closest is Low, which averages 33 FPS, but this is still 27 FPS below the 60 FPS threshold. Medium averages 24 FPS with a minimum of 20 FPS and a maximum of 27 FPS, while High and Ultra average 21 FPS and 18 FPS respectively. None of these meet the playable standard.

At 2560x1440, the situation is similar. No preset clears 60 FPS. Low is the highest-performing preset at 50 FPS average, but it remains 10 FPS shy of playable. Medium averages 35 FPS (minimum 30, maximum 40), High averages 31 FPS, and Ultra averages 27 FPS. The best option for visual quality while staying closest to 60 FPS is still Low, but it does not reach the threshold.

At 1920x1080, Low is the only preset that stays at or above 60 FPS, delivering 65 FPS average. Medium averages 46 FPS (minimum 40, maximum 53), High averages 41 FPS, and Ultra averages 36 FPS. Therefore, the most demanding preset that maintains playable performance at 1080p is Low, with a recorded average of 65 FPS. Users seeking higher visual fidelity must accept frame rates below 60 FPS.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark data reveals a clear pattern: the GPU is the dominant constraint at every resolution and preset. This conclusion emerges from the scaling behavior across resolutions. At 1920x1080 Low, the system achieves 65 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 Low drops performance to 50 FPS, a reduction of 23%. At 3840x2160 Low, the frame rate falls to 33 FPS, a further 34% reduction from the 1440p result. This steep decline with increasing pixel count points to the graphics subsystem as the primary bottleneck.

The Arc B390's modest standing among GPUs reinforces this interpretation. Its 9th percentile rank across all GPUs, combined with an average benchmark score of 1482 that places it just 1.3% ahead of the GT 520MX, indicates limited rasterization throughput. The GPU's specifications support this view: 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output units. The pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s are low for modern gaming demands, and the system-shared memory with dependent bandwidth further constrains performance.

The CPU, by contrast, shows adequate capability for this workload. The Core i5-9400 offers 6 cores and 6 threads with a boost clock of 4.10 GHz, and its 47th percentile rank places it near the median of all processors. Its multi-threaded scores, such as 6629 in Cinebench R23 and 5141 in Geekbench multicore, suggest it can feed frames to the GPU without becoming the limiting factor at these frame rates. Since even the highest average FPS recorded (65 at 1080p Low) is modest, the CPU has headroom to handle the game's logic and physics at this level of output.

The preset scaling also highlights GPU dominance. At 1920x1080, increasing from Low to Medium drops FPS from 65 to 46, a 29% reduction. Moving from Medium to High further reduces to 41 FPS, and High to Ultra drops to 36 FPS. At 2560x1440, the same progression goes from 50 to 35 to 31 to 27 FPS. At 3840x2160, Low to Medium drops from 33 to 24 FPS, and High to Ultra goes from 21 to 18 FPS. These consistent declines across preset tiers, independent of resolution, demonstrate that graphical settings load the GPU far more than the CPU.

At higher resolutions, the GPU's limitations become even more pronounced. The gap between Low at 1080p (65 FPS) and Low at 4K (33 FPS) represents a 49% performance loss. The CPU's workload does not scale linearly with resolution in the same way, so this drop is attributable almost entirely to the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth constraints. For this combo, users should treat the CPU as sufficient and the GPU as the decisive factor in all performance outcomes.

The Verdict

This system can run Control, but only under narrow conditions. According to the verdict data, the only playable settings are at 1920x1080 with Low quality, where the average frame rate is 65 FPS. This clears the 60 FPS threshold by 5 FPS, providing a modest margin of playability.

At 2560x1440, no settings are playable. The best result, Low at 50 FPS, falls below the threshold. Even the least demanding preset cannot sustain 60 FPS at this resolution. At 3840x2160, performance is worse still, with Low averaging 33 FPS, which is less than 60% of the playable threshold.

The GPU's 9th percentile ranking among all GPUs explains this outcome. The Arc B390, despite its modern architecture and DirectX 12 Ultimate support, delivers raw performance comparable to decade-old discrete GPUs like the GT 710 and GT 625 OEM. Its nearest rivals in benchmark score are all legacy parts, and while it edges them by up to 2.7%, none of these GPUs are capable of high-refresh gaming in demanding titles.

For users who accept Low settings at 1080p, the system is functional. The recorded 65 FPS average suggests a stable experience for this preset. However, any attempt to raise visual quality or resolution will result in sub-60 FPS performance. Medium at 1080p averages 46 FPS, which may be tolerable for some players, but it does not meet the defined playable standard. The verdict is clear: this combo is playable only at 1080p Low, and owners should set expectations accordingly.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The Core i5-9400's nearest CPU rivals, based on average benchmark scores, all perform within 0.4% of each other. The Intel Core i7-1068NG7 scores 2259 (0.2% higher), the Intel Core i3-10305 scores 2264 (0.4% higher), the Intel Core i7-10710U scores 2248 (0.3% lower), and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 2246 (0.4% lower). In practice, swapping the Core i5-9400 for any of these processors would produce nearly identical frame rates in Control, since the CPU is not the bottleneck at the frame rates this GPU can deliver.

The GPU's nearest rivals are all NVIDIA parts from older generations. The GeForce GT 520MX (1463, 1.3% slower), GeForce 800M (1460, 1.5% slower), GeForce GT 625 OEM (1446, 2.5% slower), and GeForce GT 710 (1443, 2.7% slower) all score within 2.7% of the Arc B390. A system with any of these GPUs paired with a similar CPU would deliver comparable performance in Control, meaning sub-60 FPS at 1440p and 4K, with playable frame rates only at 1080p Low. The Arc B390's advantage over these rivals is marginal, so users should not expect a meaningful difference when comparing systems built around these parts.

It is worth remembering the nearest GPU rivals are all significantly older products with much lower feature support. The Arc B390 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6, while the GT 710 and similar parts lack modern API features. In a game like Control, which can leverage modern rendering techniques, the Arc B390 may offer better visual feature support even where raw frame rates are similar. However, based on measured scores, the performance class is the same.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested CPU and GPU combinations for Control, this system ranks 3311 out of 3720 total combos. This places it in the bottom 11% of tested systems, a position consistent with the GPU's low percentile rank. The Arc B390's 9th percentile standing among all GPUs is the primary driver of this low ranking; the Core i5-9400's 47th percentile CPU rank is middling but not the limiting factor.

The rank of 3311 means roughly 409 other combinations perform worse in this game. These would likely include systems with even weaker GPUs, such as those built around the GT 710 or older integrated graphics. Meanwhile, the vast majority of tested combos outperform this system, including any pairing with a mid-range or high-end GPU from recent generations.

For context, the nearest GPU rivals (GT 520MX, GeForce 800M, GT 625 OEM, GT 710) would all rank near this system, likely within a few dozen positions. The CPU rivals, being within 0.4% in score, would not move the rank meaningfully when paired with the same GPU. The combination's rank is essentially determined by the Arc B390's position in the GPU hierarchy, with the CPU contributing little differentiation at these performance levels.

Users considering this system should understand that it sits near the bottom of the database for Control. It can run the game at 1080p Low, but it will not provide a high-quality experience by modern standards. The data shows a clear ceiling: 65 FPS at the lowest preset and 1080p, with no path to higher settings or resolutions without dropping below the playable threshold.