Control

Best Settings per Resolution

The recorded data for this combination of Intel Core i7-14700F and Intel Arc B370 shows a consistent pattern: no setting preset reaches the 60 FPS playable threshold at any of the three tested resolutions. At 3840x2160, the highest average frame rate is 30 FPS, achieved at Low settings. Medium settings drop to 21 FPS, High to 19 FPS, and Ultra to 17 FPS. Since even the lowest preset at 4K falls far below 60 FPS, there is no "best settings" recommendation that satisfies the playable threshold; the verdict table confirms no playable settings exist at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the situation improves slightly but remains below target. Low settings yield an average of 45 FPS, Medium produces 32 FPS, High drops to 28 FPS, and Ultra falls to 25 FPS. Again, no preset clears 60 FPS, and the verdictByResolution field lists no playable settings for 1440p. The closest approach to the threshold is the Low preset, but it still leaves a 15 FPS gap.

At 1920x1080, the best recorded result is 59 FPS at Low settings, which is remarkably close to but technically one frame short of the 60 FPS playable threshold. Medium settings deliver 42 FPS, High yields 37 FPS, and Ultra produces 32 FPS. The database marks no playable settings at 1080p either, because the playableThresholdFps is exactly 60 and the Low preset averages 59. This near-miss means users would need to accept a sub-60 experience or look for other configurations.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals a severe GPU bottleneck at every resolution and preset. The Intel Arc B370, with a percentile rank of only 5 among all GPUs, is clearly the limiting factor. Its single benchmark score of 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad places it in the company of much older discrete graphics cards. The CPU, by contrast, is a high-end 20-core, 28-thread part with a 91st percentile ranking among all CPUs, and its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 35122 indicates substantial headroom for gaming workloads.

When examining scaling across resolutions, the frame rate drops are proportionally consistent with pixel-count increases. Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 at Low settings, the average FPS falls from 59 to 45, a reduction of 23.7%. Going further to 3840x2160 at Low, the average drops to 30 FPS, another 33.3% reduction. These consistent declines suggest the GPU is saturated at all resolutions, with the CPU never becoming the primary constraint.

The settings scaling tells a similar story. At 1080p, moving from Low to Medium costs 17 FPS (from 59 to 42), from Medium to High costs 5 FPS, and from High to Ultra costs another 5 FPS. At 1440p, the same progression yields 45, 32, 28, and 25 FPS. At 4K, it is 30, 21, 19, and 17 FPS. The diminishing returns at higher presets are characteristic of a GPU that runs out of shading units, texture units, and raster operations well before the CPU's capabilities are taxed.

The Arc B370 has 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs, with a boost clock of 2400 MHz. Its FP32 throughput is 6.144 TFLOPS, and its pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s. These specifications, combined with the measured frame rates, point to a component that can handle low-detail 1080p gaming but struggles with anything more demanding. The CPU's role in this pairing is essentially to feed a GPU that cannot keep up, making the processor a non-factor in determining playability.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the complete dataset is as follows. Low settings produce an average of 30 FPS with no min or max 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, indicating that even the least demanding preset cannot approach the 60 FPS target.

At 2560x1440, Low settings average 45 FPS with no range. Medium averages 32 FPS, ranging from 27 to 37. High averages 28 FPS with no range. Ultra averages 25 FPS with no range. The gap between Low and Ultra here is 20 FPS, showing that preset selection has a meaningful impact but cannot bridge the gap to playability.

At 1920x1080, Low settings average 59 FPS with no range. Medium averages 42 FPS, with a minimum of 36 and a maximum of 48. High averages 37 FPS with no range. Ultra averages 32 FPS with no range. The difference between Low and Ultra is 27 FPS, the largest spread across all resolutions. The Medium preset's recorded range of 36 to 48 FPS suggests some variability in scene complexity, but even the peak does not reach 60.

Notably, the database only records min and max values for Medium settings at each resolution. This partial data means the full variability picture is incomplete, but the available numbers indicate that frame pacing is relatively stable, with the 4K Medium range spanning 7 FPS and the 1080p Medium range spanning 12 FPS.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the Intel Core i7-14700F sits at an average benchmark score of 53620. Its nearest rivals in the database are closely clustered. The Intel Xeon 6505P scores 53701, which is 0.2% higher. The Intel Xeon Phi 7290 scores 53469, 0.3% lower. The AMD Ryzen 9 7900X scores 53288, 0.6% lower. The AMD EPYC 7313P scores 53206, 0.8% lower. These four alternatives would deliver statistically identical CPU performance in this game, meaning the processor is not the differentiating factor for Control.

For the GPU, the Intel Arc B370 has an average benchmark score of 1184. Its nearest rivals are all older discrete parts. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186, 0.2% higher. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190, 0.5% higher. The AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192, 0.7% higher. The AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168, 1.4% lower. These deltas are all within 1.4%, indicating that any of these GPUs would produce nearly identical frame rates in Control. Users with any of these alternatives should expect the same sub-60 performance profile.

The practical implication is that swapping the CPU for any of its rivals would change nothing about playability, while swapping the GPU for any of its rivals would also yield negligible differences. The bottleneck is so pronounced that the exact GPU model matters less than the generation gap between this integrated-class part and the demands of the game.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of Intel Core i7-14700F and Intel Arc B370 ranks 3436 out of 3720 tested combinations for Control. This places it in the bottom 7.6% of all tested systems, which aligns with the measured frame rates. The GPU's 5th percentile ranking among all GPUs drags the overall combo down despite the CPU's 91st percentile ranking.

To contextualize this rank, consider that 284 other tested combinations perform worse, while 3435 perform better. The fact that a modern 20-core CPU cannot lift this combo out of the bottom decile underscores the GPU's dominance in determining game performance. Control is an action-adventure title that clearly requires more graphics throughput than this GPU provides.

The rank also implies that users with this combo would experience performance comparable to systems with much older CPUs paired with mid-range GPUs from previous generations. The CPU's headroom is entirely wasted in this configuration, as the GPU cannot translate additional processing power into higher frame rates.

The Verdict

Based on the verdictByResolution data, this PC cannot run Control at a playable level at any resolution. The playableThresholdFps is 60, and every measured average falls below this. At 3840x2160, no settings preset is listed as playable, and the best available average is 30 FPS at Low. At 2560x1440, the same applies, with a best average of 45 FPS at Low. At 1920x1080, the best average is 59 FPS at Low, which is one frame short of the threshold.

The database explicitly marks all three resolutions as having zero playable settings. This means even at the lowest graphical preset and the lowest resolution, the system cannot sustain 60 FPS on average. The 1080p Low result of 59 FPS is tantalizingly close, but the threshold is absolute, and 59 does not meet it.

Users seeking 60 FPS in Control would need to consider a different GPU entirely. The CPU, despite its strength, cannot compensate for the Arc B370's limitations. The measured data is unambiguous: this combo fails the playability test at every resolution and preset combination tested.

FAQ

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

A: No. The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 Low is 59, which falls one frame short of the 60 FPS playable threshold. The database records no playable settings at this resolution.

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo achieves in Control?

A: The highest recorded average is 59 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. No other resolution or preset combination reaches this figure.

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

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

Q: Does upgrading the CPU help this system run Control better?

A: No. The CPU is not the bottleneck. The Intel Core i7-14700F ranks in the 91st percentile among all CPUs, and its nearest rivals (Intel Xeon 6505P, Intel Xeon Phi 7290, AMD Ryzen 9 7900X, AMD EPYC 7313P) all score within 0.8% of it. The GPU's 5th percentile ranking is the limiting factor.

Q: What is the best settings preset at 2560x1440?

A: Low settings produce the highest average FPS at 45. Medium averages 32, High averages 28, and Ultra averages 25. However, none of these meet the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested systems for Control?

A: It ranks 3436 out of 3720 combinations, placing it in the bottom 7.6% of tested systems. The GPU's low percentile rank is the primary reason for this poor standing.