Control

The Intel Core i7-14700KF paired with the Intel Arc B390 presents a striking imbalance in Control. The processor is a high-end desktop part, while the graphics solution is an integrated-class GPU. The recorded data shows a system that struggles to maintain fluid frame rates at higher resolutions, with playability confined to the lowest settings at 1080p.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The database contains measured frame rate data for four settings presets across three resolutions. At 3840x2160, the system is heavily limited. The Low preset delivers an average of 33 FPS. Medium drops to an average of 24 FPS, with recorded minimum and maximum values of 20 and 27 FPS, respectively. High settings yield an average of 21 FPS, and Ultra falls to 18 FPS. None of these averages approach the 60 FPS playable threshold.

At 2560x1440, performance improves but remains below the playable threshold. The Low preset reaches an average of 50 FPS. Medium averages 35 FPS, with min and max figures of 30 and 40 FPS. High settings produce an average of 31 FPS, while Ultra averages 27 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium at this resolution is 15 FPS, indicating a steep cost for the first step up in quality.

At 1920x1080, the system finally crosses the 60 FPS line, but only on the Low preset. Low averages 65 FPS. Medium averages 46 FPS, with a recorded range of 40 to 53 FPS. High settings average 41 FPS, and Ultra averages 36 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 19 FPS, which is the largest single-preset penalty observed at any resolution. The data shows a consistent pattern: each increase in settings costs a significant number of frames, and resolution scaling compounds the problem.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark results indicate that the Intel Arc B390 is the decisive component in this pairing. The GPU's percentile ranking against all GPUs is 9, placing it in the lowest tier of recorded hardware. Its nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, NVIDIA GeForce 800M, NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM, and NVIDIA GeForce GT 710, all of which are legacy or entry-level parts. This explains why the frame rates scale so dramatically with resolution and settings.

The CPU, by contrast, sits in the 94th percentile against all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F, AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX, AMD Ryzen 9 7950X, and Intel Core Ultra 7 265K. A processor of this class is not the limiting factor in Control. The evidence lies in the FPS scaling: when resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 at the same settings, the frame rate collapses. At Low settings, the average drops from 65 FPS to 33 FPS, a reduction of roughly half. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rate would remain relatively flat across resolutions, as the CPU workload does not scale with pixel count.

The GPU's memory configuration further reinforces this conclusion. The Arc B390 uses System Shared memory, with bandwidth listed as System Dependent. This means the graphics workload is constrained not only by the GPU's compute resources but also by shared system memory bandwidth. The shading units number 1536, with 48 TMUs and 24 ROPs, and the FP32 throughput is 7.680 TFLOPS. These are modest figures for a modern game at high resolution. The i7-14700KF, with 20 cores and 28 threads, has ample headroom for Control's CPU demands. The recorded data suggests the CPU is largely idle waiting on the GPU at every resolution tested.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Control at 60 FPS on Ultra settings?

A: No. The highest average FPS recorded at any resolution is 65, and that occurs only at 1920x1080 on Low settings. Ultra settings produce averages of 36 FPS at 1080p, 27 FPS at 1440p, and 18 FPS at 2160p, all far below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: What is the best playable setting at 1440p?

A: There is no playable setting at 2560x1440. The verdict data shows an empty list of playable settings at this resolution, meaning no preset achieves an average of 60 FPS. The closest is Low at 50 FPS.

Q: How does the Arc B390 compare to the closest GPUs in the database?

A: The Arc B390 has an average benchmark score of 1482 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, scores 1463, which is 1.3% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce 800M scores 1460 (1.5% lower), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446 (2.5% lower), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 scores 1443 (2.7% lower). The Arc B390 leads this group by a narrow margin.

Q: What frame rates does the Medium preset produce at 1080p?

A: The Medium preset at 1920x1080 averages 46 FPS, with a minimum of 40 FPS and a maximum of 53 FPS. This is below the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: Is the Intel Core i7-14700KF a strong performer relative to other CPUs?

A: Yes. The CPU is in the 94th percentile of all CPUs in the database. Its average benchmark score is 70163, which is 0.2% higher than the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F (69996), 0.4% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX (69875), and 0.9% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X (69515). The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K scores 70879, which is 1% higher than the i7-14700KF.

Q: What is the overall rank of this CPU and GPU combination for Control?

A: The combination ranks 3311 out of 3720 recorded hardware combinations for this game, placing it in the lower portion of the database.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the GPU, the nearest rivals in the database are all NVIDIA parts with closely matched average scores. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX is the closest, with a delta of just 1.3% from the Arc B390's score. The NVIDIA GeForce 800M follows at 1.5%, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM at 2.5%, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 at 2.7%. In practical terms, any of these GPUs would produce nearly identical frame rates in Control, meaning users with these cards would see the same inability to hit 60 FPS above Low settings at 1080p.

For the CPU, the situation is different. The Intel Core i7-14700KF is surrounded by high-end alternatives. The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F, AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX, and AMD Ryzen 9 7950X all score within 0.9% of the i7-14700KF, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K is 1% faster. Swapping among these CPUs would have no measurable effect on Control's frame rates, because the game is GPU-bound in this configuration. The data suggests that any of these processors paired with a more capable GPU would yield better results, but with the Arc B390, the CPU choice is irrelevant to the outcome.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS. The database records no playable settings at this resolution, and the best average FPS is 33 on Low. At 2560x1440, the same situation applies: no playable settings exist, with Low producing the highest average at 50 FPS. At 1920x1080, the Low preset is the only playable option, delivering an average of 65 FPS. This is the sole configuration in the entire dataset that clears the 60 FPS threshold. The Medium preset at 1080p averages 46 FPS, which is not playable by the database's standard.

The most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is therefore Low at 1920x1080. Every other combination of resolution and settings falls short. The gap between the best playable configuration and the next step up is substantial: moving from Low to Medium at 1080p costs 19 FPS on average, dropping the frame rate from 65 to 46.

The Verdict

The data answers the question directly: this PC can run Control, but only in a narrow configuration. The verdict by resolution is unambiguous. At 3840x2160, no settings are playable. At 2560x1440, no settings are playable. At 1920x1080, only the Low preset achieves 60 FPS, with an average of 65 FPS. The system does not clear the 60 FPS threshold at any other resolution or preset combination.

The root cause is clear from the hardware data. The Intel Arc B390 is an integrated graphics solution with a 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1482, placing it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are decades-old entry-level NVIDIA parts. The Intel Core i7-14700KF, in contrast, is a 94th percentile desktop CPU with an average benchmark score of 70163. The processor is not the bottleneck; the GPU is. Users seeking playable frame rates in Control at higher resolutions or quality settings would need a fundamentally different graphics solution. As configured, this system is limited to 1080p Low, and even that configuration leaves little headroom above the 60 FPS threshold.