Control

The Intel Core i9-14900K paired with the Intel Arc B390 presents a highly unbalanced configuration for Control, with the CPU capable of elite-level compute while the GPU falls into the lower percentile of tested graphics hardware. The recorded data shows a system that struggles to maintain smooth gameplay at higher resolutions and presets, only achieving the 60 FPS threshold at 1080p with the lowest settings. Below is a detailed breakdown of the measured performance.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The benchmark data for this combo covers three resolutions and four quality presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra), with average frame rates recorded for all, and minimum/maximum values captured for the Medium preset at each resolution.

At 3840x2160 (4K), the results are uniformly below playable levels. The Low preset averages 33 FPS, which is the best result at this resolution. Moving up to Medium drops the average to 24 FPS, with a recorded minimum of 20 FPS and a maximum of 27 FPS. High settings yield an average of 21 FPS, while Ultra bottoms out at 18 FPS. Every 4K configuration falls far short of the 60 FPS target, and even the fastest setting (Low) delivers less than half of that threshold.

At 2560x1440 (1440p), the pattern improves but remains insufficient. The Low preset reaches an average of 50 FPS, which is the highest recorded at this resolution. Medium settings produce an average of 35 FPS, with a minimum of 30 FPS and a maximum of 40 FPS. High settings average 31 FPS, and Ultra averages 27 FPS. While the gap between Low and Ultra is narrower here than at 4K, all configurations remain below the 60 FPS line, with the best option still 10 FPS short.

At 1920x1080 (1080p), the combo finally approaches usable performance. The Low preset averages 65 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS threshold. Medium settings average 46 FPS, with a minimum of 40 FPS and a maximum of 53 FPS. High settings average 41 FPS, and Ultra averages 36 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra is steep, with a 29 FPS drop between the lowest and highest presets, indicating that the GPU is the dominant limiting factor even at this resolution.

Best Settings per Resolution

Based on the recorded data, the only resolution that offers a playable experience (at or above 60 FPS average) is 1920x1080 with the Low preset. This configuration produces an average of 65 FPS, which is the sole instance in the entire dataset where the system meets the playable threshold.

For 2560x1440, no preset achieves 60 FPS. The closest is the Low preset at 50 FPS, which is 10 FPS below the target. The database lists no playable settings for this resolution, meaning users would need to accept a sub-60 FPS experience regardless of quality settings.

Similarly, 3840x2160 has no playable settings. The best result is the Low preset at 33 FPS, which is 27 FPS below the threshold. Ultra settings at this resolution average just 18 FPS, making the game effectively unplayable at 4K with this hardware combination.

How This Combo Ranks

The database ranks this specific CPU and GPU combination at position 3311 out of 3720 tested combos for Control. This places the configuration in the bottom 11% of all tested systems, reflecting the severe bottleneck created by the Arc B390 graphics solution. The rank is particularly striking given the CPU's capabilities: the Core i9-14900K sits in the 95th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 79097. However, the GPU's percentile is dramatically lower, at the 9th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 1482 based on the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test.

This mismatch means the system's overall performance in Control is dictated almost entirely by the graphics component, dragging what could be a high-end machine into the lower echelons of the ranking. The combo rank of 3311 reflects a configuration that is far more capable on paper than in practice, as the CPU's potential is left largely untapped by the GPU's limited throughput.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the Intel Core i9-14900K in the database include several processors with comparable average benchmark scores. The Intel Core i9-14900KF scores 79371, which is 0.3% higher than the 14900K's 79097 average. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus scores 79574, a 0.6% difference. The AMD EPYC 7413 scores 80041, 1.2% higher, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 scores 77740, which is 1.7% lower. In practical terms, any of these CPUs would deliver nearly identical CPU-bound performance in Control, meaning the choice between them would have negligible impact on frame rates given the same GPU.

For the Intel Arc B390, the nearest rivals are all significantly older, lower-end NVIDIA parts. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX scores 1463, which is 1.3% lower than the Arc B390's 1482. 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. These deltas are all within 3%, meaning the Arc B390 performs within a narrow band of these legacy GPUs. For a user considering alternatives, any of these graphics cards would produce broadly similar frame rates in Control, although none would be considered adequate for modern gaming at high settings.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data clearly indicates that the GPU is the overwhelming bottleneck in this configuration. The Intel Core i9-14900K, with 24 cores, 32 threads, and a boost clock of 6.00 GHz, is more than capable of feeding any modern graphics card. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 39399.5 and single-core score of 2262.5 place it among the top processors in the database. However, the Arc B390's modest specifications, including 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, along with its shared system memory architecture, limit the system to frame rates typical of entry-level GPUs.

The scaling between resolutions confirms this imbalance. From 1080p Low (65 FPS) to 1440p Low (50 FPS), the frame rate drops by 23%. From 1440p Low to 4K Low (33 FPS), the drop is 34%. This steep degradation with resolution is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario, where increasing pixel count directly stresses the rendering pipeline. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the frame rates would remain relatively flat across resolutions, as the processor would be saturated regardless of pixel output.

Similarly, the preset scaling shows a consistent pattern. At 1080p, moving from Low to Ultra reduces the average from 65 FPS to 36 FPS, a 45% decrease. At 1440p, the same preset change drops performance from 50 FPS to 27 FPS, a 46% decrease. At 4K, the drop is from 33 FPS to 18 FPS, a 45% decrease. This uniform reduction across all resolutions indicates that the GPU's shader and texture throughput, not the CPU's processing capacity, determines the frame rate. The CPU's role is limited to feeding the GPU with draw calls and physics data, which it does without issue given its high single-threaded performance.

The Verdict

Can this PC run Control? The answer depends entirely on the target resolution and quality settings. Based on the recorded data, the only configuration that clears the 60 FPS threshold is 1920x1080 with the Low preset, which averages 65 FPS. This is the sole playable setting in the entire dataset.

At 2560x1440, the system cannot reach 60 FPS at any preset. The best case is the Low preset at 50 FPS, which falls 10 FPS short. At 3840x2160, the situation is worse, with the Low preset averaging just 33 FPS and Ultra dropping to 18 FPS.

The verdict by resolution is clear: no playable settings exist at 4K or 1440p, while 1080p offers a single playable option at Low. The combination of the Core i9-14900K and Arc B390 is, therefore, only suitable for running Control at the lowest settings and at 1080p resolution. For users seeking higher visual fidelity or higher resolutions, this GPU is a severe liability that negates the CPU's considerable strengths. The data suggests that swapping the Arc B390 for a more capable graphics card would yield dramatic improvements, as the CPU has ample headroom to support far higher frame rates. As configured, this system is a classic case of a top-tier processor being held back by an entry-level GPU, resulting in a benchmark ranking that reflects the weakest link rather than the strongest component.