Control

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and Intel Arc B570 combination delivers a playable Control experience at 1080p and 1440p, but falls short of the 60 FPS threshold at 4K across all tested settings. The data shows a clear performance ceiling that varies significantly by resolution and quality preset, with the system's strongest showing at 1920x1080 where it achieves an average of 101 FPS on Low settings.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU and GPU each sit near specific rival components in aggregate benchmark scores. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 posts an average benchmark score of 48995, placing it within a narrow band of comparable processors. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G scores 49196, a mere 0.4 percent advantage, while the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 reaches 49228, just 0.5 percent higher. On the Intel side, the Xeon Gold 5318H trails by 0.6 percent with 48698, and the Core i5-14600K scores 48618, a 0.8 percent deficit. These deltas are remarkably tight, meaning any of these CPUs would produce nearly identical frame pacing in Control, assuming the GPU remains the limiting factor.

The Intel Arc B570's average benchmark score of 20556 places it alongside several established graphics cards. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile scores 20534, just 0.1 percent behind, while the Intel Arc A750 leads by 0.1 percent with 20582. The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M trails by 0.4 percent at 20480, and the AMD Radeon R9 M390X sits 0.5 percent ahead at 20662. For Control specifically, the Arc B570's 10 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus with 380.0 GB/s bandwidth determines how texture-heavy scenes perform, particularly at higher resolutions. The GPU's 2304 shading units and 80 ROPs handle the game's particle effects and physics-based combat, but the 18 ray tracing cores are underutilized given the game's age and the lack of RT-specific benchmark data in this suite.

The practical implication for buyers is that swapping the Core Ultra 5 245 for any of its nearest CPU rivals would not meaningfully change Control's frame rates, as the processor's 14 cores and 14 threads provide ample headroom. Similarly, substituting the Arc B570 with an RTX 3070 Mobile or Arc A750 would keep performance within a fraction of a percent, making these viable alternatives for users seeking different driver ecosystems or feature sets.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Control at 60 FPS in 4K?

A: No. The measured data shows no playable settings at 3840x2160. The best result is 51 FPS average on Low, which still falls below the 60 FPS playable threshold. Medium averages 36 FPS, High averages 32 FPS, and Ultra averages 28 FPS.

Q: What is the best 1080p setting for this combination?

A: High delivers the best playable experience at 1920x1080 with a 63 FPS average. While Low achieves 101 FPS and Medium reaches 71 FPS, High offers the highest visual quality that still clears the 60 FPS threshold. Ultra drops to 55 FPS, which is not playable.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its closest rivals?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 scores 48995 on average benchmarks, placing it within 0.8 percent of the AMD Ryzen 9 7900, AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G, Intel Xeon Gold 5318H, and Intel Core i5-14600K. The AMD Ryzen 9 7900 is the fastest of this group at 49228, just 0.5 percent ahead.

Q: What GPU memory configuration does the Arc B570 use?

A: The Intel Arc B570 features 10 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus, providing 380.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory runs at 2375 MHz with 19 Gbps effective speed, and the card has a 2500 MHz base and boost clock.

Q: Does the system perform better at 1440p Low or 1080p Ultra?

A: The 1440p Low preset averages 76 FPS, while 1080p Ultra averages 55 FPS. The 1440p Low setting provides both higher frame rates and a higher resolution, making it the better choice for players prioritizing smoothness over visual effects.

Q: What is the system's overall ranking among tested combinations?

A: The combo ranks 2995 out of 3720 tested combinations in Control, placing it in the lower portion of the database. This reflects the GPU's 65th percentile standing among all GPUs, while the CPU sits at the 90th percentile among all CPUs.

CPU and GPU Roles

The performance scaling across resolutions reveals which component dominates in Control. At 1920x1080, the Arc B570 is clearly the bottleneck. The jump from Low to Medium costs 30 FPS (101 to 71), and Medium to High costs another 8 FPS (71 to 63). The CPU's 14 cores and 5.10 GHz boost clock are never stressed at this resolution, as evidenced by the fact that the 1080p Low result of 101 FPS is more than double the 4K Low result of 51 FPS.

Moving to 2560x1440, the GPU's workload increases substantially. The 1440p Low average of 76 FPS represents a 25 FPS drop from 1080p Low, a 24.8 percent reduction. At Medium, the 1440p result of 54 FPS is 17 FPS below the 1080p Medium result, and High drops from 63 to 48 FPS. The pattern confirms that the Arc B570's 160-bit memory bus and 380.0 GB/s bandwidth become limiting factors as pixel count rises, with the 10 GB frame buffer handling the game's assets without capacity issues but struggling with fill rate demands.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is thoroughly saturated. The 4K Low average of 51 FPS is barely above half the 1080p Low figure, and the scaling from Medium (36 FPS) to High (32 FPS) to Ultra (28 FPS) shows diminishing returns as settings increase. The CPU's role at 4K is negligible; the processor's 24 MB of L3 cache and 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth are sufficient for the game's logic, physics, and AI at all resolutions. The data indicates that Control at this system's performance level is entirely GPU-bound, with the Core Ultra 5 245 providing no measurable constraint even at the lowest 4K frame rates.

The settings scaling further illustrates the GPU limitation. At 1080p, the gap between Low and Ultra is 46 FPS (101 to 55), a 45.5 percent range. At 1440p, the same gap narrows to 34 FPS (76 to 42), and at 4K it compresses to 23 FPS (51 to 28). This compression at higher resolutions indicates the GPU is running out of compute resources regardless of image quality settings, whereas at 1080p the settings have more headroom to influence performance.

The Verdict

This PC can run Control, but the playable range is strictly limited to 1920x1080 and 2560x1440. At 1080p, the High preset clears the 60 FPS threshold with a 63 FPS average, and both Low (101 FPS) and Medium (71 FPS) also deliver playable performance. The Ultra preset at 1080p falls short at 55 FPS, so players seeking maximum quality must accept sub-60 frame rates. At 1440p, only the Low preset achieves playable status with a 76 FPS average; Medium (54 FPS), High (48 FPS), and Ultra (42 FPS) all miss the threshold. At 4K, no settings are playable, with the best result being 51 FPS on Low.

For a 60 FPS target, the recommended configuration is 1920x1080 with High settings, which balances visual fidelity with frame rate. Players with 1440p monitors can use Low settings for a smooth experience, but should expect to compromise on shadows, reflections, and post-processing effects. The 4K resolution is not viable for this combination in Control, and users with 4K displays should either lower the output resolution or adjust the game's scaling options.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the system produces an average of 51 FPS on Low settings. Medium averages 36 FPS with a minimum of 31 and maximum of 42. High averages 32 FPS, and Ultra averages 28 FPS. The 4K results show no settings reaching the 60 FPS playable threshold, and the frame time variance at Medium (31 to 42 FPS range) suggests inconsistent performance during intense combat sequences.

At 2560x1440, Low settings deliver a 76 FPS average, which is the only playable result at this resolution. Medium averages 54 FPS with a minimum of 46 and maximum of 62, placing it just below the threshold but with occasional playable spikes. High averages 48 FPS, and Ultra averages 42 FPS. The 1440p results show a similar pattern to 4K but with roughly 50 percent higher frame rates across all settings.

At 1920x1080, the system shows its strongest performance. Low settings produce an average of 101 FPS, Medium averages 71 FPS with a minimum of 61 and maximum of 82, and High averages 63 FPS. Ultra drops to 55 FPS, just below the playable threshold. The 1080p Medium setting's minimum of 61 FPS indicates that even during demanding scenes, the system maintains playable frame rates, while the High preset's 63 FPS average suggests it hovers just above the threshold with potential dips below in heavy combat.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and Intel Arc B570 combination ranks 2995 out of 3720 tested configurations in Control, placing it in the 19.5th percentile of all tested systems. This ranking reflects the significant GPU bottleneck at higher resolutions, as the CPU's 90th percentile standing among all processors does little to compensate for the GPU's 65th percentile position. The system outperforms roughly 80 percent of tested configurations, but the gap between the CPU's strong benchmark scores and the GPU's moderate scores highlights an imbalance that manifests in the game's resolution scaling.

The ranking indicates that this combination is better suited for 1080p gaming than for higher resolutions. The measured FPS data supports this, with the 1080p results showing a 63 FPS average at High settings, while the 1440p and 4K results fall progressively behind. The system's position in the database suggests that users seeking 1440p or 4K performance in Control would need a more powerful GPU, while those targeting 1080p will find this combination adequate for medium-to-high settings. The 2995 rank also reflects the game's release in 2019, meaning newer titles with higher system requirements would likely push this combination further down the rankings.