Control

Control with the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 and Intel Arc B370 presents a severely constrained experience, with the measured data showing the combination ranking 2657th out of 2888 tested combos. The Arc B370, operating as an integrated GPU with system-shared memory, is the dominant bottleneck, and the benchmark results consistently reflect this limitation across all tested resolutions and settings.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data for this combo reveals that the playable threshold is only approached at the absolute lowest settings. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo achieves an average of 59 FPS, which is the only configuration in the entire dataset to reach a frame rate suitable for standard 60 Hz displays. Every other settings preset at 1080p falls below 42 FPS, with High averaging 37 FPS, Medium 42 FPS, and Ultra dropping to 32 FPS. Therefore, the Low preset is the only viable option for a smooth experience, though it still lacks the headroom to guarantee stability in more demanding scenes.

At 2560x1440, the situation deteriorates further. The Low preset yields an average of 45 FPS, which may be acceptable for slower-paced action but is far from ideal. Medium drops to 32 FPS, High to 28 FPS, and Ultra to 25 FPS, all of which will result in noticeable stutter and input lag for a game like Control, which features fast-paced combat and physics-driven environments. For users who must run this resolution, Low is the only reasonable choice, but the experience will be compromised.

For 3840x2160, the data shows the combo is effectively non-functional for gaming. The best result is 30 FPS on Low, but this is an average, with no minimum frame rate recorded. The Medium preset, which does have min/max data, shows an average of 21 FPS with a minimum of 18 FPS, indicating severe frame pacing issues. High and Ultra produce averages of 19 FPS and 17 FPS respectively. The data suggests that any attempt to run Control at 4K with this hardware should be avoided entirely. The recommended preset for this combo is unequivocally Low at 1080p, as it is the only configuration that provides a baseline level of playability.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is the primary limiting factor in this configuration. Its benchmark profile is exceptionally weak, with a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184, placing it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. The nearest rivals in the database are legacy parts like the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (score 1186, deltaPct -0.2) and the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (score 1190, deltaPct -0.5), which are roughly equivalent in performance. This places the Arc B370 firmly in the entry-level integrated graphics class, despite its modern Xe3-LPG architecture and 3 nm process node.

The GPU's memory configuration is "System Shared" and "System Dependent," meaning it has no dedicated VRAM and relies on the system's main memory. This is a critical disadvantage for Control, a game that demands substantial memory bandwidth for its textures and physics calculations. The GPU does have a boost clock of 2400 MHz, but its power envelope is a mere 25 W, and its FP32 performance is just 6.144 TFLOPS. The pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s are similarly modest. The data shows that this GPU is not designed for demanding 3D workloads, and the measured FPS results confirm this. The shared memory architecture means that the GPU will contend with the CPU for memory access, further hampering performance in a title like Control.

How This Combo Ranks

In the global database of tested hardware combos for Control, this pairing of the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 and Intel Arc B370 sits at rank 2657 out of 2888 combinations. This places it in the bottom 8% of all tested systems, indicating that the vast majority of hardware configurations will deliver a superior experience. The GPU's 5th percentile ranking is the clear driver of this poor result, as the GPU benchmark score of 1184 is the lowest component score in this evaluation.

The CPU, by contrast, is a much more capable part. The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 has an average benchmark score of 21484, placing it in the 75th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V (score 21440, deltaPct 0.2) and the Intel Core i9-11900H (score 21367, deltaPct 0.5), showing that it is competitive with much newer processors in synthetic tests. This contrast highlights the massive imbalance in this combo: a mid-range CPU from 2018 is paired with an integrated GPU that is only suitable for basic tasks. The result is a system where the CPU is effectively idle waiting for the GPU to finish rendering frames, leading to the low FPS figures observed.

FAQ

Q: What is the best average frame rate this combo can achieve in Control?

A: The highest average frame rate recorded is 59 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings. All other configurations produce lower averages, with the next best being 45 FPS at 2560x1440 on Low.

Q: Is this combo capable of running Control at 4K resolution?

A: The data indicates no. At 3840x2160, the highest average FPS is 30 on Low settings, but the Medium preset shows a minimum of 18 FPS. High and Ultra settings produce averages of 19 and 17 FPS respectively, which are unplayable.

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

A: The Arc B370 scores 1184 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark. This is within 0.7% of the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186) and within 1.4% of the AMD FirePro M2000 (1168), indicating near-identical performance to these older parts.

Q: What is the frame time consistency like for this combo?

A: The only preset with reported minimum and maximum FPS is Medium. At 1080p, it ranges from 36 to 48 FPS; at 1440p, from 27 to 37 FPS; and at 4K, from 18 to 25 FPS. The tight range suggests that the GPU is consistently saturated, leading to a stable but low frame rate.

Q: Does the CPU hold back the GPU in this configuration?

A: No, the data suggests the opposite. The Ryzen 5 2600 has a 75th percentile CPU benchmark score, while the Arc B370 is in the 5th percentile. The GPU is the definitive bottleneck, as the CPU has ample headroom to feed frames, but the GPU cannot render them quickly enough.

Q: What is the combo's overall ranking for Control?

A: This combination of AMD Ryzen 5 2600 and Intel Arc B370 ranks 2657th out of 2888 tested combos for Control, placing it in the bottom portion of all results.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a steep decline as resolution increases, which is a classic sign of a GPU-bound system. Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 on Low settings, the average FPS drops from 59 to 45, a reduction of 14 FPS. Scaling further to 3840x2160 on Low, the average falls to 30 FPS, another 15 FPS drop. This linear degradation pattern indicates that the rendering pipeline is entirely limited by the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth.

At Medium settings, the drop is similarly pronounced: 42 FPS at 1080p, 32 FPS at 1440p, and 21 FPS at 4K. The percentage decrease from 1080p to 4K is roughly 50% for both Low and Medium presets. This halving of performance when pixel count quadruples (from ~2 million to ~8.3 million pixels) shows that the GPU is not scaling efficiently, likely due to the system-shared memory bottleneck. The CPU, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, is not the limiting factor here; if it were, we would expect to see a smaller FPS delta between resolutions, as the CPU workload per frame remains relatively constant. The data confirms that the Arc B370's integrated nature and lack of dedicated VRAM make it utterly incapable of handling higher resolutions in Control.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen architecture, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz. It features 16 MB of shared L3 cache and a dual-channel DDR4 memory interface with 46.9 GB/s of bandwidth. In synthetic benchmarks, it scores 1248 in Cinebench R15 multi-core and 157.3 in single-core, with a Geekbench multi-core score of 5648 and a single-core score of 1154. Its Passmark multi-thread score is 13160, and its single-thread score is 2239.

These scores indicate that the CPU is a competent performer for its generation, especially in multi-threaded workloads. Its average benchmark score of 21484 places it in the 75th percentile, and its nearest rivals are within a 1.2% delta, showing it is well-matched to parts like the Intel Xeon D-1746TER or the AMD EPYC 9454. However, in the context of Control with the Arc B370, the CPU's role is diminished. The game's engine can utilize multiple threads, and the Ryzen 5 2600 has enough processing power to handle the game's logic and physics, but it is starved of frames by the GPU. The measured FPS values are far too low to be attributed to CPU limitations, as a CPU bottleneck would typically manifest as inconsistent frame times or poor minimum FPS, whereas the data shows a consistent, low average FPS across all settings. The CPU is ready to deliver more, but the GPU cannot keep up.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured FPS data for Control is as follows, organized by resolution and settings:

At 1920x1080, the combo achieves its best results. With Low settings, the average FPS is 59, with no min/max data provided. Medium settings produce an average of 42 FPS, with a range of 36 to 48 FPS. High settings drop the average to 37 FPS. Ultra settings yield an average of 32 FPS. This shows a clear 27 FPS difference between the lowest and highest presets, indicating that settings have a substantial impact, but even the best case is only marginally playable.

At 2560x1440, performance degrades further. Low settings average 45 FPS. Medium settings average 32 FPS, with a range of 27 to 37 FPS. High settings average 28 FPS. Ultra settings average 25 FPS. The delta between Low and Ultra is 20 FPS, and the overall reduction from 1080p is roughly 15-25% across all presets.

At 3840x2160, the combo struggles to render the game. Low settings average 30 FPS. Medium settings average 21 FPS, with a minimum of 18 FPS and a maximum of 25 FPS. High settings average 19 FPS. Ultra settings average 17 FPS. The data shows a collapse in performance, with the Ultra preset delivering less than a third of the 1080p Low result. The lack of min/max data for most 4K presets suggests the frame rate is likely unstable, and the single recorded range for Medium confirms a poor experience with sub-20 FPS dips. This resolution is not viable for this hardware combination.