Control

The AMD Ryzen 5 4600G paired with the Intel Arc B370 presents a highly unusual combination for playing Control, a 2019 Action Adventure title. The measured data shows this system struggles significantly, with performance levels that place it in the bottom tier of tested configurations. This analysis breaks down the benchmark results, the role each component plays, and what settings offer the most playable experience, using only the provided measured data.

FAQ

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

A: The highest average frame rate recorded is 59 FPS, which occurs at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. No other settings or resolution combination in the measured data reaches or exceeds 60 FPS average.

Q: How does this combo rank overall for Control performance?

A: The combo ranks 2657 out of 2888 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 8% of all configurations tested for this game. This indicates the hardware combination is not well-suited for delivering high frame rates in Control.

Q: What is the difference in average FPS between 1080p Low and 1080p Ultra?

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves an average of 59 FPS, while the Ultra preset achieves an average of 32 FPS. This represents a 27 FPS drop when moving from the lowest to the highest settings at this resolution.

Q: Does the Intel Arc B370 have dedicated VRAM?

A: No, the Intel Arc B370 uses System Shared memory for both its memory size and type. Its memory bandwidth is described as System Dependent, meaning it relies on the system’s main memory rather than dedicated graphics memory.

Q: How many cores and threads does the AMD Ryzen 5 4600G have?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 4600G has 6 cores and 12 threads. It is based on the Zen 2 architecture with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.20 GHz.

Q: What is the lowest average FPS recorded in the measured data?

A: The lowest average FPS is 17, which occurs at 3840x2160 resolution with Ultra settings. This is the only configuration that falls below 20 FPS average.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is the primary bottleneck in this configuration for Control. The GPU’s benchmark data shows a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184, placing it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. This extremely low percentile is reflected directly in the game’s frame rates. The Arc B370’s closest rivals in terms of average benchmark score are the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (score 1186, delta -0.2%), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (score 1190, delta -0.5%), and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (score 1192, delta -0.7%). These are all older, low-performance parts, which contextualizes the level of graphics power available here.

The Arc B370 operates with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. It has 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster output units. The pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance at 6.144 TFLOPS. However, the critical limitation is its memory configuration. The GPU uses System Shared memory, meaning it has no dedicated VRAM of its own. The memory bus width is also listed as System Shared, and the bandwidth is System Dependent. This architecture forces the GPU to compete with the CPU for system memory bandwidth, which is a severe handicap in a demanding game like Control.

In the measured FPS data, the impact of this shared memory setup is clear. At 3840x2160, the highest resolution tested, the GPU can only manage an average of 19 FPS on High settings and 17 FPS on Ultra. Even dropping to Low settings at this resolution only yields 30 FPS average. The performance scales predictably as resolution decreases, but the underlying GPU capability remains the limiting factor. At 2560x1440, the average frame rates range from 45 FPS on Low to 25 FPS on Ultra. At 1920x1080, the best case scenario is 59 FPS on Low, with High at 37 FPS and Ultra at 32 FPS. The data shows a consistent pattern: the Arc B370 is only capable of producing playable frame rates at the lowest settings and resolution, and even then, it barely crosses the 60 FPS threshold.

The GPU’s architecture is Xe3-LPG, built on a 3 nm process from Intel. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so it is feature-complete for modern APIs. The presence of 10 ray tracing cores suggests hardware support for ray tracing effects, but the raw performance is so low that enabling such features would likely cripple frame rates further. The texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s are modest figures that align with its low-tier benchmark standing. The GPU also has a TDP of 25 W, which is very low, indicating it is not designed for high-performance gaming workloads.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured data, the only viable path to a playable experience in Control is to use the Low preset at 1920x1080. This configuration produces an average FPS of 59, which is the highest recorded in the entire dataset. While 59 FPS is not a locked 60, it is the closest this combo gets to smooth gameplay. The Medium preset at 1080p drops the average to 42 FPS, which is a significant step down and introduces more noticeable stutter, especially during action sequences. The measured data for Medium at 1080p shows a minimum FPS of 36 and a maximum of 48, indicating a wide variance that could feel inconsistent.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset achieves an average of 45 FPS. This is playable but noticeably less smooth than the 1080p Low result. The Medium preset at 1440p averages 32 FPS, with a minimum of 27 FPS, which is likely to feel choppy. For users who prioritize higher resolution over frame rate, 1440p Low is the only reasonable choice, but it comes with a 14 FPS average penalty compared to 1080p Low.

At 3840x2160, the results are uniformly poor. The Low preset averages 30 FPS, while Medium averages 21 FPS, High averages 19 FPS, and Ultra averages 17 FPS. None of these are playable for a fast-paced action game. The minimum FPS recorded at 4K Medium is 18, which means the game will frequently dip into unplayable territory. Therefore, the recommendation is clear: use 1920x1080 with Low settings for the best balance of visual fidelity and performance. If the user insists on higher settings, the Medium preset at 1080p is the highest quality option that maintains an average above 40 FPS, but it requires accepting a less stable frame rate.

The data also indicates that the gap between Low and Medium settings is substantial. At 1080p, moving from Low to Medium costs 17 FPS on average (from 59 to 42). Moving from Medium to High costs another 5 FPS (from 42 to 37). Finally, moving from High to Ultra costs 5 FPS (from 37 to 32). This suggests that the Low preset is not just the best for frame rate; it is disproportionately better, likely because it reduces the load on the memory subsystem that the Arc B370 relies on. For any user seeking a consistent experience, Low settings are the only sensible choice.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank for this configuration in Control is 2657 out of 2888 tested combinations. This places it in the 92nd percentile from the bottom, meaning only 231 tested combos perform worse. This is a clear indication that the AMD Ryzen 5 4600G and Intel Arc B370 pairing is fundamentally mismatched for this game. The rank is not a reflection of the CPU, but rather the GPU’s severe performance limitations.

To contextualize the GPU’s contribution to this rank, the Intel Arc B370 has a percentile rank of 5 among all GPUs. This means it performs better than only 5% of the GPUs in the benchmark database. Its nearest rivals in terms of average benchmark score are all older, low-end parts: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (delta -0.2%), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (delta -0.5%), and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (delta -0.7%). These rivals are from a much earlier era of graphics hardware, highlighting just how far behind the Arc B370 is in raw compute power. The only rival it beats is the AMD FirePro M2000, which has a delta of 1.4% (meaning the Arc B370 scores 1.4% higher).

The CPU, by contrast, is a much more capable part. The AMD Ryzen 5 4600G has a percentile rank of 71 among all CPUs, placing it in the upper third. Its average benchmark score is 17507. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE (avgScore 17482, delta 0.1%), the AMD Ryzen 3 8300GE (avgScore 17614, delta -0.6%), the Intel Core 7 150U (avgScore 17395, delta 0.6%), and the Intel Core i3-14100T (avgScore 17648, delta -0.8%). These deltas are all within 1%, meaning the 4600G is competitive with these parts in synthetic benchmarks. However, this CPU strength is wasted in this combo because the GPU cannot translate it into frame rates.

The combination of a 71st percentile CPU and a 5th percentile GPU explains the low combo rank. The system is heavily imbalanced, with the GPU acting as a hard cap on performance. Even if the CPU were overclocked (it has an unlocked multiplier), it would not improve the measured FPS in Control because the GPU is the limiting factor at all resolutions and settings tested. The data suggests that this combo is only suitable for very undemanding games or non-gaming workloads, not for a title like Control.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 4600G provides the processing power for this combo, and in the context of Control, it is more than sufficient for the task. The CPU has 6 cores and 12 threads, based on the Zen 2 architecture with a process node of 7 nm from TSMC. Its base clock is 3.70 GHz, and it can boost up to 4.20 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. This configuration is typical for a mid-range desktop processor.

In synthetic benchmarks, the 4600G shows solid performance. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score is 13593, and its single-core score is 1919. The Geekbench multicore score is 6637, with a single-core score of 1460. The Passmark multithread score is 15992, and the single-thread score is 2653. These numbers indicate a CPU that can handle modern game logic, physics, and AI without becoming a bottleneck in most scenarios. The 3DMark scores also show scaling with thread count: 1430 for 2 threads, 2732 for 4 threads, 4138 for 8 threads, and 4889 for max threads. This scaling suggests the CPU can utilize multiple cores effectively.

However, in this specific combo, the CPU’s role is largely passive. The measured FPS data shows that at 1080p Low, the system achieves 59 FPS. This is close to the CPU’s potential limit for this game, but it is not a CPU bottleneck. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect to see similar frame rates across different resolutions, as the CPU workload remains constant while the GPU workload changes. Instead, the data shows a clear resolution-based scaling: 59 FPS at 1080p, 45 FPS at 1440p, and 30 FPS at 4K for Low settings. This pattern indicates the GPU is the bottleneck at every resolution. The CPU has enough headroom to feed the GPU, but the GPU cannot render frames fast enough to utilize that headroom.

The CPU’s memory support is DDR4 with a dual-channel bus and a bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. This is relevant because the Intel Arc B370 uses System Shared memory. In this configuration, the GPU will consume some of the system’s DDR4 bandwidth, which could impact CPU performance in memory-heavy tasks. However, the measured gaming data does not show any anomalies that would suggest a severe memory contention issue. The 4600G’s 8 MB of L3 cache is shared across all cores, which is modest by modern standards, but it is sufficient for the CPU’s assigned tasks in this game.

The CPU’s TDP is 65 W, and it integrates Radeon Vega 7 graphics, though those are not used in this combo since the Arc B370 is the active GPU. The CPU supports PCIe Gen 3 with 20 lanes, which is older but still adequate for this GPU. In summary, the Ryzen 5 4600G is a capable mid-range CPU that performs well in synthetic tests and is not the reason for this combo’s poor gaming results. The data shows that the CPU is ready to deliver higher frame rates, but the Intel Arc B370 is unable to keep up.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data for Control provides a complete picture of this combo’s performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. Each entry lists an average FPS, and some include minimum and maximum values for the Medium preset.

At 3840x2160 (4K) , the results are as follows:

• Low: Average 30 FPS. This is the best 4K result, but still below playable thresholds.
• Medium: Average 21 FPS, with a minimum of 18 FPS and a maximum of 25 FPS. The minimum is critically low.
• High: Average 19 FPS. No min/max data available.
• Ultra: Average 17 FPS. The lowest average in the entire dataset.

At 2560x1440 (1440p) , the results improve but remain limited:

• Low: Average 45 FPS. This is the only 1440p result above 40 FPS.
• Medium: Average 32 FPS, with a minimum of 27 FPS and a maximum of 37 FPS.
• High: Average 28 FPS. No min/max data available.
• Ultra: Average 25 FPS. No min/max data available.

At 1920x1080 (1080p) , the results are the most playable:

• Low: Average 59 FPS. The best result in the dataset, nearly hitting 60 FPS.
• Medium: Average 42 FPS, with a minimum of 36 FPS and a maximum of 48 FPS.
• High: Average 37 FPS. No min/max data available.
• Ultra: Average 32 FPS. No min/max data available.

The pattern across all resolutions is consistent: Low settings always provide a significant boost over Medium, while the jump from High to Ultra is smaller. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Medium is 17 FPS (59 vs 42), while the difference between High and Ultra is only 5 FPS (37 vs 32). This suggests that the Low preset disables or reduces certain GPU-intensive effects that disproportionately affect the Arc B370. The Medium preset at 1080p shows a variance of 12 FPS between its minimum and maximum (36 to 48), indicating frame pacing issues that could make the game feel less smooth than the average suggests.

For users with a 1080p monitor, the choice is straightforward: Low settings for near-60 FPS gameplay. The Medium preset is a compromise at 42 FPS, but the frame drops to 36 FPS minimum may be noticeable during combat. At 1440p, the Low preset at 45 FPS is the only option that avoids the sub-30 FPS territory, but it still falls short of the smoothness of 1080p Low. At 4K, no settings preset yields a playable result, so users should avoid this resolution entirely with this combo.

The data does not include min/max FPS for Low, High, or Ultra presets, so it is impossible to assess frame time consistency for those settings. However, the average FPS values alone are enough to conclude that this combo is only suitable for 1080p Low settings in Control. The measured results align with the GPU’s low benchmark percentile and its System Shared memory architecture, both of which severely limit its ability to handle a graphically demanding title like Control.