Control

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600X and Intel Arc B570 combination lands at rank 2307 out of 2888 tested combos in Control, placing it in the lower third of the database. This pairing of a Zen 3 six-core CPU with Intel’s Battlemage GPU produces playable but not exceptional results, with the data showing a system that is consistently GPU-limited across most settings and resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 2307 out of 2888 represents the 79.9th percentile from the bottom, meaning roughly 80% of tested configurations outperform it in this title. The CPU itself sits at the 75th percentile among all processors in the database, while the GPU ranks at the 65th percentile among all graphics cards. This gap between component percentiles suggests the graphics card is the primary constraint in Control, a game known for its physics-heavy combat and destructible environments.

The Ryzen 5 5600X’s average benchmark score of 21771 places it in a tight cluster with its nearest rivals. The AMD Ryzen 7 4800H scores 21749 (0.1% behind), the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 6650U scores 21874 (0.5% ahead), the Intel Core i7-11700 scores 21891 (0.5% ahead), and the AMD EPYC 9554P scores 21899 (0.6% ahead). These sub-1% differences are within noise, meaning the CPU is not the differentiator here. The 5600X’s 6 cores and 12 threads with a 3.70 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost clock provide ample compute for a 2019 title like Control, which was released on 2019-08-26.

The Intel Arc B570’s average benchmark score of 20556 similarly sits close to its rivals: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile scores 20534 (0.1% behind), the Intel Arc A750 scores 20582 (0.1% ahead), the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M scores 20480 (0.4% behind), and the AMD Radeon R9 M390X scores 20662 (0.5% ahead). The Arc B570’s position among these rivals indicates mid-range performance, but in Control specifically, the measured FPS reveals the card’s limits at higher resolutions.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B570 carries 10 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus, yielding 380.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base and boost clocks are both 2500 MHz, with memory running at 2375 MHz (19 Gbps effective). The card’s architecture is Xe2-HPG on the BMG-G21 chip, built on TSMC’s 5 nm process with 19,600 million transistors on a 272 mm² die.

The 10 GB VRAM capacity is sufficient for Control at the tested settings, as the game’s texture requirements at 1080p and 1440p are well within this limit. However, the 160-bit memory bus and 380.0 GB/s bandwidth become more relevant at 4K, where the card’s 32 FPS average at High settings suggests memory bandwidth or fill rate constraints. The card’s 80 ROPs deliver a pixel rate of 200.0 GPixel/s, and its 144 TMUs provide a texture rate of 360.0 GTexel/s. The FP32 throughput of 11.52 TFLOPS is modest by modern standards, and Control’s reliance on compute-heavy effects like debris physics and time manipulation appears to strain the GPU.

The Arc B570’s 18 ray tracing cores are present, but Control’s implementation of RT reflections and shadows is demanding; the data does not include separate RT benchmarks, so the measured results presumably run without RT enabled. The card’s DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) aligns with Control’s DX12 renderer, but the measured FPS indicates that even without RT, the GPU struggles at higher resolutions.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K shows a clear pattern of GPU limitation. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 101 at 1920x1080 to 76 at 2560x1440 (a 24.8% reduction) and then to 51 at 3840x2160 (a 32.9% reduction from 1440p). The total drop from 1080p to 4K at Low is 49.5%, from 101 to 51 FPS.

At High settings, the scaling is steeper in percentage terms: 63 FPS at 1080p drops to 48 FPS at 1440p (a 23.8% reduction) and then to 32 FPS at 4K (a 33.3% reduction from 1440p). The total drop from 1080p to 4K at High is 49.2%, from 63 to 32 FPS.

This consistent ~50% reduction from 1080p to 4K across both Low and High settings indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS penalty from increasing resolution would be smaller, as the CPU workload stays roughly constant. The fact that even at Low settings the 4K average is only 51 FPS confirms the Arc B570 cannot maintain high frame rates at 4K in Control, regardless of how light the settings are.

The Medium settings row provides additional detail: at 1080p, the average is 71 FPS with a minimum of 61 and maximum of 82. At 1440p, the average drops to 54 FPS with a minimum of 46 and maximum of 62. At 4K, the average falls to 36 FPS with a minimum of 31 and maximum of 42. The min-to-max spread widens slightly at lower resolutions, suggesting more frame time variance when the GPU has headroom.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full settings range is available. Low delivers 101 FPS average, Medium delivers 71 FPS (min 61, max 82), High delivers 63 FPS, and Ultra delivers 55 FPS. The jump from Low to Medium costs 30 FPS (a 29.7% reduction), while Medium to High costs 8 FPS (an 11.3% reduction), and High to Ultra costs another 8 FPS (a 12.7% reduction). The diminishing returns suggest the Medium preset captures most of the visual fidelity without the steep performance penalty of Low.

At 2560x1440, the results are: Low at 76 FPS, Medium at 54 FPS (min 46, max 62), High at 48 FPS, and Ultra at 42 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 22 FPS (a 28.9% reduction), while Medium to High costs 6 FPS (an 11.1% reduction), and High to Ultra costs another 6 FPS (a 12.5% reduction). The pattern mirrors 1080p, with the Medium preset offering a balanced trade-off.

At 3840x2160, the numbers compress: Low at 51 FPS, Medium at 36 FPS (min 31, max 42), High at 32 FPS, and Ultra at 28 FPS. The Low-to-Medium drop is 15 FPS (a 29.4% reduction), Medium-to-High costs 4 FPS (an 11.1% reduction), and High-to-Ultra costs 4 FPS (a 12.5% reduction). At 4K, even Low settings barely reach 60 FPS, and Ultra dips below 30 FPS, making the highest preset effectively unplayable.

The data shows a consistent pattern: the relative cost of each settings tier remains roughly constant across resolutions, reinforcing that the GPU’s raw throughput, not memory or CPU, dictates performance. The 1080p Medium result of 71 FPS is the best balance of frame rate and visual quality in the entire measured set.

Settings Recommendations

For 1920x1080 displays, the Medium preset at 71 FPS (min 61, max 82) is the clear recommendation. It provides a 12.7% higher average than High’s 63 FPS while still looking substantially better than Low’s 101 FPS. The minimum of 61 FPS means the experience stays above 60 FPS in the worst case, which is important for action sequences. Ultra at 55 FPS is playable but the 16 FPS difference from Medium is significant, and the visual uplift from Medium to Ultra is unlikely to justify a 22.5% frame rate penalty.

At 2560x1440, Medium at 54 FPS (min 46, max 62) is the most sensible choice for a 60 Hz display, though it will occasionally dip below 50 FPS. High at 48 FPS is acceptable for slower exploration but may feel stuttery during combat. Low at 76 FPS is the only preset that comfortably exceeds 60 FPS at 1440p, so users prioritizing smoothness over visuals should choose Low.

For 3840x2160, the options are constrained. Low at 51 FPS is the only preset that approaches playability, and it still falls short of 60 FPS. Medium at 36 FPS (min 31, max 42) is borderline, with the 31 FPS minimum indicating noticeable hitches during intense scenes. High at 32 FPS and Ultra at 28 FPS are both below the threshold for comfortable play. Users with 4K displays should either accept Low settings or consider lowering the resolution to 1440p.

The overall best experience in the measured data is 1080p Medium, which delivers 71 FPS average with a 61 FPS minimum. This combination provides smooth gameplay while retaining the Medium preset’s improved textures and effects over Low.

FAQ

Q: What is the best settings preset for this combo at 1080p?

A: The Medium preset at 1920x1080 delivers 71 FPS average with a minimum of 61 FPS and maximum of 82 FPS. This is the only settings level at any resolution where the average exceeds 70 FPS while the minimum stays above 60 FPS.

*Q: Can this combo run Control at 4K?*

A: At 3840x2160, the Low preset achieves 51 FPS average, which is playable but below 60 FPS. Medium drops to 36 FPS (min 31, max 42), High to 32 FPS, and Ultra to 28 FPS. Only Low is recommended for 4K, and even then, the frame rate is not ideal for fast-paced combat.

Q: How much performance is lost going from 1080p to 4K?

A: At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 101 at 1920x1080 to 51 at 3840x2160, a 49.5% reduction. At High settings, it drops from 63 to 32 FPS, a 49.2% reduction. The consistent ~50% loss indicates the GPU is the limiting component.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this game?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the bottleneck. The FPS scales consistently with resolution changes, and the CPU’s average benchmark score of 21771 places it within 0.6% of its nearest rivals, while the GPU’s average of 20556 is similarly close to its own rivals. The CPU’s 75th percentile ranking versus the GPU’s 65th percentile suggests the graphics card limits performance.

Q: What is the worst-performing preset in the measured data?

A: The 3840x2160 Ultra preset delivers the lowest average FPS at 28 FPS. This is the only measured configuration where the average drops below 30 FPS, making it effectively unplayable for most users.

Q: How does the Arc B570 compare to the Arc A750 in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Arc B570’s average benchmark score is 20556, while the Arc A750 scores 20582, a difference of 0.1% in favor of the A750. This places the two Intel cards in the same performance tier, with the B570 being virtually identical in overall compute performance.