Control

Control pairs the AMD Ryzen 7 5700 with the Intel Arc B370, and the measured frame rates in this Action Adventure title place the combo at rank 2657 out of 2888 tested configurations. The data reveals a system that is heavily constrained by its graphics component, with the CPU offering substantial headroom that the GPU cannot utilize at higher resolutions. The Intel Arc B370, with its System Shared memory and modest specifications, produces playable results only at the lowest settings, while the Ryzen 7 5700’s eight-core, sixteen-thread design demonstrates the kind of processing power that would normally support far higher frame rates.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the only setting that delivers a consistently playable experience is Low, particularly at 1920x1080. At this resolution and preset, the average frame rate reaches 59 FPS, which is just shy of the 60 FPS target that many players consider the baseline for smooth action gameplay. The next closest option is Medium at 1920x1080, which produces an average of 42 FPS, a significant drop of 17 frames per second. While this is still technically playable, the 42 FPS average suggests that intense combat sequences with particle effects and physics interactions could cause noticeable stuttering, especially given that the minimum measured FPS at this setting is 36.

Moving up to High at 1920x1080 yields 37 FPS average, and Ultra drops further to 32 FPS. The pattern across all resolutions is consistent: Low provides roughly a 40-50% improvement over Medium, while the gap between High and Ultra is smaller, typically around 5 FPS. This suggests that the game’s higher presets introduce graphical features that disproportionately tax the Intel Arc B370’s limited resources. For the best experience per the measured data, Low at 1080p is the clear recommendation, as it is the only configuration that approaches a fluid frame rate. At 2560x1440, Low drops to 45 FPS average, which is borderline, while 4K Low falls to 30 FPS, which is only suitable for slower-paced exploration or screenshot purposes.

The data implies that players should prioritize resolution over graphical fidelity. Dropping from 1080p Medium to 1080p Low provides a 17 FPS gain, whereas dropping from 1080p Medium to 1440p Low provides a 13 FPS gain. The former is the better trade-off, as it maintains a higher minimum frame rate. For those who insist on Medium settings, the minimum FPS of 36 at 1080p indicates that the experience will be playable but far from ideal, and any attempt to enable High or Ultra should be avoided given the sub-40 FPS averages.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for this system?

A: The data shows that Low settings at 1920x1080 produce the highest average frame rate of 59 FPS. This is the only measured configuration that approaches a standard 60 FPS target. All other settings and resolutions yield averages below 45 FPS, with 4K Ultra falling to just 17 FPS.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370 perform relative to its nearest rivals in this game?

A: The GPU’s average 3DMark Steel Nomad score is 1184, placing it just below the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (score 1186, delta -0.2%) and the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (score 1190, delta -0.5%). It is slightly ahead of the AMD FirePro M2000 (score 1168, delta 1.4%). This indicates the B370 is in the entry-level performance tier, which aligns with its measured FPS results.

Q: Can this system run Control at 4K?

A: Technically yes, but the frame rates are marginal. The highest 4K average is 30 FPS at Low settings, which is playable but not smooth. Medium averages 21 FPS, High averages 19 FPS, and Ultra averages 17 FPS. The minimum FPS at 4K Medium is 18, suggesting that even the Low setting would likely dip below 30 FPS during demanding scenes.

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 7 5700 holding back performance in this game?

A: No. The CPU’s benchmark scores are strong, including a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 20655 and a single-core score of 2916. The GPU’s percentile ranking is only 5, while the CPU ranks in the 78th percentile. This massive gap indicates the GPU is the limiting factor, not the processor.

Q: What is the difference between 1080p Low and 1440p Low in terms of frame rate?

A: Dropping from 1080p Low to 1440p Low reduces the average frame rate from 59 FPS to 45 FPS, a 14 FPS decrease. This is a smaller loss than the 17 FPS drop seen when moving from 1080p Low to 1080p Medium, which suggests that resolution scaling is less punishing than increasing graphical presets for this specific GPU.

Q: How does the CPU’s multi-threaded performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Ryzen 7 5700 has an average benchmark score of 25517. Its closest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 6600H, scores 25550 (delta -0.1%), while the Intel Xeon D-2752TER scores 25530 (delta -0.1%). The data shows the Ryzen 7 5700 is effectively tied with these processors, with a negligible 0.3% difference from the AMD Ryzen 7 5825U.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is the primary bottleneck in this configuration. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1184 places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, which is exceptionally low and explains the measured frame rates. The GPU’s specifications are unusual for a desktop part: it uses System Shared memory, meaning it relies on the system’s DDR4 RAM rather than dedicated VRAM. This architecture likely contributes to the performance collapse at higher resolutions and settings, as memory bandwidth becomes a limiting factor.

The GPU’s base clock is 300 MHz with a boost clock of 2400 MHz. While the boost clock is respectable, the low base clock and the 25 W TDP suggest that sustained workloads will cause the card to throttle or operate below its maximum potential. With 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster output units, the B370 is designed for light loads, not demanding action games. The 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 performance is a theoretical peak, but the System Shared memory and "System Dependent" bandwidth mean that real-world performance will vary based on the CPU’s memory configuration.

The data across all measured FPS rows shows a clear pattern: as resolution increases, frame rates drop disproportionately. At 1080p Low, the average is 59 FPS. At 1440p Low, it is 45 FPS (a 24% drop). At 4K Low, it is 30 FPS (a 33% further drop). This non-linear scaling is characteristic of a GPU that is running out of memory bandwidth or fill rate. The RT cores (10) and DirectX 12 Ultimate support are present, but the GPU lacks the raw processing power to make use of these features at playable frame rates. The data does not include any ray tracing measurements, but given that this GPU ranks in the 5th percentile, enabling such features would likely render the game unplayable.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full range of presets was tested. Low produced an average of 59 FPS, which is the only result above 50 FPS in the entire dataset. Medium averaged 42 FPS with a minimum of 36 and a maximum of 48. High averaged 37 FPS, and Ultra averaged 32 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a steady degradation, with each step costing roughly 5-17 FPS. The most substantial drop is from Low to Medium (17 FPS), while the smallest is from High to Ultra (5 FPS).

At 2560x1440, the averages are 45 FPS for Low, 32 FPS for Medium (min 27, max 37), 28 FPS for High, and 25 FPS for Ultra. The relative gaps between presets are similar to 1080p, but the absolute values are lower across the board. The jump from Low to Medium costs 13 FPS, while High to Ultra costs only 3 FPS. This suggests that the Ultra preset at 1440p is adding features that the GPU can barely process, resulting in diminishing returns.

At 3840x2160, the results are marginal. Low averages 30 FPS, Medium averages 21 FPS (min 18, max 25), High averages 19 FPS, and Ultra averages 17 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 9 FPS, while High and Ultra are nearly identical, differing by only 2 FPS. The minimum FPS of 18 at Medium indicates that the game will frequently stutter below 20 FPS, making 4K only viable for static scenes or slow exploration. The data shows that the GPU’s performance collapses at 4K, with even the lowest preset barely maintaining a playable average.

Resolution Scaling

The measured data reveals how frame rates scale with resolution. Moving from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings drops the average from 59 FPS to 45 FPS, a 24% reduction. Moving from 1440p to 4K at Low drops the average from 45 FPS to 30 FPS, a 33% reduction. This accelerating decline indicates that the GPU is increasingly the limiting factor as pixel count rises. The scaling is not linear, which would be expected if the CPU were the bottleneck.

At Medium settings, the pattern is similar: 42 FPS at 1080p, 32 FPS at 1440p (a 24% drop), and 21 FPS at 4K (a 34% drop). The consistency of these percentages across settings suggests that resolution scaling is independent of the preset chosen, reinforcing that the GPU is the primary constraint. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect the frame rate to remain relatively constant as resolution increases, since the CPU work per frame does not change with pixel count.

The data implies that the Ryzen 7 5700 is far from being the bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the CPU is likely capable of generating many more frames than the GPU can render, which is why the average is only 59 FPS. At 4K, the GPU workload increases fourfold compared to 1080p, and the frame rate drops by roughly half, from 59 to 30 FPS. This is consistent with a GPU-bound scenario where the CPU has ample headroom. The resolution scaling data strongly suggests that upgrading the GPU would provide a significant frame rate boost at all resolutions, while upgrading the CPU would yield little to no improvement for this game.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700 is a Zen 3 (Cezanne) processor with 8 cores and 16 threads, base clock of 3.70 GHz, and boost clock of 4.60 GHz. Its benchmark scores are robust: Cinebench R23 multi-core of 20655 and single-core of 2916, Geekbench multi-core of 9959 and single-core of 1907. The CPU’s 78th percentile ranking among all processors indicates it is a capable mid-range part, far above the GPU’s 5th percentile ranking.

In this game, the CPU’s role appears to be secondary. The measured FPS at 1080p Low is 59, which is likely close to the CPU’s maximum frame rate for this game, but the GPU cannot push beyond that. The single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core of 2916) is sufficient for the game’s logic and physics, as evidenced by the fact that frame rates do not improve when lowering resolution. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would see similar frame rates across different resolutions, but the data shows a clear decline from 59 FPS at 1080p to 30 FPS at 4K.

The CPU’s 8 cores and 16 threads provide ample multi-threading capability, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 20655. This is relevant for background tasks and streaming, but for Control specifically, the game likely relies more on single-thread performance. The CPU’s 3DMark scores show a scaling from 1762 (2 threads) to 6617 (max threads), indicating good multi-thread scaling. However, the data suggests that the GPU is so weak that the CPU’s capabilities are largely wasted in this configuration. The nearest CPU rivals, such as the AMD Ryzen 5 6600H (avg score 25550), perform nearly identically, with all deltas within 0.3%, confirming that the Ryzen 7 5700 is not a performance outlier in either direction.

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700 + Intel Arc B370 combination ranks 2657 out of 2888 tested combos in Control, placing it in the bottom 8% of all configurations. This ranking is driven entirely by the GPU, as the CPU’s percentile rank (78) is vastly higher than the GPU’s (5). The combo’s ranking suggests that this pairing is severely imbalanced, with the processor capable of supporting a much more powerful graphics card.

The GPU’s nearest rivals in the benchmark database, the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 and ATI Radeon HD 5770, are both over a decade old, yet they score nearly identically to the Arc B370 in synthetic benchmarks. This reinforces the notion that the B370 is an entry-level part, not suited for demanding titles like Control at higher settings. The combo’s rank implies that 99.9% of other tested configurations would deliver better performance, which is consistent with the sub-60 FPS averages at all settings except 1080p Low.

The data indicates that this combo is only suitable for older or less demanding games, or for playing Control at the lowest possible settings. The rank of 2657 out of 2888 is a clear signal that users should not expect a smooth experience at 1440p or 4K. The CPU’s excellent performance relative to its rivals (all within 0.3% of the AMD Ryzen 5 6600H) suggests that any future GPU upgrade would unlock the system’s true potential, as the processor would not become the limiting factor until frame rates reach much higher levels. For now, the measured data shows that this combo is firmly in the entry-level tier, suitable for 1080p Low gaming at best.