Control

FAQ

Q: What is the overall performance ranking of this AMD Ryzen 7 5700 + Intel Arc B390 combo in Control?

A: The combo ranks 2551 out of 2888 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom percentile of systems for this game. This indicates a generally weak performance profile relative to the broader test pool.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B390 compare to its nearest GPU rivals in raw benchmark scores?

A: The Arc B390 scores 1482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, which is only 1.3% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463), 1.5% higher than the GeForce 800M (1460), and 2.5-2.7% higher than the GeForce GT 625 OEM (1446) and GT 710 (1443). This places it in a very low performance bracket.

Q: What is the CPU's multi-threaded performance relative to its closest rivals?

A: The Ryzen 7 5700's average benchmark score is 25,517, which is essentially tied with its nearest rivals: it is 0.1% slower than the Intel Xeon D-2752TER (25,530) and AMD Ryzen 5 6600H (25,550), and 0.1-0.3% faster than the AMD Ryzen 5 7640U (25,485) and Ryzen 7 5825U (25,446).

Q: Does the GPU use dedicated VRAM?

A: No. The Intel Arc B390 has "System Shared" memory, meaning it draws from the system's main RAM rather than having its own dedicated video memory. Its memory bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent."

Q: What is the best measured average FPS across all tested configurations?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 65, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only configuration that reaches a smooth 60+ FPS threshold in the measured data.

Q: How much does the CPU's multi-core score exceed its single-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The Ryzen 7 5700 scores 20,655 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2,916 in single-core, representing a roughly 7x improvement in multi-threaded workloads, consistent with its 8-core/16-thread design.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is the primary bottleneck in this system, and the data makes this clear. With a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of just 1,482, the GPU sits at the 9th percentile of all GPUs, meaning 91% of tested graphics cards perform better. Its nearest rivals are ancient low-end parts like the GeForce GT 710 and GT 520MX, which is telling.

The GPU's architecture is Xe3-LPG on a 3 nm Intel process, with 1,536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. It has 12 RT cores, though ray tracing performance is not separately benchmarked here. The boost clock is 2,500 MHz, but the base clock is only 300 MHz — this wide gap suggests aggressive power management, which is consistent with its 80 W TDP and IGP (integrated graphics processor) form factor.

Critically, the Arc B390 uses "System Shared" memory. This means there is no dedicated VRAM; the GPU relies on the system's main memory, with bandwidth described as "System Dependent." In a game like Control, which features complex physics and detailed textures, this shared memory arrangement likely causes significant performance penalties. The lack of dedicated VRAM means texture streaming and frame buffer operations compete with CPU memory accesses, which can explain why even modest resolution increases cause sharp FPS drops.

The pixel rate is 60.00 GPixel/s and texture rate is 120.0 GTexel/s, while FP32 compute is 7.680 TFLOPS. These are modest numbers for a modern GPU, and the benchmark results reflect this. At 4K Ultra, the combo manages only 18 FPS average; at 1080p Low, it reaches 65 FPS. The GPU's performance ceiling is clearly low, and the shared memory architecture compounds the issue.

Resolution Scaling

The resolution scaling behavior reveals a system heavily constrained by the GPU. Moving from 1080p to 4K at High settings, average FPS drops from 41 to 21 — a 49% reduction. At Low settings, the drop is from 65 to 33 FPS, a 49% reduction as well. This consistent halving suggests the GPU is the limiting factor across all settings.

At Medium settings, the numbers are 46 FPS at 1080p, 35 FPS at 1440p, and 24 FPS at 4K. This represents a 24% drop from 1080p to 1440p, then a 31% drop from 1440p to 4K. The scaling is not perfectly linear, which indicates that at higher resolutions, the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth constraints become more pronounced.

The fact that 1440p High (31 FPS) is only slightly better than 1080p Ultra (36 FPS) suggests that both resolution and settings have similar impacts on performance. This is characteristic of a GPU that is already near its limit at 1080p. The CPU, with its 8 cores and 16 threads, is likely not the primary constraint here — if it were, we would expect less dramatic FPS drops as resolution increases.

The 4K performance is particularly weak. At 4K Ultra, the system averages 18 FPS, which is effectively unplayable. Even at 4K Low, it only reaches 33 FPS. The data implies that 4K gaming is not a realistic use case for this combo, and even 1440p requires significant settings compromises to approach playability.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 2551 out of 2888 tested combinations in Control. This places it in the bottom 12% of all tested systems, which is consistent with the GPU's 9th percentile ranking. The CPU, by contrast, ranks at the 78th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 25,517.

This disparity between CPU and GPU performance is notable. The Ryzen 7 5700 is a capable mid-range processor, but it is paired with a GPU that performs on par with decade-old entry-level cards. The result is a system where the GPU is almost certainly the limiting factor in every measured scenario.

The nearest CPU rivals — the Intel Xeon D-2752TER, AMD Ryzen 5 7640U, AMD Ryzen 5 6600H, and AMD Ryzen 7 5825U — all have average scores within 0.3% of the Ryzen 7 5700. This indicates the CPU is well-matched to its peers in general compute tasks. However, in Control specifically, the combo's low rank suggests that the GPU's limitations dominate the gaming experience.

The gap between the 2551st rank and the top of the list is substantial. To put it in context, the system would need roughly double its current FPS at 1080p High to approach even mid-pack performance. The data does not support any scenario where this combo performs competitively.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700 is a Zen 3 (Cezanne) processor on a 7 nm TSMC process, with 8 cores and 16 threads. Its base clock is 3.70 GHz with a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, and it has a 65 W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 16 MB L3 shared. This is a solid mid-range CPU by modern standards.

Benchmark results confirm the CPU's capability. In Cinebench R23, it scores 20,655 multi-core and 2,916 single-core. In Geekbench, it scores 9,959 multi-core and 1,907 single-core. The PassMark multi-thread score is 24,303, with a single-thread score of 3,296. The 3DMark tests show scaling from 1,762 (2 threads) to 6,617 (max threads), indicating good multi-threading efficiency.

The CPU's percentile rank of 78th among all CPUs means it outperforms 78% of tested processors. Its nearest rivals are all within 0.3% in average score, confirming that it sits in a tightly competitive performance band. The CPU supports DDR4 memory with dual-channel configuration and 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, and it has 20 PCIe Gen 3 lanes.

In the context of Control, the CPU's 8 cores and 16 threads should be sufficient for the game's physics and AI workloads. However, the measured FPS data does not show any signs of CPU bottlenecking — the performance is consistently GPU-limited. For example, at 1080p Low, the system hits 65 FPS, but the CPU is likely capable of much higher frame rates if paired with a stronger GPU.

The CPU's single-thread performance, as indicated by the 2,916 Cinebench R23 single-core score, is also adequate for gaming. The data suggests that the CPU is not the weak link in this combo; it is the GPU that holds the system back.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured results are as follows: Low settings average 65 FPS, Medium averages 46 FPS (with a minimum of 40 and maximum of 53), High averages 41 FPS, and Ultra averages 36 FPS. The step from Low to Medium is a 19 FPS drop, which is the largest single-settings penalty at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the average FPS figures are: Low at 50, Medium at 35 (min 30, max 40), High at 31, and Ultra at 27. The gap between Low and Medium is 15 FPS, while the gap between Medium and High is 4 FPS, and between High and Ultra is also 4 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the results are: Low at 33, Medium at 24 (min 20, max 27), High at 21, and Ultra at 18. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 4K is a 15 FPS total drop, which is proportionally smaller than at lower resolutions, indicating that the GPU is already saturated.

The only configuration that exceeds 60 FPS is 1080p Low at 65 FPS. The next highest is 1440p Low at 50 FPS, followed by 1080p Medium at 46 FPS. No other configuration reaches 45 FPS. The minimum FPS data, available only for Medium settings, shows 40 FPS at 1080p, 30 FPS at 1440p, and 20 FPS at 4K — these minimums suggest occasional frame drops that could cause stutter.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the optimal experience is at 1920x1080 with Low settings, which delivers 65 FPS average. This is the only configuration that provides a smooth, consistently playable frame rate. If visual quality is prioritized over frame rate, 1080p Medium at 46 FPS is the next best option, though the 40 FPS minimum may cause noticeable dips.

At 1440p, Low settings at 50 FPS is the most playable option, but it still falls short of 60 FPS. The 30 FPS minimum at 1440p Medium suggests that this resolution is borderline for the GPU. For users who prefer higher resolutions, 1440p Low is the recommended compromise, as it offers a 50 FPS average while maintaining some visual fidelity.

At 4K, no configuration is truly playable. Even Low settings only reach 33 FPS, and Ultra drops to 18 FPS. The data strongly suggests avoiding 4K with this combo. If 4K is unavoidable, Low settings at 33 FPS is the best available option, but it will not provide a smooth experience.

The settings scaling shows diminishing returns at higher presets. Moving from Low to Medium at 1080p costs 19 FPS, while moving from High to Ultra only costs 5 FPS. This suggests that the Medium preset offers the best balance of visual quality and performance for users who want more than the bare minimum. However, for competitive or fast-paced gameplay, the Low preset is the only reliable choice. The data indicates that this system is best suited for 1080p gaming with modest settings, with 1440p possible only at Low, and 4K effectively out of reach.