Control

Control is a demanding action-adventure title that stresses both CPU and GPU, and the pairing of the AMD Ryzen 7 5700G with the Intel Arc B390 produces a very specific performance profile. The measured data reveals that this combo is heavily GPU-limited at nearly every resolution and settings combination, with the processor’s strong multi-threaded capabilities doing little to overcome the graphics card’s modest output. This analysis breaks down the resolution scaling, the combo’s ranking among tested systems, the CPU’s role, the exact FPS measurements, and practical settings guidance based solely on the provided benchmark results.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K in Control is steep and consistent, which points directly to the Intel Arc B390 as the limiting component. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 65 FPS at 1920x1080 to 50 FPS at 2560x1440, a 23% reduction, and then to 33 FPS at 3840x2160, a 49% reduction from the 1440p figure. This pattern—where each step up in resolution produces a substantial loss—is characteristic of a GPU that is saturated even at lower workloads. The Arc B390’s benchmark scores reinforce this: its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482 places it in the 9th percentile among all GPUs, and its nearest rivals are ancient parts like the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX and GeForce 800M. The graphics card simply does not have the pixel throughput to maintain high frame rates as pixel count increases.

At Medium settings, the scaling tells a similar story but with a slightly gentler slope. The average FPS goes from 46 at 1080p to 35 at 1440p (a 24% drop) and then to 24 at 4K (a 31% drop from 1440p). The minimum and maximum figures for Medium settings provide additional context: at 1080p, the frame time varies between 40 and 53 FPS, while at 1440p it ranges from 30 to 40 FPS, and at 4K it falls to 20–27 FPS. The shrinking range at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU is becoming more uniformly bottlenecked, leaving less headroom for variance. This is a classic sign of a component operating at its limits, where every additional pixel is a direct tax on performance.

High settings show the most dramatic scaling penalty. The average FPS drops from 41 at 1080p to 31 at 1440p (a 24% loss) and then to 21 at 4K (a 32% loss from 1440p). Ultra settings, which are the most demanding, produce averages of 36 FPS at 1080p, 27 FPS at 1440p, and 18 FPS at 4K. The gap between Low and Ultra at each resolution is notable: at 1080p, Low delivers 65 FPS while Ultra delivers 36 FPS, a 45% difference. At 4K, the same comparison shows 33 FPS versus 18 FPS, a 45% difference as well. This consistency across resolutions suggests that the settings are scaling the GPU load more or less uniformly, but the absolute numbers remain too low for smooth gameplay beyond 1080p.

What does this say about the limiting component? The CPU, an AMD Ryzen 7 5700G with 8 cores and 16 threads, is far more capable than the GPU. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12830.5 and single-core score of 1494, combined with an average benchmark score of 27051 that places it in the 79th percentile of all CPUs, indicate that it can handle the game’s logic and physics without being the primary constraint. The fact that FPS scales almost entirely with resolution and settings—rather than showing a plateau at lower resolutions where the CPU might become the bottleneck—confirms that the Arc B390 is the limiting factor in every measured configuration. Even at 1080p Low, the 65 FPS average is likely near the GPU’s ceiling for this title, not the CPU’s.

How This Combo Ranks

Among the 2888 tested CPU and GPU combinations for Control, this pairing of the Ryzen 7 5700G and the Intel Arc B390 ranks 2551st. That places it in the bottom 12% of all tested combos, which is a poor showing for a system with a processor that otherwise performs well in synthetic benchmarks. The rank reflects the GPU’s severe underperformance relative to the CPU, as the Arc B390’s 3DMark score of 1482 puts it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, while the CPU sits in the 79th percentile. This mismatch—a high-tier processor paired with a very low-tier graphics solution—creates a system that is fundamentally unbalanced for a game like Control, which relies heavily on GPU rendering.

The CPU’s nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks help contextualize its strength, but they do not change the combo’s ranking. The Ryzen 7 5700G has an average benchmark score of 27051, which is 0.2% below the Intel Core i9-9900K (score 27097), 0.4% above the AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 (score 26936), 0.4% below the Intel Core i5-14400T (score 27166), and 0.6% above the Intel Core i7-1370P (score 26900). These deltas are all within 1%, meaning the CPU is effectively on par with several strong desktop and mobile processors from recent generations. However, none of that matters in Control when the GPU is the bottleneck. The combo rank of 2551 reflects the real-world result: even a capable CPU cannot compensate for a GPU that scores in the single-digit percentile.

The GPU’s nearest rivals are even more telling. The Intel Arc B390’s 1482 average score is 1.3% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (score 1463), 1.5% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce 800M (score 1460), 2.5% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM (score 1446), and 2.7% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 (score 1443). These are all entry-level or legacy graphics solutions, confirming that the Arc B390 is positioned at the very bottom of the performance spectrum. In Control, this translates to sub-30 FPS averages at 4K across all settings, and only reaching playable territory at 1080p Low (65 FPS) or 1440p Low (50 FPS). The ranking data makes it clear that this combo is not designed for high-refresh or high-resolution gaming in this title.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700G is a Zen 3 part on the AMD Socket AM4 platform, built on a 7 nm process by TSMC with 10,700 million transistors on a 180 mm² die. It features 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a 16 MB L3 cache. Memory support is dual-channel DDR4 with a bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s, and the CPU offers Gen 3 PCIe with 16 lanes. It also includes integrated Radeon Vega 8 graphics, though the system under analysis uses the discrete Intel Arc B390. The processor’s TDP is 65 W, and it is unlocked for overclocking.

In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU shows strong multi-threaded performance. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 12830.5, while the single-core score is 1494. The Geekbench results are 9950 multi-core and 1894 single-core. The 3DMark tests show a progression from 899 single-thread to 6629 for 16 threads, with 1758 for 2 threads, 3389 for 4 threads, and 5648 for 8 threads. These numbers indicate that the CPU scales well with additional threads, which is typical of an 8-core, 16-thread design. The PassMark multi-thread score of 24419 and single-thread score of 3283 further confirm its capability.

For Control, a game that is not known for extreme CPU demands, the Ryzen 7 5700G is more than sufficient. The measured FPS data shows no evidence of CPU bottlenecking: at 1080p Low, the combo achieves 65 FPS, which is the highest average across all settings and resolutions. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect to see FPS plateau at a certain level regardless of resolution, but instead the FPS drops consistently as resolution increases. This indicates that the GPU, not the CPU, is setting the performance ceiling. The Arc B390’s base clock of 300 MHz and boost clock of 2500 MHz, combined with its 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster operation units, are simply inadequate for high-end gaming. The CPU’s role in this combo is to provide a solid foundation that is never fully utilized, as the GPU runs out of steam first.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data for Control with this CPU/GPU combo is comprehensive, covering three resolutions and four settings levels each. At 1920x1080, the average frame rates are 65 FPS on Low, 46 FPS on Medium, 41 FPS on High, and 36 FPS on Ultra. The Medium setting includes a minimum of 40 FPS and a maximum of 53 FPS, providing a range of 13 FPS. This is the only resolution where any setting achieves an average above 50 FPS, and it is only at Low settings. High and Ultra at 1080p are playable but not smooth, with averages below 45 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at this resolution is 29 FPS, which is significant but not as large as the gap at higher resolutions.

At 2560x1440, the averages drop to 50 FPS on Low, 35 FPS on Medium, 31 FPS on High, and 27 FPS on Ultra. The Medium setting shows a minimum of 30 FPS and a maximum of 40 FPS. Low settings at 1440p are the only configuration here that stays above 45 FPS, and it comes close to the 1080p High result of 41 FPS. The drop from 1080p Low to 1440p Low is 15 FPS, while the drop from 1080p Ultra to 1440p Ultra is 9 FPS. This suggests that at higher settings, the GPU is already so constrained that resolution increases have a proportionally smaller absolute impact, though the percentage losses remain similar.

At 3840x2160, the averages fall to 33 FPS on Low, 24 FPS on Medium, 21 FPS on High, and 18 FPS on Ultra. The Medium setting again provides the only min/max data, showing a range of 20 to 27 FPS. No setting at 4K achieves an average above 33 FPS, and Ultra drops to 18 FPS, which is barely a slideshow. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is 15 FPS, which is half the gap seen at 1080p. This compression of the settings range at 4K indicates that the GPU’s raw throughput is the dominant factor, and reducing settings cannot overcome the pixel count burden.

Comparing across all measured rows, the best performance is clearly at 1080p Low with 65 FPS, while the worst is at 4K Ultra with 18 FPS. The Medium settings at each resolution offer a middle ground: 46 FPS at 1080p, 35 FPS at 1440p, and 24 FPS at 4K. The data shows that for a consistent experience, users would need to drop resolution or settings aggressively. The 1440p Medium result of 35 FPS is roughly equivalent to the 1080p Ultra result of 36 FPS, meaning that resolution and settings trade-offs can be used to balance image quality and frame rate, but neither yields a high-refresh experience.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Control?

A: Based on the measured data, 1920x1080 is the only resolution where any settings preset achieves an average above 50 FPS. At 1080p Low, the average is 65 FPS, which is the highest of all measured configurations. Higher resolutions at 1440p and 4K fall below 50 FPS across all settings, making 1080p the clear choice for playable performance.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 5700G has an average benchmark score of 27051, which is 0.2% below the Intel Core i9-9900K (27097), 0.4% above the AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 (26936), 0.4% below the Intel Core i5-14400T (27166), and 0.6% above the Intel Core i7-1370P (26900). These deltas are all within 1%, indicating near-identical performance among these processors.

Q: Is the GPU the main bottleneck in this system?

A: Yes. The Intel Arc B390 has a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482, placing it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, GeForce 800M, GeForce GT 625 OEM, and GeForce GT 710, all of which are low-end parts. The FPS data shows consistent drops with resolution increases, which is a hallmark of GPU limitation.

Q: What are the FPS differences between Low and Ultra settings?

A: At 1080p, the average FPS goes from 65 on Low to 36 on Ultra, a 29 FPS difference. At 1440p, it goes from 50 to 27, a 23 FPS difference. At 4K, it goes from 33 to 18, a 15 FPS difference. The absolute gap shrinks at higher resolutions, but the percentage difference remains around 45% in all cases.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested systems for Control?

A: This pairing ranks 2551st out of 2888 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 12%. The CPU’s high percentile (79) and the GPU’s low percentile (9) create a large imbalance, which explains the poor overall ranking for this game.

Q: Are there any settings that provide a stable frame rate above 60 FPS?

A: No. The only measured configuration that exceeds 60 FPS is 1080p Low with an average of 65 FPS, but no minimum FPS data is provided for that setting. The next closest is 1080p Medium at 46 FPS, which has a minimum of 40 FPS and a maximum of 53 FPS, so it does not reach 60 FPS.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the user’s priority between frame rate and visual fidelity. For the smoothest experience, 1080p Low is the only configuration that averages 65 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold that many players consider acceptable for action games. However, Low settings may reduce visual quality significantly, and the lack of minimum FPS data for this setting means there is no guarantee of consistent frame pacing. If a stable 60 FPS is the goal, 1080p Low is the only option, but it carries the risk of dips below that mark without measured minimums to confirm.

For a balance between performance and image quality, 1080p Medium provides a 46 FPS average with a minimum of 40 FPS and a maximum of 53 FPS. This is a playable range for a slower-paced game like Control, though it may feel less responsive during combat. The 40 FPS minimum is not ideal but is above the 30 FPS threshold for playability. At 1440p, Medium drops to a 35 FPS average with a range of 30 to 40 FPS, which is borderline. The 30 FPS minimum could result in noticeable stutter in demanding scenes, so 1440p Medium is only recommended for users who prioritize resolution over smoothness.

High settings are difficult to recommend for this combo. At 1080p, High averages 41 FPS, which is only 5 FPS below Medium but offers better visual fidelity. At 1440p, High averages 31 FPS, and at 4K it drops to 21 FPS. These figures are below the 30 FPS minimum for smooth gameplay in many scenes, so High is best avoided unless the user is willing to accept a sub-30 FPS experience at higher resolutions. Ultra settings are the least viable, with averages of 36 FPS at 1080p, 27 FPS at 1440p, and 18 FPS at 4K. The 4K Ultra result of 18 FPS is effectively unplayable, and even 1080p Ultra fails to maintain a consistent 40 FPS.

The most practical recommendation is to play at 1080p with Medium settings, as it provides a 46 FPS average with a 40 FPS minimum, which is the highest minimum among all Medium configurations across resolutions. This allows for a reasonably smooth experience while retaining some visual enhancements over Low. For users who cannot tolerate frame rates below 60, 1080p Low is the only choice, but they should be aware that the minimum FPS is unmeasured and could fall below the average. Alternatively, 1440p Low at 50 FPS average offers a higher resolution with a modest frame rate penalty compared to 1080p Medium, making it a viable option for those who prefer sharper images over the minimum frame rate. Ultimately, the data shows that this combo is best suited for 1080p gaming, with Medium settings representing the sweet spot between performance and quality.