Control

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F and Intel Arc B390 pairing presents a striking study in bottleneck dynamics within Control. The processor is a high-end desktop part, sitting in the 94th percentile of all CPUs, while the graphics solution is an integrated-class component that ranks in the 9th percentile of all GPUs. This massive disparity defines every measurable frame rate in this dataset, where the GPU is consistently the limiting factor.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drops from 1080p to 4K are dramatic, revealing a system almost entirely constrained by the graphics processor. At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 41 FPS at 1920x1080 to 31 FPS at 2560x1440, then plummets to 21 FPS at 3840x2160. This represents a 24% reduction from 1080p to 1440p and a further 32% reduction from 1440p to 4K. When moving from 1080p to 4K at High settings, the performance loss is 49%, which is a steep curve that points directly at the GPU struggling to fill pixels.

The pattern holds across all quality presets. At Low settings, the averages are 65 FPS at 1080p, 50 FPS at 1440p, and 33 FPS at 4K. The scaling here shows a 23% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 34% drop from 1440p to 4K. At Ultra, the numbers are 36, 27, and 18 FPS respectively, with percentage losses of 25% and 33% at each step. The consistency of these percentage drops across all settings strongly suggests that the limiting component is resolution-dependent rather than settings-dependent. A CPU-bound scenario would show much flatter FPS lines as resolution increases, since the processor workload stays roughly constant while pixel count rises.

The data implies that the integrated graphics unit is running out of shading and texture throughput as pixel counts increase. The 4K results, all of which are below 35 FPS even at Low, indicate that the 60.00 GPixel/s pixel rate and 120.0 GTexel/s texture rate are simply insufficient for 8.3 million pixels at any quality level. Interestingly, the gap between Low and High settings at 4K is only 12 FPS (33 vs 21), whereas at 1080p the gap is 24 FPS (65 vs 41). This narrowing gap at higher resolutions further confirms that raw pixel throughput, not shader complexity, is the primary limiter.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is built on the Xe3-LPG architecture with a Panther Lake chip. Its boost clock reaches 2500 MHz, but the base clock sits at 300 MHz, which is an unusually wide range. The memory configuration is listed as "System Shared" with "System Dependent" bandwidth, meaning the graphics unit relies on the CPU's DDR5 memory bus rather than dedicated VRAM. The Ryzen 7 9700F provides dual-channel DDR5 with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth, but that bandwidth is shared between CPU and GPU tasks, creating potential contention.

The GPU has 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. These are modest numbers for a modern graphics part, explaining the low 7.680 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482 places this GPU in the 9th percentile, with nearest rivals being the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463, 1.3% slower) and the GeForce GT 710 (1443, 2.7% slower). These are ancient entry-level discrete GPUs, which contextualizes the performance level. The Arc B390 is essentially competing with hardware from over a decade ago.

The 12 RT cores are present but likely underutilized in Control, which is known for heavy ray tracing effects. However, the benchmark data does not include RT-specific measurements, so the impact cannot be quantified here. The FP16 throughput of 15.36 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) suggests that some compute-heavy effects could run at half precision, but the average FPS numbers indicate this is not enough to save playability at higher resolutions. The 80 W TDP and IGP slot width confirm this is not a discrete card, and the "Portable Device Dependent" display outputs suggest it may be tested in a laptop or mini-PC configuration.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F is a Zen 5 part on the Granite Ridge codename, fabricated on a 4 nm TSMC process. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. The 65 W TDP is remarkably low for such a high-clocked desktop processor, pointing to excellent power efficiency. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 32 MB shared L3. This substantial cache configuration helps feed the 16 threads with data for compute-intensive tasks.

Benchmark results show a Passmark multi-thread score of 36470 and a single-thread score of 4691. The processor sits in the 94th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 69996. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX (69875, 0.2% slower), the Intel Core i7-14700KF (70163, 0.2% faster), and the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X (69515, 0.7% slower). This places the 9700F in the upper echelon of desktop processors, with performance essentially matching the previous generation's flagship models.

In Control, the CPU's role is almost certainly underutilized. The game is not known for being particularly CPU-intensive, and with the GPU delivering such low frame rates, the processor is likely idling waiting for graphics work. The Passmark physics score of 2122 and integer math score of 120788 show strong computational capability, but these are irrelevant when the GPU cannot render frames fast enough to feed the display. The data suggests that swapping the Arc B390 for a discrete GPU would unlock the full potential of the 9700F, but such a change is outside the scope of this measured dataset.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank for this pairing in Control is 2551 out of 2888 tested combinations. This places it in the bottom 12% of all tested systems, which aligns with the GPU's low percentile ranking. The CPU's high percentile (94th) does not compensate for the GPU's low percentile (9th) in gaming workloads, where the graphics card typically dominates performance. This is a classic case where the weakest link determines the outcome.

The rank of 2551 means there are 2550 other CPU-GPU combinations that deliver higher average FPS in Control across the tested resolutions and settings. Given that the GPU rivals include the GT 710 and GT 520MX, this ranking is expected. The fact that the combo ranks better than 337 other combinations (2888 minus 2551) suggests that the CPU is at least preventing the system from falling to the absolute bottom, likely by handling game logic and draw calls without becoming a bottleneck. But the overall picture is one of severe GPU limitation.

Comparing to the nearest CPU rivals, the 9700F's performance is essentially equivalent to the Ryzen 9 7950X and Core i7-14700KF in synthetic benchmarks. If those CPUs were paired with a stronger GPU, the combo would rank much higher. This dataset isolates the GPU as the sole cause of the low rank. The data implies that the 9700F is "wasted" in this configuration for gaming purposes, as it could drive a much more powerful graphics card without becoming a limiting factor.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured FPS rows, the only playable configuration is at 1920x1080 with Low settings, which delivers an average of 65 FPS. This is the only row that comfortably exceeds the 60 FPS threshold typically considered smooth for action-adventure games. The next best options are 1920x1080 at Medium (46 FPS) and 1440p at Low (50 FPS), both of which are playable but with compromises in visual quality or resolution.

For players who prioritize smoothness over visuals, 1080p Low is the clear choice. The 65 FPS average provides headroom for frame time spikes, which are common in Control's physics-heavy combat sequences. If the user prefers higher visual fidelity, 1080p Medium at 46 FPS is a reasonable trade-off, offering some texture and lighting improvements while remaining above 40 FPS. The Medium preset at 1080p has a recorded minimum of 40 FPS and maximum of 53 FPS, indicating a fairly stable experience.

The 1440p Low setting at 50 FPS is viable for users with 1440p displays who accept lowered settings. However, 4K is not recommended under any preset, as even Low settings only reach 33 FPS, and Ultra drops to 18 FPS. The High and Ultra presets at 1080p (41 and 36 FPS) are marginal, offering better shadows and reflections but risking drops below 30 FPS during intense scenes. The data suggests that the GPU's 24 ROPs and 48 TMUs are the limiting factors for higher presets, as they directly impact fill rate and texture filtering.

FAQ

*Q: Is this system capable of playing Control at 4K?*

A: No. The highest average FPS at 3840x2160 is 33 FPS on Low settings, with High at 21 FPS, Medium at 24 FPS, and Ultra at 18 FPS. None of these reach a consistently playable 30 FPS threshold, and the minimum FPS for Medium is 20 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU compare to similar processors?

A: The Ryzen 7 9700F scores 69996 on average, which is 0.2% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX (69875) and 0.2% lower than the Intel Core i7-14700KF (70163). It also beats the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X (69515) by 0.7%.

Q: What GPU performance tier does the Arc B390 belong to?

A: The 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1482 places it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463, 1.3% slower) and the GeForce GT 625 OEM (1446, 2.5% slower).

Q: Which resolution and settings combo yields the highest FPS?

A: The best result is 1920x1080 at Low settings, producing an average of 65 FPS. This is 15 FPS higher than the next best result of 50 FPS at 2560x1440 Low.

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

A: The GPU is the bottleneck. The CPU ranks in the 94th percentile of all processors, while the GPU ranks in the 9th percentile. The FPS scaling with resolution, showing consistent 23-34% drops from 1080p to 4K, confirms the graphics unit is the limiting component.

Q: How stable are the frame rates at Medium settings?

A: At Medium settings, the measured minimum and maximum FPS are: 40-53 at 1080p, 30-40 at 1440p, and 20-27 at 4K. The 1080p Medium range is the most stable, with a 13 FPS spread.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete dataset for Control with the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F and Intel Arc B390 is as follows:

At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 65 FPS. The Medium preset averages 46 FPS, with a minimum of 40 FPS and a maximum of 53 FPS. High settings average 41 FPS. The Ultra preset averages 36 FPS. This resolution is the only one where any preset exceeds 60 FPS.

At 2560x1440, Low settings average 50 FPS. Medium settings average 35 FPS, with a minimum of 30 FPS and a maximum of 40 FPS. High settings average 31 FPS. Ultra settings average 27 FPS. The 1440p results show a 15 FPS gap between Low and Ultra, which is narrower than the 29 FPS gap seen at 1080p.

At 3840x2160, Low settings average 33 FPS. Medium settings average 24 FPS, with a minimum of 20 FPS and a maximum of 27 FPS. High settings average 21 FPS. Ultra settings average 18 FPS. The 4K results are all below 35 FPS, with the Ultra preset falling to 18 FPS, which is barely above a slideshow.

Across all resolutions, the Low preset consistently offers the highest FPS, followed by Medium, High, and Ultra in descending order. The performance deltas between presets shrink as resolution increases: at 1080p, Low beats Ultra by 29 FPS; at 1440p, the gap is 23 FPS; at 4K, the gap is just 15 FPS. This pattern reinforces that the GPU is pixel-bound at higher resolutions, making preset choices less impactful than resolution changes.