Control

The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D paired with the Intel Arc B390 presents a stark study in component imbalance within the 2019 action-adventure title Control. The data shows a processor with immense computational headroom paired with a graphics solution that severely constrains the overall experience. This analysis breaks down the measured frame rates, resolution scaling, and the specific roles each component plays in producing them.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D is a desktop-class processor built on the Zen 5 architecture, featuring 8 cores and 16 threads. It operates with a base clock of 4.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, backed by a substantial 96 MB of shared L3 cache. This configuration is designed for high-throughput and low-latency workloads, which is reflected in its synthetic benchmark scores: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23230 and a single-core score of 2080. In Geekbench, it scores 18696 multi-core and 2964 single-core.

Given these specifications, the CPU is unequivocally not the limiting factor in this pairing. The measured frame rates in Control are far below what this processor could theoretically support. Its nearest rivals in terms of average benchmark score—the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS (39603, +0.4%), the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 (40048, -0.7%), the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450 (39485, +0.7%), and the AMD Ryzen 7 7700 (40081, -0.8%)—all fall within a 1.5% band of the 9800X3D's average score of 39768. This indicates that even among top-tier CPUs, this chip is at the forefront of processing capability. The high thread count and clock speeds ensure that physics calculations, AI routines, and game logic in Control are handled with ease. The fact that frame rates drop dramatically when resolution and settings increase points directly to the GPU as the bottleneck, not the CPU. The processor's 87th percentile ranking among all CPUs reinforces its position as a high-end component that is being held back by its graphics counterpart.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Arc B390 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) based on the Xe3-LPG architecture and manufactured on Intel's 3 nm process. It features a boost clock of 2500 MHz and 1536 shading units, along with 48 TMUs and 24 ROPs. Critically, its memory configuration is "System Shared," meaning it relies on the system's main memory rather than dedicated VRAM. This is a fundamental limitation for a demanding game like Control, which relies heavily on graphics memory for textures and rendering buffers.

The GPU's performance profile is modest, to say the least. Its only benchmark score is a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result of 1482, placing it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are all legacy or low-end parts: the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463, +1.3%), the NVIDIA GeForce 800M (1460, +1.5%), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM (1446, +2.5%), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 (1443, +2.7%). This places the Arc B390 in a performance tier that is fundamentally unsuited for high-fidelity gaming at modern resolutions. The 7.680 TFLOPS of FP32 compute is the theoretical peak, but the system-shared memory and 80 W TDP indicate a part designed for efficiency and basic graphical output, not for rendering complex scenes with advanced effects. The data suggests that the GPU's fillrate (60.00 GPixel/s) and texture rate (120.0 GTexel/s) are insufficient to maintain playable frame rates at higher settings, leading to the low FPS figures observed in the measured results.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

In the specific context of Control, this hardware combination ranks 2551 out of 2888 tested combos. This places it in the bottom 12% of all system configurations tested for this game. The ranking is a direct consequence of the GPU's limitations, which drag down the overall gaming performance despite the CPU's high standing.

This low rank is expected given the GPU's 9th percentile standing. The combination of a top-tier 8-core/16-thread CPU with a GPU that competes with parts like the GT 710 creates a massive mismatch. The combo rank is essentially determined by the weakest link, and the data indicates that the Arc B390 is a severe bottleneck. While the CPU is in the 87th percentile of all CPUs, its performance advantages are largely irrelevant when the GPU is unable to render frames at a competitive rate. The 2888 total combos tested suggest a broad database of systems, and ranking 2551 means the vast majority of other hardware pairings, even those with older or less capable CPUs, likely outperform this specific setup in Control due to having a more capable graphics solution. The benchmark results indicate that this is a case where a high-end processor is completely neutralized by an entry-level graphics component.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of performance limitations. At 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the frame rates are only marginally playable at the lowest settings. The average FPS ranges from 65 at Low settings to 36 at Ultra. The Medium setting yields an average of 46 FPS, with a min of 40 and a max of 53. At High settings, the average drops to 41 FPS.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance degrades further. The average FPS at Low settings is 50, which is playable but not smooth. At Medium, the average falls to 35 FPS, with a min of 30 and a max of 40. High settings produce an average of 31 FPS, while Ultra settings drop to an average of 27 FPS.

At 3840x2160 (4K), the experience becomes largely unplayable. The average FPS at Low settings is 33. At Medium, it drops to 24 FPS, with a min of 20 and a max of 27. High settings average 21 FPS, and Ultra settings average just 18 FPS. These numbers show a consistent and steep decline in performance as both resolution and graphical fidelity increase. The only settings that approach a consistently smooth experience are the Low presets at 1080p and 1440p, with averages of 65 and 50 FPS, respectively. All other configurations result in averages below 46 FPS, which is often considered the threshold for sub-par gameplay fluidity.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The scaling of frame rates from 1080p to 4K is a textbook demonstration of a GPU-bound scenario. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 65 at 1080p to 50 at 1440p, a reduction of 23%. Moving from 1080p to 4K at Low settings, the average falls from 65 to 33 FPS, a 49% decrease. This nearly halving of performance when resolution quadruples is a clear sign that the rendering pipeline is saturated.

At High settings, the trend is similar: 41 FPS at 1080p, 31 FPS at 1440p, and 21 FPS at 4K. This is a 49% drop from 1080p to 4K. The Ultra settings show a similar pattern, with 36 FPS at 1080p, 27 FPS at 1440p, and 18 FPS at 4K, a 50% reduction. The consistency of this ~50% drop across all settings strongly indicates that the GPU is the primary constraint. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rates would be more consistent across resolutions, as the CPU's workload does not scale with pixel count. The fact that performance degrades proportionally with the number of pixels proves that the Intel Arc B390's rendering capabilities are the limiting factor. The CPU, with its high single-core and multi-core scores, is waiting for the GPU to finish its work, and the GPU takes progressively longer as the resolution increases.

FAQ

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D a bottleneck for the Intel Arc B390 in Control?

A: No. The data indicates the opposite. The CPU's benchmark scores are in the 87th percentile, while the GPU's are in the 9th. The frame rates are low at all resolutions and settings, which is characteristic of a GPU bottleneck, not a CPU one.

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for this hardware in Control?

A: Based on the measured FPS, the 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings is the most playable, yielding an average of 65 FPS. The 2560x1440 Low setting is also an option, with an average of 50 FPS, but it is less fluid.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B390 compare to its nearest rivals in terms of raw performance?

A: The Arc B390's average benchmark score is 1482. Its closest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463, +1.3%), the NVIDIA GeForce 800M (1460, +1.5%), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM (1446, +2.5%), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 (1443, +2.7%). The performance differences are marginal, within a few percentage points.

Q: Can this system run Control at 4K resolution?

A: Technically, yes, but not at a playable frame rate. At 3840x2160, the average FPS ranges from 33 at Low settings to 18 at Ultra settings. These frame rates are below the threshold for a smooth gaming experience.

Q: Is the CPU's performance a factor in this game's results?

A: The CPU's performance is sufficient, but it is not a contributing factor to the low frame rates. The Ryzen 7 9800X3D has a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23230 and a single-core score of 2080, indicating it has ample power. The FPS is limited by the GPU's rendering speed.

Q: What does the combo rank of 2551 out of 2888 tell us?

A: It indicates that this specific combination performs worse than the vast majority of other tested systems in Control. This is driven by the GPU's low performance percentile, which outweighs the CPU's high performance percentile.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured data, the optimal experience is found at the lower end of the graphics spectrum. The primary goal should be to achieve a stable frame rate, and the data shows that only the Low preset provides a consistently playable experience.

At 1920x1080, the Low settings offer the best balance, with an average of 65 FPS. This is the only configuration that approaches a smooth 60 FPS experience. The Medium settings at 1080p yield 46 FPS, which is a significant drop and may be noticeable as stutter. The High and Ultra presets at this resolution offer averages of 41 and 36 FPS, respectively, which are sub-optimal for a game that relies on precise movement and timing.

For 2560x1440 users, the Low preset is the only reasonable choice, with an average of 50 FPS. All other settings at this resolution fall below 35 FPS, which is not recommended for a fluid experience. At 3840x2160, no settings are recommended, as even the Low preset only manages an average of 33 FPS, and the Ultra preset drops to 18 FPS.

The data strongly suggests that the user must prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity. The Ultra preset, while visually impressive, results in an average FPS that is less than a third of the 1080p Low setting. The difference in image quality between Low and Ultra is substantial, but the interactive quality is heavily compromised. Therefore, the recommendation is to play at 1920x1080 with Low settings for the best measured performance, or 2560x1440 with Low settings if a higher resolution is preferred at the cost of some frame rate.