Control

Control is a demanding action-adventure title in the best of ways, and the pairing of the AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D with the Intel Arc B370 illustrates a system where the graphics solution is the unmistakable bottleneck. The measured data shows a combo that can produce playable frame rates at 1080p with optimized settings, but the experience degrades sharply as resolution increases. With an average FPS range from 17 at 4K Ultra to 59 at 1080p Low, this configuration is best understood as a 1080p-oriented setup, and even then, it requires careful setting selection to stay fluid. The CPU is a high-end desktop part with 8 cores and 16 threads, but its substantial processing power is largely left untapped in this game because the Intel Arc B370, with its 25 W TDP and system-shared memory, caps performance well before the processor can flex its muscles.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K is severe and tells a clear story about where the limiting component sits. At 1080p Low, the combo averages 59 FPS, which is nearly playable at a smooth clip. Moving to 1440p Low drops that average to 45 FPS, a 24% reduction. At 4K Low, the average falls to 30 FPS, which is a 49% reduction from the 1080p Low figure. These are large percentage drops for a single resolution step, and they confirm that the GPU is the primary constraint, as a CPU-bound system would show far less variance when pixel count changes.

The scaling pattern is consistent across all settings. For High settings, the averages go from 37 FPS at 1080p to 28 FPS at 1440p and then to 19 FPS at 4K. That is a 49% loss from 1080p to 4K, mirroring the Low setting’s proportional decline. Medium settings show a similar trend: 42 FPS at 1080p, 32 FPS at 1440p, and 21 FPS at 4K. Ultra settings are the most punishing, with 32 FPS at 1080p, 25 FPS at 1440p, and just 17 FPS at 4K. The data indicates that no matter the preset, the transition from 1080p to 4K roughly halves the average frame rate. This is a classic sign of a GPU that is running out of pixel-pushing capacity, not a CPU that is struggling to feed frames.

The only measured frame time data available is for Medium settings, which shows a min FPS of 36 at 1080p, 27 at 1440p, and 18 at 4K, with corresponding max FPS of 48, 37, and 25. These deltas between min and max are roughly 12-13 FPS at each resolution, suggesting that while the average is low, the frame pacing is not wildly erratic. Still, at 4K Medium, the min FPS of 18 means the experience will feel stuttery and unresponsive. The resolution scaling analysis leads to a firm conclusion: this combo is not viable for 4K gaming, struggles at 1440p, and only becomes acceptable at 1080p with lower presets.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is the decisive factor in this combo’s performance, and its specifications explain the measured results. It operates with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz, which are modest figures for a modern GPU, and its TDP is just 25 W. That power envelope is typical of an integrated graphics part, which is exactly what this is, as the bus interface is listed as IGP. The GPU’s memory is “System Shared,” meaning it borrows from the CPU’s DDR5 memory rather than having its own dedicated VRAM. This arrangement limits memory bandwidth to “System Dependent,” which in practice means the GPU is at the mercy of the system’s memory configuration.

With 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs, the Arc B370 has a small execution footprint. Its pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s, which are enough for light 1080p workloads but insufficient for high-resolution gaming. The FP32 throughput of 6.144 TFLOPS places it firmly in the entry-level segment. Benchmark data from 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 shows a score of 1184, which puts the GPU in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in that benchmark are the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (score 1186, delta -0.2%), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (score 1190, delta -0.5%), and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (score 1192, delta -0.7%). The Arc B370 is essentially trading blows with GPUs that are over a decade old, which underscores how limited its gaming performance is.

The GPU’s VRAM situation is critical. With no dedicated VRAM, the Arc B370 cannot rely on a fast local memory pool, and it must access system memory over the memory bus. This adds latency and reduces effective bandwidth, which is likely a major reason why 4K performance collapses to 17-30 FPS depending on the preset. In Control, a game known for its physics-heavy environments and particle effects, the GPU’s lack of dedicated memory bandwidth becomes a hard ceiling. The boost clock of 2400 MHz helps at lower resolutions, but it cannot compensate for the fundamental lack of resources. The data shows that this GPU is the bottleneck in every measured scenario, and any attempt to raise resolution or settings directly translates to a disproportionate FPS loss.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured rows, the only sensible path to a fluid experience is to use the Low preset at 1080p. The 59 FPS average at 1080p Low is the single playable result in the entire dataset. It is not a locked 60 FPS, but it is close enough that most users would find it acceptable for a story-driven game like Control. The Medium preset at 1080p yields 42 FPS, which is borderline, but the min FPS of 36 indicates that combat scenes with heavy destruction effects could dip into uncomfortable territory. High at 1080p drops to 37 FPS, and Ultra falls to 32 FPS, both of which are too low for consistent action.

At 1440p, the situation is grim. Low settings produce 45 FPS, which is technically above 30 FPS but still not smooth. Medium at 1440p averages 32 FPS with a min of 27, meaning it will stutter in intense moments. High and Ultra at 1440p sit at 28 and 25 FPS respectively, which are not viable for gameplay. At 4K, no setting is playable: Low is 30 FPS, Medium is 21 FPS, High is 19 FPS, and Ultra is 17 FPS. The recommendation is clear: use 1080p Low for the best experience. If visual fidelity is a priority, 1080p Medium at 42 FPS is the highest preset that stays above 40 FPS, but it requires accepting occasional dips below 40. There is no measured configuration that offers both high visual quality and high frame rates, so the user must choose the Low preset to get the closest to 60 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The full dataset provides a comprehensive view of this combo’s performance across resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 59 FPS, which is the peak for this combo. Medium averages 42 FPS, with a min of 36 and a max of 48. High averages 37 FPS, and Ultra averages 32 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 27 FPS, which is a significant range, but even the best result is below a 60 FPS lock. At 2560x1440, Low averages 45 FPS, Medium averages 32 FPS (min 27, max 37), High averages 28 FPS, and Ultra averages 25 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra narrows to 20 FPS, and all results are below the 1080p Low figure. At 3840x2160, 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 Ultra is just 13 FPS, showing that at 4K, even dropping settings yields minimal gains because the GPU is overwhelmed by the pixel count.

Looking at the scaling within each setting, the Low preset drops from 59 FPS at 1080p to 45 FPS at 1440p to 30 FPS at 4K. That is a 29 FPS loss from 1080p to 4K. The Medium preset drops from 42 to 32 to 21, a 21 FPS loss. High drops from 37 to 28 to 19, an 18 FPS loss. Ultra drops from 32 to 25 to 17, a 15 FPS loss. The pattern is that higher presets see smaller absolute drops because they start from lower baselines, but the relative percentage loss is similar across all presets, hovering around 50% from 1080p to 4K. The min FPS data for Medium shows that at 1080p, the lowest frame is 36, which is still above the 30 FPS threshold, but at 1440p it drops to 27, and at 4K it falls to 18. These min FPS figures are the most concerning, as they represent the worst-case moments during gameplay, such as when the game loads new areas or when multiple physics objects collide.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s ranking in the database is harsh but accurate. It sits at rank 2657 out of 2888 tested combos, placing it in the bottom 8% of all configurations. This rank is driven almost entirely by the Intel Arc B370, which has a percentile rank of 5 among all GPUs. The CPU, by contrast, is a top-tier part with a percentile rank of 92 among all CPUs. The combination of a high-end CPU with an entry-level integrated GPU creates a massive imbalance, and the benchmark results reflect that. The combo’s nearest rivals in terms of average benchmark score are not listed, but the GPU’s nearest rivals give context: the Arc B370 scores 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, while the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186 (delta -0.2%), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190 (delta -0.5%), and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192 (delta -0.7%). The GPU is slightly slower than all three of those legacy parts, which is a damning comparison.

The CPU’s nearest rivals in its own benchmark suite include the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M (avg score 58323, delta 0.1%), the Intel Xeon w5-2545 (avg score 58504, delta -0.2%), the Intel Core i9-14900 (avg score 58115, delta 0.5%), and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 (avg score 58826, delta -0.7%). The Ryzen 7 9850X3D’s average benchmark score is 58386, which puts it in the middle of that pack, but its performance in Control is irrelevant because the GPU is the limiting factor. The combo rank of 2657 out of 2888 means that users purchasing this pairing for gaming at 1080p will find it at the bottom of the barrel. It is not a combo that can be recommended for any resolution above 1080p, and even at 1080p, it only achieves playable results with the Low preset.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D is a powerhouse that is wasted in this configuration. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 4.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. Its architecture is Zen 5, codenamed Granite Ridge, built on a 4 nm process by TSMC. It features 96 MB of shared L3 cache, which is a massive amount and typically beneficial for gaming. Its benchmark scores are strong: Cinebench R23 multicore is 22807, singlecore is 2228, and Passmark multithread is 41318, with a single thread score of 4704. The CPU’s percentile rank of 92 indicates it outperforms 92% of all CPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-14900 (avg score 58115, delta 0.5%) and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 (avg score 58826, delta -0.7%), showing that it is competitive with other high-end parts.

However, in Control, the CPU’s role is minimal because the GPU is the bottleneck. The measured FPS figures scale almost perfectly with resolution, which would not happen if the CPU were the limiting factor. If the CPU were struggling, we would see similar FPS at 1080p and 1440p, or at least a smaller drop when moving from 1080p to 1440p. Instead, the FPS drops by 24% from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings, and by another 33% from 1440p to 4K. This indicates that the GPU is saturated at all resolutions. The CPU’s 8 cores and 16 threads are more than enough for Control, which is not a heavily threaded game. The high boost clock of 5.60 GHz ensures that any single-threaded tasks are handled quickly, but this does not translate to higher FPS because the GPU is waiting on pixel rendering.

The CPU’s TDP of 120 W and its support for DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s are positive attributes, but they do not help the GPU’s system-shared memory situation. The CPU’s integrated Radeon Graphics could theoretically offload some work, but that is not how this combo is configured. The data shows that the CPU is not the issue: the combo’s rank is low because of the GPU, not the processor. If this CPU were paired with a discrete GPU, the results would be entirely different, but with the Arc B370, the CPU’s performance is largely irrelevant to the final FPS numbers. The only takeaway is that the Ryzen 7 9850X3D is a capable processor that will not hold back any GPU in future upgrades, but in this specific pairing, it is pulling a trailer that is far too heavy for the GPU to move.