Control

Resolution Scaling

The measured frame rates for this AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D + Intel Arc B390 combination reveal a severe GPU-bound scenario in Control, with performance collapsing as resolution increases. At 1080p Low, the combo produces 65 FPS, but moving to 1440p Low drops that to 50 FPS, and 4K Low falls to 33 FPS. That is a 49% reduction from 1080p to 4K at Low settings, which is a steep scaling curve.

The pattern is consistent across all quality presets. At High settings, the frame rate goes from 41 FPS at 1080p to 31 FPS at 1440p, then to 21 FPS at 4K — a 49% total drop from 1080p to 4K, identical to the Low preset scaling. Medium settings show the same trend: 46 FPS at 1080p, 35 FPS at 1440p, and 24 FPS at 4K, with the min/max spread at 4K being 20 to 27 FPS. Ultra settings are the most punishing, starting at 36 FPS at 1080p and falling to 27 FPS at 1440p, then 18 FPS at 4K.

The near-identical percentage drops across presets indicate that the limiting component is the GPU, not the CPU. The Ryzen 9 9900X3D, with its 12 cores and 24 threads, is far more capable than what this workload demands; the Intel Arc B390, which sits at the 9th percentile among all GPUs, is the bottleneck. The scaling behavior confirms this: when resolution increases, pixel throughput requirements rise, and the GPU's fixed shading units (1,536) and texture units (48) cannot keep pace. The CPU's role is largely irrelevant here because the frame rates are so low that the processor never becomes the constraint.

Notably, the delta between Low and Ultra at each resolution is substantial. At 1080p, Low yields 65 FPS while Ultra yields 36 FPS — a 45% performance penalty for maxing out settings. At 4K, the gap narrows proportionally but remains significant: 33 FPS at Low versus 18 FPS at Ultra. This suggests that while resolution scaling is the primary driver of performance loss, the quality preset also has a major impact, likely due to increased pixel shading and effects workload that the Arc B390's modest 7.680 TFLOPS FP32 throughput cannot handle.

FAQ

Q: What is the best frame rate this combo can achieve in Control?

A: The highest measured average is 65 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. No other configuration in the measured data exceeds this value.

Q: Is this combination CPU-bound or GPU-bound?

A: The data indicates a GPU-bound scenario. The Intel Arc B390 ranks at the 9th percentile among all GPUs, while the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D ranks at the 91st percentile among CPUs. The steep frame rate drops from 1080p to 4K — roughly 49% across all presets — are consistent with GPU limitations, not CPU bottlenecks.

Q: How does the Arc B390 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B390 has an average benchmark score of 1,482. It is 1.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1,463), 1.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 800M (1,460), 2.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM (1,446), and 2.7% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 (1,443). These are extremely close scores, indicating the Arc B390 sits at the very bottom of the GPU performance hierarchy.

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 1440p with Medium settings?

A: The measured average is 35 FPS, with a minimum of 30 FPS and a maximum of 40 FPS. This is marginally playable for slower-paced action, but Control's combat sequences may feel sluggish.

Q: Does the Ryzen 9 9900X3D's multi-threading capability help in Control?

A: The benchmark results show no evidence of CPU-related scaling benefits in this game. The CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 47,737 and its single-core score is 6,739, but the frame rates are uniformly low regardless of resolution, which points to the GPU as the sole limiting factor. Control does not appear to leverage the 12-core/24-thread configuration meaningfully in this pairing.

Q: Is the 4K Ultra preset viable for this combo?

A: No. The measured average is 18 FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, which is far below playable thresholds. Even at 4K Low, the average is only 33 FPS, so 4K gaming is not a practical option with this GPU.

How This Combo Ranks

This combination ranks 2,551 out of 2,888 tested combos in Control, placing it in the bottom 12% of all configurations in the database. That ranking is a direct consequence of the Intel Arc B390's position at the 9th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of just 1,482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12.

The CPU, by contrast, is top-tier. The Ryzen 9 9900X3D sits at the 91st percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 54,762. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF (55,093, 0.6% ahead), the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K (54,053, 1.3% behind), the Intel Xeon 6505P (53,701, 2% behind), and the Intel Core i7-14700F (53,620, 2.1% behind). This processor is clearly not the source of the low ranking.

The massive gap between CPU and GPU percentiles — 91 versus 9 — explains the combo's poor standing. In Control, the game's rendering demands overwhelm the Arc B390, and no amount of CPU headroom can compensate. The measured frame rates confirm this: even at the lowest resolution and settings (1080p Low), the combo only reaches 65 FPS, which is modest for a modern action game. At 4K Ultra, it falls to 18 FPS, which is effectively a slideshow.

Relative to other combos in the database, this pairing is at the bottom quartile. The 2,551st rank out of 2,888 means there are only 337 tested combinations that perform worse. Given the CPU's high percentile, this ranking is almost entirely attributable to the GPU. Users considering this combo for Control should expect a sub-60 FPS experience at all settings above 1080p Low, and even at 1080p Low, the 65 FPS average leaves no headroom for demanding scenes.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its best results. Low settings produce an average of 65 FPS. Medium settings yield 46 FPS, with a minimum of 40 and a maximum of 53. High settings drop to 41 FPS. Ultra settings are the weakest at 36 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra at 1080p is 29 FPS, indicating that the quality preset has a significant impact on performance even at the lowest resolution tested.

Moving to 2560x1440, all presets take a noticeable hit. Low settings average 50 FPS. Medium settings average 35 FPS, with a range of 30 to 40. High settings average 31 FPS. Ultra settings average 27 FPS. The delta between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 23 FPS, slightly narrower than at 1080p, which suggests the GPU is becoming the binding constraint at higher pixel counts.

At 3840x2160, performance becomes marginal to unplayable. Low settings average 33 FPS. Medium settings average 24 FPS, with a minimum of 20 and a maximum of 27. High settings average 21 FPS. Ultra settings average 18 FPS. The scaling from 1080p Low (65 FPS) to 4K Low (33 FPS) is a 49% reduction, and from 1080p Ultra (36 FPS) to 4K Ultra (18 FPS) is exactly a 50% reduction. This consistency reinforces the GPU-bound nature of the setup.

The min/max data available for Medium settings shows stability: at 1080p, the range is 40-53; at 1440p, 30-40; at 4K, 20-27. These ranges are tight, suggesting no major frame time spikes, but the averages are simply too low for a smooth experience. The lack of min/max data for Low, High, and Ultra presets means only average values can be assessed for those settings, but the averages alone tell a clear story of underperformance.

Settings Recommendations

The only preset that achieves a consistently playable frame rate is 1080p Low, with an average of 65 FPS. This is the recommended configuration for anyone who wants to experience Control with this hardware without significant stutter. The 65 FPS average provides enough headroom for most action sequences, though users should be prepared for drops in intense combat.

If visual fidelity is a priority, 1080p Medium at 46 FPS is a viable compromise. The 40 FPS minimum is low but tolerable for a game like Control, which is more atmospheric than twitch-based. The step from Medium to High at 1080p costs 5 FPS (from 46 to 41), and the step to Ultra costs another 5 FPS (from 41 to 36). These diminishing returns suggest that Medium is the sweet spot for balancing quality and playability.

At 1440p, no preset reaches 60 FPS. Low settings average 50 FPS, which is playable but not smooth. Medium drops to 35 FPS, and High and Ultra fall to 31 and 27 FPS respectively. For users with 1440p monitors, the recommendation is 1440p Low if playability is the goal, or 1440p Medium if they can tolerate a 35 FPS average with a 30 FPS minimum.

At 4K, all presets are below 33 FPS, and the highest average is 33 FPS at Low settings. This is not recommended for any gameplay scenario. The 4K Ultra preset at 18 FPS is essentially unusable. Users should avoid 4K entirely with this GPU unless they are willing to accept a cinematic slideshow.

The data suggests that the best experience is at 1080p Low, with 1080p Medium as a close second for those who prioritize visuals over frame rate. The 65 FPS at 1080p Low is the only measured configuration that approaches a standard 60 FPS target, and it is the only setting that can be confidently recommended for action-heavy gameplay.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D is a 12-core, 24-thread processor based on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge), built on TSMC's 4 nm process. It has a base clock of 4.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, with 128 MB of L3 cache. Its benchmark results are exceptional: Cinebench R23 multi-core scores 47,737, single-core scores 6,739, Geekbench multi-core scores 22,884, and single-core scores 3,041. The PassMark multi-thread score is 56,154, and the single-thread score is 4,646. These numbers place it at the 91st percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 54,762.

In Control, however, this CPU's capabilities are almost entirely untapped. The measured frame rates are uniformly low across all resolutions and settings, which is the signature of a GPU bottleneck. The Arc B390's 1,536 shading units and 48 texture units, running at a boost clock of 2,500 MHz, simply cannot render Control's scenes fast enough to challenge the CPU. Even at 1080p Low, where the CPU would typically have the most influence, the 65 FPS average is well below what the Ryzen 9 9900X3D could feed if the GPU were faster.

The CPU's 12 cores and 24 threads are irrelevant for this workload because the game is not CPU-limited at any measured setting. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 12,490 and max-thread score of 13,795 show strong multi-threading, but Control does not appear to scale with core count in this configuration. The single-thread performance, as evidenced by the 3DMark single-thread score of 1,269 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 6,739, is also more than sufficient.

The conclusion is straightforward: the Ryzen 9 9900X3D is a high-end processor that would pair well with a much more powerful GPU. In this combination, it is effectively wasted, as the Intel Arc B390 — which ranks at the 9th percentile among all GPUs — is the sole determinant of frame rates. Users who own this CPU should consider pairing it with a stronger graphics card to realize its potential in Control. The CPU's 120W TDP and dual 70.6 mm² dies are indicative of a premium desktop part, but none of that matters when the GPU is this far behind.