Control

Control with the Intel Core i5-12400 and Intel Arc B570 presents a clear picture: this pairing is a 1080p and 1440p solution that struggles to maintain playable frame rates at 4K. Benchmark results show the system is heavily GPU-limited at higher resolutions, while the CPU provides ample headroom for the game's engine. The data indicates that users should target High settings at 1440p for the best balance of visual fidelity and performance, as the jump to Ultra incurs a significant cost with diminishing returns.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a steep performance cliff as resolution increases. At 1080p with High settings, the combo delivers an average of 63 FPS. Moving to 1440p at the same settings drops the average to 48 FPS, a reduction of 15 FPS or roughly 24%. The transition to 4K is far more punishing: the average plummets to 32 FPS, which is a 31 FPS drop from 1080p (a 49% decrease) and a 16 FPS drop from 1440p (a 33% decrease). This scaling pattern strongly indicates that the Intel Arc B570's rendering capabilities, rather than the CPU, are the limiting factor once pixel count rises.

The pattern persists across all settings. At Low settings, the system achieves 101 FPS at 1080p, 76 FPS at 1440p, and 51 FPS at 4K. The gap between 1080p and 1440p is 25 FPS, while the gap between 1440p and 4K is also 25 FPS. However, the percentage drop from 1440p to 4K (33%) is steeper than from 1080p to 1440p (25%). This suggests that while the GPU is the primary bottleneck at every resolution, the strain becomes disproportionately heavier as the fill rate requirements approach the card's maximum throughput.

At Ultra settings, the system falls below the 30 FPS playability threshold at 4K, averaging just 28 FPS. Even at 1440p Ultra, the average of 42 FPS is marginal for smooth gameplay. The data shows that the scaling from Medium to High at 1440p costs 6 FPS (from 54 to 48), while High to Ultra costs another 6 FPS (from 48 to 42). This linear degradation suggests the GPU is consistently saturated, and there is no evidence of a CPU bottleneck at any resolution. The i5-12400's 6 cores and 12 threads are sufficient to keep feeding the Arc B570 even at 1080p Low, where the GPU is working its hardest to produce 101 FPS.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400 is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Alder Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. Its benchmark scores indicate strong single-threaded performance, which is critical for game logic and draw calls. In Cinebench R23, it scores 2257 points in single-core and 15989 points in multi-core. This level of performance places it in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs tested, indicating it is a capable mid-range part that should not impede a mid-range GPU like the Arc B570.

The data supports this conclusion. When comparing the 1080p Low result (101 FPS) to the 4K Low result (51 FPS), the frame rate halves as resolution doubles, which is a classic sign of a GPU-bound scenario. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rate would remain relatively flat across resolutions. The fact that FPS scales inversely with resolution demonstrates that the i5-12400 has reserve capacity. The CPU's 18 MB of shared L3 cache and support for DDR4/DDR5 memory further contribute to its ability to maintain consistent frame pacing without being the limiting factor.

The processor's nearest rivals in terms of average benchmark score include the AMD EPYC 7643 (0.1% slower), Intel Core i7-1355U (0.3% slower), AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 (0.7% slower), and Intel Core i3-14100F (0.9% faster). These deltas are negligible, confirming that the i5-12400 sits in a well-populated performance tier. In the context of Control, the CPU's role is to ensure that the Arc B570 is never starved of data. Given that the GPU scores 20556 in its average benchmark, which is in the 65th percentile of all GPUs, the pairing is balanced, but the GPU is clearly the component that determines the playable settings and resolutions.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides a clear hierarchy for optimizing the experience. At 1080p, all settings are playable, but the best experience per the data is High at 63 FPS. This provides a 8 FPS improvement over Ultra (55 FPS) while being visually superior to Medium (71 FPS). The jump from High to Ultra costs 8 FPS, which is a 13% reduction for what is typically a marginal visual gain. Low at 101 FPS is unnecessary unless the user has a 100Hz+ monitor, but the data shows it is available.

At 1440p, the recommendation is High. The average of 48 FPS is above the 45 FPS threshold that many consider the minimum for acceptable action gameplay. Medium offers 54 FPS, but the visual downgrade from High is significant. Ultra at 42 FPS is tempting, but the data shows it is only 6 FPS slower than High, making it a viable option for those who prioritize image quality over a small frame rate dip. Low at 76 FPS is the smoothest option, but it sacrifices the game's atmospheric lighting and effects, which are a core part of Control's aesthetic.

At 4K, the data is unambiguous: this combo is not suited for it. High (32 FPS) and Medium (36 FPS) are below the 40 FPS playability threshold, and Ultra (28 FPS) is a slideshow. Low (51 FPS) is the only setting that breaks 50 FPS, but it requires disabling most of the visual features that make the game look distinctive. The data suggests that users with a 4K display should either lower the resolution to 1440p or accept Low settings, as the GPU's 10 GB of GDDR6 memory and 380.0 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient to handle the pixel throughput at 3840x2160.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations, this specific pairing of the Intel Core i5-12400 and Intel Arc B570 ranks 2307 out of 2888 combos for Control. This places it in the bottom 20% of all tested systems, which is a sobering statistic. The rank reflects the GPU's limitations at higher resolutions, as the system is unable to achieve high frame rates at 4K Ultra, which is often the benchmark for top-tier rankings. However, the rank should be interpreted in context: it is a mid-range CPU paired with a mid-range GPU, and the rank is heavily influenced by the inclusion of high-end systems with 24-core CPUs and flagship GPUs.

The combo's percentile ranking for the GPU (65th) is notably higher than its in-game rank percentile (roughly 20th). This discrepancy highlights that while the Arc B570 is a competent GPU in synthetic benchmarks, its real-world performance in Control is constrained by the game's demanding rendering engine and the high resolution tested. The CPU's percentile (72nd) is also higher than the combo's in-game rank, reinforcing that the CPU is not the weak link. The data indicates that the combo's ranking would improve significantly if the analysis were limited to 1080p or 1440p resolutions, where it performs within expectations for its hardware class.

FAQ

Q: Is the Intel Core i5-12400 a bottleneck for the Intel Arc B570 in Control?

A: No. The data shows that FPS scales inversely with resolution (101 FPS at 1080p Low, 51 FPS at 4K Low), which is a hallmark of a GPU-bound scenario. The CPU has sufficient headroom, as evidenced by its 72nd percentile ranking and single-core score of 2257 in Cinebench R23.

Q: Can this combo run Control at 4K?

A: It can run, but not comfortably. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 28, which is below the 30 FPS playability threshold. At 4K High, it averages 32 FPS. Only at 4K Low does it reach 51 FPS, but this requires significant visual compromises.

Q: What is the best settings preset for a 1440p monitor?

A: High is the recommended preset, averaging 48 FPS. It provides a solid balance between visual quality and performance. Ultra is also viable at 42 FPS, but the 6 FPS gain from dropping to High is recommended for smoother gameplay.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B570 compare to its nearest rivals in raw GPU benchmarks?

A: The Arc B570 scores 20556 on average, which is 0.1% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile, 0.1% slower than the Intel Arc A750, 0.4% faster than the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M, and 0.5% slower than the AMD Radeon R9 M390X. These differences are negligible.

Q: Is the i5-12400's performance similar to other CPUs?

A: Yes. Its average benchmark score of 18683 is 0.1% higher than the AMD EPYC 7643, 0.3% higher than the Intel Core i7-1355U, 0.7% higher than the AMD Ryzen AI 5 330, and 0.9% lower than the Intel Core i3-14100F.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Medium and High at 1080p?

A: At Medium, the average FPS is 71, while at High it is 63. The difference is 8 FPS, with High providing better visual fidelity at a 11% performance cost.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table lists all measured FPS data from the fact pack for this combo.

| Resolution | Settings | Avg FPS | Min FPS | Max FPS |

|---|---|---|---|---|

| 3840x2160 | High | 32 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 51 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 36 | 31 | 42 |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 28 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | High | 48 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 76 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 54 | 46 | 62 |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 42 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | High | 63 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 101 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 71 | 61 | 82 |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 55 | - | - |

The data shows that the system is most consistent at Medium settings, where min and max FPS figures are available across all resolutions. At 1080p Medium, the frame rate ranges from 61 to 82 FPS, indicating good frame pacing. At 1440p Medium, it ranges from 46 to 62 FPS, and at 4K Medium, from 31 to 42 FPS. These ranges suggest that Medium is the most stable preset, with less variance than the data implies for High or Ultra, where min/max figures are not provided. For users seeking a locked experience, Medium offers the tightest frame time distribution.