Control

Control is an Action Adventure title from 2019 that stresses both the CPU and GPU depending on the resolution and settings used. This analysis examines the measured performance of the Intel Core i5-12600KF paired with the Intel Arc B370, a combination that produces a narrow range of playable outcomes. The data shows a system that is heavily constrained by the graphics processor, with the central processor providing ample headroom that is never fully utilized in this particular title. The following sections break down the benchmark results across resolutions and settings, interpreting what the numbers indicate about the hardware interaction.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear and predictable pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At the High settings preset, the average frame rate drops from 37 FPS at 1080p to 28 FPS at 1440p, and finally to 19 FPS at 4K. This represents a 24.3% performance loss when moving from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 32.1% loss when stepping up to 4K. The scaling behavior indicates that the graphics processor is the primary limiting factor at every resolution, as the frame rate decreases proportionally with the increase in pixel count.

The Low settings preset shows a similar trend, with average FPS figures of 59 at 1080p, 45 at 1440p, and 30 at 4K. The percentage drops are 23.7% from 1080p to 1440p and 33.3% from 1440p to 4K, which closely mirrors the scaling observed at High settings. This consistency across presets suggests that the resolution scaling is not significantly affected by the complexity of the graphical effects being rendered. The limiting component remains the same regardless of whether the game is running at Low or High settings.

At Medium settings, the measured data includes both minimum and maximum FPS values, providing additional insight into frame time consistency. The 1440p Medium result shows an average of 32 FPS with a minimum of 27 and maximum of 37, while the 1080p Medium result shows an average of 42 FPS with a minimum of 36 and maximum of 48. The 4K Medium result drops to an average of 21 FPS with a minimum of 18 and maximum of 25. The spread between minimum and maximum frames is relatively narrow at each resolution, indicating that the frame pacing remains stable even when the overall performance is low.

The Ultra preset produces the lowest frame rates across all resolutions, with averages of 32 FPS at 1080p, 25 FPS at 1440p, and 17 FPS at 4K. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p shows a 21.9% drop, and from 1440p to 4K a 32% drop. These figures confirm that the graphics card is operating at its absolute limit when the highest quality settings are enabled, particularly at 4K where the average frame rate falls below 20 FPS.

The data indicates that this combination is only suitable for 1080p gaming, and even then only at lower quality presets. The 4K results are consistently below 30 FPS across all settings, making that resolution impractical for smooth gameplay. The 1440p results fall into a marginal range, with the Low preset achieving 45 FPS but the High and Medium presets dropping into the 28-32 FPS territory. The resolution scaling behavior confirms that the Intel Arc B370 is the bottleneck, as the CPU has sufficient compute resources to handle the increased pixel throughput demands without becoming a constraint.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12600KF is a 10-core, 16-thread processor based on the Alder Lake architecture, with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. In the context of Control, the benchmark results indicate that this processor is not the performance limiter at any resolution or settings combination. The FPS scaling across resolutions is consistent with a GPU-bound scenario, where the frame rate is determined by the graphics card's rendering capabilities rather than the CPU's ability to feed it data.

The processor's benchmark scores demonstrate substantial computational headroom. In Cinebench R23, the multicore score reaches 23391 points, while the single-core score is 3302 points. The 3DMark results show a single-thread score of 1016 and a 16-thread score of 7956, indicating strong performance in both lightly threaded and heavily threaded workloads. The Geekbench scores of 2157 single-core and 12137 multi-core further confirm that the CPU has significant processing power available.

The nearest rival comparisons for this CPU show that it performs within a narrow band of other processors. The Intel Core i9-10900K has an average score of 27872, which is 0.3% higher than the i5-12600KF's average of 27799. The AMD Ryzen 5 8500GE scores 27712, representing a 0.3% difference in the opposite direction. The AMD Ryzen 7 6800U and AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D both score slightly higher at 27887 and 27896 respectively, each showing a 0.3% delta. These margins are negligible and indicate that the i5-12600KF is well-positioned among its peers.

In Control specifically, the CPU's role is to manage game logic, physics calculations, and draw call submissions. The 10-core configuration with 16 threads provides ample parallelism for these tasks, and the 20 MB of shared L3 cache helps reduce memory latency. The processor's 79th percentile ranking among all CPUs suggests that it is a capable performer, but the game's frame rates are not reflecting this capability because the graphics card cannot keep pace.

The data shows no evidence of CPU bottlenecking at any resolution. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the FPS would remain relatively constant across resolutions, as the same amount of CPU work is required regardless of pixel count. Instead, the frame rates drop significantly at higher resolutions, which is the signature of a GPU-limited scenario. The i5-12600KF is effectively waiting for the Intel Arc B370 to complete its rendering tasks, and the CPU's performance headroom is never fully exercised.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this CPU and GPU combination in Control?

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 is the only resolution where the combination achieves playable frame rates across multiple settings. The Low preset averages 59 FPS, Medium averages 42 FPS, High averages 37 FPS, and Ultra averages 32 FPS at this resolution.

Q: How does the Intel Core i5-12600KF compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The processor's average benchmark score of 27799 is 0.3% lower than the Intel Core i9-10900K's 27872, 0.3% higher than the AMD Ryzen 5 8500GE's 27712, and 0.3% lower than both the AMD Ryzen 7 6800U's 27887 and the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D's 27896.

Q: Is the Intel Arc B370 capable of running Control at 4K resolution?

A: The measured data indicates that 4K performance is below 30 FPS at all settings. The Low preset achieves 30 FPS, Medium averages 21 FPS, High averages 19 FPS, and Ultra averages 17 FPS, making 4K impractical for smooth gameplay.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 45 FPS while the Ultra preset averages 25 FPS. This represents a 20 FPS difference, or a 44.4% reduction in performance when moving from the lowest to the highest quality settings.

Q: Does the CPU or GPU limit performance in Control with this hardware combination?

A: The resolution scaling data indicates that the Intel Arc B370 is the limiting factor. Frame rates decrease proportionally with increasing resolution, which is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario, while the CPU maintains sufficient performance headroom.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for this combination in Control?

A: The only recorded minimum FPS values are at Medium settings. The 1080p result shows a minimum of 36 FPS, the 1440p result shows a minimum of 27 FPS, and the 4K result shows a minimum of 18 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080 resolution, the Intel Core i5-12600KF with Intel Arc B370 produces its best results. The Low settings preset achieves an average of 59 FPS, which is the highest frame rate recorded for this combination. The Medium preset drops to 42 FPS average, with a minimum of 36 and maximum of 48. The High preset averages 37 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 32 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 27 FPS difference between the extremes, representing a 45.8% performance range across the four quality levels.

The 2560x1440 results show a significant step down in performance. The Low preset averages 45 FPS, which is 14 FPS lower than the equivalent 1080p result. The Medium preset averages 32 FPS with a minimum of 27 and maximum of 37. The High preset averages 28 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 25 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at this resolution is 20 FPS, which is a 44.4% reduction in frame rate.

The 3840x2160 results are the weakest for this combination. The Low preset averages 30 FPS, which is the only 4K result that approaches a playable threshold. The Medium preset averages 21 FPS with a minimum of 18 and maximum of 25. The High preset averages 19 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 17 FPS. The total range from Low to Ultra at 4K is 13 FPS, representing a 43.3% difference between the quality levels.

The Medium settings preset is the only one that includes minimum and maximum FPS data across all three resolutions. At 1080p, the frame rate ranges from 36 to 48 FPS. At 1440p, the range narrows to 27 to 37 FPS. At 4K, the range contracts further to 18 to 25 FPS. This data suggests that the frame time consistency remains stable even as the average frame rate drops, with the spread between minimum and maximum staying relatively proportional to the average.

The settings scaling at each resolution follows a consistent pattern. Moving from Low to Medium incurs a performance penalty of 17 FPS at 1080p, 13 FPS at 1440p, and 9 FPS at 4K. Moving from Medium to High costs 5 FPS at 1080p, 4 FPS at 1440p, and 2 FPS at 4K. Moving from High to Ultra costs 5 FPS at 1080p, 3 FPS at 1440p, and 2 FPS at 4K. The diminishing returns at higher resolutions indicate that the GPU is becoming more constrained as the pixel count increases.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated graphics solution based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process. It features 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster output units, along with 10 ray tracing cores. The GPU operates at a base clock of 300 MHz and boosts up to 2400 MHz, delivering a peak FP32 throughput of 6.144 TFLOPS and a texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s.

The graphics card uses system shared memory for its frame buffer, with the memory bandwidth being system dependent. This architecture means that the GPU's performance is influenced by the system's memory subsystem, and the 25 W TDP indicates that this is a low-power integrated solution. The GPU's benchmark results are modest, with a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184, placing it in the 5th percentile among all GPUs.

The nearest rival comparisons for the Intel Arc B370 show it performing at a similar level to several older discrete graphics cards. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186, representing a 0.2% higher result. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190, which is 0.5% higher. The AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192, showing a 0.7% advantage, while the AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168, which is 1.4% lower than the Arc B370's result.

In Control, the GPU's role is dominant in determining the frame rate. The measured FPS data shows that the graphics card is the bottleneck at all resolutions and settings, with the CPU providing more than enough processing power. The GPU's limited shading units and texture units are insufficient to maintain high frame rates at modern resolutions, particularly when higher quality settings are enabled.

The GPU's ray tracing capabilities, supported by 10 dedicated cores, are present in the hardware but the measured data does not include ray tracing performance. The API support includes DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, which means the card is feature-complete for modern games. However, the raw computational throughput of 6.144 TFLOPS is the primary constraint in this title, as evidenced by the consistent performance drops at higher resolutions.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this hardware combination depend on the target resolution. At 1920x1080, the Low preset provides the best experience with an average of 59 FPS, which is close to the 60 FPS target for smooth gameplay. The Medium preset at 42 FPS is also viable, offering improved visual quality while maintaining a playable frame rate. The High preset at 37 FPS and Ultra at 32 FPS are less desirable due to the reduced smoothness.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset at 45 FPS is the only setting that provides a reasonably smooth experience. The Medium preset at 32 FPS is borderline playable, but the High and Ultra presets at 28 and 25 FPS respectively may introduce noticeable stutter. Users prioritizing frame rate over visual quality should select the Low preset, while those willing to accept lower smoothness can experiment with Medium.

At 3840x2160, none of the presets deliver an ideal experience. The Low preset at 30 FPS is the minimum threshold for playability, while the Medium at 21 FPS, High at 19 FPS, and Ultra at 17 FPS are all below acceptable levels. For this resolution, the Low preset is the only reasonable choice, and even then, the experience will be compromised.

The data shows that the performance penalty for moving from Low to Medium is significant at all resolutions, ranging from 9 to 17 FPS. The penalty for moving from Medium to High is smaller, ranging from 2 to 5 FPS. The penalty for moving from High to Ultra is similarly small, at 2 to 5 FPS. This suggests that the Medium preset offers the best balance between visual quality and performance for users who want more than the minimum settings.

For users with a 1080p display, the Medium preset is recommended as it provides a 42 FPS average with a minimum of 36 FPS, which is a good balance between quality and smoothness. For 1440p users, the Low preset is the safest choice at 45 FPS, though the Medium preset at 32 FPS may be acceptable for less demanding players. The 4K resolution should be avoided with this combination, as the highest achievable average is 30 FPS at Low settings.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-12600KF with Intel Arc B370 combination ranks 2657th out of 2888 tested combinations in Control. This places the combo in the bottom 8% of all tested systems, indicating that it is a low-performing configuration for this particular game. The rank reflects the GPU's limited capabilities, as the CPU component is a relatively strong performer in its own right.

The low ranking is consistent with the GPU's 5th percentile position among all graphics cards. The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated solution designed for power efficiency rather than high-performance gaming, and its 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1184 places it far below dedicated gaming graphics cards. The CPU's 79th percentile ranking among processors does little to compensate for the GPU's limitations in this game.

The measured FPS data confirms that this combination is only suitable for 1080p gaming at lower settings, which is a narrow use case. The 59 FPS result at 1080p Low is the only setting that approaches a standard 60 FPS target, and even this result leaves little headroom for demanding scenes. The 4K results are uniformly below 30 FPS, rendering that resolution unusable for this title.

The combination's performance characteristics are defined by the GPU's constraints. The CPU provides excellent single-threaded and multi-threaded performance, as evidenced by its benchmark scores and rival comparisons, but this performance cannot be translated into higher frame rates in Control because the GPU is the bottleneck. The combo rank of 2657 out of 2888 reflects this imbalance, with the system's overall capability being limited by its weakest component.

For users considering this hardware configuration, the data suggests that it is not well-suited for Control at higher resolutions or quality settings. The combination can handle the game at 1080p with reduced settings, but users seeking higher frame rates or better visual quality would need to consider alternative graphics solutions. The rank position serves as a clear indicator that this is a low-tier configuration for this particular title.