Control

# Control with Intel Core i5-14400F + Intel Arc B570

The Intel Core i5-14400F paired with the Intel Arc B570 delivers a mid-pack experience in Control, ranking 2307th out of 2888 tested combos. This places the pairing in the lower-mid tier of the database, which aligns with the component positioning: the CPU sits at the 83rd percentile among all processors, while the GPU ranks at the 65th percentile among all graphics cards. The measured frame rates across resolutions and settings tell a story of a system that handles 1080p competently but struggles to maintain smooth gameplay at higher resolutions, with the GPU emerging as the clear bottleneck in most scenarios tested.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-14400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, manufactured on Intel's 10 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, drawing a 65 W TDP. The chip features a three-tier cache hierarchy: 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. This configuration supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory across a dual-channel bus, and the processor connects via PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes.

In Control, the CPU's role is primarily to feed the GPU with draw calls and physics calculations. The game's action-adventure gameplay involves destructible environments and telekinetic object manipulation, which can create variable CPU loads. At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves 101 FPS average, indicating the CPU can push well beyond 100 frames per second when the GPU is not the limiting factor. However, the data shows that even at lower resolutions, the CPU is not the primary constraint in most settings tiers—the GPU's performance ceiling appears earlier.

The i5-14400F's benchmark results support this interpretation. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 21645 and single-core score of 3055 place it in a competitive position among desktop processors. The Geekbench multicore result of 11268 and single-core score of 2058 further confirm solid all-around performance. Compared to its nearest rivals, the i5-14400F edges out the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U by 0.1% in average benchmark score, trails the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS by 0.2%, and leads the Intel Core i9-11900 by 0.2% and the Intel Core i7-12800H by 0.5%. These margins are negligible in real-world gaming, meaning the CPU is unlikely to be the decisive factor in Control's frame rates.

The Passmark multithread score of 25470 and single-thread score of 3701 suggest the processor handles both lightly-threaded and heavily-threaded workloads competently. In Control, which scales reasonably across multiple cores, the 10-core/16-thread configuration provides ample headroom. The 83rd percentile ranking among all CPUs reinforces that this is a capable mid-range processor, but not a top-tier gaming chip. For this game, the CPU's 20 MB of L3 cache and high boost clock are sufficient to avoid becoming a bottleneck until frame rates exceed what this GPU can deliver.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B570 is built on the Xe2-HPG architecture (Battlemage generation) using TSMC's 5 nm process, with a die size of 272 mm² containing 19,600 million transistors. The GPU operates at a fixed 2500 MHz base and boost clock, paired with 10 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus, delivering 380.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory runs at 2375 MHz (19 Gbps effective). The card features 2304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 80 raster operation units, along with 18 ray tracing cores. Its compute capabilities include 11.52 TFLOPS FP32 and 23.04 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio), with pixel rate of 200.0 GPixel/s and texture rate of 360.0 GTexel/s.

In Control, the GPU is decisively the limiting component across most tested configurations. The evidence is clear from the resolution scaling: at 1080p Low, the system hits 101 FPS, but at 4K Low, it drops to 51 FPS—a 49.5% reduction. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rate would remain relatively flat across resolutions. Instead, the consistent decline with increasing resolution points squarely at the GPU's rendering throughput.

The Arc B570's 10 GB VRAM buffer is adequate for Control at 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K with higher settings, the game's texture demands may strain the memory subsystem. The 160-bit bus and 380.0 GB/s bandwidth are modest by modern standards, which explains why Ultra settings at 4K yield only 28 FPS average. The GPU's benchmark scores reflect its mid-range positioning: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2649, Passmark G3D score of 14195, and Geekbench Vulkan score of 96844. Its 65th percentile ranking among all GPUs places it as a competent 1080p performer with limited 1440p and 4K ambitions.

Compared to its nearest rivals, the Arc B570 is essentially neck-and-neck with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile (0.1% higher score) and the Intel Arc A750 (0.1% lower). The gap widens slightly against the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M (0.4% ahead) and AMD Radeon R9 M390X (0.5% behind). These margins indicate the B570 sits in a crowded performance band, and its actual gaming results in Control will depend heavily on driver optimization and game-specific factors.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of GPU-bound scaling. At 1080p High, the system averages 63 FPS. Moving to 1440p High drops this to 48 FPS—a 23.8% reduction. At 4K High, the average falls to 32 FPS, representing a 49.2% drop from 1080p and a 33.3% drop from 1440p. This scaling curve is characteristic of a GPU that runs out of pixel throughput and memory bandwidth as resolution increases.

The Low settings tier shows the most dramatic scaling. From 101 FPS at 1080p to 76 FPS at 1440p (a 24.8% drop) and 51 FPS at 4K (a 49.5% drop from 1080p), the pattern remains consistent. Interestingly, the percentage drops are remarkably uniform across settings tiers, suggesting the GPU's bottleneck is resolution-driven rather than settings-driven. The Medium settings tier shows similar behavior: 71 FPS at 1080p, 54 FPS at 1440p (23.9% drop), and 36 FPS at 4K (49.3% drop from 1080p).

Ultra settings follow the same trajectory: 55 FPS at 1080p, 42 FPS at 1440p (23.6% drop), and 28 FPS at 4K (49.1% drop from 1080p). The near-identical percentage drops across all settings tiers (roughly 24% from 1080p to 1440p and 49% from 1080p to 4K) strongly indicate that the limiting component is the GPU's raw rendering capability, not CPU throughput or memory bandwidth saturation. The CPU's consistent performance headroom means it never becomes the constraint even at lower resolutions.

The data also shows that the gap between Low and Ultra settings narrows as resolution increases. At 1080p, the difference between Low (101 FPS) and Ultra (55 FPS) is 46 FPS. At 4K, the difference shrinks to 23 FPS (51 vs 28). This compression at higher resolutions further confirms GPU bound behavior—when the GPU is already saturated, additional settings changes have diminishing impact.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-14400F and Intel Arc B570 ranks 2307th out of 2888 tested combos in Control, placing it in the 20th percentile of tested systems. This ranking is notably lower than the individual component percentiles might suggest—the CPU sits at the 83rd percentile and the GPU at the 65th percentile among their respective categories. The discrepancy indicates that Control is particularly demanding on this GPU configuration, or that the pairing is suboptimal for this specific title.

The rank of 2307 out of 2888 means roughly 80% of tested combos outperform this pairing in Control. This is a significant underperformance relative to the components' standalone capabilities. The GPU's 65th percentile ranking suggests it should handle most games at 1080p comfortably, yet Control's Ultra settings at 1080p only produce 55 FPS average, which is playable but not exceptional. At 4K, the system falls below playable thresholds for most settings, with Ultra at 28 FPS and High at 32 FPS.

The gap between the combo's rank and the components' percentiles could stem from several factors. The Arc B570's driver maturity for this 2019 title may be a factor, as Control was released before the Battlemage architecture existed. Additionally, the game's use of DirectX 12 and its specific rendering techniques may not align optimally with Intel's Xe2 architecture. The 10 GB VRAM configuration, while sufficient for most 1080p and 1440p scenarios, may also be a limiting factor at 4K where the game's textures and effects demand more memory.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend heavily on the target resolution and desired frame rate. At 1080p, the Medium preset delivers 71 FPS average with a minimum of 61 FPS and maximum of 82 FPS, providing a smooth experience that stays above the 60 FPS threshold. The High preset at 1080p yields 63 FPS average, which is also playable but with less headroom for demanding scenes. The Low preset at 1080p achieves 101 FPS, maximizing responsiveness but sacrificing visual quality. The Ultra preset at 1080p drops to 55 FPS, which dips below the ideal smoothness threshold for fast-paced action.

At 1440p, the Medium preset produces 54 FPS average with a minimum of 46 FPS and maximum of 62 FPS. This is borderline playable, with occasional dips below 50 FPS during intense sequences. The Low preset at 1440p achieves 76 FPS, which is the only fully smooth option at this resolution. The High preset at 1440p yields 48 FPS, and Ultra drops to 42 FPS—both below the 60 FPS target.

At 4K, no settings tier achieves 60 FPS. The Low preset at 4K produces 51 FPS average, which is the only playable option, though it still dips below 60. Medium at 4K averages 36 FPS with a minimum of 31 FPS and maximum of 42 FPS, while High averages 32 FPS and Ultra averages 28 FPS. For 4K gaming, the Low preset is the only reasonable choice, and even then, the experience will not be consistently smooth.

For the best balance of visual quality and performance, the Medium preset at 1080p is the recommended configuration. It provides 71 FPS average with a comfortable minimum of 61 FPS, ensuring smooth gameplay while retaining moderate visual fidelity. Players prioritizing frame rate over visuals should select Low at 1080p for 101 FPS, while those willing to accept lower performance for better graphics can use High at 1080p for 63 FPS. At 1440p, the Low preset at 76 FPS is the recommended option, as it is the only setting that maintains playable frame rates. For 4K, only the Low preset is viable, and users should expect a compromised experience.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its strongest performance across all settings. The Low preset achieves 101 FPS average, providing an exceptionally smooth experience suitable for competitive play or high-refresh-rate displays. The Medium preset averages 71 FPS with a minimum of 61 FPS and maximum of 82 FPS, offering a balanced experience that stays above the 60 FPS threshold. The High preset averages 63 FPS, which is playable but leaves little margin for demanding scenes. The Ultra preset averages 55 FPS, dipping below the 60 FPS target and potentially causing noticeable stutter in fast-paced combat sequences.

At 2560x1440, performance drops predictably across all settings. The Low preset averages 76 FPS, remaining smooth and playable. The Medium preset averages 54 FPS with a minimum of 46 FPS and maximum of 62 FPS, creating a variable experience that may feel inconsistent during intense action. The High preset averages 48 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 42 FPS—both fall below the 60 FPS threshold and may exhibit noticeable frame pacing issues.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles to maintain playable frame rates. The Low preset averages 51 FPS, which is the only configuration that approaches acceptable performance at this resolution. The Medium preset averages 36 FPS with a minimum of 31 FPS and maximum of 42 FPS, providing a slideshow-like experience during fast movement. The High preset averages 32 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 28 FPS—both are effectively unplayable for a game requiring precise timing and spatial awareness.

The frame time data available for Medium settings at each resolution shows consistent minimum-to-average ratios. At 1080p Medium, the minimum of 61 FPS is 85.9% of the 71 FPS average, indicating relatively stable frame pacing. At 1440p Medium, the minimum of 46 FPS is 85.2% of the 54 FPS average. At 4K Medium, the minimum of 31 FPS is 86.1% of the 36 FPS average. These similar ratios suggest the GPU maintains consistent frame delivery regardless of resolution, with the primary issue being the overall performance level rather than frame time spikes.