Control

FAQ

Q: What is the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus's standing among all tested CPUs?

A: The processor ranks in the 96th percentile among all CPUs in the benchmark database. Its average benchmark score of 84,003 puts it slightly ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, which scores 83,807, a delta of 0.2 percent. It also leads the AMD EPYC 4584PX and AMD EPYC 9135 by 1.1 percent and 1.2 percent, respectively, while trailing the AMD EPYC 7F72 by 1.3 percent.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370 compare to its closest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B370's average benchmark score of 1,184 is nearly identical to the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, which scores 1,186, a delta of -0.2 percent. It is 0.5 percent behind the ATI Radeon HD 5770 and 0.7 percent behind the AMD Radeon HD 7650M, while it leads the AMD FirePro M2000 by 1.4 percent. The GPU sits in the 5th percentile of all tested GPUs.

Q: What is the best playable setting for this combo at 1920x1080?

A: The data shows that the Low preset at 1920x1080 delivers an average of 59 FPS, which is the only measured configuration that approaches a standard 60 FPS target. The Medium preset drops to 42 FPS average, while High and Ultra produce 37 FPS and 32 FPS, respectively.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160?

A: At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 59 FPS at 1920x1080 to 30 FPS at 3840x2160, a reduction of roughly half. At High settings, the drop is from 37 FPS to 19 FPS. The scaling is steep across all presets, indicating the GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

Q: Does this combination provide consistent frame pacing across settings?

A: Only the Medium preset rows include minimum and maximum frame data. At 1920x1080 Medium, the average is 42 FPS with a minimum of 36 and maximum of 48. At 2560x1440 Medium, the average is 32 FPS with a range of 27 to 37. At 3840x2160 Medium, the average is 21 FPS with a range of 18 to 25. This suggests relatively tight frame delivery, though the absolute values are low.

Q: What are the core and thread counts of the CPU in this combo?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus features 24 cores and 24 threads. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, with a TDP of 125 watts and a 36 MB shared L3 cache.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is the graphics component in this configuration, and its specifications reveal why performance in Control is constrained. The GPU operates with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. It uses system-shared memory, meaning there is no dedicated VRAM pool; the memory size, type, and bus width are all listed as "System Shared," with bandwidth described as "System Dependent." This architecture places significant pressure on the system's main memory, which is a critical factor for a game like Control that relies heavily on texture streaming and GPU memory bandwidth.

The GPU's compute resources are modest: 1,280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster output units. It also includes 10 ray tracing cores, which is notable for a game that features ray-traced reflections and lighting effects. However, the raw throughput figures are low. The pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s, the texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s, and FP32 performance is 6.144 TFLOPS. These figures place the Arc B370 in the 5th percentile of all GPUs in the database, a position that aligns with the measured frame rates in Control.

The GPU's benchmark result from 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 is 1,184 points, which is nearly identical to the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570's score of 1,186. This places the Arc B370 in the same performance class as a decade-old mobile discrete GPU, which helps contextualize the game's results. The measured FPS data in Control shows that at 3840x2160, even the Low preset only achieves 30 FPS average, while Ultra drops to 17 FPS. At 2560x1440, the Low preset reaches 45 FPS, and at 1920x1080, it hits 59 FPS. The pattern is clear: this GPU is barely sufficient for 1080p gaming at the lowest settings, and higher resolutions or quality presets quickly push frame rates into unplayable territory.

The shared memory architecture is likely a key bottleneck. In Control, which is known for its detailed environments and complex visual effects, the GPU must access system memory for all texture and geometry data. The lack of dedicated VRAM means memory latency and bandwidth are shared with the CPU, which can cause stuttering and low frame rates. The measured minimum FPS at 3840x2160 Medium is 18, with a maximum of 25, indicating that the GPU struggles to maintain consistent performance under load. Despite the ray tracing cores, the overall compute throughput is too low to deliver playable ray-traced performance, so the game's advanced features should be considered off-limits for this configuration.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a high-end desktop processor, and its specifications suggest it should be more than capable of feeding the GPU in Control. The CPU has 24 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz. It is built on a 3 nm process node at TSMC, with a die size of 243 mm² and 17,800 million transistors. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and a bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, which is substantial for feeding system-shared GPU memory.

The CPU's benchmark results confirm its strength. In Cinebench R23, it scores 51,731 in multi-core and 7,303 in single-core. In Cinebench R20, the scores are 21,727 multi-core and 3,067 single-core. Passmark results show a multi-thread score of 60,860 and a single-thread score of 4,823. The average benchmark score of 84,003 places it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, which scores 83,807, and the AMD EPYC 4584PX at 83,090. The CPU leads these by 0.2 percent and 1.1 percent, respectively.

In the context of Control, the CPU role is to handle game logic, physics, and draw call submission. Given the 24-core configuration and high boost clock, the CPU is unlikely to be the bottleneck in this combination. The measured FPS data shows that performance scales significantly with resolution and settings, which is typical of GPU-bound workloads. For example, at 1920x1080 Low, the average is 59 FPS, but at 3840x2160 Low, it drops to 30 FPS. This indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor, as a CPU bottleneck would produce more consistent frame rates across resolutions.

The CPU's memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s is relevant because the GPU uses system-shared memory. This means the CPU's memory controller is responsible for servicing both CPU and GPU memory requests. The dual-channel DDR5 configuration provides adequate bandwidth, but it is shared between the two processors, which can lead to contention. The data shows that Control is not CPU-limited here; the CPU has ample headroom to handle the game's demands. The 24 threads are more than sufficient for a title like Control, which typically scales well with multi-core CPUs but does not require 24 threads to perform optimally. The CPU's single-core performance, as evidenced by the 7,303 score in Cinebench R23, ensures that the game's main thread is well-served.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and the Intel Arc B370 ranks 2,657 out of 2,888 tested combos in Control. This places it in the bottom 8 percent of all configurations, which is consistent with the GPU's low percentile ranking. The CPU is a top-tier component, but the GPU drags the overall combo down significantly. The ranking of 2,657 means there are 231 other combinations that perform worse, but the vast majority of tested systems deliver better frame rates in this game.

The disparity between the CPU and GPU performance is stark. The CPU ranks in the 96th percentile, while the GPU ranks in the 5th percentile. This creates a highly imbalanced system where the CPU is vastly overqualified for the GPU's capabilities. In Control, this imbalance manifests as frame rates that are entirely GPU-limited. The CPU is capable of producing far higher frame rates, but the GPU cannot keep up. The measured FPS data confirms this: at 1920x1080 Low, the combo achieves 59 FPS, which is close to the minimum playable threshold, but at any higher setting or resolution, the frame rates fall below 45 FPS.

The combo's rank relative to other tested systems suggests that users with this CPU should pair it with a much more powerful GPU to achieve reasonable performance in Control. The data shows that the GPU is the primary constraint, and the CPU's potential is largely wasted in this configuration. For a game like Control, which is visually demanding and requires a capable GPU, this combo is not recommended for anything beyond the lowest settings at 1080p.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions and four settings presets, providing a clear picture of performance scaling. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 59 FPS, which is the highest measured value in the entire dataset. The Medium preset averages 42 FPS, with a minimum of 36 and maximum of 48. The High preset averages 37 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 32 FPS. This represents a drop of 17 FPS from Low to Ultra, or a 29 percent reduction in average frame rate.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 45 FPS, which is a 14 FPS drop from the 1080p Low result. The Medium preset averages 32 FPS, with a range of 27 to 37. The High preset averages 28 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 25 FPS. From Low to Ultra at this resolution, the average drops by 20 FPS, or 44 percent. The scaling is steeper than at 1080p, indicating that the GPU is under more stress at higher pixel counts.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 30 FPS, which is the only configuration at this resolution that approaches playability. 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. From Low to Ultra at 4K, the average drops by 13 FPS, or 43 percent. The minimum FPS at 4K Medium is 18, which indicates that the GPU is struggling to maintain even a consistent low frame rate.

The data shows a clear trend: performance drops by roughly 40-50 percent when moving from 1080p to 4K at the same settings. The Low preset at 1080p is the only configuration that achieves an average near 60 FPS, and even that is below the standard 60 FPS target. The Medium preset at 1080p provides a playable experience for some users, but the minimum of 36 FPS suggests occasional stutters. At higher resolutions, the frame rates fall below 30 FPS, which is generally considered unplayable for an action-adventure game.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal configuration for this combo is the Low preset at 1920x1080, which delivers an average of 59 FPS. This is the only setting that comes close to a standard 60 FPS target, and it provides the smoothest experience. The Low preset at 2560x1440 averages 45 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for a fast-paced action game. At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 30 FPS, which is borderline playable but likely to feel sluggish.

The Medium preset is not recommended for any resolution. At 1920x1080, it averages 42 FPS, which is a 29 percent drop from Low. At 2560x1440, it averages 32 FPS, and at 3840x2160, it averages 21 FPS. The minimum FPS values for Medium are 36 at 1080p, 27 at 1440p, and 18 at 4K. These minimums indicate that the game will experience noticeable frame drops during intense scenes, which can be disruptive in a game that requires precise timing.

The High and Ultra presets are only viable at 1920x1080, where they average 37 FPS and 32 FPS, respectively. These frame rates are below the playable threshold for most users, and the visual improvements over Medium are unlikely to compensate for the performance loss. At 2560x1440, High averages 28 FPS and Ultra averages 25 FPS, both of which are too low for comfortable gameplay. At 3840x2160, High and Ultra produce 19 FPS and 17 FPS, respectively, which are effectively slideshows.

For the best experience, users should set the resolution to 1920x1080 and select the Low preset. This provides an average of 59 FPS, which is the highest measured performance. If a higher resolution is desired, the Low preset at 2560x1440 with an average of 45 FPS is the only acceptable alternative. The Medium preset at 1080p is a secondary option for users who prioritize visual quality, but the frame rate is inconsistent. The data suggests that this combo is not suited for High or Ultra settings at any resolution, and the GPU simply lacks the compute throughput to handle Control's demanding visuals.