Pc Building Simulator

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i3-12100F paired with the Intel Arc B390 lands at rank 3310 out of 3723 tested combos in Pc Building Simulator. That places this configuration in the bottom 12% of all recorded system pairings, a position that reflects the Arc B390's modest graphics throughput more than the CPU's contribution. The database shows this combo trailing a substantial majority of tested hardware, with only 413 combinations ranking below it.

The ranking becomes more understandable when viewing the individual component percentiles. The Core i3-12100F sits at the 68th percentile among all CPUs, meaning it outperforms roughly two-thirds of processors in the database. The Arc B390, however, sits at just the 9th percentile among GPUs, outperforming only about one in eleven graphics cards. This massive gap between CPU strength and GPU weakness defines the combo's overall standing. The processor is clearly not the bottleneck here; the graphics solution is carrying the system down in the rankings.

What makes this ranking particularly interesting is the game itself. Pc Building Simulator is a simulation title with modest graphical demands compared to AAA shooters or open-world epics. The data suggests that even within this lightweight genre, the Arc B390 struggles to keep pace. The combo's rank reflects a fundamental imbalance: a capable four-core processor paired with an integrated-class graphics engine that appears designed for basic productivity rather than gaming fluency.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Pc Building Simulator at 60 FPS on a 1080p display?

A: Yes, at 1080p the combo clears the 60 FPS threshold on High settings with an average of 62 FPS, as well as on Low (125 FPS) and Medium (88 FPS). Ultra settings fall just short at 59 FPS.

Q: What is the best playable setting at 1440p?

A: Low settings at 2560x1440 produce an average of 79 FPS, which is the only playable setting at that resolution. Medium drops to 56 FPS, High to 39 FPS, and Ultra to 38 FPS, all below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Is 4K gaming possible with this hardware?

A: No. At 3840x2160, the highest recorded average is 41 FPS on Low settings. High, Medium, and Ultra produce 21, 29, and 20 FPS respectively. None of these reach the 60 FPS playable threshold.

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

A: The Arc B390's average benchmark score of 1482 puts it just 1.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, 1.5% ahead of the GeForce 800M, 2.5% ahead of the GT 625 OEM, and 2.7% ahead of the GT 710. These are all older, low-end graphics solutions.

Q: How does the Core i3-12100F compare to nearby CPUs?

A: The i3-12100F's average benchmark score of 13494 is essentially tied with the Intel Core 3 N355 at 13492 (0% delta), 0.3% ahead of the Core i5-9500 at 13452, 0.7% behind the Core 5 120UL at 13594, and 1.1% ahead of the Core i7-1250U at 13351.

Q: What is the most demanding preset that stays above 60 FPS at any resolution?

A: High settings at 1920x1080 with an average of 62 FPS is the most demanding preset that clears the threshold. At 1440p, only Low settings achieve this, and at 4K no preset is playable.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that maintains at least 60 FPS is High, delivering an average of 62 FPS. This is a narrow margin, just 2 FPS above the playable threshold, so users seeking more headroom could drop to Medium for 88 FPS or Low for 125 FPS. Ultra runs at 59 FPS, missing the threshold by a single frame.

At 2560x1440, the most demanding playable preset is Low, which produces an average of 79 FPS. This is the only setting at 1440p that clears 60 FPS. Medium drops to 56 FPS, a 23 FPS deficit from Low, suggesting a steep scaling curve as graphical quality increases. High and Ultra sit at 39 FPS and 38 FPS respectively, making them unsuitable for smooth gameplay.

At 3840x2160, no preset reaches the 60 FPS threshold. The best recorded average is 41 FPS on Low settings, which is 19 FPS short of playable. Medium reaches 29 FPS, High 21 FPS, and Ultra 20 FPS. The database classifies 4K as having no playable settings for this combo.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest CPU rivals to the Core i3-12100F in the database's benchmarks provide insight into what other processors would behave similarly. The Intel Core 3 N355 matches the i3-12100F almost exactly with a 0% delta in average score (13492 vs 13494). The Intel Core i5-9500 trails by just 0.3% (13452), making it effectively interchangeable for this game. The Intel Core 5 120UL sits 0.7% higher (13594), while the Intel Core i7-1250U is 1.1% lower (13351). Any of these CPUs would produce nearly identical frame rates when paired with the same GPU, as the differences are well within measurement noise.

For the GPU side, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX is the closest rival, scoring 1463 versus the Arc B390's 1482, a 1.3% deficit. The GeForce 800M trails by 1.5% (1460), the GT 625 OEM by 2.5% (1446), and the GT 710 by 2.7% (1443). These deltas are small enough that users swapping between these cards would see nearly identical performance in Pc Building Simulator. The pattern among these rivals is clear: the Arc B390 performs in the same tier as decade-old entry-level graphics solutions, despite being a much newer product.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data provides a complete picture of this combo's performance across three resolutions and four quality presets.

At 3840x2160, the results are uniformly poor. Low settings average 41 FPS with no recorded minimum or maximum. Medium averages 29 FPS with a range of 25 to 34 FPS. High averages 21 FPS. Ultra averages 20 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra is 21 FPS, and even the lowest preset fails to approach playability.

At 2560x1440, Low settings average 79 FPS, a solid playable result. Medium averages 56 FPS with a range of 47 to 64 FPS, meaning some scenes dip below the threshold while others clear it. High averages 39 FPS. Ultra averages 38 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 23 FPS, the largest single-step drop in the entire dataset, indicating that the Medium preset introduces a significant rendering load that the Arc B390 cannot comfortably handle.

At 1920x1080, the results are mixed but mostly playable. Low averages 125 FPS, more than double the threshold. Medium averages 88 FPS with a range of 75 to 102 FPS, comfortably above 60 throughout. High averages 62 FPS, just clearing the threshold. Ultra averages 59 FPS, missing by one frame. The progression from Low to Ultra shows diminishing returns: 125, 88, 62, and 59 FPS, with the High-to-Ultra step costing only 3 FPS despite the increased visual fidelity.

The Verdict

This PC can run Pc Building Simulator, but only under specific conditions. At 1920x1080, the system delivers playable performance on High, Medium, and Low settings, with High being the best visually demanding option at 62 FPS average. The Ultra preset misses the 60 FPS threshold by a single frame, making it borderline rather than definitively unplayable, but the database classifies it as below the playable line.

At 2560x1440, the system is playable only on Low settings, which produce 79 FPS. Medium (56 FPS), High (39 FPS), and Ultra (38 FPS) all fall short. The 1440p medium preset is 4 FPS below the threshold, close enough that minor scene variations could push it over, but the recorded average indicates it is not reliably playable.

At 3840x2160, the system cannot run the game at a playable frame rate on any preset. The best result, Low at 41 FPS, is 19 FPS below the threshold. This resolution should be avoided entirely with this hardware.

The overall verdict is: this is a 1080p machine for this game, with a small margin of comfort at High settings, and a 1440p machine only if the user accepts Low graphical quality.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals a clear division of labor between the two components. The Core i3-12100F, with its 68th percentile CPU ranking, provides more than enough processing power for Pc Building Simulator's simulation mechanics. The game's CPU demands are evidently modest, as the i3's strong single-threaded and multithreaded scores (893 single-thread, 4023 max-thread in 3DMark) do not become limiting factors at any resolution.

The Arc B390, by contrast, is the constraining component throughout. Its 9th percentile GPU ranking and 1482 average benchmark score place it far below what modern games typically require. The scaling pattern across resolutions confirms this: dropping from 1080p to 1440p roughly halves frame rates at equivalent settings, and dropping to 4K halves them again. This is classic GPU-bound behavior, where pixel throughput dictates performance.

The resolution scaling is particularly telling. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 125 FPS, which suggests the CPU can push far beyond what the GPU delivers at higher settings. At 1440p Low, the frame rate drops to 79 FPS, a 37% reduction purely from increased pixel count. At 4K Low, it falls to 41 FPS, another 48% reduction. These drops are far larger than the 1.78x and 2.25x pixel count increases would suggest linearly, indicating the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth are severely strained at higher resolutions.

The preset scaling within each resolution reinforces the GPU bottleneck. At 1080p, moving from Low to Ultra costs 66 FPS (125 to 59), while at 1440p the same move costs 41 FPS (79 to 38), and at 4K it costs 21 FPS (41 to 20). The absolute losses shrink at higher resolutions because the GPU is already saturated, leaving less headroom to give up. This pattern is characteristic of a graphics card operating at its limits.

The CPU's role becomes more prominent only at the lowest resolution and settings, where the 1080p Low result of 125 FPS shows the i3-12100F can sustain high frame rates without becoming a bottleneck. At every other configuration, the Arc B390 is the definitive limiting factor. Users considering upgrades should prioritize the GPU, as the CPU has demonstrated it can handle far more demanding graphics workloads than this GPU can deliver.