Pc Building Simulator

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the Intel Core i5-11400F and Intel Arc B390 combination struggles to maintain playable frame rates across all tested presets. The Ultra preset delivers an average of 20 FPS, while High reaches 21 FPS. Medium improves to 29 FPS with a minimum of 25 and maximum of 34 FPS. Low is the best performer at this resolution, producing 41 FPS average. None of these figures approach the 60 FPS playability threshold.

Moving to 2560x1440, the results show a meaningful step up. Low settings produce a solid 79 FPS average. Medium lands at 56 FPS with a minimum of 47 and maximum of 64 FPS. High reaches 39 FPS, and Ultra sits at 38 FPS. The gap between Medium and Low is substantial, representing a 23 FPS difference, while the difference between High and Ultra is minimal at just 1 FPS.

At 1920x1080, the picture changes dramatically. Low settings deliver 125 FPS average, which is the highest recorded figure for this combo. Medium produces 88 FPS with a minimum of 75 and maximum of 102 FPS. High hits 62 FPS, and Ultra trails slightly at 59 FPS. The scaling from 1440p to 1080p is steep: Low jumps from 79 to 125 FPS, Medium from 56 to 88 FPS, High from 39 to 62 FPS, and Ultra from 38 to 59 FPS.

The recorded data shows that resolution scaling has a pronounced effect on this hardware pairing. At 4K, even the lowest settings fail to reach 60 FPS, while at 1080p, three out of four presets clear that threshold. The min and max figures are only recorded for Medium settings, which indicates that this preset was tested with frame time variance tracking. At 1080p Medium, the 75 FPS minimum still exceeds the 60 FPS target, confirming smooth performance. At 1440p Medium, the 47 FPS minimum falls below the target, showing occasional dips. At 4K Medium, the 25 FPS minimum highlights severe frame pacing issues.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the verdict is clear: no preset achieves an average of 60 FPS. The database records no playable settings for this resolution. The best available option is Low at 41 FPS, but that remains 19 FPS short of the playability threshold. Users targeting 4K would need to consider different hardware or accept a compromised experience.

At 2560x1440, only Low qualifies as playable. It delivers 79 FPS average, which is 19 FPS above the threshold. Medium falls short at 56 FPS, and both High and Ultra sit well below at 39 and 38 FPS respectively. The best settings for 1440p are therefore Low, and the recorded average at that preset is 79 FPS.

At 1920x1080, three presets clear the 60 FPS bar: Low at 125 FPS, Medium at 88 FPS, and High at 62 FPS. Ultra misses by just 1 FPS at 59 FPS. The most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is High, with an average of 62 FPS. This gives a comfortable margin of only 2 FPS, so users who want extra headroom might prefer Medium at 88 FPS, but the data supports High as the best playable setting.

CPU and GPU Roles

The scaling between resolutions and presets reveals which component constrains performance. At 4K, the GPU is clearly the limiting factor. The Arc B390, which ranks in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, cannot push enough pixels at 3840x2160. Dropping from High to Low at 4K improves performance from 21 to 41 FPS, nearly doubling the frame rate. This large swing with preset changes indicates GPU-bound behavior.

At 1440p, the pattern shifts. Low produces 79 FPS, but Medium drops to 56 FPS. The 23 FPS penalty for moving from Low to Medium is substantial. This suggests that the GPU is still the primary constraint, but the CPU begins to contribute. The difference between High and Ultra at 1440p is only 1 FPS, which implies that the Ultra preset adds little graphical load over High, or that the system hits a different bottleneck.

At 1080p, the CPU becomes more relevant. The i5-11400F, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, has a 71st percentile ranking among all CPUs. At Low settings, the combination reaches 125 FPS, which indicates that the CPU can feed the GPU adequately at lower graphical loads. The jump from High at 62 FPS to Ultra at 59 FPS is small, but the step from Medium at 88 FPS to High at 62 FPS is a 26 FPS drop. This steep decline with increasing preset quality points to the GPU struggling as shader complexity rises.

The measured data shows that resolution changes have a larger impact than preset changes. Going from 4K Low at 41 FPS to 1440p Low at 79 FPS is a 38 FPS gain. Going from 1440p Low to 1080p Low is another 46 FPS gain. These jumps are larger than any preset-to-preset difference at the same resolution. This indicates that pixel count is the dominant factor, and the GPU is the primary bottleneck across all resolutions, with the CPU only becoming a secondary factor at 1080p Low.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the CPU nearest rivals, the Intel Core i5-11400F has an average benchmark score of 17177. The AMD EPYC 7H12 scores 17120, which is 0.3% lower. The Intel Core i5-12450H scores 17239, which is 0.4% higher. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G scores 17278, 0.6% higher. The Intel Core Ultra 7 164U scores 17074, 0.6% lower. These differences are tiny, meaning any of these CPUs would deliver nearly identical frame rates in Pc Building Simulator. The i5-12450H would be the closest match in terms of raw compute, while the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G edges out the i5-11400F by a negligible margin.

For the GPU, the Intel Arc B390 has an average benchmark score of 1482 from the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test. Its rivals are notably weaker in the broader GPU landscape. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX scores 1463, which is 1.3% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce 800M scores 1460, 1.5% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446, 2.5% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 scores 1443, 2.7% lower. These GPUs are all from older generations and would behave similarly to the Arc B390 in this simulation game. The GT 520MX is the closest rival, and users with that GPU should expect nearly identical performance.

The practical implication is that swapping the i5-11400F for any of its four rivals would not change the playability verdict at any resolution. Similarly, swapping the Arc B390 for the GT 520MX or GT 710 would produce comparable frame rates. The database shows that this combo sits at rank 3310 out of 3723 tested combinations, placing it in the lower quartile of system performance.

The Verdict

Can this PC run Pc Building Simulator? The answer depends entirely on the target resolution. At 3840x2160, the data says no. No preset reaches 60 FPS, and the best case is Low at 41 FPS. This resolution is not playable with this hardware.

At 2560x1440, the answer is a qualified yes. The Low preset achieves 79 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS threshold by a comfortable margin. However, Medium and above fall short, so users must accept minimal graphical quality to maintain smooth gameplay. The verdict by resolution records only Low as playable at 1440p.

At 1920x1080, the answer is a clear yes. High settings deliver 62 FPS, which is above the threshold. Medium at 88 FPS and Low at 125 FPS provide even more headroom. Ultra misses the mark by a single frame at 59 FPS, which is marginal but technically below the playable threshold. For the best visual fidelity while staying above 60 FPS, High is the recommended preset at 1080p.

The playable settings list at 1080p includes High, Low, and Medium, but not Ultra. At 1440p, only Low is listed. The combination of the 71st percentile CPU and 9th percentile GPU creates a system that is best suited for 1080p gaming with medium-to-high settings, or 1440p with low settings. For simulation games that are not graphically intensive, this setup can provide a functional experience at 1080p.

How This Combo Ranks

The database ranks this CPU and GPU combination at 3310 out of 3723 tested combos for Pc Building Simulator. That places it in the 11th percentile of all tested systems, meaning roughly 89% of tested combinations perform better. The rank reflects the GPU's severe limitation; the Arc B390 is in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, while the CPU is in the 71st percentile. This imbalance means the GPU drags the overall ranking down significantly.

In practical terms, this combo outperforms only 413 other tested systems. The rank suggests that most modern gaming PCs would deliver better frame rates at 1080p, and many would handle 1440p at higher presets. The i5-11400F is a capable processor, but it is paired with a GPU that is closer in performance to integrated graphics from a decade ago. The data implies that users would benefit more from upgrading the GPU than the CPU.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Pc Building Simulator at 4K?

A: No. The best recorded average at 3840x2160 is 41 FPS on Low settings. Medium produces 29 FPS, High 21 FPS, and Ultra 20 FPS. All fall below the 60 FPS playability threshold.

Q: What is the highest quality preset that stays above 60 FPS at 1080p?

A: High settings at 1920x1080 produce an average of 62 FPS. Medium reaches 88 FPS, and Low hits 125 FPS. Ultra averages 59 FPS, which is just below the threshold.

Q: Does the CPU or GPU matter more for this game?

A: The GPU is the primary bottleneck at all resolutions. The Arc B390 ranks in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, while the i5-11400F ranks in the 71st percentile. Resolution scaling causes larger frame rate changes than preset changes, confirming the GPU is the limiting factor.

Q: What settings should be used at 1440p?

A: Only Low is considered playable at 2560x1440, with an average of 79 FPS. Medium averages 56 FPS, High 39 FPS, and Ultra 38 FPS, all below the 60 FPS target.

Q: How does this combo rank against other tested systems?

A: It ranks 3310 out of 3723 tested combinations for Pc Building Simulator, placing it in the lower portion of the performance distribution.

Q: Which GPU rivals would perform similarly?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX is the closest rival with a score 1.3% lower. The GeForce 800M is 1.5% lower, the GT 625 OEM is 2.5% lower, and the GT 710 is 2.7% lower. All would deliver nearly identical frame rates in this game.