Instant compatibility check with FPS benchmarks and optimization tips
Pc Building Simulator
Performance
1080p (Full HD)
1440p (2K / QHD)
4K (Ultra HD)
Requirements Check
Recommendations
Your hardware doesn't meet minimum requirements for this game.
Your GPU supports ray tracing.
Average FPS: resolution vs quality settings
| Ultra | High | Medium | Low | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4K Ultra HD | 63 | 65 | 94 | 129 |
| 1440p QHD | 121 | 127 | 175 | 248 |
| 1080p Full HD | 189 | 196 | 282 | 367 |
Cell color: green is 120+ FPS, teal is 60+, amber is 30+, red is below 30. Cards marked Estimated above have no measured row and are scaled from your GPU benchmark percentile.
Performance Analysis: Pc Building Simulator on Your System
The Intel Core i5-13400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 combination delivers a strong 1080p and 1440p experience in Pc Building Simulator, with 4K also clearing the 60 FPS threshold at every tested preset. The measured data shows this pairing ranks 698th out of 3723 combinations for this title, placing it comfortably in the upper tier of tested hardware. The RTX 5070, with its 12 GB GDDR7 memory and 672.0 GB/s bandwidth, appears to be the dominant factor in this simulation, though the i5-13400F's 10 cores and 16 threads ensure the CPU never becomes a bottleneck at the settings tested.
Similar Performance Alternatives
The CPU's average benchmark score of 25292 places it within a tight cluster of rivals. The AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS matches it almost exactly with a score of 25284 and a deltaPct of 0. The AMD Ryzen 7 6800H is marginally behind at 25201, a deltaPct of 0.4, while the Intel Core 5 120 (25362, -0.3 deltaPct) and AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D (25365, -0.3 deltaPct) are fractionally ahead. In practice, swapping the i5-13400F for any of these four chips would produce nearly identical frame rates in Pc Building Simulator, as the performance differences are well under one percent.
On the GPU side, the RTX 5070's average benchmark score of 40377 places it among some unexpected company. The AMD Radeon Pro 580 scores 40318, a deltaPct of 0.1, making it a statistical tie. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 is 0.8% behind at 40063, while the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 sits 1.2% ahead at 40870. The NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile trails by 2% with a score of 39568. These workstation-class cards would deliver comparable rasterization performance in this simulation title, though the RTX 5070's newer architecture and feature set differentiate it in other workloads.
CPU and GPU Roles
The data indicates that resolution scaling follows a predictable pattern, with the GPU taking on increasing importance as resolution rises. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo produces 367.3 FPS, which drops to 248.1 FPS at 2560x1440 and 129.1 FPS at 3840x2160 — a 71.6% reduction from 1080p Low to 4K Low. The gap widens further at Ultra settings: 189.3 FPS at 1080p falls to 121.2 FPS at 1440p and 63.2 FPS at 4K, a 66.6% drop across the resolution range.
Preset scaling within a single resolution reveals the GPU's headroom. At 4K, moving from Low to Medium costs 35.2 FPS (from 129.1 to 93.9), while High to Ultra costs only 1.3 FPS (64.5 to 63.2). This suggests that at 4K, the GPU is the limiting factor, as the step from Medium to High (93.9 to 64.5) represents a substantial 29.4 FPS penalty. At 1080p, the CPU's role becomes more apparent: Low to Medium drops from 367.3 to 282 FPS, but Ultra still holds at 189.3 FPS, indicating the 10-core processor can feed the GPU adequately even at high frame rates. The 65 W TDP of the i5-13400F and its 4.60 GHz boost clock provide enough single-thread throughput for simulation logic, while the RTX 5070's 30.87 TFLOPS FP32 performance handles the rendering load.
Measured FPS Breakdown
At 1920x1080, the system delivers its highest frame rates. Low settings produce 367.3 FPS average, Medium drops to 282 FPS, High yields 195.6 FPS, and Ultra maintains 189.3 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra is minimal at 6.3 FPS, suggesting diminishing returns from the highest preset at this resolution.
Moving to 2560x1440, the averages remain comfortably high. Low settings hit 248.1 FPS, Medium reaches 174.8 FPS, High sustains 127.3 FPS, and Ultra holds 121.2 FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p is consistent: each preset loses roughly 35-40% of its frame rate, which aligns with the increased pixel count.
At 3840x2160, the system still clears 60 FPS across all presets. Low settings average 129.1 FPS, Medium drops to 93.9 FPS, High manages 64.5 FPS, and Ultra sits at 63.2 FPS. The margin at Ultra is thin — just 3.2 FPS above the 60 FPS playable threshold — but it is playable. The data shows no min or max FPS values were recorded, so consistency cannot be assessed from these numbers, but the averages indicate stable performance.
The Verdict
Yes, this PC can run Pc Building Simulator. The verdictByResolution data confirms that all four presets — Low, Medium, High, and Ultra — are playable at every resolution tested, with playable defined as maintaining at least 60 FPS average. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset delivers 189.3 FPS, leaving enormous headroom. At 2560x1440, Ultra averages 121.2 FPS, still more than double the threshold. At 3840x2160, Ultra barely clears the bar at 63.2 FPS, while High sits at 64.5 FPS.
For 4K gaming, the practical advice is to stick with High or Ultra, as both are playable, but the margin at Ultra is slim. If you prioritize frame rate stability over visual fidelity, High at 64.5 FPS provides a slightly larger buffer. At 1440p and below, Ultra is the obvious choice, as the system has ample performance to spare. The combo's rank of 698 out of 3723 combinations reinforces that this is a well-matched pairing for the title.
FAQ
Q: What is the highest playable setting at 3840x2160?
A: Ultra is playable, averaging 63.2 FPS, which is 3.2 FPS above the 60 FPS threshold. High also works at 64.5 FPS.
Q: How much performance does the system lose going from 1080p to 4K at Ultra settings?
A: At Ultra, the average frame rate drops from 189.3 FPS at 1920x1080 to 121.2 FPS at 2560x1440, then to 63.2 FPS at 3840x2160 — a total reduction of 126.1 FPS, or 66.6%.
Q: Is the CPU or GPU more important for this game at 4K?
A: The data shows a 29.4 FPS penalty when moving from Medium (93.9 FPS) to High (64.5 FPS) at 4K, indicating the GPU is the primary constraint at this resolution.
Q: Can the system maintain 60 FPS at 1440p with all settings maxed?
A: Yes, Ultra at 2560x1440 averages 121.2 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS playable threshold.
Q: How does the i5-13400F compare to its nearest rivals?
A: It scores 25292 on average, with the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS at 25284 (0 deltaPct) and the Intel Core 5 120 at 25362 (-0.3 deltaPct). All are within 0.4% of each other.
Q: What is the frame rate at 1080p with Low settings?
A: Low settings at 1920x1080 produce an average of 367.3 FPS, the highest recorded in the measured data.
Best Settings per Resolution
At 1920x1080, the best setting is Ultra, which averages 189.3 FPS. This preset provides the maximum visual quality while still delivering more than triple the 60 FPS threshold. There is no reason to lower settings at this resolution, as even the most demanding preset leaves substantial performance headroom.
At 2560x1440, Ultra also wins, averaging 121.2 FPS. The step down to High at 127.3 FPS offers only a 6.1 FPS improvement, so the visual gain from Ultra is worth the minor frame rate trade-off. The system handles this resolution with ease across all presets.
At 3840x2160, the situation is tighter. Ultra averages 63.2 FPS, which is playable but close to the threshold. High averages 64.5 FPS, a slightly safer margin. For most users, Ultra is the pick if you want maximum fidelity and can tolerate a 63 FPS average; if you prefer a buffer, High is the conservative choice. Both clear 60 FPS, but the data shows that Medium (93.9 FPS) offers a much larger safety margin if you experience demanding scenes.