Pc Building Simulator

# Pc Building Simulator Performance Analysis: AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070

This combo ranks 467th out of 1,769 tested configurations in Pc Building Simulator, placing it in the top quarter of all systems measured. The pairing of an 8-core/16-thread Zen 3 processor with Ada Lovelace graphics delivers frame rates that range from playable at 4K Ultra to exceptionally high at 1080p Low, making it a versatile option for a simulation title that rewards both CPU and GPU throughput. The data shows a system that scales predictably across resolutions and settings, though the limiting component shifts depending on where you point it.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT brings 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. This is a Zen 3 part built on TSMC's 7 nm process, featuring 32 MB of L3 cache and a 105 W TDP. In Pc Building Simulator, where the simulation logic tracks individual components and their interactions, the CPU's multi-threaded throughput matters more than in typical shooters. The benchmark results confirm this: the processor scores 7,683 in 3DMark's 16-thread test and 7,680 at max threads, indicating that scaling from 8 to 16 threads yields nearly linear gains. Single-thread performance is also strong, with a 3DMark single-thread score of 959 and a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3,359.

The 5800XT's average benchmark score of 29,774 places it in the 86th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals show how tightly packed this performance tier is: the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755GE scores 29,740 (0.1% higher), the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS scores 29,856 (0.3% lower), the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 scores 29,682 (0.3% higher), and the AMD Ryzen 7 7840H scores 29,868 (0.3% lower). These deltas are within noise, meaning the 5800XT effectively trades blows with mobile and low-power variants of similar architectures. For a simulation game that can use all available threads, the 16-thread capability ensures the CPU rarely becomes a bottleneck at lower resolutions — at 1080p Low, the combo hits 355.2 FPS, which is far beyond what any display can show but demonstrates headroom.

The CPU's memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s over dual-channel DDR4 is adequate for this game's data demands. Pc Building Simulator's asset loading and part-swapping logic benefit from the 32 MB L3 cache, which reduces repeated memory fetches. The processor's PassMark multithread score of 27,988 and integer math score of 93,997 indicate strong computational throughput for the game's backend calculations. At 4K Ultra, where the GPU becomes the primary constraint, the CPU still maintains enough headroom to keep frame pacing consistent, as evidenced by the 56.4 FPS average at that setting.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 uses the AD104 chip on TSMC's 5 nm process, with 5,888 shading units, 184 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. Its base clock is 1,920 MHz with a boost clock of 2,475 MHz, and memory runs at 21 Gbps effective across a 192-bit bus, yielding 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The 12 GB of GDDR6X VRAM is more than sufficient for Pc Building Simulator's visuals, which include detailed PC case models, component textures, and tool animations. The GPU's FP32 throughput of 29.15 TFLOPS and texture rate of 455.4 GTexel/s handle the game's rendering loads comfortably.

The RTX 4070's average benchmark score of 37,283 places it in the 81st percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals reveal an interesting mix: the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 scores 37,507 (0.6% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A scores 38,008 (1.9% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile scores 38,135 (2.2% higher), and the AMD Radeon RX 5300M scores 36,371 (2.5% lower). These are all within a few percentage points, suggesting that the desktop-class 4070 competes closely with mobile parts and older high-end cards in synthetic workloads. In Pc Building Simulator specifically, the GPU's real-world performance is better than these deltas imply, as the game's moderate graphical demands favor the 4070's modern architecture.

The 12 GB VRAM capacity prevents any memory-related stuttering at 4K Ultra, where the game loads high-resolution textures for cases, motherboards, and cooling systems. The GPU's DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) ensures compatibility with the game's rendering pipeline, while its Vulkan 1.4 and OpenGL 4.6 APIs provide fallback paths. The pixel rate of 158.4 GPixel/s and ray tracing cores (46 RT cores) are not heavily exercised by this simulation title, but the raw rasterization performance is what drives the measured frame rates. At 1080p Low, the GPU pushes 355.2 FPS, indicating that the RTX 4070 has substantial headroom even when the CPU is feeding it at maximum speed.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data shows a clear progression across settings at each resolution. At 1080p, Low delivers 355.2 FPS, Medium drops to 257.9 FPS, High yields 181.6 FPS, and Ultra settles at 172.5 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra is just 9.1 FPS (5%), suggesting that Ultra's additional visual features cost relatively little at this resolution. At 1440p, the pattern changes: Low hits 232.7 FPS, Medium 164.6 FPS, High 117.5 FPS, and Ultra 111.7 FPS. Here, the High-to-Ultra delta shrinks to 5.8 FPS (5.2%), but the Medium-to-High drop is 47.1 FPS (28.6%), indicating that High settings introduce significant rendering load.

At 4K, the settings matter even more. Low produces 119.7 FPS, Medium 83.9 FPS, High 59.1 FPS, and Ultra 56.4 FPS. The drop from Medium to High is 24.8 FPS (29.6%), while High to Ultra is only 2.7 FPS (4.6%). For the best experience per the measured rows, the High preset at 1080p offers a strong balance: 181.6 FPS is well above the refresh rate of most monitors, and the visual upgrade from Medium is substantial. If you have a 1440p display, High at 117.5 FPS is playable for a simulation game, but Medium at 164.6 FPS provides more headroom for demanding scenes. At 4K, Medium at 83.9 FPS is the sweet spot, as High drops below 60 FPS and Ultra offers negligible visual gains for a 4.6% frame rate penalty.

FAQ

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

A: Yes, but with caveats. At 4K Medium, the combo averages 83.9 FPS, which is smooth for a simulation title. At 4K High, it drops to 59.1 FPS, and Ultra falls to 56.4 FPS. If you prioritize frame rate above 60 FPS, stick to Medium or lower at 4K.

Q: How much performance do I lose going from 1080p to 1440p at the same settings?

A: At High settings, the drop is from 181.6 FPS to 117.5 FPS, a 35.3% reduction. At Low settings, it goes from 355.2 FPS to 232.7 FPS, a 34.5% reduction. The consistent percentage drop indicates that resolution scaling is uniform across settings.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor at 1080p Low?

A: The data shows 355.2 FPS at 1080p Low, which is extremely high. Given that the CPU's 16-thread performance is strong (7,680 in 3DMark max threads) and the GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad score is 3,854, the system is likely balanced at this setting, with neither component fully saturating.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between High and Ultra at 1440p?

A: High averages 117.5 FPS, while Ultra averages 111.7 FPS. The 5.8 FPS difference (5.2%) is small, so enabling Ultra at 1440p is a reasonable choice if you want maximum visual quality without a major performance hit.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested systems in this game?

A: It ranks 467th out of 1,769 combos, placing it in the top 26.4% of all configurations. This is a strong result for a mid-range CPU paired with an upper-mid-range GPU.

Q: Does the 12 GB VRAM cause any issues at 4K Ultra?

A: No. The 4K Ultra average of 56.4 FPS shows no signs of VRAM-related stuttering. The 12 GB GDDR6X capacity with 504.2 GB/s bandwidth is more than adequate for this game's 4K texture loads.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals how the system scales from 1080p to 4K. At Low settings, the progression is 355.2 FPS (1080p) → 232.7 FPS (1440p) → 119.7 FPS (4K). This represents a 34.5% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 66.3% drop from 1080p to 4K. At High settings, the numbers are 181.6 FPS → 117.5 FPS → 59.1 FPS, with drops of 35.3% and 67.5% respectively. The percentage drops are remarkably consistent across settings, indicating that the system's scaling behavior is resolution-bound rather than settings-bound.

The 4K-to-1080p ratio at High is 59.1/181.6 = 0.325, meaning 4K delivers roughly one-third of the 1080p frame rate. This is typical for a GPU-bound scenario — the RTX 4070 has to render four times as many pixels at 4K. However, the CPU's role becomes visible when comparing Low settings across resolutions: 355.2 FPS at 1080p Low versus 119.7 FPS at 4K Low. The 4K Low result is still high, suggesting that even at 4K, the GPU has enough headroom to maintain playable frame rates when visual effects are minimized. The limiting component shifts from CPU at 1080p Low (where the GPU could theoretically push even higher than 355.2 FPS if the CPU were faster) to GPU at 4K Ultra (where the 56.4 FPS result reflects the GPU's raw rendering limits). The data indicates that at 1440p, the system is well-balanced, with neither component dominating the frame rate outcome.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its highest frame rates. Low settings average 355.2 FPS, which is exceptional for any game and far exceeds typical display refresh rates. Medium settings drop to 257.9 FPS, still more than enough for 240 Hz monitors. High settings average 181.6 FPS, suitable for 165 Hz or 180 Hz displays. Ultra settings produce 172.5 FPS, a modest 5% reduction from High, indicating that the Ultra preset's additional effects (likely improved shadows and reflections) are not particularly demanding at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain high but show the expected resolution penalty. Low settings average 232.7 FPS, which is still excellent for competitive play. Medium settings hit 164.6 FPS, comfortably above 144 Hz refresh rates. High settings average 117.5 FPS, which is playable on standard 60 Hz monitors and acceptable on 120 Hz panels. Ultra settings produce 111.7 FPS, a 5.2% reduction from High — the smallest absolute drop among all resolutions, suggesting that Ultra's extra features have diminishing returns at 1440p.

At 3840x2160, the system shows its limits. Low settings average 119.7 FPS, which is impressive for 4K and suitable for 120 Hz displays. Medium settings drop to 83.9 FPS, still smooth for a simulation game on 60 Hz or 75 Hz monitors. High settings fall to 59.1 FPS, which is just below the 60 FPS threshold — noticeable but not unplayable for this genre. Ultra settings average 56.4 FPS, a 4.6% reduction from High. The 4K results show that this combo is best used at Medium settings for a locked 60+ FPS experience, or at High if you prioritize visual fidelity over a few frames per second. The data across all resolutions and settings shows a system that handles 1080p and 1440p with ease, while 4K requires setting compromises to maintain smooth frame rates.