Pc Building Simulator

# Pc Building Simulator with AMD Ryzen 9 9900X + NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650

Pc Building Simulator, a simulation title from January 2019, presents an interesting performance profile when paired with the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650. The measured data reveals a system that is heavily constrained by the GPU across all tested resolutions and settings, with the CPU's substantial capabilities largely left untapped. This combination ranks 3598 out of 3723 tested combos in this game, placing it in the bottom percentile of system pairings, which is a direct consequence of the GTX 1650's modest performance envelope relative to the processor's high-end positioning.

Settings Recommendations

The benchmark data shows a clear hierarchy across the four graphics presets—Low, Medium, High, and Ultra—with average FPS values that define the playable envelope for each resolution. At 1920x1080, the most common gaming resolution, the Low preset delivers an average of 107 FPS, which is the only setting that approaches high-refresh-rate territory. Medium drops to 76 FPS, High falls to 54 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 51 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra at 1080p shows a 56 FPS spread between the extremes, indicating that the GTX 1650's rendering capabilities are the primary determinant of performance.

For players seeking the best experience per the measured rows, the Medium preset at 1080p represents the optimal balance. The 76 FPS average is comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold, with a measured minimum of 65 FPS and maximum of 88 FPS, which indicates consistent frame delivery without significant dips. This is particularly relevant for a simulation game where interface responsiveness and smooth camera movement matter more than visual fidelity. The High preset at 54 FPS is technically playable but sits below the 60 FPS mark, which can introduce perceptible stutter during intensive build sequences or when rotating the camera in the workshop.

At 2560x1440, the situation changes markedly. Low settings produce 68 FPS, which is the only preset exceeding 60 FPS at this resolution. Medium drops to 48 FPS with a minimum of 41 FPS and maximum of 55 FPS, while High and Ultra fall to 34 FPS and 32 FPS respectively. The recommendation here shifts to Low settings as the only viable option for smooth gameplay, though the visual compromise is significant. The 1440p Medium preset, while delivering a more polished image, risks dropping below 45 FPS in demanding scenes, which can impair the gameplay experience in a title that requires precise mouse interactions for component placement.

For 3840x2160, none of the presets achieve playable frame rates. Low settings yield 35 FPS, Medium produces 25 FPS with a minimum of 21 FPS, High reaches 18 FPS, and Ultra manages only 17 FPS. The data suggests that 4K resolution is not a practical option for this GPU in this game, regardless of settings. The most pragmatic approach is to stick with 1080p Medium for the best combination of visual quality and performance, or 1080p Low if higher frame rates are prioritized for smoother camera panning and UI interaction.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Ryzen 9 9900X and GTX 1650 achieves a rank of 3598 out of 3723 tested combos in Pc Building Simulator, placing it in the bottom 3.4% of all system pairings tested. This low ranking is notable because it reflects the severe imbalance between the CPU and GPU components. The Ryzen 9 9900X is a top-tier processor that ranks in the 92nd percentile among all CPUs based on average benchmark scores, while the GTX 1650 sits in the 40th percentile among all GPUs. The game's performance is evidently driven by the GPU, and the processor's high-end capabilities provide no tangible benefit to frame rates in this title.

The ranking context becomes clearer when examining the GPU's nearest rivals. The GTX 1650's average benchmark score of 7472 places it just 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (7447), 0.4% ahead of the Intel UHD Graphics 750 (7441), and 0.6% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 350 (7425). It trails the Intel Arc A310 by 1% (7550). This cluster of GPUs around the 7400-7550 score range indicates that the GTX 1650 is competing with entry-level and integrated graphics solutions, which explains why this combo ranks so poorly in a game that likely has modest rendering requirements but still exceeds what this GPU can deliver at higher settings.

For the CPU, the Ryzen 9 9900X's nearest rivals show a tightly packed group at the top of the performance spectrum. The AMD EPYC 9015 averages 57555 (0.1% ahead), the AMD EPYC 7313 averages 57399 (0.2% behind), the Intel Core i9-14900 averages 58115 (1.1% ahead), and the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M averages 58323 (1.4% ahead). The Ryzen's average benchmark score of 57498 places it squarely in this elite tier, but this processing power is essentially idle when paired with a GPU that becomes the bottleneck at every resolution and setting combination tested.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650, based on the TU117 chip and Turing architecture on a 12 nm process, provides 4 GB of GDDR5 memory across a 128-bit bus, yielding 128.1 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The memory operates at 2001 MHz, and the GPU clocks run at 1485 MHz base with a 1665 MHz boost. These specifications, combined with 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, deliver a raw compute capability of 2.984 TFLOPS FP32 and a pixel rate of 53.28 GPixel/s.

The VRAM capacity of 4 GB is a critical factor in this game's performance at higher resolutions. The measured FPS data shows a consistent pattern where Ultra settings at every resolution produce the lowest frame rates, which suggests that the game's highest preset may be exceeding the 4 GB VRAM allocation, causing the GPU to resort to slower memory operations. The 128-bit memory bus and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth also become limiting factors at 1440p and 4K resolutions, where the pixel throughput demands exceed what this memory subsystem can sustain.

The GPU's benchmark scores reinforce its position as an entry-level part. The passmark G3D score of 7880 and the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 305 indicate limited DirectX 12 performance, which is relevant for a game released in 2019 that may use modern rendering features. The DirectX 11 score of 58 in passmark also shows that the GPU's legacy API performance is modest, while the DirectX 9 score of 124 is relatively strong, suggesting that older rendering paths run more efficiently on this hardware.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves 107 FPS average, which is the highest frame rate recorded for this combo. Medium follows at 76 FPS with a minimum of 65 FPS and maximum of 88 FPS, High drops to 54 FPS, and Ultra reaches 51 FPS. The delta between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 56 FPS, representing a 52% reduction in frame rate when moving from the lowest to highest quality settings.

At 2560x1440, the pattern continues but with lower absolute values. Low produces 68 FPS, Medium averages 48 FPS with a minimum of 41 FPS and maximum of 55 FPS, High reaches 34 FPS, and Ultra falls to 32 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra is 36 FPS, which is a smaller absolute delta than at 1080p but represents a similar proportional reduction of 53%. Notably, the Ultra preset at 1440p (32 FPS) is nearly identical to the High preset at 4K (18 FPS) in terms of the gap from the Low preset at each respective resolution.

At 3840x2160, the performance degrades substantially. Low averages 35 FPS, Medium averages 25 FPS with a minimum of 21 FPS and maximum of 29 FPS, High reaches 18 FPS, and Ultra produces 17 FPS. The minimum FPS values at Medium settings across all resolutions—21 FPS at 4K, 41 FPS at 1440p, and 65 FPS at 1080p—show that frame pacing remains consistent within each preset, with no major stuttering anomalies beyond what the averages suggest.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 1440p to 4K reveals important insights about the limiting component. At Low settings, the transition from 1080p (107 FPS) to 1440p (68 FPS) represents a 36% reduction in frame rate, and the transition from 1440p to 4K (35 FPS) represents a 49% reduction. These scaling factors are close to the pixel count increases—1440p has 1.78 times the pixels of 1080p, and 4K has 2.25 times the pixels of 1440p—which indicates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck across the entire resolution range.

At Medium settings, the scaling shows a similar pattern. From 1080p (76 FPS) to 1440p (48 FPS), the reduction is 37%, and from 1440p to 4K (25 FPS), it is 48%. The consistent scaling ratios across settings suggest that the rendering workload scales predictably with pixel count, and the GTX 1650's fixed hardware resources are the limiting factor. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see diminishing FPS reductions at lower resolutions, where the GPU has more headroom and the CPU's frame preparation time becomes the constraint.

The Ultra settings show the most severe scaling, with 51 FPS at 1080p dropping to 32 FPS at 1440p (37% reduction) and then to 17 FPS at 4K (47% reduction). The fact that the Ultra preset at 4K produces nearly identical FPS to the High preset at 4K (17 vs 18 FPS) suggests that the GPU is fully saturated at this resolution, and additional quality settings have minimal impact because the hardware is already at its limit. This resolution scaling analysis confirms that the GTX 1650's rendering throughput, rather than the Ryzen 9 9900X's processing power, determines the frame rates in this game.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for this system?

A: The 1920x1080 Medium preset provides the best balance, with an average of 76 FPS and a minimum of 65 FPS. This is the only resolution and setting combination that offers both visual quality above Low and frame rates comfortably above 60 FPS.

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

A: Based on the measured data, no. At 3840x2160, even the Low preset only achieves 35 FPS, while Medium drops to 25 FPS, High to 18 FPS, and Ultra to 17 FPS. None of these frame rates approach the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 1440p?

A: At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 107 to 68, a 36% reduction. At Medium, it drops from 76 to 48 (37% reduction), and at High, from 54 to 34 (37% reduction). The consistent reduction suggests the GPU is the limiting factor.

Q: Why does this combo rank so low in the benchmark database?

A: The combo ranks 3598 out of 3723 tested combinations because the GTX 1650's average benchmark score of 7472 places it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs, while the Ryzen 9 9900X ranks in the 92nd percentile of CPUs. The extreme imbalance means the CPU's power cannot compensate for the GPU's limitations.

Q: What is the difference between High and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: The measured data shows High averaging 54 FPS and Ultra averaging 51 FPS, a difference of only 3 FPS. This suggests that the Ultra preset adds minimal visual benefit relative to its performance cost, making High the more efficient choice if visual quality is prioritized over Medium.

Q: Does the Ryzen 9 9900X help performance in this game?

A: The data indicates no. The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K follows pixel count increases almost exactly, which is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario. The CPU's 12 cores, 24 threads, and boost clock of 5.60 GHz provide far more processing capability than this game requires, leaving the GTX 1650 as the sole performance limiter.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X, built on the Zen 5 architecture with the Granite Ridge codename, presents a specification sheet that is dramatically mismatched with the GTX 1650's capabilities. This 12-core, 24-thread processor runs at a 4.40 GHz base clock and 5.60 GHz boost clock, with a 64 MB L3 cache and 1 MB L2 cache per core. The CPU's 3DMark scores show strong multi-threaded performance, with 12552 in the 16-thread test and 13929 in the max-thread test, while single-thread performance reaches 1286 in the 3DMark single-thread test.

The Cinebench R23 results of 32172 multi-core and 2253 single-core, along with a Geekbench multi-core score of 22174 and single-core score of 3010, place this processor firmly at the top of consumer CPU performance charts. The passmark multi-thread score of 54643 and single-thread score of 4672 further confirm its capabilities. The CPU's average benchmark score of 57498 places it in the 92nd percentile of all CPUs, and its nearest rivals—the AMD EPYC 9015, AMD EPYC 7313, Intel Core i9-14900, and Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M—all fall within a 1.4% range of its average score.

In Pc Building Simulator, however, this processing power goes largely unused. The measured FPS data shows no evidence of CPU limitation at any resolution or setting. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 107 FPS, which is likely near the game's engine limit or the GPU's rendering ceiling, but the frame rate drops consistently with resolution increases, following the pixel count scaling that indicates GPU-bound performance. The CPU's 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth and DDR5 support provide ample data throughput, but the game's rendering workload is dominated by the GPU's 2.984 TFLOPS FP32 compute capability and 128.1 GB/s memory bandwidth.

The CPU's benchmark scores reveal a processor that excels at heavily threaded workloads—the 3DMark max-thread score of 13929 is only 11% higher than the 16-thread score of 12552, indicating excellent scaling. But a simulation game like Pc Building Simulator, which likely has modest CPU requirements due to its non-real-time physics and build mechanics, cannot leverage this capability. The result is that the Ryzen 9 9900X sits idle relative to its potential, while the GTX 1650's 4 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory bus become the definitive constraints on performance across all measured configurations.