Pc Building Simulator

Pc Building Simulator is a simulation title that stresses system assembly logic more than raw graphical fidelity, but the benchmark data still shows a clear performance hierarchy between the CPU and GPU in this combo. The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER produce very high frame rates across all tested settings, with the CPU clearly dominating at lower resolutions and the GPU becoming the limiting factor at 4K. This pairing ranks 75th out of 1769 tested combos in this game, placing it in the top 5% of all configurations measured.

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

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X brings 12 cores and 24 threads to the table, running on the Zen 5 architecture with a base clock of 4.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. Its 64 MB of shared L3 cache and support for DDR5 memory with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth give it substantial headroom for simulation logic, which often relies on single-threaded performance for game state updates. The CPU's benchmark results confirm this strength: a single-thread Geekbench score of 3341 and a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 6555 place it well ahead of most desktop processors.

In Pc Building Simulator, the CPU's influence is most visible at 1080p, where the frame rates are so high that the GPU is barely breaking a sweat. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo hits 464.8 FPS, which is more than triple the 4K Ultra result. This massive gap indicates that the Ryzen 9 9900X is capable of feeding the RTX 4080 SUPER far more frames than the GPU can render at higher resolutions. The CPU's multicore performance is also relevant, as the game's simulation of component compatibility and thermal calculations can utilize multiple threads. A Cinebench R23 multicore score of 46438 shows strong parallel throughput, though the game itself rarely becomes fully CPU-bound at any tested resolution.

The 9900X sits in the 94th percentile of all CPUs tested, with an average benchmark score of 54450. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D, scores 54681, a mere 0.4% difference that places the 9900X slightly behind. The Intel Core i7-14700F trails by 0.7% with a score of 54097, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K and 245KF are ahead by 1.5% and 1.8% respectively. These margins are negligible in real-world gaming, meaning the 9900X's core configuration is competitive with the best alternatives for this workload.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

The measured data shows a clear pattern: Ultra settings provide a fully playable experience at every resolution, but the jump from High to Ultra costs more frames than the visual difference justifies in a simulation game. At 2560x1440, High settings deliver 149.7 FPS while Ultra drops to 138 FPS — a loss of only 11.7 FPS, which is surprisingly modest. The story changes at 4K, where High hits 75.2 FPS and Ultra falls to 72.6 FPS, still comfortably above 60 FPS but approaching the threshold where frame drops become noticeable.

For the best experience, High settings at 1440p is the sweet spot. It offers 149.7 FPS, which is smooth enough for any monitor, and the visual difference from Ultra in a game focused on menus and component models is minimal. At 1080p, even Ultra holds 219.4 FPS, so users with high-refresh displays can max everything out without concern. The Medium preset at 4K produces 110.9 FPS, which is a strong option for those who want higher resolution without sacrificing smoothness — it is 35.7 FPS faster than High at that resolution.

The Low preset is only worth considering if you are chasing maximum frame rates, such as 464.8 FPS at 1080p or 296.5 FPS at 1440p. For a simulation game where you spend most time in menus and building screens, these extreme frame rates offer no practical benefit. The data recommends High as the default, with Ultra reserved for 1080p and 1440p if you want the highest settings without worrying about performance.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals where the bottleneck shifts. At Low settings, the combo delivers 464.8 FPS at 1080p, 296.5 FPS at 1440p, and 152.8 FPS at 4K. That is a 67% drop from 1080p to 4K at Low, which is a massive reduction that points directly at the GPU being the limiting factor. The RTX 4080 SUPER is being fed far more frames than it can render at higher pixel counts, meaning the CPU has ample headroom.

At High settings, the drop is less severe but still pronounced: 230.7 FPS at 1080p, 149.7 FPS at 1440p, and 75.2 FPS at 4K. The 4K result is roughly one-third of the 1080p result, which is exactly what you would expect when the GPU becomes fully saturated. The Ultra preset shows a similar pattern, with 219.4 FPS at 1080p falling to 138 FPS at 1440p and 72.6 FPS at 4K. The 4K Ultra result is 33% of the 1080p Ultra result, confirming that the GPU is the sole constraint at higher resolutions.

The fact that the 1080p Low result (464.8 FPS) is more than double the 4K Low result (152.8 FPS) indicates that the RTX 4080 SUPER is the limiting component in every scenario above 1080p. If the CPU were the bottleneck, you would see smaller differences between resolutions because the CPU's work does not scale with pixel count. The data shows the opposite — the frame rate drops proportionally with resolution, which is classic GPU-bound behavior. The Ryzen 9 9900X is never the limiting factor in this combo, even at 1080p Low where it must feed 464.8 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific CPU-GPU pairing ranks 75th out of 1769 tested combos in Pc Building Simulator, placing it in the 95.8th percentile of all configurations. That is an outstanding result, but it is importantly the rank reflects the entire combo's performance, not just individual component strength. The CPU ranks in the 94th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU ranks in the 88th percentile of all GPUs, so the combo ranking is higher than either component would achieve alone. This suggests the pairing is well-balanced for this game, with the CPU's strength compensating for the GPU's slightly lower percentile.

The rank of 75 out of 1769 means there are 74 combos that outperform this one, but those likely involve top-tier components like the RTX 4090 or the Ryzen 9 9950X3D. For a practical build, this combo sits near the top of what is achievable without going to extreme enthusiast hardware. The data shows that adding a stronger GPU would improve the 4K results, but the 1080p and 1440p performance is already so high that the gains would be marginal. Conversely, a weaker CPU would not meaningfully hurt performance because the current CPU is never the bottleneck.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture with 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 736.3 GB/s of bandwidth. Its boost clock of 2550 MHz and 10240 shading units provide substantial raw compute power, reflected in a Passmark G3D score of 34245 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 6600. The GPU's 80 RT cores and 320 tensor cores are not heavily utilized in Pc Building Simulator, which is primarily a CPU-driven simulation with simple 3D rendering, but the high memory bandwidth ensures that texture loading and UI rendering remain fast.

The GPU's percentile rank of 88 places it below the CPU's 94th percentile, and its average benchmark score of 53610 is nearly identical to the nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT, which scores 53489 (a 0.2% difference). The RTX 4080 SUPER leads the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M by 0.4% and the RX 7700S by 2.1%, while trailing the RTX 5070 Ti by 2.9%. These small deltas mean the RTX 4080 SUPER is competitive with its immediate peers, but it is not a class-leading GPU in this game. The 16 GB VRAM is more than sufficient for Pc Building Simulator at any resolution, as the game does not feature large textures or complex shaders that would push memory usage.

The GPU's role becomes clear when examining the 4K results. At 4K Ultra, the combo achieves 72.6 FPS, which is the lowest measured result but still playable. The GPU is the limiting factor here, as evidenced by the sharp drop from 1440p Ultra (138 FPS) to 4K Ultra (72.6 FPS). The RTX 4080 SUPER's 52.22 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is not enough to maintain high frame rates at 4K with Ultra settings in this game, but it is sufficient for 4K High at 75.2 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers exceptional performance across all settings. Low settings produce 464.8 FPS, Medium hits 333.8 FPS, High reaches 230.7 FPS, and Ultra maintains 219.4 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra is only 11.3 FPS, which is surprisingly small and suggests that the Ultra preset adds little graphical load beyond High. The difference between Low and Medium is 131 FPS, while the difference between Medium and High is 103.1 FPS, showing that each preset step has a diminishing impact on frame rate.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates remain high but show a more pronounced drop from 1080p. Low produces 296.5 FPS, Medium hits 207.6 FPS, High reaches 149.7 FPS, and Ultra drops to 138 FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p is roughly 63-64% for each preset, meaning the GPU is beginning to feel the load of additional pixels. The difference between High and Ultra is only 11.7 FPS, similar to the 1080p gap, which reinforces that Ultra is not significantly more demanding than High.

At 3840x2160, the performance drops sharply, confirming the GPU is the bottleneck. Low produces 152.8 FPS, Medium hits 110.9 FPS, High reaches 75.2 FPS, and Ultra drops to 72.6 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra narrows to just 2.6 FPS, which is within the margin of error and suggests that the Ultra preset at 4K is nearly identical to High in terms of GPU load. The drop from 1440p to 4K is 48% for Low (from 296.5 to 152.8 FPS), 47% for Medium (from 207.6 to 110.9 FPS), and 50% for both High and Ultra (from 149.7 to 75.2 and 138 to 72.6, respectively). This consistent halving of frame rates when doubling pixel count is the signature of a GPU-bound scenario.