Pc Building Simulator

# Pc Building Simulator: AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 + AMD Radeon 8060S — Benchmark Analysis

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 paired with the integrated Radeon 8060S represents a unified Strix Halo platform, where the CPU and GPU share a single die, memory pool, and power envelope. In Pc Building Simulator, this combo lands at rank 1710 out of 3002 tested configurations, placing it in the lower-middle tier of the database. The data reveals a system that is heavily GPU-limited at higher resolutions, yet surprisingly capable at 1080p, with the integrated graphics scaling predictably as pixel count rises. The following analysis breaks down the measured FPS, component roles, and scaling behavior using only the benchmark data provided.

FAQ

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested configurations in Pc Building Simulator?

A: The combo ranks 1710 out of 3002 tested combos, placing it in the 57th percentile of all configurations. This is a mid-pack result, indicating that while the platform is competent, it does not challenge dedicated high-end builds in this simulation title.

Q: What is the maximum average FPS achieved at 1080p with this setup?

A: At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo reaches an average of 247 FPS. At Ultra settings, the average drops to 118 FPS, showing a wide performance envelope depending on quality presets.

Q: Does the Radeon 8060S outperform or underperform compared to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Radeon 8060S scores 55757 on average benchmarks, which is 0.1% ahead of the Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB and 0.6% behind the RTX 5080. It also leads the Radeon Pro W5700X by 1.7% and the RTX 4080 by 2.8%.

Q: How does the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 compare to its closest CPU competitors?

A: The CPU's average benchmark score is 77740, placing it 1.6% behind the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX and EPYC Embedded 8224P, 1.7% ahead of the Intel Core i9-14900K, and 2% ahead of the Ryzen 9 8945HX.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Low settings yield 156 FPS average, while Ultra drops to 74 FPS. That is a 82 FPS gap, representing a 52.6% reduction in performance when moving from the lowest to the highest quality preset.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU the primary bottleneck in this game?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the limiting factor at higher resolutions. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS falls to 39, while the CPU remains a 16-core, 32-thread part with a 5.10 GHz boost clock. The GPU's 2560 shading units and 14.85 TFLOPS FP32 performance are the more likely constraint.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 1710 out of 3002 places it near the middle of the distribution, but the percentile data for individual components tells a more nuanced story. The CPU sits in the 95th percentile against all CPUs, while the GPU is in the 87th percentile against all GPUs. This discrepancy suggests that the combination underperforms relative to what each part could achieve individually, likely due to the integrated nature of the graphics and shared power/thermal budgets.

In Pc Building Simulator, the rank reflects the game's specific demands. The simulation genre typically stresses CPU logic for component interactions, but the measured FPS at 4K Ultra (39 FPS average) indicates that the Radeon 8060S cannot maintain high frame rates at extreme resolutions. The CPU's nearest rivals — the Threadripper PRO 9945WX and EPYC Embedded 8224P — score within 1.6% higher on average, yet those are workstation-class parts with different power envelopes. The fact that this mobile-oriented APU keeps pace with them in synthetic benchmarks but still lands mid-pack in gaming suggests the GPU holds the combo back.

Notably, the combo's rank is not catastrophic; it outperforms roughly 43% of tested configurations. This positions it as a viable option for 1080p gaming but not for high-refresh 4K. The measured data at 1080p Low (247 FPS) demonstrates headroom, but the 4K Ultra result (39 FPS) confirms that users targeting 60 FPS at 4K will need to lower settings significantly.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 8060S is an integrated graphics solution built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture, sharing a 4 nm process with the CPU. It operates with a base clock of 1295 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz, which are aggressive figures for an IGP. The GPU features 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units, along with 40 ray tracing cores. Its FP32 performance is rated at 14.85 TFLOPS, with FP16 also at 14.85 TFLOPS (1:1).

Memory is system-shared, meaning the GPU draws from the same LPDDR5X pool as the CPU. The memory bus is quad-channel with a bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s, but the GPU's effective bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent" — a critical caveat for gaming performance. In Pc Building Simulator, the GPU's pixel rate of 185.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 464.0 GTexel/s provide theoretical ceilings, but measured FPS shows practical limits.

The GPU's average benchmark score is 55757, placing it in the 87th percentile. Its nearest rival, the Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB, scores 55698, a delta of just 0.1%. This means the 8060S performs essentially on par with a discrete mid-range card from a previous generation. However, the RTX 5080 scores 56083, putting the 8060S 0.6% behind — a negligible difference in synthetic tests but potentially larger in real workloads due to memory bandwidth differences.

In Pc Building Simulator, the GPU's role becomes evident in the FPS scaling across settings. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 118 FPS, which is 52.2% lower than the 247 FPS at Low. This 129 FPS drop is characteristic of a GPU that is fill-rate limited, as higher settings increase shader and texture demands. The 64 ROPs and 14.85 TFLOPS are sufficient for low-detail gaming but struggle with Ultra presets at higher resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its strongest results. Low settings produce an average of 247 FPS, Medium drops to 175 FPS, High to 124 FPS, and Ultra to 118 FPS. The Medium preset shows a minimum of 149 FPS and a maximum of 201 FPS, indicating reasonable frame pacing. The gap between High and Ultra is just 6 FPS, suggesting diminishing returns beyond High settings.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance halves in some cases. Low averages 156 FPS, Medium 111 FPS (with min 94 and max 127), High 78 FPS, and Ultra 74 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p at Low is 91 FPS, a 36.8% reduction. At Ultra, the drop is 44 FPS, a 37.3% reduction — consistent scaling across presets.

At 3840x2160, the GPU begins to struggle. Low averages 82 FPS, Medium 58 FPS (min 49, max 66), High 41 FPS, and Ultra 39 FPS. The Medium preset's minimum of 49 FPS is below the 60 FPS threshold that many users consider smooth. The gap between High and Ultra narrows to just 2 FPS, indicating that the GPU is hitting a hard performance ceiling.

The data shows a clear pattern: the combo is playable at 1080p across all settings, acceptable at 1440p with medium-to-low settings, and only viable at 4K with Low presets. The 4K Ultra result of 39 FPS is particularly telling, as it aligns with the GPU's 87th percentile ranking — strong for an IGP but not competitive with high-end discrete GPUs.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K reveals the bottleneck characteristics of this combo. At Low settings, 1080p averages 247 FPS, while 4K averages 82 FPS — a 66.8% reduction. At Ultra settings, the drop is from 118 FPS to 39 FPS, a 66.9% reduction. This near-identical percentage drop across settings indicates that the GPU is consistently the limiting factor, as pixel count increases linearly with resolution.

The theoretical pixel count at 4K is 4 times that of 1080p (3840x2160 vs 1920x1080). If the GPU were perfectly scalable, 4K performance would be roughly one-quarter of 1080p. At Low settings, 247 FPS divided by 4 is 61.75 FPS, but the actual 4K result is 82 FPS — better than the theoretical scaling. At Ultra, 118 FPS divided by 4 is 29.5 FPS, but the actual result is 39 FPS — again better. This suggests that the GPU is not purely pixel-bound; other factors like CPU overhead or memory bandwidth partially mitigate the resolution penalty.

The 1440p results reinforce this. At Low, 1080p yields 247 FPS, and 1440p yields 156 FPS. The pixel count increases by 1.78 times (2560x1440 vs 1920x1080), but FPS only drops by 36.8%, implying sub-linear scaling. This could indicate that the CPU is providing some headroom at lower resolutions, allowing the GPU to work more efficiently. However, at 4K, the GPU becomes fully saturated, and the FPS drop approaches the pixel count ratio more closely.

The limiting component is clearly the GPU. The CPU, with 16 cores and 32 threads on Zen 5 architecture, has ample processing power. Its boost clock of 5.10 GHz and 64 MB of shared L3 cache should handle the simulation logic easily. The 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is shared, but at 4K, the GPU's 14.85 TFLOPS are insufficient to maintain high frame rates.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is a 16-core, 32-thread processor based on the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Strix Halo. It has a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, with a TDP of 55 W. The CPU features 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3 cache. It supports LPDDR5X memory via a quad-channel interface, providing 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU scores 35314 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2044 in single-core. Geekbench results show 20992 multi-core and 2464 single-core. Passmark scores include 54934 for multi-thread and 4147 for single-thread. These figures place the CPU in the 95th percentile, with an average benchmark score of 77740.

The CPU's nearest rivals include the Threadripper PRO 9945WX (76513 average, 1.6% higher), EPYC Embedded 8224P (76492, 1.6% higher), i9-14900K (79097, 1.7% lower), and Ryzen 9 8945HX (76212, 2% lower). The fact that this mobile APU trades blows with desktop and workstation parts highlights its strength.

In Pc Building Simulator, the CPU's role is likely less critical than the GPU, given the game's simulation mechanics. However, the high core count and fast clock speeds ensure that CPU-bound scenarios — such as managing many components or complex build interactions — do not create frame drops. The measured FPS at 1080p Low (247 FPS) is likely CPU-limited to some degree, as the GPU could theoretically push higher if the CPU were slower.

The 55 W TDP is shared between CPU and GPU, meaning power is dynamically allocated. This could explain why the combo does not hit higher FPS at 4K, as the GPU may be power-starved when the CPU is active. The CPU's 32 threads and 64 MB L3 cache are more than sufficient for this game, so the integrated GPU's performance ceiling is the primary constraint.