Pc Building Simulator

# Pc Building Simulator — Intel Core i5-10400F + AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT

This combination of a 6-core Comet Lake processor and a top-tier RDNA 2 graphics card produces a fascinating split personality in Pc Building Simulator. At 1080p, the data shows frame rates that approach the limits of high-refresh displays, while at 4K, the experience becomes demanding enough to test the GPU's 16 GB frame buffer. The measured results reveal a system that scales predictably with resolution, but the relationship between settings and frame rate is not always linear, suggesting that the simulation's workload reacts unusually to certain graphical toggles.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data from 1080p to 4K reveals a steep and consistent performance drop that points squarely at the GPU as the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions. At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 170.5 FPS at 1920x1080 to 105.3 FPS at 2560x1440, a reduction of roughly 38%. Moving to 3840x2160, the High preset yields only 57.5 FPS, which is about 66% lower than the 1080p result. This scaling pattern is typical of a GPU-bound scenario—the CPU's 6 cores and 12 threads can feed frames quickly at lower resolutions, but the RX 6800 XT's rendering workload grows faster than the resolution increase.

The gap between 1440p and 4K is particularly telling. At Low settings, the 1440p average of 215.8 FPS drops to 110.3 FPS at 4K, a 49% decline. At Ultra, the same resolution step moves from 103 FPS to 51.2 FPS, again roughly a 50% reduction. This consistent halving across settings suggests that the 4K resolution doubles the pixel count relative to 1440p (not exactly, but close), and the frame rate follows that mathematical relationship almost perfectly. The data indicates that the RX 6800 XT's 512.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 20.74 TFLOPS FP32 throughput are being fully utilized at 4K, with no CPU-related ceiling appearing even at the lowest settings.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT's specifications paint a picture of a card built for high-resolution gaming, and the measured results in Pc Building Simulator largely confirm this. With 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, the card has substantial bandwidth headroom—512.0 GB/s—which becomes critical when rendering at 3840x2160 where texture and geometry data demands are highest. The boost clock of 2250 MHz, with a game clock of 2015 MHz, allows the card to sustain high throughput, though the simulation's performance at 4K Ultra (51.2 FPS) suggests that even this flagship-tier GPU is not overkill for this game at maximum settings.

Interestingly, the GPU's 72 ray accelerators and RDNA 2.0 architecture do not appear to provide an outsized advantage in this title, as the frame rates scale almost linearly with settings rather than showing the kind of dramatic jumps that ray tracing workloads often produce. The card's 87th percentile ranking among all GPUs, based on its average benchmark score of 49982, places it in the upper echelon, but the nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX 4070 Ti SUPER (2.6% slower) and the Intel Arc A550M (0.5% slower), indicating that the field is tightly packed at this performance tier. The 16 GB frame buffer is a notable asset—at 4K High, the card maintains 57.5 FPS, which is playable but not silky smooth, and the memory capacity ensures that texture quality does not become a limiting factor.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the database of tested CPU-GPU combinations, this pairing sits at rank 668 out of 1769 combos, placing it in the 62nd percentile overall. This ranking is somewhat surprising given the individual strengths of both components—the CPU's 73rd percentile standing and the GPU's 87th percentile—but it reflects the fact that Pc Building Simulator is not a graphically demanding title in the traditional sense. The simulation genre typically relies more on CPU logic and game-state updates than on complex rendering, yet the measured FPS data shows that the GPU still dominates the performance profile at higher resolutions.

The combo's rank suggests that there are many other pairings that achieve better results in this specific game, likely because the simulation's engine is not optimized to leverage the RX 6800 XT's full compute potential. The CPU's nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks—the AMD EPYC 7552 (0.4% higher score), AMD Ryzen 3 7320C (0.8% lower), Intel Core i5-8500 (1.1% lower), and AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 (1.2% lower)—all sit within a narrow performance band, indicating that the i5-10400F is not a standout in raw compute. Yet the measured game performance is strong, which implies that the game's engine is more sensitive to GPU throughput than to CPU multi-threading capabilities.

Settings Recommendations

Examining the measured rows across each resolution, the data suggests that the High preset offers the most balanced experience for this combo, particularly at 1440p where it achieves 105.3 FPS. At 1080p, High delivers 170.5 FPS, which is well above the 144 Hz threshold for high-refresh monitors, while Ultra drops to 159.9 FPS—still excellent but with diminishing visual returns for a 6.6% performance cost. The Medium preset at 1080p produces 228.1 FPS, which is 34% faster than High, but the visual quality difference in a simulation game may not justify the jump for most users.

At 4K, the recommendations become more nuanced. Ultra yields 51.2 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target, while High improves to 57.5 FPS—still not quite there. Dropping to Medium provides 79.1 FPS, a substantial 38% improvement over High, and Low reaches 110.3 FPS. For a simulation game where precise mouse control and UI responsiveness matter more than fast-paced action, the Medium preset at 4K appears to be the sweet spot, offering smooth performance without sacrificing too much visual fidelity. At 1440p, Ultra at 103 FPS is playable, but High at 105.3 FPS is nearly identical, suggesting that the Ultra preset's additional effects are not well-optimized.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Pc Building Simulator at 4K 60 FPS?

A: At 4K High settings, the average FPS is 57.5, slightly below the 60 FPS target. Dropping to Medium settings raises the average to 79.1 FPS, which comfortably exceeds 60 FPS.

Q: How does the RX 6800 XT compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score of 49982 is 0.5% higher than the Intel Arc A550M, 1.7% lower than the NVIDIA RTX A1000, 1.9% higher than the NVIDIA CMP 50HX, and 2.6% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 1080p gaming?

A: At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset delivers 159.9 FPS, while High achieves 170.5 FPS. For maximum smoothness, Medium reaches 228.1 FPS, but the visual trade-off may not be worth it for a simulation title.

Q: Is the i5-10400F a bottleneck at any resolution?

A: The data shows no evidence of CPU bottlenecking. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 256.9 FPS, and at 4K Low it achieves 110.3 FPS, with the GPU clearly being the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

Q: How does the CPU's multi-threading performance compare to its single-thread performance?

A: The CPU scores 4324 in Cinebench R20 multi-core and 610 in single-core, while in 3DMark it scores 4748 with 16 threads and 688 with a single thread. The multi-thread scaling is strong, but the game appears to rely more on the GPU.

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 1440p with Ultra settings?

A: At 2560x1440 with Ultra settings, the measured average is 103 FPS, which is just above the 100 FPS mark and suitable for high-refresh displays.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-10400F brings 6 cores and 12 threads based on the Comet Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. Its 12 MB of shared L3 cache and 42.7 GB/s memory bandwidth provide adequate feeding for the RX 6800 XT, but the benchmark data reveals that the CPU's compute capabilities are modest relative to its GPU partner. In Cinebench R23, the CPU scores 10297 multi-core and 1453 single-core, while in Geekbench it achieves 5783 multi-core and 1454 single-core. These scores place the CPU in the 73rd percentile of all processors, with its nearest rivals in synthetic tests being the AMD EPYC 7552 (0.4% faster) and AMD Ryzen 3 7320C (0.8% slower).

The game's performance at low resolutions provides indirect evidence of CPU capability. At 1080p Low, the system produces 256.9 FPS, which suggests that the CPU can sustain very high frame rates when the GPU is not stressed. However, the 3DMark single-thread score of 688 and PassMark single-thread score of 2541 indicate that the CPU's per-core performance is not exceptional, which could theoretically limit frame rates in CPU-bound scenarios. Yet the measured data shows that even at 1080p, the GPU remains the limiting factor, as the frame rate drops by 33% when moving from Low to High settings at the same resolution.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the frame rate ranges from a low of 159.9 FPS at Ultra settings to a high of 256.9 FPS at Low settings. The Medium preset delivers 228.1 FPS, while High achieves 170.5 FPS. This represents a 38% performance difference between Low and High, and a 60% difference between Low and Ultra.

Moving to 2560x1440, the average FPS values are 215.8 (Low), 150.4 (Medium), 105.3 (High), and 103 (Ultra). The step from Low to Medium is a 30% reduction, while High to Ultra is only a 2% drop, indicating that the Ultra preset at 1440p adds minimal overhead over High but provides a significant visual upgrade.

At 3840x2160, the results are 110.3 FPS (Low), 79.1 FPS (Medium), 57.5 FPS (High), and 51.2 FPS (Ultra). The relative scaling is more even here, with each setting step costing roughly 20-30% performance. The difference between High and Ultra is 11%, which is more pronounced than at lower resolutions, suggesting that the Ultra preset's effects are more demanding at 4K. Overall, the data shows that this combo is best suited for 1440p High or 4K Medium, depending on whether the user prioritizes frame rate or visual fidelity.