Pc Building Simulator

# Pc Building Simulator: Intel Core i5-10400F + AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT

This combination of a 6-core Comet Lake processor and a 12 GB RDNA 3 graphics card delivers a wide performance envelope in Pc Building Simulator, ranging from nearly 255 FPS at 1080p Low to just above 48 FPS at 4K Ultra. The measured data reveals a system that scales predictably with resolution and settings, but with distinct bottlenecks emerging at different points in the configuration space. The combo ranks 822nd out of 1769 tested combinations, placing it in the upper-middle portion of the database, yet the raw FPS figures suggest this ranking is heavily influenced by the game's simulation workload rather than pure graphics throughput.

Resolution Scaling

The transition from 1080p to 4K produces a dramatic and consistent drop in frame rates across all settings presets, indicating that the Radeon RX 7700 XT becomes increasingly the limiting component as pixel count rises. At Low settings, the average FPS falls from 254.7 at 1920x1080 to 192.7 at 2560x1440, a reduction of 62 FPS, and then further to 103.9 at 3840x2160—less than half the 1080p figure. This 59% loss from 1080p to 4K at Low settings suggests that even at minimal graphical load, the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth are being taxed heavily by the fourfold increase in pixels.

The scaling pattern shifts when moving to higher presets. At Ultra settings, the average drops from 149.1 at 1080p to 89.9 at 1440p, then to 48.2 at 4K—a 67.7% reduction from 1080p to 4K. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 105.6 FPS, but at 4K that gap narrows to 55.7 FPS. This convergence at higher resolutions is a classic sign of GPU-bound operation: when the render target grows, the relative cost of each settings tier diminishes because pixel throughput dominates the workload. The data implies that at 4K, even Low settings cannot fully escape the GPU limitation, whereas at 1080p, the CPU has more headroom to push higher frame rates.

Interestingly, the difference between High and Ultra at each resolution is relatively small: 6.4 FPS at 1080p, 9.6 FPS at 1440p, and just 0.2 FPS at 4K. This suggests that the Ultra preset adds effects that are nearly negligible at 4K, or that the GPU is already saturated enough that the extra settings have minimal impact. The Medium preset sits roughly halfway between Low and High at all resolutions, confirming a linear scaling pattern that points to consistent GPU utilization rather than sudden bottlenecks.

GPU Role

The Radeon RX 7700 XT brings 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth—a figure that becomes critical when analyzing the 4K results. At 3840x2160 Ultra, the average FPS of 48.2 is just 0.2 FPS below the High preset's 48.4, suggesting that memory bandwidth is nearly exhausted. The GPU's boost clock of 2544 MHz and game clock of 2171 MHz provide the raw compute headroom, with 35.17 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 549.5 GTexel/s texture rate, yet the pixel rate of 244.2 GPixel/s appears to be the constraining factor at higher resolutions.

The GPU's benchmark profile places it at the 73rd percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 30097. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060, scores 30109—a delta of 0%—indicating near-identical synthetic performance. The AMD Radeon RX 570 sits 0.2% below, while the NVIDIA Tesla M60 is 0.4% ahead. This tight clustering suggests that in pure compute terms, the RX 7700 XT is well-matched to its peers, yet the measured FPS in Pc Building Simulator shows it handling the game's demands competently at 1080p and 1440p, but struggling to maintain 60 FPS at 4K on higher presets.

The 12 GB memory capacity is never explicitly stressed in the measured data, but the 432.0 GB/s bandwidth becomes relevant when comparing the 4K Low (103.9 FPS) to 4K Medium (74.3 FPS)—a 29.6 FPS drop that cannot be explained by compute alone. The memory clock of 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) provides the data rate needed for high-resolution textures, yet the game's simulation nature likely means geometry and draw calls also factor into the equation.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-10400F contributes 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and boost up to 4.30 GHz. Its 12 MB shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support (42.7 GB/s bandwidth) are modest by modern standards, but sufficient for a simulation title that likely relies on single-threaded logic for game state updates. The CPU's benchmark scores show a single-thread performance of 688 in 3dmark and 1453 in Cinebench R23, placing it at the 73rd percentile among all CPUs.

The CPU's role becomes evident when examining the 1080p results. At Low settings, the system reaches 254.7 FPS, which is likely approaching the CPU's limit for frame generation in this game. The 3dmark 16-thread score of 4748 and max-thread score of 4735 indicate that multithreaded performance is consistent, but the single-thread score of 688 suggests that per-core performance is the bottleneck for high-refresh-rate scenarios. The nearest CPU rivals include the AMD EPYC 7552 (0.4% higher average score), AMD Ryzen 3 7320C (0.8% lower), and Intel Core i5-8500 (1.1% lower), all within a narrow band that confirms the i5-10400F's mid-pack positioning.

At 1440p Low, the FPS drops to 192.7, and at 4K Low to 103.9—a clear sign that the GPU is taking over as the primary limiter beyond 1080p. However, the CPU's 12 threads and 4.30 GHz boost clock ensure that even at 4K Ultra, the system maintains playable frame rates above 48 FPS, suggesting that the CPU is not completely overwhelmed by the game's simulation overhead. The Cinebench R20 multicore score of 4324 and Geekbench multicore of 5783 show moderate multithreaded capability, which aligns with a game that likely uses a few threads for physics and logic while the graphics pipeline runs on the GPU.

FAQ

Q: What is the maximum average FPS achievable with this combo?

A: The highest measured average FPS is 254.7 at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The next highest is 217.3 at 1080p Medium, followed by 155.5 at 1080p High.

Q: Can this system maintain 60 FPS at 4K?

A: At 4K, the system only exceeds 60 FPS on Low settings, with 103.9 FPS. Medium drops to 74.3 FPS, while High and Ultra both stay below 50 FPS (48.4 and 48.2, respectively).

Q: How does the RX 7700 XT compare to its nearest rival in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The RX 7700 XT's average benchmark score is 30097, which is 0% different from the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060's 30109. The AMD Radeon RX 570 is 0.2% lower, and the NVIDIA Tesla M60 is 0.4% higher.

Q: What is the CPU's single-thread performance relative to its multithreaded score?

A: The 3dmark single-thread score is 688, while the max-thread score is 4735, indicating a roughly 6.9x scaling across 12 threads. The Cinebench R23 single-core score is 1453 versus 10297 multicore.

Q: Which settings preset shows the smallest FPS difference between High and Ultra?

A: At 4K, the difference is just 0.2 FPS (48.4 vs 48.2). At 1440p, it's 9.6 FPS (99.5 vs 89.9), and at 1080p, it's 6.4 FPS (155.5 vs 149.1).

Q: Where does this combo rank among all tested combinations?

A: The combo ranks 822nd out of 1769 tested combinations, placing it in the 46.5th percentile of the database.

Settings Recommendations

For 1080p gaming, the Medium preset at 217.3 FPS offers an excellent balance, delivering over 200 FPS while providing better visual quality than Low's 254.7 FPS. The High preset at 155.5 FPS remains highly playable and adds further fidelity, while Ultra at 149.1 FPS is nearly identical in cost—only 6.4 FPS less—making it the best choice for 1080p if visual quality is prioritized. Given the small gap between High and Ultra, there is little reason to choose High over Ultra at this resolution.

At 1440p, the Medium preset at 138.7 FPS is the sweet spot, offering smooth gameplay well above 120 FPS. High at 99.5 FPS is still excellent for most displays, but the drop to Ultra at 89.9 FPS suggests that High provides the best balance of visual fidelity and performance. Low at 192.7 FPS is only recommended for competitive play where frame rate trumps visuals, but the 54 FPS difference between Low and Medium shows that Medium is a far more reasonable choice.

For 4K, the situation is more constrained. Low at 103.9 FPS is the only preset that clears 60 FPS comfortably, while Medium at 74.3 FPS remains playable. High and Ultra both fall below 50 FPS (48.4 and 48.2), making them borderline for smooth gameplay. The data suggests that 4K users should stick with Medium or Low, as the High-to-Ultra gap is negligible but the Medium-to-High drop of 26.1 FPS is substantial.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers 254.7 FPS on Low, 217.3 FPS on Medium, 155.5 FPS on High, and 149.1 FPS on Ultra. The scaling from Low to Medium is 37.4 FPS, from Medium to High is 61.8 FPS, and from High to Ultra is just 6.4 FPS. This pattern indicates that the Medium-to-High transition introduces the most significant performance cost, while Ultra adds relatively little overhead.

At 2560x1440, the averages are 192.7 FPS on Low, 138.7 FPS on Medium, 99.5 FPS on High, and 89.9 FPS on Ultra. The drops are 54.0 FPS from Low to Medium, 39.2 FPS from Medium to High, and 9.6 FPS from High to Ultra. The relative cost of Medium shrinks compared to 1080p, but High becomes more expensive, reinforcing the GPU-bound nature at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the averages are 103.9 FPS on Low, 74.3 FPS on Medium, 48.4 FPS on High, and 48.2 FPS on Ultra. The reductions are 29.6 FPS from Low to Medium, 25.9 FPS from Medium to High, and only 0.2 FPS from High to Ultra. The near-zero difference between High and Ultra at 4K strongly suggests that the GPU is fully saturated at this resolution, with memory bandwidth or pixel throughput capping performance regardless of the additional settings.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-10400F and AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT ranks 822nd out of 1769 tested combinations in Pc Building Simulator, placing it just below the median of tested systems. This ranking is somewhat surprising given the high frame rates measured, but it reflects the fact that many other combos in the database likely feature more powerful CPUs or GPUs that excel in this simulation-heavy title. The CPU's 73rd percentile ranking and the GPU's 73rd percentile ranking both suggest mid-to-upper tier performance, yet the combo rank of 822/1769 (46.5th percentile) indicates that the pairing does not synergize as well as individual component rankings might imply.

The data shows that the system is well-suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, with the CPU providing enough single-thread performance to drive high frame rates at lower resolutions. However, at 4K, the GPU becomes the clear bottleneck, and the combo's rank likely suffers relative to systems with higher-end GPUs that can maintain 60 FPS at Ultra settings. The rank also reflects the game's simulation nature, which may favor CPUs with higher single-thread scores over the i5-10400F's 688 3dmark single-thread result. For users targeting 1080p or 1440p, this combo offers a strong experience, but for 4K enthusiasts, it falls short of the top-tier combinations in the database.