Pc Building Simulator

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

The Intel Core i5-10400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Comet Lake architecture, built on Intel's 14nm process node. It operates with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz, with a 65W TDP. The chip features 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support includes DDR4 with a dual-channel bus, providing a theoretical bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. The CPU connects via PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes.

In terms of raw compute benchmarks, this processor delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 10283 and a single-core score of 1451. The Geekbench multi-core result is 6257, while single-core is 1420. The 3DMark tests show a max-threads score of 4735, with 8-thread and 4-thread scores of 3929 and 2560 respectively, and a 2-thread score of 1350. The single-thread 3DMark score is 688. PassMark results include a multithread score of 12115 and a single-thread score of 2541, with floating-point math at 25956 and integer math at 41471.

The CPU holds a percentile rank of 68 among all CPUs tested, meaning it outperforms roughly two-thirds of the processor pool. Its average benchmark score is 14185. The nearest rivals provide context: the Intel Xeon 6756E scores 14163 (deltaPct 0.2), the Intel Core 7 160UL scores 14232 (deltaPct -0.3), the AMD EPYC 7552 scores 14115 (deltaPct 0.5), and the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C scores 14277 (deltaPct -0.6). These deltas are all within 0.6%, indicating the i5-10400F sits in a tightly contested performance band where no single rival holds a meaningful advantage in aggregate CPU benchmarks.

For Pc Building Simulator, a simulation title, the CPU's role is significant because these games often rely on consistent frame pacing and physics calculations. The 12 threads provide ample parallelism for simulation logic, and the boost clock of 4.30 GHz ensures responsive single-threaded performance for UI interactions and menu navigation. The benchmark data shows the CPU's multi-threaded capabilities are well-balanced — the 3DMark max-threads score of 4735 is nearly identical to the 16-thread score of 4748, indicating that the processor reaches its scaling ceiling at 12 threads without significant degradation. The single-thread score of 688 in 3DMark, while modest, is sufficient for the game's core logic, which likely does not require extreme per-core throughput.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti is built on the Ampere architecture, fabricated on Samsung's 8nm process with 17,400 million transistors on a 392 mm² die. It features 8 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 608.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU runs at a base clock of 1575 MHz with a boost clock of 1770 MHz, and memory operates at 1188 MHz with 19 Gbps effective speed. The card has 6144 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 96 raster operation pipelines. It includes 48 RT cores and 192 tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and DLSS. The pixel rate is 169.9 GPixel/s, texture rate is 339.8 GTexel/s, and FP32 performance reaches 21.75 TFLOPS.

In benchmark tests, the RTX 3070 Ti achieves a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3478. PassMark results show a G3D score of 23356, G2D of 1055, and GPU compute of 11601. Geekbench scores include OpenCL at 119718 and Vulkan at 139541. The GPU's percentile rank is 75 among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 29945. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Mobile (score 29928, deltaPct 0.1), AMD Radeon RX 6800 (score 30095, deltaPct -0.5), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti (score 29783, deltaPct 0.5), and AMD Radeon RX 6700 (score 30433, deltaPct -1.6). The performance differences are minimal, all within 1.6%, placing the 3070 Ti in a competitive tier where architectural differences matter less than driver optimization and game-specific workloads.

For Pc Building Simulator, the GPU role is primarily about rendering the 3D workspace, component models, and case visualization. The 8 GB VRAM is more than adequate for this title, which does not feature high-resolution textures or complex geometry. The 608.3 GB/s memory bandwidth ensures that texture streaming and scene updates remain fluid even when rotating the camera around fully populated systems. The boost clock of 1770 MHz provides consistent frame delivery, and the high pixel rate of 169.9 GPixel/s helps maintain smooth visuals at high refresh rates, particularly at 1080p where the GPU is not the bottleneck.

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

The measured FPS data reveals a clear scaling pattern across resolutions. At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves 256 FPS, which drops to 105 FPS at 4K Low — a reduction of 59%. At Medium settings, 1080p delivers 225 FPS while 4K drops to 74 FPS, a 67% reduction. High settings show 159 FPS at 1080p falling to 52 FPS at 4K, a 67% drop. Ultra settings produce 151 FPS at 1080p and 50 FPS at 4K, a 67% decrease.

The consistency of the percentage drop across Medium, High, and Ultra settings — all around 67% — indicates that the GPU becomes the dominant limiting factor as resolution increases. The CPU, with its 12 threads and 4.30 GHz boost, maintains sufficient headroom at 1080p to push frame rates above 150 FPS even at Ultra settings. However, at 4K, the GPU's raw pixel throughput and memory bandwidth constrain performance, as evidenced by the 50-52 FPS range at High and Ultra.

The Low settings at 4K (105 FPS) versus 1080p (256 FPS) show a slightly smaller relative drop of 59%, suggesting that at Low settings the CPU begins to play a more significant role, as the GPU has less work per frame. The 1080p Low result of 256 FPS indicates the CPU can sustain very high frame rates when the GPU is not heavily loaded, but the 4K Low result of 105 FPS shows that even with minimal graphics load, resolution scaling still taxes the GPU substantially. This pattern confirms that for this combination, the RTX 3070 Ti is the primary performance limiter at 1440p and above, while the i5-10400F is sufficient to avoid bottlenecking at 1080p across all settings.

# FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo achieves at 1080p?

A: The highest average FPS at 1080p is 256, achieved at Low settings. Medium settings deliver 225 FPS, High settings 159 FPS, and Ultra settings 151 FPS.

Q: How does the 4K Ultra performance compare to 1080p Ultra?

A: At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 50, which represents a 67% reduction from the 151 FPS seen at 1080p Ultra. This indicates the GPU is the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

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

A: At 1080p, the CPU can sustain frame rates above 250 FPS at Low settings, suggesting it is not a bottleneck. At 4K, the performance drop across all settings indicates the GPU becomes the limiting component, as the CPU has sufficient headroom.

Q: What is the rank of this combo among all tested combinations?

A: The Intel Core i5-10400F + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti combo ranks 1537 out of 3723 tested combinations in Pc Building Simulator, placing it in the upper half of all systems.

Q: How does the RTX 3070 Ti compare to its nearest GPU rival?

A: The RTX 3070 Ti has an average benchmark score of 29945, while its closest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Mobile, scores 29928, a delta of 0.1%. The AMD Radeon RX 6800 scores 30095, which is 0.5% higher.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded at 1080p Medium?

A: At 1080p Medium, the minimum FPS is 191, with a maximum of 259 and an average of 225. This minimum is still well above typical display refresh rates.

# Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the Medium preset offers the best balance of visual quality and performance across all resolutions. At 1080p Medium, the system delivers 225 FPS average with a minimum of 191 FPS, ensuring smooth gameplay even during demanding scenes. The jump to High settings at 1080p reduces average FPS to 159, which is still excellent but does not provide a proportional visual improvement for the 30% performance cost.

At 1440p, Medium settings produce 142 FPS average with a minimum of 121 FPS, which is ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors. High settings at 1440p yield 100 FPS, and Ultra drops to 95 FPS — both acceptable, but Medium offers the safest margin for maintaining consistent frame pacing. At 4K, Medium delivers 74 FPS average with a minimum of 63 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for fast-paced interaction. High settings at 4K drop to 52 FPS, and Ultra to 50 FPS, making Medium the only preset at 4K that maintains a minimum above 60 FPS.

For users prioritizing maximum visual fidelity, Ultra at 1080p (151 FPS) or 1440p (95 FPS) is viable, but the performance gap between Medium and Ultra is substantial — 33% at 1080p and 33% at 1440p. The Low preset, while offering the highest frame rates (256 FPS at 1080p, 200 FPS at 1440p, 105 FPS at 4K), sacrifices too much visual detail for a simulation game where reading component labels and inspecting system builds matters. Medium settings provide the best compromise, ensuring the game remains playable at all resolutions without dipping below 60 FPS average.

# Measured FPS Breakdown

1920x1080:

• Low: 256 FPS average
• Medium: 225 FPS average, 191 FPS minimum, 259 FPS maximum
• High: 159 FPS average
• Ultra: 151 FPS average

2560x1440:

• Low: 200 FPS average
• Medium: 142 FPS average, 121 FPS minimum, 163 FPS maximum
• High: 100 FPS average
• Ultra: 95 FPS average

3840x2160:

• Low: 105 FPS average
• Medium: 74 FPS average, 63 FPS minimum, 85 FPS maximum
• High: 52 FPS average
• Ultra: 50 FPS average

The data reveals a consistent pattern: each settings tier increases frame rate by roughly 40-50% over the next tier at the same resolution. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 105 FPS (256 vs 151). At 1440p, the spread is 105 FPS (200 vs 95). At 4K, the spread narrows to 55 FPS (105 vs 50), indicating that at higher resolutions, the GPU's rendering load compresses the performance differences between settings tiers. The Medium preset at every resolution provides the only data point with both minimum and maximum FPS recorded, suggesting it is the most stable preset for this combo. The minimum FPS values (191 at 1080p, 121 at 1440p, 63 at 4K) all stay within 50 FPS of their corresponding averages, indicating consistent frame delivery without major stutters.

# How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-10400F + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti combination ranks 1537 out of 3723 tested combos in Pc Building Simulator, placing it at approximately the 59th percentile of all systems tested. This rank reflects the balanced nature of the pairing — the CPU's 68th percentile performance and the GPU's 75th percentile performance combine to produce a system that sits above the median for this specific game.

The CPU's nearest rivals show that the i5-10400F is positioned in a crowded field. The Intel Xeon 6756E, with a deltaPct of 0.2%, is effectively identical in aggregate performance. The AMD EPYC 7552 trails by 0.5%, while the Intel Core 7 160UL leads by 0.3%. None of these differences would translate into meaningful gameplay variance in a simulation title like Pc Building Simulator, where the CPU workload is moderate and well-threaded.

On the GPU side, the RTX 3070 Ti's position is similarly tight. The RTX 5070 Mobile is 0.1% behind, the RTX 2080 Ti is 0.5% behind, and the RX 6800 is 0.5% ahead. The largest gap is with the RX 6700, which leads by 1.6%. These small deltas suggest that the 3070 Ti's performance in this game is representative of its class, and swapping to any of these rivals would produce negligible FPS differences.

The combo rank of 1537 out of 3723 indicates that while this system is not in the top tier, it delivers solid performance for Pc Building Simulator. The 1080p Ultra result of 151 FPS and 1440p High result of 100 FPS demonstrate that the combo can handle high-refresh-rate gaming at mainstream resolutions. The 4K results, while lower, remain playable at Medium settings with a 74 FPS average. The rank reflects a system that is well-suited for the game's demands without excessive headroom, making it a practical choice for users who play at 1080p or 1440p and occasionally connect to a 4K display.