Pc Building Simulator

The Intel Core i5-10400F is a 6-core, 12-thread Comet Lake processor with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. In the benchmark database, it holds a 73rd percentile ranking against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 14168. Its nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 7552, scores 14115, placing the i5-10400F a marginal 0.4% ahead; conversely, the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C scores 14277, which is 0.8% higher. For a simulation game like Pc Building Simulator, the workload is largely single-thread-driven, as the genre emphasizes logic and menu interactions rather than complex physics. The CPU’s single-thread performance, evidenced by a PassMark single-thread score of 2541 and a 3DMark single-thread score of 688, is solid for this task. However, the data shows that the processor’s multi-threaded capabilities are more pronounced: Cinebench R23 multicore scores 10297, while the single-core variant scores 1453, indicating a strong scaling from 6 physical cores to 12 threads. This is relevant because while the game’s core logic may not use all threads, the system overhead and background tasks benefit from the available headroom. The i5-10400F’s 12 MB of shared L3 cache and 42.7 GB/s of dual-channel DDR4 memory bandwidth provide adequate data throughput for a simulation that frequently loads small assets. In the context of this combo, the CPU is not the bottleneck; its benchmark deltas against rivals—all within a 1.2% range—confirm that it performs consistently with its peers, making it a stable foundation for the GPU to do heavy lifting.

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

The CPU’s architecture is built around 6 cores and 12 threads, a configuration that balances single-thread responsiveness with multi-thread capacity. The base clock of 2.90 GHz and boost clock of 4.30 GHz are the key levers; in a simulation title, the boost clock is what drives frame pacing during menu navigation and part selection. Benchmark results reinforce this: the 3DMark 2-thread score of 1350 is significantly lower than the 8-thread score of 3929, but the game’s primary thread benefits from that 4.30 GHz peak. The PassMark physics score of 696 is modest, but Pc Building Simulator does not rely on heavy physics simulation, so this is not a limiting factor. What matters more is the consistent delivery of instructions, and the data shows the CPU handles this well. The Cinebench R20 multicore score of 4324 versus the single-core score of 610 indicates that while the CPU can scale, the game’s frame rate is unlikely to be bound by core count. Instead, the CPU’s role is to feed the GPU without stalling; the 12 MB L3 cache helps keep frequently accessed game data close. When comparing to the nearest rivals, the i5-10400F is effectively tied with the AMD EPYC 7552 (0.4% faster) and the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C (0.8% slower), meaning any performance differences in-game are negligible at the CPU level. For this specific title, the CPU’s job is to maintain a high single-thread throughput, and the 4.30 GHz boost clock delivers that, as evidenced by the FPS results at lower resolutions where the CPU has more influence.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 is the dominant component in this pairing, featuring 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus, delivering 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock is 2017 MHz with a boost clock of 2407 MHz, and it houses 21760 shading units. For a game like Pc Building Simulator, which is not graphically intensive by modern standards, the RTX 5090 is massively overprovisioned; however, the benchmark data shows it still scales with settings. The GPU’s 94th percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 84306, places it far ahead of its nearest rivals: it is 0.1% faster than the RTX 5090 D (84241) and 0.2% faster than the RTX 5050 Mobile (84171). The GPU’s 32 GB of VRAM is far more than the game requires, but it ensures zero memory pressure, allowing the GPU to focus on pixel throughput. The boost clock of 2407 MHz is the key driver for frame rate, and the data confirms this: at 1080p Low, the GPU pushes 259 FPS, but at 4K Ultra, it drops to 82.5 FPS. This indicates that even a top-tier GPU is bound by resolution and settings in this title. The RTX 5090’s raw compute—104.8 TFLOPS FP32—is not fully utilized by a simulation game, but the high pixel rate of 423.6 GPixel/s ensures that texture fill and rasterization are never bottlenecks. In essence, the GPU is the performance ceiling, and its capabilities are only partially tapped at 1080p, where the CPU starts to limit frame rates.

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

The measured FPS data reveals a classic scaling curve from 1080p to 4K. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 259 FPS, while at 4K Low, it drops to 177.5 FPS—a reduction of 81.5 FPS (or roughly 31%). This drop is primarily due to the GPU’s workload increasing with pixel count, but the fact that Low settings still yield over 177 FPS at 4K shows the GPU is not stressed. Moving to Ultra settings, the scaling is more pronounced: 1080p Ultra runs at 195.2 FPS, while 4K Ultra drops to 82.5 FPS, a 58% reduction. This steep drop indicates that at Ultra settings, the GPU is becoming the limiting component, as the increased shading and texture work halve the frame rate. Conversely, at 1080p Low, the 259 FPS figure suggests the CPU is nearing its limit, as the GPU is idle much of the time. The data points to a balanced shift: at 1080p, the CPU is the primary limiter, while at 4K, the GPU takes over. This is corroborated by the FPS at 1440p Medium (193.5 FPS) versus 4K Medium (124.2 FPS), a 36% drop, which is less severe than the Ultra drop, indicating that settings complexity amplifies the GPU’s role. The takeaway is that this combo is GPU-bound at higher resolutions and settings, but CPU-bound at lower resolutions, making it versatile for players who prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 1080p with High settings?

A: The measured average FPS is 200.5, which is higher than the 1080p Ultra result of 195.2 FPS, showing that High settings offer a slight performance boost without a major visual penalty.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its closest rival in multi-threaded performance?

A: The Intel Core i5-10400F has an average benchmark score of 14168, which is 0.4% higher than the AMD EPYC 7552’s 14115, but 0.8% lower than the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C’s 14277, indicating near-identical performance among these three.

Q: Is the RTX 5090’s 32 GB of VRAM necessary for this game?

A: The data does not show VRAM usage, but 32 GB is far above what a simulation game requires; the GPU’s performance is instead limited by its clock speeds and resolution scaling.

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

A: At 1440p, Low settings yield 217 FPS, while Ultra drops to 162.2 FPS, a reduction of 54.8 FPS, showing that Ultra settings demand more from the GPU but still maintain high frame rates.

Q: Which component limits performance at 4K Ultra?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor, as the FPS drops from 195.2 at 1080p Ultra to 82.5 at 4K Ultra, a 58% decrease that aligns with the GPU’s increased pixel and shading workload.

Q: How does the combo rank among tested configurations?

A: The combo ranks 302 out of 1769 tested combinations in this game, placing it in the top 17% of all configurations, which is consistent with the high-end GPU and mid-range CPU pairing.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured data provides a clear picture across three resolutions and four settings levels. At 1920x1080, the frame rates are consistently high: Low settings deliver 259 FPS, Medium drops to 222.8 FPS, High runs at 200.5 FPS, and Ultra is the slowest at 195.2 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 63.8 FPS, indicating that settings have a moderate impact at this resolution, but the CPU’s single-thread performance is the primary ceiling. Moving to 2560x1440, the scaling is more uniform: Low yields 217 FPS, Medium 193.5 FPS, High 168.4 FPS, and Ultra 162.2 FPS. Here, the drop from Low to Ultra is 54.8 FPS, and the GPU begins to assert more influence, though the CPU still holds frame rates above 160 FPS. At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the clear bottleneck: Low runs at 177.5 FPS, Medium at 124.2 FPS, High at 92.1 FPS, and Ultra at 82.5 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 95 FPS, the largest spread across all resolutions, confirming that 4K Ultra pushes the GPU to its limits. Notably, the transition from 1440p to 4K at High settings shows a drop from 168.4 to 92.1 FPS, a 45% reduction, which is more severe than the 1080p to 1440p drop of 32 FPS (from 200.5 to 168.4). This pattern underscores that while the CPU is adequate for high refresh rates at lower resolutions, the RTX 5090 is the component that dictates performance at 4K, especially with higher graphical presets.