Pc Building Simulator

FAQ

Q: What is the combo rank of the Intel Core i5-12400 and AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT in Pc Building Simulator?

A: This combination ranks 2,652 out of 3,723 tested combos in this game, placing it in the lower-middle portion of the database.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The i5-12400 scores 18,683 on average. It trails the AMD EPYC 7643 by 0.1%, the Intel Core i7-1355U by 0.3%, and the AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 by 0.7%. It leads the Intel Core i3-14100F by 0.9%.

Q: What is the GPU's benchmark percentile and how does it compare to nearby cards?

A: The RX 6600 XT sits at the 70th percentile among all GPUs. Its average score of 24,442 is 0.7% ahead of the GTX 1630, 0.8% behind the Arc A350M, 0.8% ahead of the GTX 780 Ti, and 1.1% ahead of the RTX 2080 SUPER.

Q: What is the best measured average FPS at 1080p for this combo?

A: At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo achieves 225 FPS average. Medium yields 159 FPS, High yields 112 FPS, and Ultra yields 107 FPS.

Q: Does the combo maintain playable FPS at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, the results vary widely by preset: Low averages 74 FPS, Medium averages 52 FPS, High averages 37 FPS, and Ultra drops to 35 FPS. Only Low and Medium remain comfortably above 30 FPS.

Q: What are the core and clock specifications of the CPU?

A: The i5-12400 has 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. It features 18 MB of shared L3 cache and a 65 W TDP.

How This Combo Ranks

The data places this pairing at position 2,652 out of 3,723 combinations tested in Pc Building Simulator. That means roughly 71% of tested combos outperform it, while 29% fall below. The rank reflects the combined capability of the CPU and GPU in this specific simulation title, not their standalone benchmark scores.

The CPU’s average benchmark score of 18,683 puts it at the 72nd percentile among all CPUs. Its nearest rivals cluster tightly: the AMD EPYC 7643 scores 18,697 (-0.1%), the Intel Core i7-1355U scores 18,730 (-0.3%), and the AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 scores 18,811 (-0.7%). The Intel Core i3-14100F trails at 18,519 (+0.9% for the i5). These deltas are all within one percent, indicating that the i5-12400 sits in a densely populated performance band where small differences separate competitors.

The GPU’s average benchmark score of 24,442 places it at the 70th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals show a similar pattern of close margins: the GTX 1630 scores 24,277 (+0.7% for the RX 6600 XT), the Arc A350M scores 24,647 (-0.8%), the GTX 780 Ti scores 24,236 (+0.8%), and the RTX 2080 SUPER scores 24,170 (+1.1%). Again, the differences are minimal, suggesting the RX 6600 XT competes in a tight cluster of graphics cards with comparable aggregate performance.

In game, the combo’s ranking is lower than either component’s individual percentile would suggest. This indicates that Pc Building Simulator may be sensitive to factors beyond raw compute, such as memory bandwidth, driver overhead, or the specific workload patterns of simulation logic. The measured FPS data provides a clearer picture of how this pairing behaves across resolutions and settings.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with a Navi 23 chip fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It contains 11,060 million transistors on a 237 mm² die. The card features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock is 1968 MHz, with a game clock of 2359 MHz and a boost clock of 2589 MHz. Memory operates at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective transfer.

The GPU has 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 raster output units. It includes 32 ray tracing cores. Pixel rate reaches 165.7 GPixel/s, texture rate reaches 331.4 GTexel/s, and FP32 compute peaks at 10.60 TFLOPS. The card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Its TDP is 160 W with a suggested PSU of 450 W.

In Pc Building Simulator, the GPU’s role becomes apparent when comparing FPS across settings at the same resolution. At 1080p, moving from Low to Medium drops average FPS from 225 to 159, a reduction of 66 FPS. High reduces it to 112, and Ultra to 107. The gap between High and Ultra is only 5 FPS, suggesting diminishing returns at the top end. This pattern repeats at 1440p: Low averages 142 FPS, Medium 100, High 71, and Ultra 67. The consistent small delta between High and Ultra across resolutions indicates the GPU is nearing its limit with Ultra settings, but the larger drop from Low to Medium shows that even mid-tier settings significantly increase rendering load.

The 8 GB VRAM capacity and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for this simulation at the tested settings, as no texture pop-in or stutter is indicated in the min FPS data. The card’s 64 ROPs handle the rasterization demands of a simulation game with modest geometry complexity.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its highest performance. Low settings produce an average of 225 FPS. Medium settings yield 159 FPS with a minimum of 135 and maximum of 183. High settings average 112 FPS. Ultra settings average 107 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 118 FPS, with the largest single drop occurring between Low and Medium (66 FPS).

At 2560x1440, performance scales down proportionally. Low settings average 142 FPS. Medium settings average 100 FPS with a minimum of 85 and maximum of 115. High settings average 71 FPS. Ultra settings average 67 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra remains small at 4 FPS, identical to the 1080p delta. The drop from Low to Medium is 42 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the limiting factor. Low settings average 74 FPS. Medium settings average 52 FPS with a minimum of 45 and maximum of 60. High settings average 37 FPS. Ultra settings average 35 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra narrows to just 2 FPS, suggesting that Ultra at 4K provides no meaningful benefit for the performance cost.

Min FPS data is only available for Medium settings across all resolutions. At 1080p Medium, the minimum is 135 FPS; at 1440p Medium, it is 85 FPS; at 4K Medium, it is 45 FPS. These minimums indicate that the combo maintains consistent frame pacing without severe drops, even at higher resolutions.

Resolution Scaling

Moving from 1080p to 1440p reduces average FPS across all settings. At Low, the drop is from 225 to 142 FPS, a 36.9% reduction. At Medium, it drops from 159 to 100 FPS, a 37.1% reduction. At High, it falls from 112 to 71 FPS, a 36.6% reduction. At Ultra, it goes from 107 to 67 FPS, a 37.4% reduction. The consistency of these percentages — all within a 0.8 percentage point range — indicates that the scaling is uniform and resolution-bound rather than setting-bound.

Scaling from 1440p to 4K produces larger reductions. At Low, FPS drops from 142 to 74, a 47.9% reduction. At Medium, it falls from 100 to 52, a 48.0% reduction. At High, it goes from 71 to 37, a 47.9% reduction. At Ultra, it drops from 67 to 35, a 47.8% reduction. Again, the percentages are tightly clustered, but the magnitude is noticeably larger than the 1080p-to-1440p step.

The consistency of scaling percentages within each resolution pair suggests that neither the CPU nor the GPU is bottlenecking disproportionately at any single setting. The uniform drop across settings at each resolution step points to a balanced system where the GPU is the primary limiter as pixel count increases. The larger reduction from 1440p to 4K (roughly 48%) compared to 1080p to 1440p (roughly 37%) aligns with the increase in pixel count: 1440p has 1.78 times the pixels of 1080p, while 4K has 2.25 times the pixels of 1440p. The FPS reductions track this pixel scaling almost linearly, confirming that the RX 6600 XT’s fill rate and bandwidth are the governing factors at higher resolutions.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400 provides 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. It operates on the Alder Lake-S architecture with a 10 nm process node. The L3 cache totals 18 MB shared across all cores. The CPU supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration and offers PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes.

In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU shows strong scaling from 2 threads to 8 threads: 3dmark scores go from 1,692 at 2 threads to 3,012 at 4 threads, then 4,745 at 8 threads, and 5,873 at 16 threads. The jump from 8 to 16 threads is modest (1,128 points), indicating that the additional threads beyond 8 provide diminishing returns. Single-thread performance is 910 in 3dmark and 2,257 in Cinebench R23 single-core.

The CPU’s role in Pc Building Simulator is evident from the FPS data at lower resolutions. At 1080p Low, the combo reaches 225 FPS, which is high enough that the CPU could become a limiting factor if the game’s simulation logic is single-threaded. However, the uniform scaling percentages across settings and resolutions suggest that the CPU maintains sufficient headroom. The 12 threads handle the background simulation tasks, while the game’s rendering workload is passed to the GPU.

Comparing to its nearest rivals, the i5-12400’s average score of 18,683 is within 1% of all four listed competitors. This means that swapping to an EPYC 7643, i7-1355U, Ryzen AI 5 330, or i3-14100F would likely produce negligible FPS differences in this game. The CPU’s 72nd percentile ranking among all CPUs indicates it is a solid mid-range performer, but not a top-tier part. For a simulation game that may not heavily multi-thread, the 6-core/12-thread configuration is adequate without being excessive.

Settings Recommendations

For 1080p displays, the data shows that Medium settings provide the best balance of performance and visual quality. At 1080p Medium, the combo averages 159 FPS with a minimum of 135, which is well above the threshold for smooth gameplay on high refresh rate monitors. High settings drop to 112 FPS, still playable but with a 47 FPS penalty for marginal visual gains. Ultra at 107 FPS is nearly identical to High, offering no meaningful advantage for the extra load.

For 1440p displays, Medium remains the recommended preset. It averages 100 FPS with a minimum of 85, which is comfortable for most gaming scenarios. Low settings at 142 FPS provide a competitive edge for players prioritizing frame rate, but the jump to Medium is worth the 42 FPS cost for improved visuals. High and Ultra both fall below 75 FPS, which may be acceptable for slower-paced simulation gameplay but is not ideal for smooth motion.

For 4K displays, users should select Low or Medium. Low averages 74 FPS, which is playable. Medium averages 52 FPS with a minimum of 45, which is borderline but workable for a simulation title where reaction time is less critical. High at 37 FPS and Ultra at 35 FPS are both below the 40 FPS threshold that most players consider acceptable for sustained gameplay. The 2 FPS difference between High and Ultra at 4K makes Ultra an easy choice to skip.

Across all resolutions, the gap between High and Ultra is consistently small: 5 FPS at 1080p, 4 FPS at 1440p, and 2 FPS at 4K. This pattern indicates that Ultra settings in Pc Building Simulator impose a near-negligible additional cost over High, but also provide near-negligible benefit. Players should default to High if they want the best visuals without the Ultra label, or Medium for a more comfortable frame rate margin. Low settings are only recommended for players seeking maximum FPS at 1080p or playable frame rates at 4K.