Pc Building Simulator

# Pc Building Simulator Performance Analysis: Intel Core i5-12600KF + AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT

This combo pairs Intel’s 10-core Alder Lake desktop processor with AMD’s Navi 32-based Radeon RX 7800 XT, and the measured frame rates across three resolutions reveal a system that scales predictably with settings and resolution. The data shows 158–332 FPS at 1080p, 100–210 FPS at 1440p, and 52–110 FPS at 4K, depending on the graphics preset. The combination ranks 1215th out of 3723 tested combos for this game, placing it firmly in the upper third of all configurations.

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

The Intel Core i5-12600KF brings 10 cores and 16 threads to the table, running at a 3.70 GHz base clock with a 4.90 GHz boost clock. This Alder Lake-S processor uses a 10 nm process and supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory across a dual-channel bus. Its 20 MB of shared L3 cache, combined with 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, provides solid data locality for simulation workloads. The CPU’s benchmark profile shows strong multi-threaded performance: Cinebench R23 multicore reaches 23391 points, while the single-core score of 3302 indicates robust per-thread speed. PassMark multithread results hit 27575, and 3DMark max-thread scoring lands at 7952.

For a simulation game like Pc Building Simulator, the CPU has to handle ongoing logic updates, component interactions, and build-state calculations. The 16 threads give the processor headroom for background simulation tasks even when frame rates are high. Notably, the 3DMark 16-thread score of 7956 nearly matches the max-thread score of 7952, suggesting the CPU saturates its available parallelism efficiently. The processor sits at the 79th percentile among all CPUs, and its average benchmark score of 27799 places it within 0.3% of the Intel Core i9-10900K (27872), 0.3% above the AMD Ryzen 5 8500GE (27712), and 0.3% below both the AMD Ryzen 7 6800U (27887) and AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D (27896). These near-identical averages indicate that in synthetic workloads, the i5-12600KF trades blows with older flagship parts.

At 1080p with Low settings, the system reaches 332 FPS — a figure that likely reflects CPU throughput limits rather than GPU constraints. The jump from 235 FPS at Medium to 332 FPS at Low (a 97 FPS increase) suggests that lowering graphics load exposes more of the CPU’s capability. The single-thread performance, evidenced by the 3DMark single-thread score of 1016 and Geekbench single-core score of 2157, helps maintain high minimum framerates in logic-heavy scenes. The 125 W TDP and unlocked multiplier indicate this is a performance-oriented part, though the data does not reveal any thermal throttling behavior.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT uses the Navi 32 chip built on a 5 nm process from TSMC, with 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die. Its memory subsystem is substantial: 16 GB of GDDR6 across a 256-bit bus delivers 624.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU’s boost clock reaches 2430 MHz, with a game clock of 2124 MHz and a base clock of 1295 MHz. Compute resources include 3840 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 96 raster output units, alongside 60 ray tracing cores. The pixel rate of 233.3 GPixel/s and texture rate of 583.2 GTexel/s indicate strong fill-rate capabilities.

In this simulation title, the GPU’s role becomes more pronounced as resolution increases. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS drops to 52, while 4K High yields 55 FPS — a mere 3 FPS difference. This tight grouping at the highest resolution suggests the GPU is the primary constraint, and the 16 GB VRAM capacity likely prevents any memory-related bottlenecks even at 4K with heavy textures. The GPU’s benchmark scores reflect its mid-range positioning: PassMark G3D reaches 24176, while 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 scores 4157. Vulkan performance is notably strong at 54228 in Geekbench, and OpenCL results hit 18290.

The RX 7800 XT sits at the 51st percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 11627. Its nearest rivals show a tight cluster: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 scores 11680 (0.5% higher), the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M scores 11528 (0.9% lower), the NVIDIA Tesla K20c scores 11479 (1.3% lower), and the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT scores 11842 (1.8% higher). This grouping is surprising — the RX 7800 XT’s modern architecture and large memory pool do not translate to a dominant average score, yet in this game it delivers playable frame rates even at 4K. The GPU’s 96 ROPs and high texture rate help maintain consistent output as settings escalate.

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

The measured FPS data reveals clear scaling patterns across resolutions. At Ultra settings, the system delivers 158 FPS at 1080p, 100 FPS at 1440p, and 52 FPS at 4K. This represents a 37% drop from 1080p to 1440p, followed by a 48% drop from 1440p to 4K. The 4K Ultra result of 52 FPS is just above the 50 FPS threshold many players consider the minimum for smooth gameplay, indicating the GPU is working near its limits at this resolution.

Low settings show the most dramatic scaling: 332 FPS at 1080p, 210 FPS at 1440p, and 110 FPS at 4K. The 1080p-to-1440p drop of 122 FPS (37%) mirrors the Ultra pattern, but the 1440p-to-4K drop of 100 FPS (48%) is proportionally similar. This consistency suggests that resolution scaling follows a predictable curve regardless of settings, though the absolute headroom at Low settings keeps every resolution comfortably playable.

Medium settings provide the only rows with min and max FPS values. At 1080p, the system averages 235 FPS with a minimum of 200 and maximum of 271. At 1440p, the average falls to 148 FPS with a minimum of 126 and maximum of 171. At 4K, the average drops to 78 FPS with a minimum of 66 and maximum of 89. The spread between minimum and maximum (71 FPS at 1080p, 45 FPS at 1440p, 23 FPS at 4K) narrows as resolution increases, implying that higher resolutions smooth out frame-to-frame variance — likely because the GPU becomes the consistent limiter rather than CPU-driven spikes.

High settings tell a similar story: 166 FPS at 1080p, 105 FPS at 1440p, and 55 FPS at 4K. The 1080p-to-1440p drop is 61 FPS (37%), and the 1440p-to-4K drop is 50 FPS (48%). These percentages align almost exactly with Ultra and Low patterns, suggesting the limiting component shifts predictably with pixel count. At 1080p, the CPU’s 10 cores and high boost clock keep frame rates elevated, but the GPU’s rendering load grows proportionally with resolution, eventually dominating at 4K.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Looking at the measured data, Medium settings emerge as the most balanced preset across all three resolutions. At 1080p, Medium delivers 235 FPS with a 200 FPS minimum — a 71 FPS buffer above the minimum that ensures smooth gameplay even in complex build scenes. At 1440p, Medium’s 148 FPS average with a 126 FPS minimum keeps the experience well above refresh-rate thresholds for most displays. At 4K, Medium’s 78 FPS average with a 66 FPS minimum remains playable, though users with high-refresh 4K panels may notice the gap from 1440p.

High settings offer a modest visual upgrade over Medium, with 1080p reaching 166 FPS, 1440p hitting 105 FPS, and 4K dropping to 55 FPS. The 4K result sits barely above the 50 FPS comfort zone, making High a borderline choice at that resolution. Ultra settings push 4K down to 52 FPS, which is technically playable but leaves no headroom for demanding scenes. At 1080p and 1440p, Ultra remains viable at 158 FPS and 100 FPS respectively, but the visual gains over High may not justify the FPS cost.

Low settings deliver exceptional performance — 332 FPS at 1080p, 210 FPS at 1440p, and 110 FPS at 4K — but the data does not indicate what visual compromises are required. For players prioritizing maximum frame rates, Low at 1440p offers a strong middle ground: 210 FPS exceeds many high-refresh monitors’ capabilities while maintaining higher pixel density than 1080p. The Medium preset’s min FPS values (200 at 1080p, 126 at 1440p, 66 at 4K) provide the most consistent experience relative to averages, making it the recommended default for this combo.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific combination of Intel Core i5-12600KF and AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT ranks 1215th out of 3723 tested combos for Pc Building Simulator. This places the pairing in the 67th percentile of all configurations — a solid upper-third result. The ranking reflects the system’s ability to maintain high frame rates across settings, though it does not reach the top tier of combinations.

The CPU’s 79th percentile standing among all processors suggests the i5-12600KF is not the limiting factor in this pairing. Conversely, the GPU’s 51st percentile ranking puts the RX 7800 XT near the median of all graphics cards, yet the combo still achieves 100+ FPS at 1440p High and 55 FPS at 4K High. This discrepancy implies that Pc Building Simulator is not exceptionally GPU-demanding, allowing the CPU’s strong multi-threaded performance to carry the combo to a higher overall rank than the GPU’s percentile would suggest.

The rank of 1215 means roughly 2508 other combos perform better in this game, but also that over 2500 combos perform worse. For a simulation title that rewards CPU throughput and memory bandwidth, the i5-12600KF’s 10 cores and 16 threads appear well-matched to the RX 7800 XT’s 16 GB frame buffer. The combo’s position in the upper third indicates it can handle the game’s demands without significant bottlenecks, though users seeking top-tier 4K Ultra performance might find the 52 FPS result limiting compared to higher-ranked pairings.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its highest frame rates across all presets. Low settings produce an average of 332 FPS, while Medium drops to 235 FPS with a minimum of 200 and maximum of 271. High settings yield 166 FPS, and Ultra trails at 158 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium (97 FPS) is substantially larger than the gap between High and Ultra (8 FPS), indicating that the GPU handles most settings increases efficiently until the highest preset.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance curve compresses. Low settings average 210 FPS, Medium averages 148 FPS with a minimum of 126 and maximum of 171, High averages 105 FPS, and Ultra averages 100 FPS. The Low-to-Medium gap narrows to 62 FPS, while High-to-Ultra remains tight at 5 FPS. The Medium preset’s min/max range of 45 FPS shows tighter consistency than at 1080p, where the range spanned 71 FPS.

At 3840x2160, frame rates become more modest. Low settings still manage 110 FPS, but Medium drops to 78 FPS with a minimum of 66 and maximum of 89. High settings reach 55 FPS, and Ultra falls to 52 FPS. The Low-to-Medium gap shrinks further to 32 FPS, and High-to-Ultra narrows to just 3 FPS. The Medium min/max spread of 23 FPS is the smallest of any resolution, suggesting that 4K rendering smooths out CPU-related frame spikes. Across all resolutions, the Medium preset is the only one with complete min/max data, providing the most detailed picture of frame pacing for this combo.

FAQ

Q: Does this combo maintain 60+ FPS at 4K?

A: Yes, but only at Low (110 FPS) and Medium (78 FPS) settings. High settings average 55 FPS, and Ultra drops to 52 FPS, both falling below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The i5-12600KF’s average benchmark score of 27799 is 0.3% below the Intel Core i9-10900K (27872), 0.3% above the AMD Ryzen 5 8500GE (27712), and 0.3% below both the AMD Ryzen 7 6800U (27887) and AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D (27896).

Q: What is the best resolution for high-refresh-rate displays?

A: At 1440p, the combo delivers 210 FPS on Low and 148 FPS on Medium, both exceeding 144 Hz refresh rates. At 1080p, Medium provides 235 FPS, which supports 240 Hz displays.

Q: How much FPS is lost when moving from 1080p to 1440p?

A: At Ultra settings, the drop is 58 FPS (from 158 to 100). At High, the drop is 61 FPS (from 166 to 105). At Medium, the drop is 87 FPS (from 235 to 148). At Low, the drop is 122 FPS (from 332 to 210).

Q: Does the GPU’s 16 GB VRAM make a difference in this game?

A: The data does not provide VRAM usage metrics, but the 16 GB capacity on a 256-bit bus with 624.1 GB/s bandwidth supports the game’s simulation-heavy rendering without apparent memory-related slowdowns, especially at 4K.

Q: Is this combo better suited for CPU-bound or GPU-bound scenarios?

A: The CPU ranks at the 79th percentile while the GPU sits at the 51st percentile, yet the combo achieves 55 FPS at 4K High. This suggests the system handles CPU-bound scenarios well, with GPU limitations emerging primarily at 4K Ultra where FPS drops to 52.