Pc Building Simulator

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture with a 5 nm process from TSMC, housing 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. Its memory subsystem consists of 12 GB of GDDR6X on a 192-bit bus, delivering 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU operates with a base clock of 1980 MHz and a boost clock of 2475 MHz, while the memory runs at 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective). These specifications place the card in the 83rd percentile among all GPUs in the database.

For Pc Building Simulator, the game's demands are modest relative to the card's capabilities. The RTX 4070 SUPER's 12 GB frame buffer is more than sufficient for this simulation title, which does not appear to stress VRAM capacity even at 4K Ultra settings. The card's 7168 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 80 raster output pipelines provide substantial geometry and pixel throughput. With a pixel rate of 198.0 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 554.4 GTexel/s, the GPU has ample headroom for the game's relatively simple visual scenes.

The measured FPS data confirms that the RTX 4070 SUPER is the dominant component in this pairing. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 394 FPS, which is nearly double the 205 FPS at 1080p High. At 4K Ultra, the average drops to 64 FPS, showing that resolution scaling and settings quality have a significant impact. However, even at the most demanding configuration tested, the card maintains playable framerates. The transition from High to Ultra settings at each resolution costs roughly 5-10% performance, suggesting the game's Ultra preset adds marginal visual fidelity for a measurable FPS penalty.

The card's FP32 performance of 35.48 TFLOPS, with FP16 at the same rate (1:1), indicates strong compute throughput that benefits simulation games with physics calculations. The 56 ray tracing cores and 224 tensor cores are present but likely underutilized in this title, as Pc Building Simulator does not appear to employ ray-traced effects in its measured configurations. The GPU's 220 W TDP and dual-slot design are consistent with its performance class, though the 1x 16-pin power connector means users need a compatible power supply — the suggested PSU rating is 550 W.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Intel Core i5-12600KF and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER achieves a rank of 574 out of 3723 tested combos in Pc Building Simulator. This places the pairing in the top 15.4% of all tested configurations, a strong showing for a mid-range CPU paired with a high-end GPU.

The CPU itself sits at the 79th percentile among all processors, with an average benchmark score of 27799. Its nearest rivals in the database provide context for its standing. The Intel Core i9-10900K scores 27872, a delta of -0.3% relative to the i5-12600KF, meaning the older i9 is essentially tied with the i5 in aggregate performance. The AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D scores 27896, also a -0.3% delta, showing that the i5-12600KF trades blows with AMD's gaming-focused chip. The AMD Ryzen 5 8500GE scores 27712, a +0.3% delta, meaning the i5 is slightly ahead of this lower-tier AMD part.

For the GPU, the RTX 4070 SUPER's average benchmark score is 43223, placing it at the 83rd percentile. Its nearest rivals cluster closely: the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB scores 43262 (-0.1% delta), the RTX 5050 Mobile scores 43268 (-0.1% delta), and the Quadro M6000 scores 43301 (-0.2% delta). The RTX 4090 Mobile scores 43667, a -1% delta, indicating the desktop 4070 SUPER trails the laptop 4090 by a narrow 1% margin in aggregate benchmarks.

The rank of 574 suggests that the GPU is doing most of the heavy lifting in this game, as the CPU's mid-pack standing is compensated by the GPU's strong performance. The combination's percentile placement in the top 15% of all combos indicates that this pairing is well-matched for Pc Building Simulator's requirements, with neither component bottlenecking the other to a significant degree at most settings.

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

The measured FPS data provides clear guidance for optimal settings across resolutions. At 1080p, all presets deliver high framerates, but the differences between them are substantial. Low settings achieve 394 FPS on average, Medium hits 290 FPS, High reaches 205 FPS, and Ultra drops to 195 FPS. For users with a 60 Hz or 144 Hz monitor, even High settings at 205 FPS exceed what most displays can show, making the Ultra preset's 195 FPS a reasonable choice for maximum visual quality without sacrificing smoothness. However, the 10 FPS difference between High and Ultra (205 vs 195) represents a 4.9% performance cost for the Ultra visual upgrade, which is a reasonable trade-off.

At 1440p, the pattern shifts slightly. Low settings produce 258 FPS, Medium delivers 183 FPS, High achieves 129 FPS, and Ultra drops to 123 FPS. The jump from High to Ultra costs only 6 FPS (129 to 123, a 4.7% penalty), making Ultra the better choice at this resolution if visual fidelity is a priority. Medium at 183 FPS is the sweet spot for high-refresh-rate displays, while High and Ultra remain comfortably above 120 FPS for most gaming monitors.

At 4K, the choices become more critical. Low settings achieve 135 FPS, Medium drops to 96 FPS, High reaches 67 FPS, and Ultra falls to 64 FPS. The Medium preset at 96 FPS offers the best balance for 4K gaming, providing fluid motion while maintaining reasonable visual quality. High and Ultra are playable at 67 and 64 FPS respectively, but the 32 FPS gap between Medium and High (96 vs 67) represents a 33% performance drop for the High preset's visual improvements. For players with 60 Hz 4K displays, High at 67 FPS is sufficient, but Medium at 96 FPS provides better headroom for demanding scenes.

The data indicates that the Ultra preset provides diminishing returns across all resolutions. At 1080p, Ultra costs 10 FPS over High; at 1440p, it costs 6 FPS; at 4K, it costs 3 FPS. The relative penalty shrinks as resolution increases, suggesting the game becomes more GPU-bound at higher resolutions, making the fixed visual cost of Ultra less impactful.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to play Pc Building Simulator with this hardware?

A: At 1440p Medium, the system achieves 183 FPS average with a minimum of 155 FPS in the measured data. This provides excellent smoothness while maintaining visual quality. At 4K Medium, the average drops to 96 FPS with a minimum of 81 FPS, which is still playable but requires a 60-90 Hz display to fully utilize.

Q: How much performance is lost when going from Medium to Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, Medium achieves 290 FPS average while Ultra achieves 195 FPS. This represents a 95 FPS decrease, or a 32.8% performance penalty for the Ultra preset's visual improvements.

Q: Is the RTX 4070 SUPER bottlenecked by the i5-12600KF in this game?

A: The data shows the combo ranks 574 out of 3723 tested combinations, placing it in the top 15% of all pairings. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 394 FPS, which is very high, but at 4K Ultra it still manages 64 FPS, indicating the GPU scales well with resolution. The CPU's single-thread score of 1016 in 3DMark and multi-thread score of 7956 suggest it has sufficient headroom for this simulation title.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded in the measured data?

A: The only minimum FPS values recorded are for Medium settings across all resolutions. At 1080p Medium, the minimum is 246 FPS; at 1440p Medium, it is 155 FPS; and at 4K Medium, it is 81 FPS. No minimum values are available for Low, High, or Ultra presets.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest competitors in aggregate benchmarks?

A: The RTX 4070 SUPER scores 43223 on average. The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB scores 43262 (-0.1% delta), the RTX 5050 Mobile scores 43268 (-0.1% delta), and the RTX 4090 Mobile scores 43667 (-1% delta). All rivals are within 1% of the 4070 SUPER's aggregate performance.

Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Pc Building Simulator?

A: Yes, but with settings adjustments. At 4K Medium, the average FPS is 96 with a minimum of 81, which is smooth for most displays. At 4K High, the average drops to 67 FPS, and at 4K Ultra, it reaches 64 FPS. The 4K Low preset achieves 135 FPS for players prioritizing framerate over visual quality.

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

The measured FPS data reveals how the system scales across resolutions. At Low settings, the transition from 1080p to 1440p shows a drop from 394 FPS to 258 FPS, a decrease of 136 FPS or 34.5%. Moving from 1440p to 4K Low drops from 258 FPS to 135 FPS, another 123 FPS reduction (47.7%). The total drop from 1080p Low to 4K Low is 259 FPS, representing a 65.7% reduction in framerate.

At Medium settings, the pattern is similar. From 1080p to 1440p, FPS falls from 290 to 183, a 107 FPS decrease (36.9%). From 1440p to 4K, it drops from 183 to 96, an 87 FPS reduction (47.5%). The cumulative drop from 1080p Medium to 4K Medium is 194 FPS, or 66.9%.

High settings show the most dramatic relative scaling. At 1080p High, the system achieves 205 FPS. At 1440p High, this drops to 129 FPS, a 76 FPS decrease (37.1%). At 4K High, the average falls to 67 FPS, another 62 FPS reduction (48.1%). The total reduction from 1080p High to 4K High is 138 FPS, or 67.3%.

Ultra settings follow the same trend. From 1080p at 195 FPS to 1440p at 123 FPS is a 72 FPS drop (36.9%). From 1440p to 4K, the drop is 59 FPS (48.0%), bringing the average to 64 FPS. The cumulative reduction is 131 FPS, or 67.2%.

The consistent pattern of roughly 37% drops from 1080p to 1440p and 48% drops from 1440p to 4K, regardless of settings preset, indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting component at higher resolutions. The pixel count increases from 2.07 million (1080p) to 3.69 million (1440p), a 78% increase, and then to 8.29 million (4K), a 125% increase from 1440p. The FPS drops are proportionally smaller than the pixel increases, suggesting the GPU has some headroom in its vertex and geometry processing that isn't fully saturated by the additional pixel work.

The fact that the FPS reduction percentages are nearly identical across all settings presets (65.7% for Low, 66.9% for Medium, 67.3% for High, 67.2% for Ultra) suggests that the game's rendering pipeline scales linearly with resolution, and the RTX 4070 SUPER's rasterization throughput is the limiting factor rather than memory bandwidth or CPU-bound draw calls.

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

The Intel Core i5-12600KF is a 10-core, 16-thread processor from the Alder Lake architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, with a 125 W TDP. The CPU's cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration and connects via PCIe Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes.

In benchmark tests, the i5-12600KF demonstrates strong multi-threaded performance. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 23391, while the single-core score is 3302. The 3DMark scores show scaling from 1016 in single-thread to 7956 in 16-thread tests, with 7952 in max-thread testing. Geekbench results show 2157 single-core and 12137 multi-core. PassMark results include a multi-thread score of 27575 and a single-thread score of 3925.

For Pc Building Simulator, the CPU's role appears secondary to the GPU. The game's simulation nature likely benefits from the processor's multi-threaded capabilities, as evidenced by the 16 threads available. However, the measured FPS data shows that at 1080p Low, the system achieves 394 FPS, which is likely approaching the CPU's draw-call limit. The fact that 4K Low achieves 135 FPS, less than half of the 1080p Low result, indicates that GPU load increases significantly with resolution, but the CPU can still feed the GPU at these framerates.

The CPU's nearest rivals provide context for its performance tier. The Intel Core i9-10900K scores 27872 (-0.3% delta), the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D scores 27896 (-0.3% delta), and the AMD Ryzen 5 8500GE scores 27712 (+0.3% delta). This places the i5-12600KF in a tight cluster of processors with similar aggregate performance, despite having fewer cores than the i9-10900K but a newer architecture and higher boost clock.

The 20 MB of shared L3 cache is sufficient for the game's working set, and the dual-channel memory support (DDR4 or DDR5) provides adequate bandwidth for the GPU to receive data. The CPU's 10 nm process and 125 W TDP indicate it is a power-efficient choice for this gaming workload, though the multiplier unlocked design allows for overclocking if users need additional performance.

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

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its highest framerates across all settings. The Low preset achieves an average of 394 FPS. Medium produces an average of 290 FPS with a minimum of 246 FPS and a maximum of 333 FPS. High settings reach an average of 205 FPS. Ultra settings yield an average of 195 FPS. The range from Low to Ultra spans 199 FPS, with the Low preset outperforming Ultra by 102%.

At 2560x1440, framerates remain high but show a clear step down. Low settings average 258 FPS. Medium averages 183 FPS with a minimum of 155 FPS and a maximum of 210 FPS. High settings average 129 FPS. Ultra settings average 123 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 135 FPS, with Low exceeding Ultra by 109.8%.

At 3840x2160, the system still maintains playable framerates across all presets. Low settings average 135 FPS. Medium averages 96 FPS with a minimum of 81 FPS and a maximum of 110 FPS. High settings average 67 FPS. Ultra settings average 64 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 71 FPS, with Low outperforming Ultra by 110.9%.

The Medium preset is the only one with recorded minimum and maximum FPS values at every resolution. At 1080p, the minimum is 246 FPS and the maximum is 333 FPS, giving a variance of 87 FPS. At 1440p, the minimum is 155 FPS and the maximum is 210 FPS, a variance of 55 FPS. At 4K, the minimum is 81 FPS and the maximum is 110 FPS, a variance of 29 FPS. The shrinking variance at higher resolutions indicates more consistent frame pacing as the GPU becomes the limiting factor.

Comparing settings across resolutions, the High preset at 1440p (129 FPS) outperforms the High preset at 4K (67 FPS) by 62 FPS, while the Medium preset at 1080p (290 FPS) more than doubles the Medium preset at 4K (96 FPS). The Ultra preset at 1080p (195 FPS) achieves nearly three times the framerate of Ultra at 4K (64 FPS). These numbers illustrate the GPU's scaling behavior across the tested configuration space, with the 4070 SUPER maintaining playable performance even at the most demanding settings.