Pc Building Simulator

Pc Building Simulator is a simulation title where the CPU and GPU interact in an unusual way: the game's workload is largely driven by the logic simulation of PC components, but the rendering of the 3D workshop and the menus still depends heavily on the graphics card. The Intel Core i5-13400F and AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT pairing delivers a playable experience at most settings, but the data reveals a clear bottleneck shift as resolution and quality presets change. The combo ranks 2795th out of 3723 tested combinations, placing it in the lower half of the database, which is a direct consequence of the game's modest demands and the hardware's mid-range positioning. This analysis will break down the measured frames per second (FPS) to show exactly where this combo excels and where it falls behind.

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

The Intel Core i5-13400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture. Its configuration includes a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, which are the figures that matter for a game like Pc Building Simulator that relies on single-threaded performance for its core simulation logic. The CPU's benchmark scores reinforce this: the 3dmark_single_thread score is 960, and the Cinebench R23 single-core score is 3191, while the multi-core score reaches 22604. The processor's percentileVsAllCpus is 77, meaning it outperforms 77% of all CPUs in the database, but its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS (avgScore 25284, deltaPct 0) and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D (avgScore 25365, deltaPct -0.3), showing that its average benchmark score of 25292 is almost identical to those parts.

In Pc Building Simulator, the CPU's role is to manage the state of the virtual components — temperatures, power draws, and compatibility checks. The 10 cores and 16 threads provide ample headroom for background tasks and the game's simulation threads, but the game does not appear to scale heavily with multi-core performance. The data shows that at 1080p Low settings, the combo achieves 196 FPS, which is the highest measured average in the dataset. This suggests that at lower resolutions and settings, the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU with enough frames to reach that ceiling. However, the single-thread score of 960 in 3dmark and 3634 in PassMark indicates that the CPU is not a limiting factor at these settings; the bottleneck lies elsewhere. The L3 cache is 20 MB shared, which is sufficient for the game's asset streaming, but the lack of a vCache3d (unlike the Ryzen 5 5600X3D rival) does not appear to hurt performance in this specific title, as the deltaPct between them is only -0.3.

The CPU's boost clock of 4.60 GHz is crucial for the simulation's tick rate. At 4K Ultra, the combo drops to 36 FPS, but this is a GPU limitation, not a CPU one. The processor's PassMark multithread score of 25032 and Geekbench multicore of 11068 show it can handle the game's logic without issue. The data indicates that the CPU is never the primary constraint in this game; even at 1080p High (128 FPS) and 1440p High (84 FPS), the CPU is not maxed out, as the FPS scales linearly with resolution, which is a classic sign of GPU-bound performance. Therefore, the CPU role here is to provide a stable foundation, and the i5-13400F does so with its 65 W TDP and dual-channel memory support, allowing the GPU to be the deciding factor.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT is the primary driver of visual performance in this combo. It features 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 432.0 GB/s. The GPU's boost clock is 2544 MHz, with a game clock of 2171 MHz, and its memory runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The GPU's benchmark scores show a PassMark G3D score of 22547 and a percentileVsAllGpus of 67, meaning it outperforms 67% of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile (avgScore 22435, deltaPct 0.5) and the RTX 4060 Mobile (avgScore 22729, deltaPct -0.8), indicating that the RX 7700 XT is statistically tied with those mobile parts in average benchmark performance.

In Pc Building Simulator, the GPU's role is to render the 3D environment, including the workbench, the PC cases, and the component models. The 12 GB VRAM is more than enough for this game, even at 4K Ultra, where the texture sizes are not demanding. The data shows that at 4K Ultra, the combo achieves 36 FPS, which is the lowest measured average. This is a clear GPU limit, as the CPU is not the bottleneck at that resolution. The GPU's FP32 performance of 35.17 TFLOPS and pixel rate of 244.2 GPixel/s are the raw specs that determine how fast it can fill the screen. The measured FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K shows a classic GPU-bound curve: at Low settings, the FPS drops from 196 at 1080p to 70 at 4K, a reduction of 126 FPS, while at Ultra, it drops from 100 at 1080p to 36 at 4K, a reduction of 64 FPS.

The GPU's 54 RT cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support are irrelevant for this simulation game, as it does not use ray tracing. The 96 ROPs and 216 TMUs handle the rasterization and texturing, which are the core tasks. The data indicates that the RX 7700 XT is the limiting component at 4K and at Ultra settings across all resolutions. At 1440p Medium, the combo hits 98 FPS, which is a good result, but at 4K Medium, it drops to 54 FPS with a min FPS of 46, showing that the GPU is struggling to maintain smooth frame times at that resolution. The GPU's TDP of 245 W and suggested PSU of 550 W are power requirements that do not affect performance in the measured data, but they define the hardware's capabilities. The 12 GB VRAM is a comfort buffer, but the game does not push it, as evidenced by the fact that the FPS drop from High to Ultra at 4K is only 10 FPS (46 to 36), suggesting that the GPU's compute units are the limit, not its memory capacity.

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

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of GPU-bound scaling. At Low settings, the combo goes from 196 FPS at 1080p to 128 FPS at 1440p, and finally to 70 FPS at 4K. This represents a 35% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 64% drop from 1080p to 4K. Such a steep decline indicates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at all resolutions, because if the CPU were the limit, the FPS would stay flat or drop less significantly. At High settings, the FPS drops from 128 at 1080p to 84 at 1440p (a 34% decrease) and then to 46 at 4K (a 64% decrease from 1080p). The consistency of these percentage drops across different settings confirms that the GPU is the limiting component.

At Medium settings, the data includes min and max FPS values. At 1080p Medium, the average is 150 FPS with a min of 128 and max of 173. At 1440p Medium, the average is 98 FPS with a min of 84 and max of 113. At 4K Medium, the average is 54 FPS with a min of 46 and max of 62. The min FPS values are notably lower than the averages, especially at 4K where the min is 46 FPS, which is close to the High preset average of 46 FPS. This suggests that even at Medium settings, the 4K resolution is pushing the GPU to its limits, causing occasional frame dips. The scaling from 1080p to 4K at Medium shows a 64% drop in average FPS (150 to 54), which is identical to the Low preset's drop, reinforcing the GPU-bound nature.

The resolution scaling also shows that the game is not CPU-limited in any tested configuration. At 1080p Low, the 196 FPS is a high ceiling that the CPU can easily feed, but the GPU cannot maintain that at higher resolutions. The fact that the 1080p to 1440p drop is less severe than the 1440p to 4K drop (e.g., at High: 128 to 84 is a 44 FPS drop, while 84 to 46 is a 38 FPS drop) indicates that the GPU's performance degrades more rapidly as pixel count increases. This is typical of a mid-range GPU like the RX 7700 XT, which has 3456 shading units. The conclusion from the data is that for the best experience, users should prioritize resolution over settings, as the GPU has enough headroom to handle 1440p at High (84 FPS) but struggles at 4K even at Medium (54 FPS).

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The Intel Core i5-13400F and AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT combo ranks 2795th out of 3723 tested combinations in Pc Building Simulator. This places it in the 75th percentile of all combos, meaning it performs better than 75% of the tested systems. While this sounds positive, the absolute rank of 2795 indicates that there are many other combos that achieve higher FPS in this game. The rank is a composite score that takes into account all measured resolutions and settings, and the data shows that this combo's weakness is at 4K Ultra, where it only achieves 36 FPS.

The combo's rank is heavily influenced by the GPU's performance relative to its rivals. The nearest GPU rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile (deltaPct 0.5) and the RTX 4060 Mobile (deltaPct -0.8), which are mobile parts that likely have lower power limits. The RX 7700 XT's desktop design gives it a slight edge in sustained performance, but the game's low demands mean that even a weaker GPU could match it at lower settings. For example, at 1080p Low, the combo hits 196 FPS, but a slower GPU might also hit 150 FPS, which is still playable. The rank of 2795 suggests that this combo is not optimized for this game, as the CPU's strong single-thread performance is wasted on a game that is GPU-bound.

The combo's rank can be contextualized by looking at the CPU's rivals. The AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS has a deltaPct of 0 versus the i5-13400F, meaning they are identical in average CPU benchmark score. If a system with a Ryzen 9 6900HS and a slower GPU were tested, it might rank similarly because the CPU is not the limiting factor. The data shows that the combo's rank is determined almost entirely by the GPU's ability to render at 4K. Since the game is not graphically intense, a lower-ranked GPU like the AMD Radeon RX 5700 (deltaPct 1.7 versus the RX 7700 XT) would likely produce similar FPS at 1080p, but the RX 7700 XT's higher memory bandwidth helps at 4K. The rank of 2795 out of 3723 is a reflection of the mid-range nature of both components, and for a simulation game that does not push hardware, this combo is adequate but not exceptional.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the best experience for this combo is at 1440p with the High preset. At this resolution and setting, the combo achieves an average of 84 FPS, which is smooth for a simulation game. The 1440p High setting provides a good balance between visual quality and performance, as the game's simulation elements are not visually demanding, and the GPU can handle the rendering without dropping below 60 FPS. The min FPS at 1440p Medium is 84, and the High preset is likely similar, so the experience is consistent.

At 1080p, the Ultra preset delivers 100 FPS, which is also excellent, but the visual difference between High and Ultra in Pc Building Simulator is minimal, and the 28 FPS drop from High (128 FPS) to Ultra (100 FPS) is not worth the extra graphical fidelity. The 1080p High preset is the sweet spot for high-refresh-rate monitors, as it hits 128 FPS, which is above the 120 Hz threshold. However, for 1440p users, the High preset at 84 FPS is the recommended choice, as it provides a solid 60+ FPS experience with good visuals. The Ultra preset at 1440p drops to 66 FPS, which is still playable, but the High preset offers more headroom for frame time spikes.

For 4K, the data indicates that this combo is not ideal. The High preset at 4K only achieves 46 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target. The Medium preset at 4K achieves 54 FPS, which is closer but still not ideal, and the min FPS of 46 shows that there are dips. The Low preset at 4K hits 70 FPS, but the visual quality is severely compromised. Therefore, the recommendation is to avoid 4K with this combo unless the user is willing to play at Low settings. The best overall experience is 1440p High, as it offers a 84 FPS average, which is smooth, and the game's simulation nature means that frame rate consistency is more important than visual bells and whistles. The 1080p High preset is a close second, but 1440p High gives a larger desktop space for the simulation UI.

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

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of this combo's performance. At 1920x1080 (1080p), the average FPS ranges from 196 at Low settings to 100 at Ultra settings. Specifically, at 1080p Low, the combo achieves 196 FPS. At 1080p Medium, the average is 150 FPS, with a minimum of 128 FPS and a maximum of 173 FPS. At 1080p High, the average is 128 FPS. At 1080p Ultra, the average drops to 100 FPS. This shows a steady decline as settings increase, with a 96 FPS difference between Low and Ultra.

At 2560x1440 (1440p), the performance scales down as expected. At 1440p Low, the average is 128 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the average is 98 FPS, with a minimum of 84 FPS and a maximum of 113 FPS. At 1440p High, the average is 84 FPS. At 1440p Ultra, the average is 66 FPS. The drop from Low to Ultra at 1440p is 62 FPS, which is less severe than at 1080p, indicating that the GPU is becoming the bottleneck. The min FPS at 1440p Medium (84 FPS) matches the High preset average, showing that the Medium preset has consistent frame times.

At 3840x2160 (4K), the performance is the lowest. At 4K Low, the average is 70 FPS. At 4K Medium, the average is 54 FPS, with a minimum of 46 FPS and a maximum of 62 FPS. At 4K High, the average is 46 FPS. At 4K Ultra, the average is 36 FPS. The data shows a clear linear progression: 70 FPS at Low, 54 at Medium, 46 at High, and 36 at Ultra. This is a 34 FPS drop from Low to Ultra, which is the smallest absolute drop across all resolutions, but the percentage drop is consistent. The min FPS at 4K Medium (46 FPS) is the same as the 4K High average, indicating that the GPU is struggling to maintain stable frame rates at this resolution.

The full dataset is as follows: at 1080p, the settings order from highest to lowest FPS is Low (196), Medium (150), High (128), Ultra (100). At 1440p, the order is Low (128), Medium (98), High (84), Ultra (66). At 4K, the order is Low (70), Medium (54), High (46), Ultra (36). The Medium presets across all resolutions include min and max FPS values, with 1080p Medium showing a min of 128 and max of 173, 1440p Medium showing a min of 84 and max of 113, and 4K Medium showing a min of 46 and max of 62. These min FPS values are critical for understanding the experience, as they indicate the worst-case frame dips. The data confirms that this combo is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, with 4K being a stretch that requires Low or Medium settings to remain playable.