Pc Building Simulator

The Intel Core i5-13400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 produces a distinctive performance profile in Pc Building Simulator, where the simulation's CPU-heavy workload interacts with a high-end GPU across three resolutions and four quality presets. Measured data shows this combo ranking 1022nd out of 3723 tested configurations, placing it in the upper third of all systems. The RTX 3080's 10 GB of GDDR6X memory and 760.3 GB/s bandwidth prove sufficient for the game's demands at every tested setting, while the i5-13400F's 10 cores and 16 threads scale effectively from 1080p to 4K. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS results, component roles, and ranking context using only the provided benchmark data.

FAQ

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

A: The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings is 168 frames per second. This is the lowest average at 1080p among the four tested presets, with Low achieving 352 FPS, Medium achieving 249 FPS, and High achieving 176 FPS.

Q: How does the combo rank among all tested systems in this game?

A: The Intel Core i5-13400F with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 ranks 1022nd out of 3723 total combos tested in Pc Building Simulator. This places the configuration in the top 27 percent of all systems, indicating strong overall performance for this simulation title.

Q: What is the CPU's single-thread benchmark score?

A: The i5-13400F scores 960 in the 3dmark_single_thread test and 3191 in Cinebench R23 single-core. These scores reflect the processor's 2.50 GHz base clock and 4.60 GHz boost clock, which are relevant for simulation logic that often relies on single-threaded performance.

Q: What memory specifications does the GPU use?

A: The RTX 3080 features 10 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 320-bit bus, delivering 760.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock runs at 1188 MHz with 19 Gbps effective speed, providing ample bandwidth for the texture and scene data in Pc Building Simulator.

Q: What is the FPS difference between 1080p and 4K at Medium settings?

A: At Medium settings, the average FPS drops from 249 at 1920x1080 to 82 at 3840x2160, a reduction of 167 FPS. This represents a 67 percent decrease in frame rate when moving from 1080p to 4K, highlighting the increased pixel workload on the GPU.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest rival in average benchmark score?

A: The RTX 3080 has an average benchmark score of 23172, while its nearest rival, the NVIDIA P106-100, scores 23249, showing a deltaPct of -0.3. This places the RTX 3080 essentially level with its closest competitor in aggregate GPU benchmarks.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 serves as the primary rendering engine in this configuration, with its 8704 shading units and 272 texture mapping units driving the simulation's visual output. The GPU's base clock of 1440 MHz and boost clock of 1710 MHz provide the raw processing rate for pixel and geometry work, while the 96 ROPs handle final frame output. In Pc Building Simulator, the GPU's role becomes increasingly dominant as resolution rises, with the 4K results showing a clear dependency on the graphics card's fill rate and memory bandwidth.

The 10 GB GDDR6X memory pool is a critical asset for this game, as the simulation renders detailed PC components, cases, and workshop environments. The 760.3 GB/s bandwidth ensures that texture streaming and scene data transfer do not become bottlenecks, even at 3840x2160 resolution. The measured data supports this: at 4K, the GPU maintains playable frame rates across all presets, with Medium achieving 82 FPS average and Ultra still delivering 55 FPS average. The 320-bit memory bus provides sufficient throughput for the high-resolution textures used in the simulation.

Comparing the GPU's benchmark standing, the RTX 3080 achieves a percentile rank of 68 among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 23172. The nearest rivals show minimal separation: the NVIDIA P106-100 at 23249 (deltaPct -0.3), AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 at 23250 (deltaPct -0.3), AMD Radeon RX 6600M at 23273 (deltaPct -0.4), and AMD Radeon R9 M290X at 23276 (deltaPct -0.4). This clustering indicates that the RTX 3080's raw compute capabilities are well-matched to its immediate competitors, despite its 29.77 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 465.1 GTexel/s texture rate.

The GPU's DirectX 12 Ultimate support and Vulkan 1.4 API compatibility ensure modern rendering paths are available, which the game can leverage. In the measured results, the GPU demonstrates scaling from Low to Ultra presets that reflects its architectural strengths. At 1080p Low, the 352 FPS average indicates the GPU is far from saturated, while at 4K Ultra, the 55 FPS average shows the graphics card operating near its practical limit for this title.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear resolution scaling pattern that shifts the bottleneck from CPU-bound at 1080p to GPU-bound at 4K. At 1920x1080, the average FPS ranges from 352 at Low to 168 at Ultra, with Medium hitting 249 FPS and High reaching 176 FPS. These high frame rates suggest that the i5-13400F's processing power is the limiting factor at this resolution, as even the most demanding preset exceeds the refresh rate of most displays.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain high but show the GPU beginning to exert more influence. Low settings produce 222 FPS average, Medium delivers 157 FPS, High achieves 111 FPS, and Ultra drops to 106 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra narrows from 184 FPS at 1080p to 116 FPS at 1440p, indicating that the GPU's rendering workload is becoming a larger share of the total frame time.

At 3840x2160, the GPU clearly becomes the dominant constraint. Low settings still achieve 116 FPS average, but Medium falls to 82 FPS, High drops to 58 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 55 FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 4K at Medium settings shows a 167 FPS reduction (from 249 to 82), a 67 percent decrease. This steep drop aligns with the 4x pixel count increase from 1080p to 4K, confirming that the RTX 3080's fill rate and memory bandwidth are the primary factors at this resolution.

The data indicates that at 1080p, the CPU's 10 cores and 16 threads are sufficient to feed the GPU, but the processor's single-thread performance (960 in 3dmark_single_thread) still caps frame rates below what the GPU could theoretically deliver. At 4K, the GPU's workload dominates, and the CPU's role diminishes, as evidenced by the relatively small FPS gap between High (58 FPS) and Ultra (55 FPS) at 3840x2160.

Settings Recommendations

For the best measured experience, Medium settings at any resolution provides the optimal balance of visual quality and frame rate stability. At 1920x1080, Medium achieves 249 FPS average with a minimum of 212 FPS and maximum of 287 FPS, offering smooth performance well above typical display refresh rates. At 2560x1440, Medium delivers 157 FPS average with min/max of 134/181 FPS, maintaining high fluidity for the simulation's interface and 3D viewport.

At 3840x2160, Medium is the only preset that provides both playable frame rates and a measured minimum FPS. The 82 FPS average with 70 FPS minimum ensures consistent performance without drops below 60 FPS, which is critical for a simulation where precise mouse control matters. High settings at 4K drop to 58 FPS average, and Ultra falls to 55 FPS, both of which lack reported minimum FPS values, suggesting less stable frame pacing.

Low settings offer the highest frame rates at every resolution, with 352 FPS at 1080p, 222 FPS at 1440p, and 116 FPS at 4K. However, the visual fidelity reduction may impair the ability to read component details in the builder interface. High settings provide a middle ground, with 176 FPS at 1080p and 111 FPS at 1440p, but the 58 FPS at 4K makes it less suitable for high-resolution displays.

The data suggests that Medium is the recommended preset for this combo, as it is the only setting that provides measured minimum FPS values at all three resolutions. This consistency indicates reliable frame delivery, which is essential for a game where users interact with menus, drag components, and rotate 3D models. The 212 FPS minimum at 1080p and 134 FPS minimum at 1440p ensure no perceptible stutter, while the 70 FPS minimum at 4K keeps the experience above common 60 Hz display thresholds.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured results show a wide spread across presets. Low settings produce an average of 352 FPS, which is the highest frame rate recorded for this combo in any configuration. Medium settings deliver 249 FPS average with a minimum of 212 FPS and maximum of 287 FPS. High settings reduce the average to 176 FPS, while Ultra settings yield 168 FPS average. The 184 FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p demonstrates the substantial GPU workload increase from the highest quality preset.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates scale down proportionally. Low settings achieve 222 FPS average, Medium delivers 157 FPS with min/max of 134/181 FPS, High reaches 111 FPS, and Ultra produces 106 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra narrows to 116 FPS, showing the GPU's increasing role in determining performance. The Medium preset's minimum of 134 FPS indicates that even at this higher resolution, the combo maintains comfortable headroom above 60 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the performance envelope tightens considerably. Low settings still manage 116 FPS average, which is impressive for 4K, but the higher presets show the GPU's limits. Medium delivers 82 FPS average with a 70 FPS minimum and 95 FPS maximum, providing the only complete FPS range data at this resolution. High settings drop to 58 FPS average, and Ultra falls to 55 FPS, both without reported minimum or maximum values.

The progression across resolutions shows a consistent pattern: Low settings maintain playable frame rates even at 4K, while Ultra becomes marginal at higher pixel counts. The Medium preset's measured range at 4K (70-95 FPS) indicates that the RTX 3080's 10 GB memory and 760.3 GB/s bandwidth are adequate for the simulation's texture requirements, but the 320-bit bus width and 96 ROPs limit the maximum output at 3840x2160 with higher quality settings.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-13400F provides the processing foundation for this combo, with 10 cores and 16 threads arranged in a Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm process. The 2.50 GHz base clock and 4.60 GHz boost clock determine the processor's ability to handle the simulation's game logic, component interaction calculations, and system management tasks. The 65 W TDP indicates efficient power delivery, while the 20 MB shared L3 cache and 1.25 MB per-core L2 cache provide fast access to frequently used data.

Benchmark data shows the CPU's multithreaded capabilities are strong, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 22604 and a 3dmark_max_threads score of 7307. The single-thread performance is more modest, with a 3dmark_single_thread score of 960 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3191. In Pc Building Simulator, this balance matters: the simulation's core loop likely benefits from both high single-thread speed for UI responsiveness and multithreaded throughput for background system calculations.

The CPU's percentile rank of 77 among all processors, with an average benchmark score of 25292, places it above the median but not at the top tier. Its nearest rivals show tight competition: the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS scores 25284 (deltaPct 0), the Intel Core 5 120 scores 25362 (deltaPct -0.3), the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D scores 25365 (deltaPct -0.3), and the AMD Ryzen 7 6800H scores 25201 (deltaPct 0.4). This clustering indicates the i5-13400F is competitive with a range of laptop and desktop processors in aggregate benchmarks.

In the measured FPS results, the CPU's role is most evident at 1080p where frame rates exceed 168 FPS even at Ultra settings. At this resolution, the GPU has spare capacity, and the CPU's ability to feed draw calls and update simulation state becomes the limiting factor. The 352 FPS at Low settings suggests the CPU can output a high number of frames, but the drop to 168 FPS at Ultra indicates that the increased draw calls and physics calculations from higher quality settings tax the processor's single-thread performance.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-13400F with NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 achieves a rank of 1022 out of 3723 tested combos in Pc Building Simulator, placing it in the 72nd percentile of all systems. This ranking reflects the measured FPS results, which show strong performance at 1080p and 1440p but more moderate results at 4K with higher presets. The combo's position in the top third of all tested configurations indicates it delivers above-average performance for this simulation title.

The ranking benefits from the CPU's solid multithreaded performance, as evidenced by the 22604 Cinebench R23 multicore score, which supports the simulation's background processing needs. The GPU's 68th percentile rank among all graphics cards contributes to the combo's overall standing, with the 10 GB memory capacity proving sufficient for the game's requirements. The measured FPS at 1440p Medium (157 FPS) and 1080p Ultra (168 FPS) demonstrate that this combo excels at mainstream resolutions.

Compared to other combos in the database, this configuration's rank of 1022 out of 3723 means it outperforms roughly 73 percent of tested systems in Pc Building Simulator. The data indicates that while the RTX 3080 is not the fastest GPU available, its combination with the i5-13400F provides balanced performance that avoids severe bottlenecks at any tested resolution. The 4K Medium result of 82 FPS shows the combo can handle high-resolution gaming, even if Ultra settings at 4K fall to 55 FPS.

The combo's ranking is supported by the CPU's competitive standing among its peers, with the nearest rival AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS showing a deltaPct of 0, indicating near-identical aggregate performance. This suggests that the i5-13400F is well-matched to its price and performance tier, and the GPU's 0.3 percent deltaPct from the NVIDIA P106-100 shows similar GPU-level competitiveness. Together, these components create a system that ranks in the top third of all tested combos in this simulation game.