Pc Building Simulator

The Intel Core i5-14400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor built on Intel's Raptor Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. It carries 20 MB of shared L3 cache and supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory. In synthetic benchmarks, this CPU posts a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21914 and a single-core score of 3093, alongside a Geekbench multi-core score of 11209. These numbers place it at the 88th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 32508. The closest rivals are tightly clustered: the Intel Core i7-12800H scores 32513 (a 0% delta), the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 7645 scores 32446 (a 0.2% delta), and the AMD Ryzen 7 250 scores 32584 (a -0.2% delta). For a game like Pc Building Simulator, which is a simulation title rather than a fast-paced shooter, this processor's strong multi-threaded performance is more than sufficient to handle game logic, physics calculations, and asset streaming. The data indicates that at no point in the measured FPS results does the CPU become the bottleneck; the processor's capability far exceeds what this simulation demands, especially when paired with a GPU that will limit frame rates far earlier.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of which settings preset delivers the best experience with this hardware combination. At 1080p, the Low preset achieves an average of 108.3 FPS, which is smooth and well above the threshold for comfortable play. The Medium preset drops to 76.8 FPS, still highly playable, while High produces 55.7 FPS and Ultra falls to 52.2 FPS. The jump from Low to Medium costs roughly 31 FPS, but the visual fidelity gain in a building simulation—where you spend time inspecting components and case layouts—can be worth it. However, the data shows that the Low preset is the only one that pushes the frame rate into triple digits at 1080p. For a game that is not reflex-intensive, the Medium preset at 76.8 FPS represents the best balance between visual clarity and responsiveness. At 1440p, the situation shifts: Low yields 68.3 FPS, Medium drops to 48.4 FPS, High to 34.6 FPS, and Ultra to 29.7 FPS. Here, Medium is the highest playable setting, but Low is the only one that maintains a consistent 60+ FPS. At 4K, no preset is truly playable; even Low only manages 37 FPS, which is below the generally accepted smoothness threshold. The recommendation is clear: for the best experience, use the Low preset at 1080p or 1440p, or accept the Medium preset at 1080p if visual fidelity takes priority over frame rate headroom.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop across resolutions reveals a system heavily constrained by the graphics card. At 1080p Low, the combo produces 108.3 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low, the average falls to 68.3 FPS, a reduction of 40 FPS, or roughly 37%. At 4K Low, the average plummets to 37 FPS, which is about 46% lower than the 1440p figure and 66% lower than the 1080p figure. These are steep, consistent declines that indicate the GPU is the limiting component. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rates would not scale so dramatically with resolution; a stronger GPU would show a flatter curve. The data shows that the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650, with its 4 GB of GDDR5 memory and 128-bit memory bus, simply runs out of pixel-pushing capability as resolution increases. At 1080p Ultra, the combo hits 52.2 FPS, but at 1440p Ultra it drops to 29.7 FPS, and at 4K Ultra it collapses to 19.9 FPS. The scaling pattern is consistent across all settings: doubling the pixel count from 1080p to 1440p roughly halves the frame rate, and moving to 4K roughly halves it again. This is classic GPU-bound behavior, confirming that the i5-14400F has ample headroom and that any FPS improvements would require a more powerful graphics solution.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the database of tested combinations for Pc Building Simulator, this specific pairing of the Intel Core i5-14400F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 ranks 1688 out of 1769 combos. This places it in the bottom 5% of all tested systems, which is a poor showing. The rank is heavily influenced by the GPU's limited capabilities; the CPU itself is a strong performer, but the GTX 1650 holds the entire system back. To contextualize, the GPU's average benchmark score is 8713, placing it at the 43rd percentile of all GPUs, with nearest rivals including the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile (score 8746, delta -0.4%) and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 (score 8761, delta -0.5%). The i5-14400F is at the 88th percentile, but the combination's rank of 1688 out of 1769 shows that the overall system performance is dragged down by the graphics card's age and modest specs. For a simulation game that may involve rendering complex 3D scenes of PC builds, this rank indicates that the experience will be playable only at lower resolutions and settings, as confirmed by the measured FPS data. The data suggests that any other tested combo with a more balanced GPU would rank significantly higher.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the clear bottleneck in this configuration. It features 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU has 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, with a base clock of 1485 MHz and a boost clock of 1665 MHz. Its raw compute capability is 2.984 TFLOPS for FP32 operations, which is modest by modern standards. In DirectX 12 benchmarks, the card scores 35 in PassMark, while DirectX 11 scores 58 and DirectX 9 scores 124. These scores indicate that the card handles older APIs reasonably well but struggles with more demanding modern workloads. The 4 GB VRAM is a significant limitation; at 4K resolution, the card cannot maintain playable frame rates even at Low settings, achieving only 37 FPS. The memory bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s is also insufficient for high-resolution textures. The GPU's percentile rank of 43 versus all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 8713, puts it in the lower half of all graphics cards. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile, scores 8746, a delta of -0.4%, showing that the GTX 1650 is competitive with that mobile chip but still fundamentally limited. In Pc Building Simulator, the GPU's role is to render the 3D workspace, components, and case models; the data shows it can do so at 1080p with acceptable frame rates on lower presets, but it chokes at higher resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the data shows a clear progression across presets. The Low preset yields an average of 108.3 FPS, which is the only preset to break the 100 FPS mark. Medium drops to 76.8 FPS, a 31.5 FPS decrease that still leaves the game smooth. High produces 55.7 FPS, and Ultra sits at 52.2 FPS, a marginal drop from High that may not justify the extra visual load. Moving to 2560x1440, the Low preset gives 68.3 FPS, which is still playable but noticeably lower than the 1080p figure. Medium drops to 48.4 FPS, High to 34.6 FPS, and Ultra to 29.7 FPS. At this resolution, only Low maintains a frame rate above 60 FPS, and Medium is borderline acceptable for a simulation game. At 3840x2160, the results are disappointing across the board. Low yields 37 FPS, Medium drops to 24.5 FPS, High falls to 17.3 FPS, and Ultra manages only 19.9 FPS. None of these are playable for a smooth experience, and the data suggests that 4K is not a viable option for this combo. The pattern across all resolutions is consistent: the GTX 1650's performance degrades linearly with pixel count, and the CPU's strong scores (Cinebench R23 multi-core 21914, single-core 3093) have no impact on these results. The takeaway is that this system is best used at 1080p with Low or Medium settings, where it can deliver a playable experience, or at 1440p with Low settings for a sharper image at a cost of smoothness.