Pc Building Simulator

# Pc Building Simulator — Intel Core i5-14400F + NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER

This combination of Intel's 10-core Core i5-14400F and NVIDIA's GTX 1660 SUPER lands at rank 1553 out of 1769 tested combos in Pc Building Simulator, placing it in the lower 12% of all configurations evaluated. The pairing is curiously balanced: the CPU sits at the 88th percentile among all processors while the GPU only reaches the 55th percentile among all graphics cards, creating a system where the graphics card is likely the primary constraint in most scenarios. The data suggests this is a functional but not exceptional pairing for a simulation title that rewards both CPU logic and GPU rendering.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 1553 out of 1769 tested configurations places it firmly in the lower quartile of system pairings for Pc Building Simulator. This is somewhat surprising given the CPU's strong standing — the Core i5-14400F achieves an average benchmark score of 32,508, which sits within 0.2% of the Intel Core i7-12800H (32,513) and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 7645 (32,446). The CPU outperforms the AMD Ryzen 7 250 and Intel Core i7-13705H by 0.2% each, showing it is competitive with mobile and desktop chips alike.

The GPU, however, drags the overall ranking down. The GTX 1660 SUPER posts an average benchmark score of 14,286, trailing the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 (14,314) by 0.2%, the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics (14,315) by 0.2%, and the AMD Radeon Vega 11 (14,352) by 0.5%. Only the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT (14,389) is marginally ahead at 0.7%. This places the GPU in a crowded mid-range pack, but the measured frame rates in this simulation suggest the bottleneck is not purely GPU-bound at lower resolutions.

GPU Role

The GTX 1660 SUPER brings 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock runs at 1530 MHz with a boost up to 1785 MHz, while memory operates at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The chip, built on TSMC's 12 nm process with 6,600 million transistors, achieves 5.027 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. For a simulation game that often involves rendering detailed PC components and workshop environments, this GPU provides adequate rasterization throughput, though it lacks dedicated ray tracing cores.

The benchmark data shows a clear pattern: at 1080p, the GPU can push well beyond 100 FPS on lower presets, but at 4K Ultra it falls to 25.1 FPS. This indicates the 6 GB VRAM and 192-bit memory interface become limiting factors at higher resolutions and quality settings. The GPU's PassMark G3D score of 12,699 and DirectX 12 score of 50 suggest it handles modern APIs adequately, but the 55th percentile ranking among all GPUs reflects its mid-range positioning in 2024.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides clear guidance for optimal settings. At 1080p, the Low preset delivers 176.1 FPS, Medium reaches 124.1 FPS, and High achieves 86.6 FPS — all comfortably playable. The Ultra preset drops to 83.3 FPS, which remains smooth but offers diminishing returns over High. For 1440p, Low produces 108.6 FPS and Medium delivers 75.1 FPS, while High and Ultra sit at 53.8 FPS and 54.2 FPS respectively, making Medium the sensible choice for 1440p gaming.

At 4K, the story changes dramatically. Low settings yield 60 FPS exactly, Medium drops to 37.8 FPS, High falls to 29.2 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 25.1 FPS. Given this data, the recommended configuration is Medium settings at 1080p or 1440p for the best balance of visual quality and frame rate. The 4K Low preset offers exactly 60 FPS, which is playable but requires significant visual compromises. The data suggests this combination is best suited to 1080p Medium or High, with 1440p Medium as a viable alternative.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the frame rate progression across presets is consistent: Low delivers 176.1 FPS, Medium achieves 124.1 FPS, High reaches 86.6 FPS, and Ultra produces 83.3 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra is minimal at just 3.3 FPS, suggesting the Ultra preset adds little performance cost but also little visual benefit at this resolution. The jump from Low to Medium costs 52 FPS (a 29.5% reduction), while Medium to High costs 37.5 FPS (a 30.2% reduction).

Moving to 2560x1440, the same pattern holds with lower absolute numbers: Low posts 108.6 FPS, Medium 75.1 FPS, High 53.8 FPS, and Ultra 54.2 FPS. Interestingly, High and Ultra are nearly identical here (0.4 FPS difference), indicating the GPU hits a rendering ceiling around 54 FPS at this resolution regardless of the highest quality settings. Low to Medium represents a 33.5 FPS drop (30.8%), while Medium to High costs 21.3 FPS (28.4%).

At 3840x2160, the results are starkly different. Low produces exactly 60 FPS, Medium 37.8 FPS, High 29.2 FPS, and Ultra 25.1 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 22.2 FPS (37%), and Medium to High is 8.6 FPS (22.8%). The Ultra preset is only 4.1 FPS below High, showing that at 4K, the GPU is so heavily constrained that increasing settings from High to Ultra has minimal additional impact.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals significant insights about the system's bottleneck. At Low settings, 1080p yields 176.1 FPS, 1440p produces 108.6 FPS (a 38.3% reduction), and 4K drops to 60 FPS (a 65.9% reduction from 1080p). This scaling pattern is expected for a GPU-bound scenario, but the CPU's role becomes apparent when examining the High preset: 1080p High achieves 86.6 FPS, 1440p High falls to 53.8 FPS (37.9% reduction), and 4K High drops to 29.2 FPS (66.3% reduction).

The consistent percentage drops across resolutions (roughly 38% from 1080p to 1440p and 66% from 1080p to 4K) indicate that the GPU is the primary limiting factor at all quality levels. However, the CPU's 10 cores and 16 threads with a boost clock of 4.70 GHz ensure that at 1080p Low, the system can reach 176.1 FPS without CPU-related stuttering. The 4K Low result of exactly 60 FPS is notable — it suggests the game engine or the GPU's rendering pipeline hits a specific cap at this resolution, rather than a gradual degradation.

FAQ

Q: Is this combination capable of 60 FPS at 1080p with high settings?

A: Yes. The measured data shows 86.6 FPS at 1080p High and 83.3 FPS at 1080p Ultra, both exceeding the 60 FPS threshold comfortably.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo?

A: 1440p Medium delivers 75.1 FPS, which is above 60 FPS, while 4K Low achieves exactly 60 FPS. The data suggests 1440p Medium offers the best balance of visual quality and performance.

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

A: The Core i5-14400F scores 32,508 on average, which is statistically tied with the Intel Core i7-12800H (32,513) and AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 7645 (32,446), while edging out the AMD Ryzen 7 250 and Intel Core i7-13705H by 0.2% each.

Q: Can this system handle 4K Ultra?

A: The measured 4K Ultra average is 25.1 FPS, which is below the 30 FPS threshold typically considered minimally playable. It is not recommended for smooth gameplay.

Q: What GPU performance tier does the GTX 1660 SUPER occupy?

A: It ranks at the 55th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 14,286. It trails the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 by 0.2% and the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT by 0.7%.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck the GPU at any resolution?

A: Given that frame rates drop consistently by about 38% from 1080p to 1440p and 66% from 1080p to 4K, the data indicates the GPU is the limiting component across all tested settings.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-14400F provides 10 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. Built on Intel's 10 nm process with a 215 mm² die size, it features 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. Its Cinebench R23 scores of 21,914 multi-core and 3,093 single-core demonstrate strong productivity performance, while Geekbench results of 11,209 multi-core and 2,333 single-core reinforce its mid-range positioning.

The CPU's 88th percentile ranking among all processors means it outperforms the vast majority of installed CPUs, yet the overall combo rank of 1553 out of 1769 reveals that the GPU holds the system back. In Pc Building Simulator, which involves simulating PC assembly and benchmarking, the CPU's multi-threaded capabilities (PassMark multithread score of 25,783) are crucial for physics and logic calculations. However, the data shows that even with this capable processor, the GTX 1660 SUPER's 55th percentile standing limits the system to mid-range frame rates at higher resolutions. The combination of a strong CPU with a modest GPU creates a system that excels at 1080p gaming but struggles to maintain playable frame rates at 4K Ultra, making it a balanced choice for 1080p or 1440p Medium settings in this simulation title.