Pc Building Simulator

Pc Building Simulator is a simulation title where the CPU and GPU work in a surprisingly balanced partnership, and the Intel Core i5-9400 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT delivers a performance profile that is strong at high refresh rates but clearly limited at 4K. The data shows this combo ranks in the 57th percentile of all tested combinations, placing it in the upper-middle tier of the database. The measured frames per second reveal a system that excels at 1080p and 1440p, but the transition to 4K exposes a significant bottleneck that changes the nature of the experience.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-9400 is a 6-core, 6-thread processor from the Coffee Lake Refresh generation, running on a 14 nm process node. Its base clock is 2.90 GHz, which boosts up to 4.10 GHz, and it accesses 9 MB of shared L3 cache alongside 256 KB of L2 per core. This CPU is not unlocked for overclocking, and its benchmark scores place it at the 50th percentile of all CPUs, indicating a mid-range standing. In synthetic tests, its Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 7969 and single-core is 1125, showing a solid but not exceptional compute capacity.

For a simulation game like Pc Building Simulator, the CPU’s role is significant because the game simulates system building and boot sequences, which rely on single-threaded logic and memory management. The 6-core/6-thread configuration is adequate for the game’s demands, but the lack of hyper-threading means it cannot offload extra tasks efficiently. The benchmark results indicate that the CPU is a capable partner at lower resolutions, where its 4.10 GHz boost clock can keep up with the GPU’s frame output. However, the data suggests that when the resolution increases to 4K, the CPU’s relative workload diminishes, and the GPU becomes the primary limiting factor.

The CPU’s memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s on a dual-channel DDR4 interface is a modest figure, which can impact performance in memory-sensitive simulation tasks. Compared to its nearest rivals, the i5-9400’s average benchmark score of 2305 is nearly identical to the Intel Core i3-10305 (2300, 0.2% faster) and Intel Core i3-1125G4 (2299, 0.2% faster), and it is 0.4% faster than the Intel Xeon E-2134 (2295). It trails the Intel Core i7-8809G (2319) by 0.6%. These tiny deltas indicate that the CPU sits in a very competitive performance band, where no single rival holds a meaningful advantage.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-9400 and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT achieves a combo rank of 1013 out of 1769 tested combinations in Pc Building Simulator. This places it in the 57th percentile, meaning it outperforms a majority of systems but is not near the top tier. The ranking reflects a balance where the GPU is the stronger component, but the CPU prevents the system from reaching the highest echelons of performance.

In the context of the database, this combo is a mid-pack performer. The GPU’s percentile rank of 77 is significantly higher than the CPU’s 50, indicating that the graphics card is the more capable part. This disparity is evident in the measured FPS, where the system hits 246.1 FPS at 1080p Low, a figure that suggests the CPU is being pushed to its limits to feed the GPU. At 4K Ultra, the combo drops to 43.3 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay, confirming that the GPU is struggling with the higher pixel count. The rank of 1013 is a direct result of this imbalance; systems with a stronger CPU would likely rank higher in this simulation-heavy title.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and dramatic scaling pattern across resolutions, which reveals the limiting component at each stage. At 1080p, the system is highly capable, with the Low preset producing 246.1 FPS and the High preset at 135.5 FPS. This indicates that at 1080p, the CPU is the primary bottleneck, as the GPU has ample headroom to render frames quickly, but the processor cannot issue draw calls fast enough to push beyond these numbers.

Moving to 1440p, the FPS drops proportionally: Low falls to 169.2 FPS (a 31.3% decrease from 1080p), and High drops to 87.2 FPS (a 35.6% decrease). This scaling suggests that the GPU is starting to become more involved, but the CPU still holds significant sway. At 4K, the impact is severe: Low falls to 86.9 FPS (a 64.7% drop from 1080p), and High plummets to 45.6 FPS (a 66.3% drop). These figures point to the GPU being the definitive limiting factor at 4K, as the pixel throughput demands exceed the RX 6700 XT’s capabilities.

The scaling from 1080p to 4K is not linear, which is typical for a GPU-bound scenario at higher resolutions. The data shows a 4.7x increase in pixel count from 1080p to 4K, but the FPS does not drop by 4.7x, indicating that the CPU is still contributing some overhead. However, the substantial drops at 4K, especially from Medium (65.9 FPS) to Ultra (43.3 FPS), confirm that the GPU’s rendering pipeline is the bottleneck.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1080p, the system delivers excellent performance across all settings. The Low preset achieves 246.1 FPS, Medium reaches 190.1 FPS, High hits 135.5 FPS, and Ultra maintains 129.4 FPS. This is a remarkably narrow spread between High and Ultra (4.5% difference), suggesting that the CPU is capping performance at the higher presets, as the GPU can handle the extra detail without a significant cost.

At 1440p, the numbers remain solid but show more separation. Low produces 169.2 FPS, Medium drops to 120.2 FPS, High falls to 87.2 FPS, and Ultra reaches 80.4 FPS. The gap between Medium and High is 30.7%, indicating that the GPU is now the limiting factor for the higher presets. The Ultra setting at 80.4 FPS is still playable, but the drop from High is 7.8%, showing that the extra settings have a measurable cost.

At 4K, the system struggles to maintain high frame rates. Low is the only playable option at 86.9 FPS, while Medium drops to 65.9 FPS. High falls to 45.6 FPS, and Ultra is just 43.3 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra at 4K is only 5.0%, indicating that the GPU is saturated and additional settings yield diminishing returns. The 4K Low vs 4K High difference is 47.5%, highlighting the GPU’s inability to handle the pixel load at higher quality settings.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT is the dominant component in this combo, with a 12 GB GDDR6 memory pool on a 192-bit bus providing 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock is 2321 MHz, boosting to 2581 MHz, and it operates on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with 2560 shading units. The GPU’s percentile rank of 77 places it well above the CPU’s 50, and its average benchmark score of 33721 is 0.7% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 6800’s 33493, though it is 1% lower than the AMD Radeon HD 7950 (34050) and RX 480 (34059). It is also 1.3% faster than the NVIDIA RTX A5000 (33294).

The GPU’s role in Pc Building Simulator is evident in the 4K results, where its 13.21 TFLOPS of FP32 compute is insufficient for Ultra settings, yielding only 43.3 FPS. The 4K Low setting at 86.9 FPS shows that the GPU can handle the game if the visual load is reduced, but the 12 GB VRAM is more than sufficient for this title, as the game’s textures are not demanding. The GPU’s boost clock of 2581 MHz helps at lower resolutions, where it can push above 200 FPS at 1080p Low, but the CPU’s 4.10 GHz boost clock prevents it from reaching its full potential.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Pc Building Simulator?

A: The data shows 1440p is the sweet spot, with High settings achieving 87.2 FPS and Ultra at 80.4 FPS, providing a good balance between visual quality and smoothness. At 1080p, the CPU limits performance to 135.5 FPS on High, while 4K drops below 60 FPS on High.

Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in this title?

A: Yes, but only at Low settings, which produce 86.9 FPS. Medium drops to 65.9 FPS, while High (45.6 FPS) and Ultra (43.3 FPS) are below the 60 FPS threshold for ideal smoothness.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck at 1080p?

A: The CPU is the limiting factor at 1080p. The FPS spread from High (135.5) to Ultra (129.4) is only 4.5%, indicating the GPU has headroom, but the i5-9400’s 6 threads cap the output.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to others?

A: It ranks 1013 out of 1769 combos, placing it in the 57th percentile. This is a mid-tier result, with the GPU’s 77th percentile rank being much higher than the CPU’s 50th percentile.

Q: What is the performance difference between 1080p and 4K at High settings?

A: The FPS drops from 135.5 at 1080p to 45.6 at 4K, a 66.3% decrease. This indicates the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions.

Q: Which settings preset offers the most consistent experience?

A: The 1440p High preset (87.2 FPS) offers the best balance, as it is well above 60 FPS and only 7.8% slower than Ultra. At 1080p, High and Ultra are nearly identical, suggesting the CPU limits further gains.

Settings Recommendations

The optimal experience per the measured data is the 1440p High preset, which delivers 87.2 FPS. This provides a smooth frame rate above 60 FPS while retaining visual fidelity. At 1080p, the High preset (135.5 FPS) is preferable to Ultra (129.4 FPS) because the 4.5% FPS gain is negligible, and the CPU is clearly the bottleneck. For players prioritizing maximum frame rates, the 1080p Low preset at 246.1 FPS is the fastest option, but it sacrifices visual detail.

At 4K, the only playable option is Low at 86.9 FPS, as Medium (65.9 FPS) is borderline and High/Ultra fall below 60 FPS. The data suggests that 4K is not a viable resolution for this combo without significant compromises. The 1440p Medium preset (120.2 FPS) is a strong alternative for high-refresh monitors, offering a 27.5% FPS increase over High with only a modest visual downgrade. Ultimately, the 1440p High settings offer the best balance of performance and quality, making it the recommended configuration for this system.