Pc Building Simulator

Pc Building Simulator is a simulation title that responds predictably to hardware, and the Intel Core i5-9400 paired with the Intel Arc B370 produces a playable but not exceptional experience. The data shows this combo ranks near the bottom of the database, at 2761 out of 3002 tested combinations, placing it in the 8th percentile of all tested combos for this specific game. The Arc B370, acting as an integrated GPU with system-shared memory, is the primary limiting factor, while the six-core i5-9400 provides adequate processing headroom for a game that is not heavily threaded.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Pc Building Simulator at 1920x1080 with playable framerates?

A: Yes, at 1920x1080 resolution, the measured data shows an average of 113 FPS on Low settings and 80 FPS on Medium settings. Even High settings deliver 56 FPS, which is above the standard 60 FPS threshold, though Ultra drops to 54 FPS.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370 compare to its closest rivals in raw GPU power?

A: The Arc B370 scores 1184 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test. This puts it statistically tied with the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, 0.2% faster), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, 0.5% faster), and AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192, 0.7% faster). The AMD FirePro M2000 is slightly slower at 1168, which is 1.4% behind.

Q: Is the Core i5-9400 processor a bottleneck for this game?

A: Benchmark results indicate the i5-9400 is not a significant bottleneck. It scores 6629 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 935 in single-core, placing it in the 47th percentile of all CPUs. For a simulation game, the six physical cores are sufficient; the GPU is the limiting factor in most scenarios.

Q: What is the best resolution/settings combination for a smooth experience?

A: The most balanced experience is 1920x1080 on Medium settings, which yields 80 FPS average with a minimum of 68 FPS and maximum of 92 FPS. This provides a comfortable margin above 60 FPS while maintaining better visual fidelity than Low settings.

Q: How does this combo perform at 2560x1440 resolution?

A: At 2560x1440, the combo manages 71 FPS on Low and 50 FPS on Medium settings. High settings drop to 36 FPS, and Ultra falls to 34 FPS. For a stable 60 FPS experience, Low settings are required at this resolution.

Q: Is 4K gaming feasible with this hardware configuration?

A: No, 4K is not practical. At 3840x2160, the highest average FPS recorded is 37 on Low settings, which is below the minimum threshold for smooth gameplay. Medium settings produce 26 FPS, High drops to 19 FPS, and Ultra runs at 18 FPS.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data suggests a clear hierarchy of settings for this combo, with the priority being maintaining a frame rate above 60 FPS. At 1920x1080, the difference between Low and Medium is substantial: 113 FPS versus 80 FPS, a 33 FPS gap. However, Medium provides a more visually coherent experience for a game about building PCs, where readability of components matters. The minimum FPS of 68 on Medium ensures that even in dense scenes, the frame rate stays above 60. High settings at 1080p drop to 56 FPS, which is borderline playable but risks noticeable stutter during busy simulation moments. Ultra at 54 FPS is not recommended because the visual gains are minimal in a game with this art style, but the performance loss is measurable.

For users who prioritize smoothness above all else, 1920x1080 Low is the obvious choice, delivering 113 FPS. This is more than enough for a simulation game that does not require fast reflexes. However, the recommendation for the best experience is 1920x1080 Medium. The 80 FPS average is 33% higher than High settings, and the minimum of 68 FPS provides a safety margin. The 12 FPS difference between Medium and Low is less noticeable than the visual quality improvement from Low to Medium. At 2560x1440, the data shows a similar pattern but with lower absolute numbers. Low settings at 71 FPS are the only option that clears 60 FPS. Medium at 50 FPS is playable but not ideal, while High and Ultra at 36 and 34 FPS respectively are too slow for a consistent experience. For 1440p, the recommendation is Low settings, accepting the visual trade-off for playability. 4K is not a viable option for this combo, as even Low settings only produce 37 FPS, which is below the playable threshold for most users.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank in game is 2761 out of 3002 total tested combinations. This places the i5-9400 + Arc B370 in the bottom 8% of all configurations tested for Pc Building Simulator. This is a low rank, but it is consistent with the hardware profile: the Arc B370 is an integrated GPU with a 5th percentile ranking among all GPUs, while the i5-9400 is a mid-range processor from 2018 that is now end-of-life. The GPU's performance is the dominant factor in this ranking, not the CPU.

To contextualize this rank, consider that the Arc B370's nearest rivals are all older discrete GPUs like the ATI Radeon HD 5770 and AMD Radeon HD 7650M. These are legacy parts from a different era, and the Arc B370's performance is comparable to them despite being a much newer design. This indicates that the integrated GPU is designed for low-power mobile scenarios, not for demanding gaming. The i5-9400, meanwhile, is competitive with modern low-end processors; its nearest CPU rivals include the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 (0.2% faster) and Intel Core i3-10305 (0.4% faster). The CPU is not the reason for the low combo rank. The data shows that even with a stronger CPU, the Arc B370 would still struggle in this game at higher resolutions. The rank of 2761 reflects the GPU's inability to sustain high frame rates at 1440p and above, and its marginal performance even at 1080p on Ultra settings. For a game that is not graphically intensive, this is a disappointing result, but it is expected from a 25-watt integrated solution.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data is consistent across resolutions, showing a clear pattern of diminishing returns as resolution increases. At 3840x2160, the performance is uniformly poor. Low settings produce 37 FPS, which is the best result at this resolution. Medium settings drop to 26 FPS with a minimum of 22 and maximum of 30. High settings yield 19 FPS, and Ultra produces 18 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 11 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is only 1 FPS, indicating that the GPU is completely saturated at 4K and settings have minimal impact beyond the lowest preset.

At 2560x1440, the performance improves significantly but still remains below 60 FPS for most settings. Low settings achieve 71 FPS, which is the only preset above the 60 FPS threshold. Medium settings produce 50 FPS with a minimum of 43 and maximum of 58. High settings drop to 36 FPS, and Ultra yields 34 FPS. The difference between Low and Medium is 21 FPS, which is substantial, while the difference between High and Ultra is only 2 FPS. This suggests that the GPU can handle 1440p Low, but any increase in settings causes a disproportionate performance hit.

At 1920x1080, the data shows the most usable range. Low settings deliver 113 FPS, which is excellent for a simulation game. Medium settings produce 80 FPS with a minimum of 68 and maximum of 92, providing a smooth experience. High settings yield 56 FPS, which is just below the 60 FPS target. Ultra settings produce 54 FPS. The scaling from Low to Medium is a 33 FPS drop, which is steep, but the visual improvement is noticeable. The drop from Medium to High is 24 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 2 FPS, showing that Ultra offers no meaningful benefit over High while costing a small amount of performance. The resolution scaling from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings is a 42 FPS drop (113 to 71), and from 1440p to 4K is another 34 FPS drop (71 to 37). This shows that the GPU is bandwidth-limited, as the system-shared memory bandwidth is dependent on the CPU's memory bus.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated GPU based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on a 3 nm process node. It has 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster output units. The boost clock is 2400 MHz with a base clock of 300 MHz. The pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 6.144 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 12.29 TFLOPS using a 2:1 ratio. The TDP is 25 watts, which is very low for a GPU, and it uses system-shared memory with no dedicated VRAM.

In Pc Building Simulator, the GPU's role is critical because the game renders a 3D workspace with various PC components. The measured FPS data shows that the Arc B370 is the primary bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the 113 FPS indicates that the GPU can handle the workload, but at 1080p Ultra, the 54 FPS shows a significant performance degradation. The GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1184 puts it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, meaning it is slower than 95% of tested GPUs. Its nearest rivals are all older discrete cards from 2010-2012, such as the ATI Radeon HD 5770 and AMD Radeon HD 7650M, which have similar scores. This confirms that the Arc B370 is not designed for gaming, but rather for basic graphics tasks in a low-power mobile environment.

The lack of dedicated VRAM is a major factor. The memory bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent," meaning it relies on the CPU's dual-channel DDR4 memory bus, which provides 42.7 GB/s. This is far lower than what a discrete GPU would offer, and it explains why the FPS drops so sharply when increasing resolution. At 4K, the GPU must access system memory for textures and frame buffers, and the limited bandwidth causes the frame rate to plummet. The 25 W TDP also limits the clock speeds, as the GPU cannot sustain high boost clocks under load. The data shows that the GPU is only capable of playable frame rates at 1080p Low or Medium, and even then, it is not a high-performance solution.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-9400 is a 6-core, 6-thread processor based on the Coffee Lake architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process. It has a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. The L3 cache is 9 MB shared, with 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core. It supports dual-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. The CPU is end-of-life and was released in October 2018. Its benchmark scores include 6629 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, 935 in single-core, and 5141 in Geekbench multi-core. It ranks in the 47th percentile of all CPUs, making it a mid-range processor.

In Pc Building Simulator, the CPU's role is to manage the simulation logic, which includes tracking component compatibility, power consumption, and thermal loads. This is not a heavily threaded workload, so the 6 cores and 6 threads are sufficient. The CPU's performance is not the limiting factor in this combo. At 1080p Low, the 113 FPS suggests that the CPU can feed the GPU adequately. The single-core score of 935 in Cinebench R23 is modest, but for a game that does not require high single-thread performance, it is adequate.

The CPU's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-1068NG7, which is 0.2% faster, and the Intel Core i3-10305, which is 0.4% faster. These are all similar in performance, indicating that the i5-9400 is not a weak processor. The bottleneck is clearly the GPU, as evidenced by the fact that increasing resolution from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings causes a 37% drop in FPS (113 to 71), while the CPU load would not change significantly. The 42.7 GB/s memory bandwidth is shared between the CPU and GPU, and at higher resolutions, the GPU consumes more bandwidth, potentially starving the CPU. However, the data shows that the CPU maintains playable frame rates even at 4K, where the GPU is the clear limiting factor. The 47th percentile CPU ranking indicates that this processor is average, but for this specific game, it is more than capable. The conclusion is that the i5-9400 provides a stable platform, but the Arc B370 prevents the combo from achieving high performance.