Pc Building Simulator

Pc Building Simulator is a simulation title where the workload is dominated by CPU-driven logic and component interaction calculations, and the benchmark data for the Intel Core i7-12700KF paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 reflects this, showing that the processor is the primary determinant of frame rates, while the GPU provides ample headroom across all tested resolutions. The measured results show that this combination ranks in the 806th position out of 3,723 total tested combinations, placing it in the upper quartile of all systems tested for this game. The data indicates that this configuration delivers exceptional performance, with even the most demanding preset at 4K resolution maintaining a playable average frame rate, and the system demonstrates a clear pattern of CPU-bound behavior that becomes more apparent at lower resolutions.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i7-12700KF is a 12-core, 20-thread processor based on the Alder Lake architecture, operating at a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. Its benchmark performance places it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 35,365. This places it in a tight competitive group; for instance, it is essentially tied with the Intel Core i7-13700T, which has an average score of 35,403, a delta of only -0.1%, and the Intel Core i5-13600T, which scores 35,305, a delta of +0.2%. The i7-12700KF is also directly comparable to its K-series sibling, the i7-12700K, which scores 35,287, a delta of +0.2%, indicating that the KF variant's lack of integrated graphics does not hamper its compute performance.

The game's simulation genre is heavily reliant on single-threaded logic and multi-threaded background calculations. In this context, the i7-12700KF's single-core performance, as measured by a 3DMark single-thread score of 1,043 and a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4,071, is robust, ensuring that the game's core simulation loop is not bottlenecked. More importantly, the processor's multi-threaded capabilities are substantial. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 28,838 and the 3DMark max-thread score of 9,983 show a significant scaling from the 2-thread score of 2,065, indicating that the 12 cores are effectively utilized when the game simulates multiple systems or complex interactions. This multi-threading performance is critical for Pc Building Simulator, where the game must track the state of many individual components and their interactions simultaneously.

In terms of game performance, the CPU's strength is clearly evidenced by the high frame rates achieved even at the most demanding settings. At 1080p Ultra, the system produces 175 FPS, and at 1080p Low, it reaches 367 FPS. This massive jump of 192 FPS when lowering settings from Ultra to Low shows that the CPU is able to feed the GPU with data fast enough to produce frame rates far beyond standard display refresh rates. The 20 threads of the processor handle the game's overhead and physics calculations, ensuring that the frame rate is not limited by the simulation's complexity. The i7-12700KF's 25 MB of shared L3 cache also plays a role in keeping the active simulation data close to the cores, reducing latency and contributing to the smooth, high average FPS observed across the board.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070, built on the Ada Lovelace architecture with a 5 nm process, is a high-end graphics card that, while important, plays a secondary role in this specific simulation title. Its 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus provides a bandwidth of 504.2 GB/s, which is more than sufficient for Pc Building Simulator's graphics load, which is not typically known for requiring massive texture memory pools. The GPU's core clock configuration, with a base of 1920 MHz and a boost of 2475 MHz, gives it the raw processing power needed to handle the game's rendering, but the data indicates that this power is rarely the limiting factor.

The RTX 4070's performance percentile of 81 places it in a competitive position relative to other GPUs. Its nearest rivals show that its average benchmark score of 37,648 is closely matched with the NVIDIA Tesla P4 (score 37,628, delta 0.1%) and the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 (score 37,507, delta 0.4%). It is interesting to note the GPU is 1.3% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile, which scores 38,135, and 1.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon PRO W6400, which scores 37,157. This grouping suggests that for this game, the RTX 4070 provides a level of graphics horsepower that is comfortably above the threshold needed for smooth gameplay.

The GPU's role becomes more defined at higher resolutions. At 4K Ultra, the system averages 58 FPS, which is the lowest result in the dataset. This indicates that at the maximum resolution and highest settings, the rendering load finally becomes a significant factor, and the GPU is working harder. However, even at this demanding configuration, the average FPS does not drop below the 60 FPS threshold, which is the target for most high-refresh-rate monitors. The data shows that when the CPU is the bottleneck, as is the case at lower resolutions, the GPU's potential is not fully utilized. For example, at 1080p Low, the GPU is rendering a simple scene, and the CPU is producing 367 FPS, a frame rate that is far beyond the GPU's need to render complex visual effects. The GPU's 64 ROPs and 184 TMUs are likely more than adequate for this title, but they are not the deciding factor in the frame rate output.

Resolution Scaling

The performance scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals the classic signs of a CPU-bound game. When moving from 1080p Low to 4K Low, the average FPS drops from 367 to 121, a decrease of 246 FPS. This is a massive drop of approximately 67%. However, this is not a linear scaling, and the pattern changes when we look at the higher settings. For the Ultra preset, the drop from 1080p (175 FPS) to 4K (58 FPS) is 117 FPS, which is a less severe percentage drop of about 67%, but the absolute numbers are lower. The key insight is that the gap between the Low and Ultra settings at 1080p is 192 FPS (367 vs 175), while at 4K, the gap is only 63 FPS (121 vs 58). This compression of the frame rate range at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU is starting to become a more significant factor, but the CPU is still able to push frame rates that are high enough to keep the GPU busy.

The data suggests that at 1080p and 1440p, the system is entirely CPU-limited. At 1440p Low, the system produces 232 FPS, which is still an extremely high frame rate. The difference between 1080p Low and 1440p Low is 135 FPS, which is a smaller drop than the 246 FPS drop from 1080p to 4K. This shows that the resolution scaling is not linear. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 36.8% in frame rate, while the drop from 1440p to 4K is 47.8%. This suggests that as the pixel count increases, the GPU's rendering time becomes a more significant portion of the total frame time. However, the system's ability to still output 121 FPS at 4K Low shows that the CPU is not a weak link. The limiting component is the GPU at 4K, but the CPU is still strong enough to allow for high frame rates. The data reveals that the i7-12700KF is not the bottleneck in this system; it is the RTX 4070 that starts to limit performance at 4K, but only at the highest settings, where the 4K Ultra average of 58 FPS is the only sub-60 FPS result in the entire dataset.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of the system's capabilities across a matrix of resolutions and settings. The dataset includes results for 4K, 1440p, and 1080p, each with Low, Medium, High, and Ultra presets, though not all configurations have min and max FPS values recorded.

1080p (1920x1080):

• Low: The system achieves an average of 367 FPS. This is the highest frame rate recorded in the entire test suite.
• Medium: The average FPS is 260, with a minimum of 221 FPS and a maximum of 299 FPS. This shows a 107 FPS drop from Low, indicating the impact of medium quality assets.
• High: The average FPS is 184. This represents a 76 FPS drop from Medium, showing a significant performance cost for High settings.
• Ultra: The average FPS is 175. This is only a 9 FPS drop from High, suggesting that the jump from High to Ultra is less demanding than the jump from Medium to High.

At 2560x1440:

• Low: The average FPS is 232. This is a 135 FPS drop from 1080p Low, showing the impact of resolution on the CPU-limited scenario.
• Medium: The average FPS is 164, with a minimum of 140 FPS and a maximum of 189 FPS. The min-max range of 49 FPS is similar to the 1080p Medium range.
• High: The average FPS is 116. This is a 68 FPS drop from 1080p High, showing a proportional scaling.
• Ultra: The average FPS is 110. The drop from High to Ultra is 6 FPS, again showing a small performance gap between these two presets.

At 4K (3840x2160):

• Low: The average FPS is 121. This is a 111 FPS drop from 1440p Low, showing the heavy resolution penalty.
• Medium: The average FPS is 86, with a min of 73 FPS and a max of 99 FPS. This is the only 4K setting with min/max data.
• High: The average FPS is 61. This is a 55 FPS drop from 1440p High.
• Ultra: The average FPS is 58. This is the lowest FPS in the entire dataset, and it is below the 60 FPS target for smooth gameplay.

The pattern is consistent: the frame rate decreases as resolution increases, and the gap between Low and Ultra settings widens at lower resolutions. At 1080p, the delta between Low and Ultra is 192 FPS, at 1440p it is 122 FPS, and at 4K it is 63 FPS. This trend confirms that the GPU becomes the bottleneck at 4K, but the CPU is still a significant performance driver.

FAQ

Q: Is the Intel Core i7-12700KF a good match for the RTX 4070 in this game?

A: Yes, the data shows it is a very strong match. The combination ranks in the 806th position out of 3,723, putting it in the top 22% of all tested combos. The CPU's high multi-threaded performance ensures that it does not bottleneck the GPU at lower resolutions, and the GPU provides the necessary power to handle 4K Ultra settings.

Q: Why is the frame rate so high at 1080p Low, but the GPU is not the bottleneck?

A: At 1080p Low, the rendering load is light, and the CPU's 12 cores and 20 threads are the limiting factor. The data shows the system achieves 367 FPS, which is far beyond what most monitors can display. This indicates that the CPU is fast enough to push the game logic, and the GPU has no trouble rendering the simple scenes.

Q: Can this system play the game at 4K with a high refresh rate monitor?

A: The data suggests that a 60Hz 4K monitor is achievable, as the average FPS at 4K Ultra is 58, which is close to the 60 FPS target. For higher refresh rates, the 4K Medium preset at 86 FPS would be the best choice, as it provides a significant FPS boost over Ultra.

Q: How does the i7-12700KF compare to its direct rival, the i7-12700K?

A: The benchmark data shows that the i7-12700KF has an average benchmark score of 35,365, which is 0.2% higher than the i7-12700K's score of 35,287. This is a negligible difference, indicating that the two CPUs perform nearly identically in this game, with the KF variant having the same core and thread count.

Q: Is there a significant difference between the Low and Medium settings in terms of FPS?

A: Yes, there is a noticeable performance cost. At 1080p, the drop from Low (367 FPS) to Medium (260 FPS) is 107 FPS, a 29% decrease. At 1440p, the drop is 68 FPS (232 to 164), and at 4K, the drop is 35 FPS (121 to 86). This indicates that Medium settings add a significant rendering load.

Q: What is the performance percentile of the CPU in this test?

A: The CPU's percentile vs all CPUs is 85, meaning it is in the 85th percentile. This places it in a high-performance bracket, and it is a clear indicator that the CPU is a strong performer for this simulation game.

Settings Recommendations

The benchmark results show that the game is highly playable at all settings, but the choice of the best preset depends on the user's hardware goals. For users with a standard 1080p 60Hz monitor, the High preset is recommended, as it provides an average FPS of 184, which is more than sufficient for a smooth experience, and it avoids the performance cost of Ultra. The Ultra preset at 1080p yields 175 FPS, which is a negligible 9 FPS drop from High, so Ultra is also a viable option if the user wants the best visual quality without sacrificing performance.

For users with a 1440p 144Hz monitor, the Medium preset is the optimal choice. It delivers an average FPS of 164, which is well above the 144Hz threshold, and it has a min FPS of 140, which ensures that the frame rate stays consistently high. The High preset at 1440p gives 116 FPS, which is still playable but may not fully saturate a 144Hz display. The Ultra preset at 110 FPS is also acceptable, but the Medium preset offers the best balance of smoothness and quality.

At 4K, the recommendation is to use the Low or Medium preset. The Medium preset at 4K averages 86 FPS, which is excellent for a 60Hz monitor and provides a smooth experience. The High preset at 4K drops to 61 FPS, which is still playable but is more susceptible to dips below 60 FPS. The Ultra preset at 58 FPS is the lowest in the dataset, and it is not recommended for a consistent experience. For a 4K 60Hz display, the Medium preset is the best choice, offering a significant FPS buffer (86 FPS) over the Ultra preset while maintaining a visually acceptable quality. The data strongly suggests that the Medium preset is the sweet spot for this system across all resolutions, as it provides the highest FPS with min and max values that indicate a stable frame rate, and it is the only preset that provides min/max data at all resolutions.