Pc Building Simulator

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core i7-14700KF compare to its closest rival in overall benchmark performance?

A: The i7-14700KF posts an average benchmark score of 70104, placing it essentially level with the Intel Core i7-14700K, which scores 70074 (a 0% delta). It sits just 0.3% above the AMD EPYC 9115 and 0.4% below the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X, indicating these processors are tightly clustered in raw compute capability.

Q: What is the GPU's percentile ranking among all graphics cards?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7600 ranks in the 63rd percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 20258. Its closest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT, which scores 20146 (0.6% higher), while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile sits 1.3% above it.

Q: What framerate does this system achieve at 1080p with Ultra settings?

A: At 1920x1080 with Ultra settings, the combination delivers an average of 105.5 FPS. This is only slightly below the High preset's 111.6 FPS, showing that the Ultra preset imposes a modest additional load at this resolution.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 4K at High settings?

A: At High settings, the average framerate drops from 111.6 FPS at 1080p to 70.6 FPS at 1440p, then further to 35.3 FPS at 4K. The 4K figure represents roughly 68% lower performance than the 1080p result, indicating a strong GPU-bound scaling curve.

Q: What is the CPU's multi-threaded performance in Cinebench R23?

A: The i7-14700KF scores 44557 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, alongside a single-core score of 6290. This places the chip in the 96th percentile among all CPUs, reflecting its 20 cores and 28 threads.

Q: How does the GPU's memory bandwidth compare to its bus width?

A: The RX 7600 features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective speed, which supports the card's 169.9 GPixel/s pixel rate.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7600 serves as the primary rendering engine in this simulation title, with its 8 GB GDDR6 frame buffer and 128-bit memory interface proving adequate for the game's asset streaming. The card's 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs operate at a base clock of 1720 MHz, boosting to 2655 MHz under load, with a game clock rated at 2250 MHz. This configuration yields 21.75 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, which the benchmark results show is sufficient for smooth 1080p and 1440p play but becomes strained at 4K.

The GPU's memory subsystem, rated at 288.0 GB/s, becomes a critical factor as resolution increases. At 4K, the Ultra preset averages just 35.8 FPS, while the High preset manages 35.3 FPS — nearly identical, suggesting the frame buffer capacity or memory bandwidth is the limiting factor rather than the settings themselves. The card's 63rd percentile ranking among all GPUs indicates mid-pack positioning, yet the measured results show it handles this particular simulation's workload efficiently at lower resolutions. The 32 ray accelerators are present but not heavily utilized in this title, as evidenced by the relatively small performance gap between High and Ultra presets at each resolution. The GPU's DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4 compatibility ensure modern API paths are available, though the game's 2019 release date suggests it likely relies on earlier API features.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of GPU-bound scaling across resolutions. At Low settings, the system delivers 226 FPS at 1080p, dropping to 140.5 FPS at 1440p (a 38% reduction), and further to 72.4 FPS at 4K (a 68% reduction from 1080p). This steep decline indicates that even at the lowest settings, the GPU's rendering throughput is the dominant constraint once pixel count increases.

At Medium settings, the scaling is similar: 162.7 FPS at 1080p falls to 103.5 FPS at 1440p, then to 54.6 FPS at 4K. The High preset shows 111.6 FPS at 1080p, 70.6 FPS at 1440p, and 35.3 FPS at 4K. Interestingly, the Ultra preset exhibits the most compressed scaling: 105.5 FPS at 1080p, 66.5 FPS at 1440p, and 35.8 FPS at 4K. The 4K Ultra result being slightly higher than 4K High (35.8 vs 35.3 FPS) is within measurement variance, further confirming that the GPU is saturated at this resolution regardless of preset.

The resolution scaling data suggests the i7-14700KF is not a bottleneck at any tested configuration. Even at 1080p Low, where the CPU has the most headroom to limit performance, the system reaches 226 FPS — a frame rate that exceeds typical display refresh rates and indicates the processor's 5.60 GHz boost clock and 20 cores are more than sufficient for this simulation's logic and physics calculations. The GPU becomes the clear limiting component as resolution climbs, with the 4K results falling below the 60 FPS threshold across all presets.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its strongest performance across all presets. Low settings average 226 FPS, Medium achieves 162.7 FPS, High reaches 111.6 FPS, and Ultra maintains 105.5 FPS. All four presets remain above the 60 FPS smoothness threshold, with even the most demanding Ultra preset providing a comfortable margin for high-refresh-rate displays.

Moving to 2560x1440, the framerates remain playable but show expected reductions. Low settings average 140.5 FPS, Medium drops to 103.5 FPS, High falls to 70.6 FPS, and Ultra settles at 66.5 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra narrows to just 4.1 FPS at this resolution, suggesting diminishing returns from the highest preset's additional effects.

At 3840x2160, performance becomes marginal for smooth gameplay. Low settings still manage 72.4 FPS, but Medium drops to 54.6 FPS, High falls to 35.3 FPS, and Ultra is nearly identical at 35.8 FPS. The 4K results show that the RX 7600's 8 GB VRAM and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient to maintain 60 FPS at this resolution with any preset above Low. The proximity of the High and Ultra numbers at 4K indicates the GPU is fully utilized, with settings changes having minimal impact on final output.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured rows, the optimal experience depends heavily on target resolution and refresh rate. For 1080p displays, the Ultra preset at 105.5 FPS provides the best visual quality while maintaining a framerate well above 60 FPS. The incremental cost of Ultra over High is only 6.1 FPS, making it a worthwhile choice for users prioritizing image fidelity.

At 1440p, the High preset at 70.6 FPS offers the best balance, staying above the 60 FPS threshold while delivering significantly better visuals than Medium's 103.5 FPS. The Ultra preset at 66.5 FPS is also viable, but the 4.1 FPS difference over High does not justify the additional rendering load for most users.

For 4K displays, the data indicates that only the Low preset at 72.4 FPS achieves smooth gameplay. Medium at 54.6 FPS dips below the 60 FPS line, while High and Ultra fall into the 35 FPS range, which is generally considered too low for responsive simulation gameplay. Users with 4K monitors should either accept Low settings or consider reducing resolution to 1440p for a better experience.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i7-14700KF provides substantial computational headroom for this simulation title. Its 20 cores and 28 threads, based on the Raptor Lake architecture, deliver a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44557 and single-core score of 6290. The processor's 3.40 GHz base clock and 5.60 GHz boost clock, combined with 33 MB of shared L3 cache, ensure that simulation logic, component interaction calculations, and system management tasks are handled without bottlenecking the GPU.

The CPU's performance relative to its rivals reinforces its capability. The i7-14700KF's average benchmark score of 70104 places it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, essentially tied with the i7-14700K (70074) and within 0.4% of the Ryzen 9 9950X. This level of compute performance means that even at 1080p Low settings where the system reaches 226 FPS, the processor is not the limiting factor — the GPU's rendering throughput defines the ceiling.

The measured FPS data across all resolutions and presets shows no evidence of CPU-related stuttering or frame pacing issues. The absence of minimum FPS data in the measured rows prevents detailed analysis of frame time consistency, but the average FPS figures indicate that the CPU's 125 W TDP and efficient 10 nm process node are more than adequate for this workload. The processor's DDR4 and DDR5 memory support, along with dual-channel memory bus, provides flexible platform configuration options, though the simulation's modest memory requirements mean this is unlikely to be a performance differentiator in practice.