Pc Building Simulator

Pc Building Simulator, a simulation title from 2019, presents a demanding environment for the tested Intel Core Ultra 5 225 and Intel Arc B370 combination. The benchmark data reveals a system that is fundamentally constrained by its graphics solution, with performance scaling that clearly identifies the Intel Arc B370 as the primary bottleneck across all tested resolutions. The combination ranks near the bottom of the database, at 2761 out of 3002 tested combos, indicating that this pairing is not optimized for modern gaming workloads, despite the capable processor at its core.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate data from 1080p to 4K tells a clear story of GPU-bound performance. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combination achieves an average of 113 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 Low drops that average to 71 FPS, a reduction of 42 frames, and at 3840x2160 Low, the average falls to 37 FPS, a further halving of performance. This steep decline—from 113 to 37 FPS at Low settings across the three resolutions—is a classic signature of a graphics card operating at its absolute limit. The pixel throughput required at 4K is simply too much for the Arc B370's 6.144 TFLOPS of FP32 compute power and its system-shared memory configuration.

The scaling pattern intensifies with higher settings. At High settings, the average frame rate moves from 56 FPS at 1080p to 36 FPS at 1440p, and finally to 19 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1440p to 4K at High settings is particularly steep, a 17 FPS loss that suggests the GPU is not only fill-rate limited but also struggling with the increased memory pressure from the system-shared architecture. The data indicates that 4K resolution is essentially unplayable for this combination at any setting level, as even the Low preset only manages an average of 37 FPS, which is below the threshold for smooth gameplay in a simulation genre that relies on consistent frame pacing.

Conversely, the scaling from 4K down to 1080p shows that the CPU has ample headroom. The Core Ultra 5 225, with its 10 cores and 10 threads running at a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, is never the limiting factor at lower resolutions. The fact that 1080p Low produces 113 FPS while 1080p Ultra produces 54 FPS indicates that the GPU is still the primary constraint even at the lowest resolution. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see less variation between settings at 1080p. Instead, the data shows a clear 59 FPS spread between Low and Ultra at 1080p, proving that the graphics processor is dictating the performance ceiling across the board.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is the decisive component in this pairing, and its specifications explain the measured results. With a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz, the GPU has a wide dynamic range, but its memory configuration is "System Shared" with system-dependent bandwidth. This is a critical weakness for a game like Pc Building Simulator, which frequently loads and renders 3D models, textures, and UI elements. The lack of dedicated VRAM means the GPU must compete with the CPU for memory bandwidth, which directly impacts frame times and average FPS.

The GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184 places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, a very low standing. Its nearest rivals in the database include the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 with a score of 1186 and the ATI Radeon HD 5770 with a score of 1190. The Arc B370 is actually slightly behind these older parts, with a deltaPct of -0.2% compared to the HD 5570 and -0.5% compared to the HD 5770. This places the Arc B370 in the same performance tier as GPUs from over a decade ago, which is a damning indictment of its gaming capability. The only rival it beats is the AMD FirePro M2000, which scores 1168, a 1.4% difference in favor of the Intel part.

The graph of measured FPS across settings shows the GPU struggling to maintain playable rates. At 1080p Medium, the average is 80 FPS with a minimum of 68 and a maximum of 92, showing a 24 FPS variance. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 50 FPS with a range of 43 to 58. The 4K Medium result is 26 FPS average with a range of 22 to 30. These numbers indicate that even at Medium settings, which are typically the baseline for modern gaming, the GPU is unable to sustain a stable frame rate. The variance between minimum and maximum FPS grows proportionally with resolution, suggesting that the system-shared memory is causing hitches when the GPU needs to access assets.

CPU Role

In stark contrast to the GPU, the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 is a highly capable processor that is underutilized in this configuration. The CPU has 10 cores and 10 threads, with a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. Its 20 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB of L2 cache per core provide ample data storage for game logic. The processor's benchmark scores are robust: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 25891 and a single-core score of 3655. The PassMark multi-thread score of 30459 and single-thread score of 4412 further confirm its strength.

The CPU sits in the 85th percentile of all CPUs, which is a high ranking. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F with an average score of 36945, the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D at 37018, and the Intel Core i9-12900T at 37112. The Core Ultra 5 225's average benchmark score is 36938, which is nearly identical to the Ryzen 5 5600F (deltaPct of 0%) and only 0.2% behind the Ryzen 5 5500X3D. This places the CPU in a competitive position against other mainstream desktop processors, indicating that it can handle complex simulation workloads without breaking a sweat.

For Pc Building Simulator, the CPU's single-thread performance is particularly relevant, as the game's simulation logic, component interaction calculations, and UI responsiveness are often bound to a single core. The Cinebench R15 single-core score of 368 and the R20 single-core score of 891 demonstrate strong per-core performance. The data suggests that if this CPU were paired with a more powerful discrete GPU, the frame rates would increase substantially. The measured FPS at 1080p Low (113 FPS) is likely close to the CPU's maximum rendering capability for this title, but the GPU's inability to push beyond that at higher settings means the processor's potential is left untapped.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 and Intel Arc B370 ranks 2761 out of 3002 tested combos in Pc Building Simulator. This places it in the bottom 8% of all system configurations in the database, which is a poor result for a pairing that includes a modern processor. The rank is dragged down almost entirely by the GPU, as the CPU's high percentile ranking (85th) cannot compensate for the GPU's abysmal 5th percentile standing.

The data shows a severe mismatch between the two components. The CPU is capable of delivering high frame rates in less demanding scenarios, but the GPU's 3DMark score of 1184 and its proximity to legacy GPUs like the Radeon HD 5770 mean that it cannot translate the CPU's power into playable performance at higher resolutions or settings. The combination's rank is a reflection of this imbalance, as the system is effectively held back by the weakest link in the chain. Compared to other combos that might pair the Core Ultra 5 225 with a mid-range discrete GPU, this setup is likely to be several hundred positions lower in the ranking, purely due to the integrated graphics solution being used as a primary display adapter.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of the system's capabilities across all settings and resolutions. At 1920x1080, the system achieves its best results: Low settings produce an average of 113 FPS, Medium produces 80 FPS with a minimum of 68 and a maximum of 92, High produces 56 FPS, and Ultra produces 54 FPS. The 1080p results are the only ones that approach playable territory, with Low and Medium being the only settings that consistently stay above 60 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the performance drops significantly. Low settings yield an average of 71 FPS, which is still playable but below the 1080p Low result. Medium settings produce an average of 50 FPS, with a minimum of 43 and a maximum of 58, which is marginal for a simulation game that benefits from smooth scrolling. High settings average 36 FPS, and Ultra settings average 34 FPS, both of which are too low for a comfortable experience.

At 3840x2160, the system is overwhelmed. Low settings produce an average of 37 FPS, Medium produces 26 FPS with a range of 22 to 30, High produces 19 FPS, and Ultra produces 18 FPS. None of these results are playable, and even the Low setting struggles to maintain a consistent frame rate. The 4K data confirms that this combination is not suitable for high-resolution gaming, and the 19 FPS at High settings is particularly indicative of a GPU that is completely saturated.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured rows, the optimal experience for this combination is at 1920x1080 with the Low preset. This setting yields an average of 113 FPS, which is the highest frame rate recorded in the entire dataset and provides sufficient headroom for the simulation's UI and menu interactions. The Medium preset at 1080p is also viable, with an average of 80 FPS, but the minimum of 68 FPS suggests that there may be occasional dips during complex scenes with many components on screen.

For users who prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate, the High preset at 1080p is the maximum reasonable choice, averaging 56 FPS. The Ultra preset at 1080p is not recommended, as its 54 FPS average is barely different from High while likely carrying a heavier load on the system-shared memory. At 2560x1440, only the Low preset is acceptable, with an average of 71 FPS. The Medium preset at 1440p, averaging 50 FPS, is borderline, and users should expect stuttering during asset-heavy moments.

The data clearly indicates that the Intel Arc B370 is not designed for gaming at 1440p or 4K, even in a simulation title. The recommendation is to stay at 1080p and use Low or Medium settings to maintain a playable frame rate. The CPU's performance ensures that the game logic will not be the limiting factor, but the GPU's 5th percentile ranking means that any attempt to increase resolution or settings beyond the measured thresholds will result in a poor experience. This combination serves as a lesson in component balance, where a high-end CPU is wasted on an integrated graphics solution that cannot deliver the required graphics performance.