Pc Building Simulator

# FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS for this CPU/GPU combo at 1080p with Ultra settings?

A: At 1920x1080 with Ultra settings, the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 paired with the Intel Arc B390 delivers an average of 59 FPS. This is just below the 60 FPS threshold often considered smooth for simulation titles, so players may notice occasional dips during complex build scenarios.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B390 compare to its closest GPU rivals in raw benchmark scores?

A: The Arc B390 scores 1482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. This puts it 1.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (score 1463), 1.5% ahead of the GeForce 800M (score 1460), 2.5% ahead of the GT 625 OEM (score 1446), and 2.7% ahead of the GT 710 (score 1443). These are extremely small margins, indicating near-identical GPU performance tiers.

Q: What is the combo's overall ranking among tested PC configurations for this game?

A: This specific combination ranks 2650 out of 3002 tested combos for Pc Building Simulator. This places it in the lower 12th percentile of all configurations, meaning roughly 88% of tested combos deliver better performance in this title.

Q: Does the CPU show any significant advantage over its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Core Ultra 5 235 has an average benchmark score of 46062. It is essentially neck-and-neck with its closest rivals: 0.1% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (46030), 0.2% ahead of both the AMD EPYC 4364P (45970) and AMD EPYC 7303 (45960), and only 0.1% behind the Intel Core i9-13900HX (46098). These differences are within measurement noise.

Q: What memory bandwidth does the CPU provide, and how does that affect this simulation game?

A: The Core Ultra 5 235 supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. Pc Building Simulator is a simulation title that frequently loads and saves system configurations, and this memory bandwidth is adequate for the game's data streaming needs, though the integrated GPU shares this bandwidth.

Q: Is the measured FPS data considered reliable for this configuration?

A: Yes, the data is marked as measured (dataIsMeasured: true), indicating that these FPS figures come from actual benchmark runs rather than estimates or extrapolations. All twelve resolution/settings combinations have recorded average FPS values, with Medium settings also including min and max FPS data.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal experience balances visual quality with playable frame rates. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset delivers 88 average FPS with a minimum of 75 and maximum of 102 FPS. This is the only preset at 1080p that breaks the 75 FPS floor, providing smooth gameplay for a simulation where camera panning across complex PC builds benefits from high frame consistency.

The High preset at 1080p drops to 62 average FPS, which remains playable but introduces more noticeable frame pacing issues during rapid component swapping. Ultra at 1080p averages 59 FPS, barely missing the 60 FPS marker, while Low reaches 125 FPS but sacrifices visual fidelity for a game that is primarily about visual inspection of components.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset yields 56 average FPS with a 47 FPS minimum and 64 FPS maximum. This is the recommended 1440p choice, as High drops to 39 FPS and Ultra to 38 FPS — both below the threshold for comfortable play. Low at 1440p achieves 79 FPS but removes too much visual detail for a game centered on observing hardware aesthetics.

For 3840x2160, no preset reaches playable territory. Medium averages 29 FPS (min 25, max 34), Low averages 41 FPS, High averages 21 FPS, and Ultra averages 20 FPS. Even Low at 4K falls below 60 FPS, making 4K impractical for this configuration. The data suggests that 1080p Medium offers the best combination of visual quality and performance, with 1440p Medium as a viable alternative for users prioritizing resolution over frame rate.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is an integrated graphics solution (IGP) based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on Intel's 3 nm process. It features 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output units, with 12 ray tracing cores. The GPU operates with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz, producing a pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s. Its FP32 performance is 7.680 TFLOPS, with FP16 reaching 15.36 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio.

Critically, the Arc B390 uses system shared memory for both its VRAM and memory bus width. This means the GPU relies entirely on the CPU's DDR5 dual-channel memory, with bandwidth described as "system dependent." For Pc Building Simulator, which involves rendering detailed 3D models of PC components, this shared memory architecture creates a bottleneck. The GPU's memory bandwidth is shared with CPU operations, and the game's frequent asset loading (new components, case models, cooling solutions) competes for the same memory resources.

The GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482 places it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, indicating entry-level performance. Its nearest rivals are all legacy NVIDIA parts: the GT 520MX (1463), GeForce 800M (1460), GT 625 OEM (1446), and GT 710 (1443). The Arc B390 leads these by margins of 1.3% to 2.7%, which is negligible in real-world gaming. This explains why the GPU struggles to maintain high frame rates at higher resolutions — it simply lacks the raw throughput for 1440p or 4K gaming in a 3D-rendered simulation.

Measured FPS Breakdown

1920x1080: The full settings sweep shows a clear performance hierarchy. Low settings produce 125 average FPS, providing maximum headroom for frame rate monitors. Medium settings reduce this to 88 average FPS, with a measured range of 75 to 102 FPS — the tightest variance among all tested configurations. High settings drop to 62 average FPS, while Ultra averages 59 FPS. The step from Low to Medium costs 37 FPS (a 29.6% reduction), while the step from Medium to High costs 26 FPS (a 29.5% reduction). The final step from High to Ultra costs only 3 FPS (a 4.8% reduction), suggesting diminishing returns at the top end.

2560x1440: At 1440p, Low settings deliver 79 average FPS, still comfortably playable. Medium settings average 56 FPS with a range of 47 to 64 FPS, maintaining reasonable consistency. High settings drop to 39 FPS, and Ultra averages 38 FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings reduces performance by 46 FPS (36.8% drop). At Medium, the drop is 32 FPS (36.4% drop). At High, the drop is 23 FPS (37.1% drop). At Ultra, the drop is 21 FPS (35.6% drop). This consistent ~36-37% reduction across all settings indicates resolution scaling is the dominant factor, not settings complexity.

3840x2160: At 4K, all settings produce unplayable results. Low averages 41 FPS, Medium averages 29 FPS (range 25-34), High averages 21 FPS, and Ultra averages 20 FPS. From 1080p to 4K, the performance drops are: 84 FPS at Low (67.2% reduction), 59 FPS at Medium (67.0% reduction), 41 FPS at High (66.1% reduction), and 39 FPS at Ultra (66.1% reduction). The consistent ~66-67% reduction across all settings strongly suggests a GPU-bound scenario where the integrated Arc B390 cannot handle the pixel throughput required at 4K.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 + Intel Arc B390 combination ranks 2650 out of 3002 tested combos for Pc Building Simulator. This places the configuration in the bottom 11.7% of all tested systems. The ranking reflects the significant mismatch between the CPU's strong synthetic performance and the GPU's weak gaming performance.

The CPU alone sits in the 89th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 46062. This is a high-end processor that outperforms or matches processors like the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (46030), Intel Core i9-13900HX (46098), AMD EPYC 4364P (45970), and AMD EPYC 7303 (45960) — all within 0.2% of each other. However, the GPU sits in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, creating a severe bottleneck.

The combo's rank of 2650 suggests that most other tested configurations use dedicated graphics cards or more balanced integrated solutions. The data indicates that the CPU's capabilities are largely wasted in this game because the GPU cannot translate the processor's computational strength into frame rate. For a simulation game like Pc Building Simulator, which renders detailed 3D environments, the GPU's 3DMark score of 1482 (near the GT 710 at 1443) is the limiting factor that drags the overall combo ranking down.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 is a 14-core, 14-thread desktop processor based on the Arrow Lake-S architecture, built on TSMC's 3 nm process. It has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The CPU features 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. It supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth and provides Gen 5 PCIe with 20 lanes.

In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU demonstrates strong multi-threaded performance. Cinebench R23 multi-core scores 14769, while single-core scores 2085. PassMark multi-thread reaches 37816, with single-thread at 4516. The CPU's 89th percentile ranking among all CPUs confirms its high-end positioning.

For Pc Building Simulator, the CPU's role is primarily in game logic, physics calculations for component interactions, and managing the simulation state. The game involves managing inventory, tracking component compatibility, and simulating thermal and power behaviors — tasks that benefit from multi-core performance. The CPU's PassMark physics score of 2570 and integer math score of 87948 indicate strong computational throughput for these simulation tasks.

However, the CPU's integrated graphics (Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 24EU) is a separate, weaker graphics solution than the discrete-class Arc B390 GPU used in this combo. The measured FPS data shows that even with the stronger Arc B390, the system is GPU-limited. The CPU's 14 cores are more than sufficient for the game's simulation demands — the bottleneck is entirely in the graphics rendering path.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS data reveals a clear pattern of resolution-dependent scaling that identifies the GPU as the primary limiting component. From 1080p to 1440p, average FPS drops by approximately 36-37% across all settings. From 1080p to 4K, the drop is approximately 66-67% across all settings. This consistency is notable — if the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect the percentage drop to decrease at higher resolutions (since the GPU takes longer per frame, giving the CPU more time to prepare the next frame). Instead, the uniform drop indicates the GPU is saturated at every resolution.

At 1080p Low, the system achieves 125 FPS. At 1080p Ultra, it drops to 59 FPS — a 52.8% reduction from settings alone. At 4K Low, the system manages only 41 FPS, and at 4K Ultra, just 20 FPS. The combination of resolution and settings scaling shows that the Arc B390's 7.680 TFLOPS FP32 performance is insufficient for high-fidelity rendering.

The Medium settings data provides the only min/max FPS measurements, revealing frame time consistency. At 1080p Medium, the range is 75-102 FPS (a 27 FPS spread). At 1440p Medium, the range is 47-64 FPS (a 17 FPS spread). At 4K Medium, the range is 25-34 FPS (a 9 FPS spread). As resolution increases, the absolute frame spread narrows, but the relative variance (spread divided by average) remains similar: 30.7% at 1080p, 30.4% at 1440p, and 31.0% at 4K. This consistent relative variance further confirms the GPU-bound nature of the system.

The resolution scaling data suggests that players should prioritize 1080p with Medium settings to maintain frame rates above 75 FPS. The GPU's shared memory architecture means that higher resolutions require more memory bandwidth for frame buffers, competing with CPU and game data needs. The system simply does not have the resources to render 4K at playable frame rates, and even 1440p requires significant settings reductions to remain smooth.