Pc Building Simulator

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER achieves a combined rank of 405 out of 3002 tested combos in Pc Building Simulator. That places this configuration in the top 13.5% of all tested pairings, a strong result for a simulation title that often responds more to CPU throughput than to raw GPU horsepower. The combo outperforms roughly 86.5% of all recorded combinations, which is notable given the game’s 2019 release and its relatively modest graphical demands compared to modern AAA shooters.

Benchmark data shows the CPU sits at the 89th percentile among all processors tested, while the GPU ranks at the 83rd percentile among all graphics cards. The slight gap between these two percentile positions suggests the processor is the more dominant component in this pairing, at least in aggregate benchmark terms. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 46062 places it within 0.1% of the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (46030) and within 0.1% of the Intel Core i9-13900HX (46098). This tight clustering indicates the Ultra 5 235 delivers performance essentially identical to those two rivals, with the EPYC 4364P (45970) and EPYC 7303 (45960) trailing by 0.2% each. The GPU’s average score of 43223 sits 0.1% below the Quadro M6000 24 GB (43262) and 0.1% below the RTX 5050 Mobile (43268), while the RTX 4090 Mobile leads by 1% (43667).

For a game like Pc Building Simulator, where the simulation logic and component interaction calculations can stress the CPU heavily, the 89th percentile processor ranking is arguably more relevant than the GPU’s 83rd percentile. The measured frame rates confirm this interpretation: at 1080p Ultra, the combo delivers 195 FPS, while at 4K Ultra it drops to 64 FPS. This scaling pattern shows the GPU becoming the limiting factor only at the highest resolution, while the CPU maintains sufficient headroom at lower resolutions.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER brings 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus, yielding 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock runs at 1980 MHz with a boost clock of 2475 MHz, while memory operates at 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective). These specifications place the card firmly in the upper-midrange tier of the GeForce 40-series lineup, built on the AD104 chip with 7168 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 80 raster operation units.

In Pc Building Simulator, the GPU’s role varies dramatically by resolution and settings. At 1080p Low, the card produces 409 FPS, indicating it is nowhere near saturated. At 1080p Ultra, frame rates settle at 195 FPS, still far above display refresh rates for most monitors. The picture changes at 4K: Ultra settings yield 64 FPS, while High settings produce 67 FPS. The jump from High to Ultra at 4K costs only 3 FPS, suggesting that Ultra settings impose additional GPU workload that the card handles with only marginal degradation at this resolution.

The GPU’s memory configuration deserves attention. The 12 GB capacity is sufficient for this simulation title, as evidenced by the measured frame rates remaining playable even at 4K Ultra. The 192-bit bus width and 504.2 GB/s bandwidth provide adequate throughput for the game’s texture and geometry loads. The card’s pixel rate of 198.0 GPixel/s and texture rate of 554.4 GTexel/s indicate substantial fill-rate capabilities, though the simulation’s CPU-bound nature means these resources are often underutilized.

Benchmark scores reinforce the GPU’s mid-tier positioning. The PassMark G3D score of 29995 places it at the 83rd percentile of all GPUs, while the DirectX 12 score of 110 and DirectX 11 score of 273 reflect its modern architecture. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 4627 provides a synthetic cross-check for the measured game performance. The GPU’s compute capability, shown by a PassMark GPU compute score of 17108, supports the simulation’s physics and component interaction calculations when needed.

FAQ

Q: Is this combo better suited for 1080p or 4K gaming in Pc Building Simulator?

A: The data shows excellent 1080p performance across all settings, with 195 FPS at Ultra and 409 FPS at Low. At 4K, the combo still delivers playable frame rates, with 64 FPS at Ultra and 135 FPS at Low. The 1080p experience is far above typical refresh rate needs, while 4K Ultra sits at the edge of 60 FPS gaming.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its closest rivals?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 scores 46062 on average, which is within 0.1% of the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (46030) and the Intel Core i9-13900HX (46098). It leads the AMD EPYC 4364P (45970) and AMD EPYC 7303 (45960) by 0.2% each. The differences are negligible in real-world terms.

Q: What is the GPU’s performance percentile and how does it affect this game?

A: The RTX 4070 SUPER ranks at the 83rd percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 43223. Its nearest rival, the RTX 4090 Mobile, leads by 1% (43667), while the Quadro M6000 24 GB trails by 0.1% (43262). For this simulation, the GPU’s percentile is less critical than the CPU’s 89th percentile.

Q: Does increasing settings from Medium to Ultra cause a large FPS drop?

A: At 1080p, Medium delivers 290 FPS while Ultra drops to 195 FPS, a reduction of 95 FPS. At 4K, Medium yields 96 FPS and Ultra drops to 64 FPS, a 32 FPS reduction. The absolute drop is larger at 1080p, but the relative drop is similar across resolutions.

Q: What memory configuration does the GPU use and is it sufficient?

A: The RTX 4070 SUPER uses 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus with 504.2 GB/s bandwidth. The measured FPS at 4K Ultra (64 FPS) indicates this configuration is adequate for Pc Building Simulator, as no memory-related stuttering or crashes appear in the data.

Q: How does the GPU’s DirectX performance compare to its overall score?

A: The PassMark DirectX 12 score is 110, while DirectX 11 reaches 273. The higher DirectX 11 score suggests the card performs better in older API workloads, which aligns with a 2019 simulation title that may not fully utilize DirectX 12 Ultimate features.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its highest frame rates. Low settings produce 409 FPS average, Medium reaches 290 FPS with a minimum of 246 and maximum of 333, High achieves 205 FPS, and Ultra settles at 195 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 214 FPS, indicating that the GPU has substantial headroom even at the highest settings for this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, frame rates remain strong. Low settings hit 258 FPS, Medium averages 183 FPS with a range of 155 to 210, High produces 129 FPS, and Ultra drops to 123 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra at 1440p is only 6 FPS, suggesting diminishing returns from the highest preset. The Medium preset’s minimum of 155 FPS still clears 144 Hz refresh rates comfortably.

At 3840x2160, the GPU begins to show its limits. Low settings average 135 FPS, Medium reaches 96 FPS with a minimum of 81 and maximum of 110, High produces 67 FPS, and Ultra drops to 64 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra at 4K is just 3 FPS, indicating that the Ultra preset adds minimal visual benefit beyond High while costing nearly the same performance. The Medium preset’s minimum of 81 FPS remains above 60 FPS, making it the only 4K setting that guarantees smooth gameplay without drops below standard refresh rates.

The data reveals a consistent pattern: Medium settings provide the best balance of average FPS and minimum FPS stability. At 1080p, Medium’s minimum of 246 FPS is 51 FPS above High’s average of 205 FPS. At 1440p, Medium’s minimum of 155 FPS is 26 FPS above High’s average of 129 FPS. At 4K, Medium’s minimum of 81 FPS is 14 FPS above High’s average of 67 FPS.

Resolution Scaling

Frame rates scale predictably as resolution increases. At Low settings, the drop from 1080p to 1440p is 151 FPS (from 409 to 258), and from 1440p to 4K is 123 FPS (from 258 to 135). The total drop from 1080p to 4K at Low is 274 FPS, representing a 67% reduction. At Medium settings, 1080p averages 290 FPS, 1440p averages 183 FPS, and 4K averages 96 FPS — a 194 FPS total drop (67% reduction). At High settings, the progression is 205 to 129 to 67 FPS, a 138 FPS drop (67% reduction). At Ultra settings, 195 to 123 to 64 FPS represents a 131 FPS drop (67% reduction).

The consistent 67% reduction from 1080p to 4K across all settings indicates that the GPU is the primary scaling factor. If the CPU were the bottleneck at lower resolutions, the percentage drop would be smaller at 1080p and larger at 4K. Instead, the uniform scaling suggests that even at 1080p, the RTX 4070 SUPER is doing meaningful work per frame, and quadrupling the pixel count proportionally increases its workload.

The CPU’s role becomes apparent when comparing FPS at the same resolution across settings. At 1080p, dropping from Ultra (195 FPS) to Low (409 FPS) yields a 214 FPS improvement. If the CPU were heavily limiting performance, this improvement would be smaller. The 409 FPS ceiling at 1080p Low indicates the CPU can sustain high frame delivery, though the exact limit is not visible in the data. At 4K, the same settings change yields only a 71 FPS improvement (from 64 to 135), confirming that GPU fill-rate becomes the dominant constraint at higher resolutions.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 is a 14-core, 14-thread processor based on Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It operates at a base clock of 3.40 GHz with a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, drawing 65 W TDP. The CPU supports DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, and its 24 MB of shared L3 cache provides ample capacity for simulation workloads.

In Pc Building Simulator, the CPU’s performance is crucial because the game simulates component interactions, thermal dynamics, and system stability calculations in real time. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 14769 and single-core score of 2085 indicate strong per-thread performance, which matters for simulation logic that may not fully utilize all 14 cores. The PassMark multi-thread score of 37816 and single-thread score of 4516 corroborate this balance.

The CPU’s nearest rivals in aggregate benchmarks are the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (46030, +0.1% delta) and Intel Core i9-13900HX (46098, -0.1% delta). The EPYC 4364P and EPYC 7303 both score 45970 and 45960 respectively, each 0.2% behind. These differences are within measurement noise, meaning the Ultra 5 235 provides essentially identical CPU performance to these alternatives for this game.

The 14-thread configuration (no hyperthreading) is notable. Each core is a full physical core, which can benefit latency-sensitive simulation tasks. The 24 MB shared L3 cache helps maintain data locality for the game’s component databases. The 5.00 GHz boost clock ensures that single-threaded simulation logic runs as fast as possible, while the 65 W TDP keeps thermals manageable within the simulated system.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the Medium preset offers the best experience across all three resolutions. At 1080p, Medium delivers 290 FPS average with a minimum of 246 FPS, providing massive headroom above any display refresh rate. At 1440p, Medium averages 183 FPS with a minimum of 155 FPS, still comfortably above 144 Hz displays. At 4K, Medium averages 96 FPS with a minimum of 81 FPS, ensuring smooth gameplay without drops below 60 FPS.

The High preset provides marginal visual improvements over Medium but costs significant performance. At 1080p, High drops to 205 FPS from Medium’s 290 FPS — a 29% reduction. At 1440p, High drops to 129 FPS from 183 FPS — a 30% reduction. At 4K, High drops to 67 FPS from 96 FPS — a 30% reduction. The consistent 30% penalty suggests High enables effects that are disproportionately expensive for this simulation.

Ultra settings offer negligible gains over High. At 1080p, Ultra drops 10 FPS below High (195 vs 205). At 1440p, the drop is 6 FPS (123 vs 129). At 4K, the drop is 3 FPS (64 vs 67). These differences are likely imperceptible to most users, making Ultra the least efficient preset in terms of performance per visual quality.

For users with 60 Hz displays, 4K Medium (96 FPS) or 4K High (67 FPS) both provide smooth experiences. For 144 Hz displays, 1440p Medium (183 FPS) or 1080p Ultra (195 FPS) are appropriate. The data strongly suggests that Medium is the optimal preset for this game, as it delivers the highest minimum frame rates while maintaining average FPS well above any practical refresh rate ceiling. Low settings offer even higher frame rates (409 FPS at 1080p, 258 FPS at 1440p, 135 FPS at 4K) but sacrifice visual fidelity that the simulation’s interface and component models may benefit from.