Pc Building Simulator

# Pc Building Simulator Performance Analysis: Intel Core Ultra 5 245 + Intel Arc B370

This combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and the Intel Arc B370 delivers strikingly low performance in Pc Building Simulator, ranking near the bottom of all tested configurations. The data reveals a system that is fundamentally GPU-limited at every resolution, with the integrated-class Arc B370 struggling to maintain playable frame rates even at 1080p. Benchmark results indicate that this combo occupies the 2761st position out of 3002 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 8% of all systems measured. The measured frame rates consistently show that the Arc B370's integrated graphics solution, despite its modern Xe3-LPG architecture, cannot deliver a smooth experience in this simulation title.

Resolution Scaling

The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is severe and tells a clear story about where the bottleneck lies. At 1080p Low settings, the combo achieves 113 FPS average, which is the only truly playable result across the entire resolution and settings matrix. Moving to 1440p Low drops the average to 71 FPS, a 37% reduction, while 4K Low falls to 37 FPS, representing a 67% decline from the 1080p baseline. This scaling pattern is characteristic of a system where the GPU is the limiting component, as the frame rate drops almost linearly with the increase in pixel count.

At High settings, the scaling is even more punishing. The 1080p High average of 56 FPS drops to 36 FPS at 1440p (a 36% decrease) and then to 19 FPS at 4K (a 66% decrease from 1080p). The Ultra preset follows a similar trajectory: 54 FPS at 1080p, 34 FPS at 1440p, and 18 FPS at 4K. The data shows that the gap between 1440p and 4K is consistently around 47-50% regardless of the quality preset, indicating that the Arc B370's rendering pipeline saturates quickly as pixel count increases.

What stands out is the relatively modest difference between Low and Ultra settings at each resolution. At 1080p, Low produces 113 FPS while Ultra produces 54 FPS — a 52% performance penalty for maximum quality. At 4K, the difference shrinks: Low achieves 37 FPS while Ultra achieves 18 FPS, a 51% penalty. This consistency suggests that the GPU's compute resources are being taxed heavily by the game's simulation overhead rather than purely by visual effects, since the scaling between presets remains proportional even when the absolute numbers are already low.

The practical implication is that 4K gaming is essentially out of reach for this combination in Pc Building Simulator. Even at the lowest settings, the 37 FPS average at 4K falls below the 40 FPS threshold that many users consider minimally acceptable. The 1440p results are borderline: Low settings at 71 FPS are playable, but Medium at 50 FPS and High at 36 FPS show the system's limits. The data suggests that this combo is best suited for 1080p gaming, where even Ultra settings maintain a 54 FPS average, though users seeking higher refresh rates would need to drop to Medium or Low.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 2761 out of 3002 tested combinations places it in the bottom 8.0% of all systems measured in Pc Building Simulator. This is a poor showing that reflects the Arc B370's status as an integrated graphics processor rather than a discrete solution. The GPU's individual benchmark score of 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad places it at the 5th percentile among all GPUs, which directly correlates with the low frame rates observed in this game.

The nearest GPU rivals in terms of raw benchmark scores are all legacy parts: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (score 1186, 0.2% ahead), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (score 1190, 0.5% ahead), and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (score 1192, 0.7% ahead). The only GPU that this Arc B370 outperforms among its nearest rivals is the AMD FirePro M2000, which scores 1168, a 1.4% deficit. This grouping with decade-old mobile and entry-level desktop parts underscores how limited the Arc B370 is for gaming workloads.

On the CPU side, the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 performs much better relative to its peers. Its average benchmark score of 48995 places it at the 90th percentile among all CPUs. The nearest CPU rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (49196, 0.4% ahead), the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (49228, 0.5% ahead), the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H (48698, 0.6% behind), and the Intel Core i5-14600K (48618, 0.8% behind). This indicates that the CPU is well above average in capability, yet the combo's in-game rank is dragged down almost entirely by the GPU's limitations.

The disparity between the CPU's 90th percentile ranking and the combo's bottom-8% game ranking is the clearest evidence that this system is bottlenecked by graphics processing. In a game like Pc Building Simulator, which features simulation-heavy logic but relatively simple 3D rendering, one might expect the CPU to carry more weight. However, the measured FPS data shows that even at 1080p Low, where the CPU should have the least graphics pressure, the system only reaches 113 FPS — a number that, while playable, is far below what a 90th percentile CPU could drive with a competent discrete GPU.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is built on the Xe3-LPG architecture and features 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 render output units, along with 10 ray tracing cores. Its clocks are notably low for a modern GPU: a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The memory configuration is entirely system-shared, meaning the GPU relies on the CPU's DDR5 memory rather than having dedicated VRAM. This architecture choice has profound implications for gaming performance, as memory bandwidth becomes "System Dependent" rather than being a fixed specification.

The GPU's raw throughput figures of 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 and a pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s might sound respectable on paper, but the 25 W TDP and integrated nature of the part tell a different story. The data shows that the Arc B370 scores only 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad, a result that places it at the 5th percentile among all GPUs. This benchmark score puts it in direct competition with parts like the ATI Radeon HD 5770 from 2009, which is a stark indicator of its real-world gaming capability.

The system-shared memory means that the GPU competes with the CPU for the same DDR5 bandwidth. In Pc Building Simulator, which involves frequent data transfers as components are swapped and simulated, this contention likely exacerbates the performance issues. The measured FPS data confirms this: even at 1080p Low, the system cannot exceed 113 FPS, suggesting that memory bandwidth constraints are limiting the GPU's ability to feed its shading units efficiently.

The Arc B370 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, which means it has modern API compatibility. However, the hardware's execution resources are simply too limited to take advantage of these features in a demanding rendering scenario. The 20 ROPs and 40 TMUs are extremely low counts by modern standards, which directly limits fill-rate and texture throughput. This explains why the frame rate drops so precipitously as resolution increases — there simply aren't enough pixel-processing units to handle 4K output at acceptable speeds.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to play Pc Building Simulator with this combo?

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 is the only resolution where the system maintains playable frame rates across all settings. At 1080p, even Ultra settings achieve 54 FPS average, while 1440p drops to 34 FPS at Ultra and 4K falls to 18 FPS.

Q: How does the Arc B370 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B370 scores 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad, placing it at the 5th percentile. It is 0.2% behind the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, 0.5% behind the ATI Radeon HD 5770, 0.7% behind the AMD Radeon HD 7650M, and 1.4% ahead of the AMD FirePro M2000.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this system?

A: The GPU is overwhelmingly the limiting factor. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 ranks at the 90th percentile among all CPUs with an average score of 48995, while the Arc B370 ranks at the 5th percentile among GPUs. The combo's game rank of 2761 out of 3002 confirms that graphics processing holds the system back.

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 1440p Medium settings?

A: At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the system averages 50 FPS with a minimum of 43 FPS and a maximum of 58 FPS. This is playable but leaves little headroom for demanding scenes.

Q: How does the CPU compare to the Intel Core i5-14600K?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 has an average benchmark score of 48995, which is 0.8% higher than the Intel Core i5-14600K's score of 48618. Both CPUs perform nearly identically in synthetic benchmarks.

Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Pc Building Simulator?

A: No. At 4K, the best result is 37 FPS average at Low settings, which drops to 26 FPS at Medium, 19 FPS at High, and 18 FPS at Ultra. These frame rates are below acceptable playability thresholds.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 is a 14-core, 14-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, manufactured on TSMC's 3 nm process node. It has a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, with 24 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB of L2 cache per core. The CPU supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, providing 102.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth, and includes an integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU solution. Its 65 W TDP and active production status make it a mainstream desktop part.

In synthetic benchmarks, the Core Ultra 5 245 performs strongly. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 32924 and single-core score of 4648 demonstrate solid multi-threaded and single-threaded capabilities. The PassMark multithread score of 38706 and single-thread score of 4394 reinforce this assessment. The CPU's average benchmark score of 48995 places it at the 90th percentile among all CPUs, with its nearest rivals being the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (0.4% ahead), AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (0.5% ahead), Intel Xeon Gold 5318H (0.6% behind), and Intel Core i5-14600K (0.8% behind).

However, in Pc Building Simulator, the CPU's potential is largely untapped due to the GPU bottleneck. The game's simulation-heavy nature should theoretically benefit from the CPU's 14 cores and high boost clock, but the measured FPS data shows that even at 1080p Low, the system only reaches 113 FPS. This suggests that the Arc B370's shared memory architecture and limited shading units prevent the CPU from feeding frames faster, regardless of its processing headroom.

The CPU's memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s is shared with the GPU in this configuration, which could create contention in a game that frequently loads and unloads component data. The 24 MB of L3 cache helps mitigate some of this pressure, but the fundamental issue remains that the GPU cannot keep up with the CPU's output capability. The 90th percentile CPU ranking versus the 5th percentile GPU ranking creates a massive performance imbalance that no amount of CPU optimization can overcome in this title.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend heavily on the target resolution and acceptable frame rate. At 1920x1080, the system achieves 80 FPS average at Medium settings with a minimum of 68 FPS and maximum of 92 FPS, making this the best balance of visual quality and performance. The Medium preset at 1080p provides a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay, with the minimum frame rate staying well above 60 FPS.

For users who prioritize visual fidelity at 1080p, the High preset delivers 56 FPS average, which is playable but with occasional dips that could be noticeable. The Ultra preset at 54 FPS average is nearly identical to High, suggesting that the additional quality settings at Ultra provide minimal visual benefit while costing performance. The data shows only a 2 FPS difference between High and Ultra at 1080p, so choosing High over Ultra is the more sensible option if frame rate stability is a concern.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset is the only viable option for smooth gameplay, producing 50 FPS average with a minimum of 43 FPS. The Low preset at 71 FPS is the best choice for competitive or high-refresh-rate play, while High at 36 FPS and Ultra at 34 FPS are too inconsistent for a satisfying experience. The 1440p Medium setting represents a reasonable compromise, though users should expect occasional frame dips below 45 FPS in busy scenes.

At 3840x2160, no settings preset delivers an acceptable experience. The best result is Low at 37 FPS average, which is below the 40 FPS minimum threshold for playability. Users with 4K displays should either reduce the resolution to 1440p or accept that this combo cannot handle 4K gaming in Pc Building Simulator. The data clearly indicates that 1080p Medium is the sweet spot for this hardware combination, offering 80 FPS average with a minimum of 68 FPS, which provides a smooth and responsive experience while maintaining reasonable visual quality.