Pc Building Simulator

# Pc Building Simulator with Intel Core Ultra 5 245 + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 pairs with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti to deliver a simulation-focused setup that handles Pc Building Simulator with ease across most settings, though the data reveals a clear pattern: this game is far more dependent on the GPU than the CPU, with frame rates scaling dramatically as resolution and quality settings change. The combo ranks in the 77th percentile (678th out of 3002 tested configurations), which is respectable but not top-tier, and the measured frame rates show that users targeting 4K Ultra will need to accept a near-60 FPS experience, while 1080p Low reaches over 360 FPS — a spread that highlights the game's scalability.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a steep, predictable decline as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160, and the shape of that decline tells you exactly where the bottleneck sits. At 1080p Low, the combo produces 366 FPS average. Drop to 1440p Low and that number falls to 231 FPS — a 37% reduction. Move to 4K Low and you get 121 FPS, which is another 48% drop from 1440p. This pattern — halving performance roughly every time you quadruple the pixel count — is the signature of a GPU-bound workload. The RTX 3080 Ti is doing nearly all the heavy lifting here, and the CPU has plenty of headroom.

Looking at the High preset, the scaling is similar but slightly less steep: 183 FPS at 1080p, 115 FPS at 1440p (a 37% drop), and 60 FPS at 4K (a 48% drop from 1440p). The consistency of these percentage drops across presets reinforces that resolution is the dominant factor, not the quality settings themselves. The Ultra preset tells the same story: 174 FPS at 1080p, 110 FPS at 1440p, and 57 FPS at 4K. The gap between High and Ultra at 4K is just 3 FPS (60 vs 57), which suggests that at 4K the GPU is so saturated that the extra quality settings barely matter — you are already hitting the compute ceiling.

The Medium preset is the only one with min/max FPS data, and it shows a wider variance at lower resolutions: at 1080p Medium, the range is 220 to 298 FPS (a 78 FPS spread), while at 1440p Medium it's 139 to 188 FPS (a 49 FPS spread), and at 4K Medium it narrows to 73 to 98 FPS (a 25 FPS spread). This tightening of the frame time variance as resolution increases is another indicator of GPU saturation — at 4K, the GPU is consistently maxed out, so frame delivery becomes more uniform. At 1080p, the GPU has spare capacity, and frame times swing more widely, likely due to CPU-side simulation logic or driver overhead.

The practical takeaway from scaling is straightforward: if you own a 1080p or 1440p monitor, this combo will crush the game at any preset, with headroom to spare. At 4K, you're looking at a playable but not luxurious experience — 60 FPS on High is fine, but 57 FPS on Ultra means you're right on the edge of what most users consider smooth. The 4K Low result of 121 FPS shows that if you prioritize frame rate over visuals, the GPU can still deliver high refresh rates even at 4K.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 is a 14-core, 14-thread processor with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, built on Intel's Arrow Lake architecture with a 3 nm process from TSMC. It has 24 MB of shared L3 cache and supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. In synthetic benchmarks, it scores 32924 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 4648 in single-core, with a Passmark multithread score of 38706 and a single-thread score of 4394. The CPU's percentile ranking versus all CPUs is 90th, and its average benchmark score of 48995 places it within 1% of rivals like the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (49196, -0.4%), AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (49228, -0.5%), Intel Xeon Gold 5318H (48698, +0.6%), and Intel Core i5-14600K (48618, +0.8%).

In Pc Building Simulator specifically, the CPU's role is secondary to the GPU, as the measured FPS scaling demonstrates. The game is a simulation, but the data shows that frame rates at all resolutions and settings are high enough that the CPU is never the limiting factor — at 1080p Low, 366 FPS average would require a very weak CPU to bottleneck, and the Ultra 5 245 is far from weak. The single-core performance is particularly relevant for simulation logic, and the 4648 Cinebench R23 single-core score is strong, but even at 4K Ultra (57 FPS), the CPU has enough headroom to feed the GPU without becoming a constraint.

The fact that the combo ranks 678th out of 3002 in this game suggests that many other combinations perform better, but given that the CPU sits at the 90th percentile among all CPUs and the GPU at the 83rd percentile among all GPUs, the ranking is likely more about the GPU's age (the RTX 3080 Ti is an end-of-life product from the GeForce 30-series) than any CPU deficiency. The 14 cores and 14 threads are more than sufficient for a game like Pc Building Simulator, which does not typically scale to many threads — the strong single-thread performance (468 in Cinebench R15 single-core, 1952 in R20, 4648 in R23) is what matters most for simulation tick rates.

For users building a PC specifically for this game, the CPU choice is not critical — any modern mid-range processor will keep up. The Ultra 5 245's 65W TDP and 3 nm process mean it runs cool and efficient, which is a bonus for system builders who care about thermals, but the benchmark data shows that upgrading the GPU would yield far more FPS than upgrading the CPU for this title.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Pc Building Simulator at 4K smoothly?

A: Yes, but only on lower presets. At 4K High, the average FPS is 60, which is playable. At 4K Ultra, it drops to 57 FPS, which is borderline. For a locked 60+ FPS experience at 4K, you would need to use Medium (85 FPS) or Low (121 FPS).

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to maximize frame rate?

A: At 1080p, the combo delivers 174 FPS on Ultra and 366 FPS on Low, making it ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors. At 1440p, it still delivers 110 FPS on Ultra and 231 FPS on Low, which is excellent. 4K is the only resolution where frame rates dip below 100 FPS on any preset.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Ultra 5 245 has an average benchmark score of 48995, which is nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (49196, -0.4%) and AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (49228, -0.5%). It is slightly ahead of the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H (48698, +0.6%) and Intel Core i5-14600K (48618, +0.8%). These differences are within 1%, so there is no meaningful performance gap.

Q: Is the RTX 3080 Ti still competitive in this game?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score is 41187, which is within 2% of the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 (40870, +0.8%) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 (40377, +2%). It is slightly ahead of the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB (41707, -1.2%) and Tesla M40 (41897, -1.7%). In Pc Building Simulator, it delivers playable frame rates at all resolutions, though 4K Ultra is marginal.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p?

A: At 1440p, Low averages 231 FPS, while Ultra averages 110 FPS. That is a 121 FPS difference, or roughly 52% lower performance on Ultra. Medium sits in between at 163 FPS, and High at 115 FPS is nearly identical to Ultra.

Q: Does the combo have any frame rate stability issues?

A: The only preset with min/max data is Medium. At 1080p Medium, the range is 220-298 FPS (a 78 FPS spread), at 1440p Medium it's 139-188 FPS (49 FPS spread), and at 4K Medium it's 73-98 FPS (25 FPS spread). The variance shrinks as resolution rises, indicating more consistent frame delivery at higher GPU loads.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 + RTX 3080 Ti combination ranks 678th out of 3002 tested combos in Pc Building Simulator, placing it in the top 22% of all configurations. That is a solid result, but it's not exceptional — the 90th percentile CPU and 83rd percentile GPU suggest that the combo should be better than average, and it is, but the ranking indicates that many other GPU pairings outperform it in this specific game.

The gap between the CPU's percentile (90th) and the combo's percentile (77th) suggests that the RTX 3080 Ti is the limiting factor. The GPU's 83rd percentile ranking is closer to the combo's overall rank, which aligns with the resolution scaling analysis showing a GPU-bound workload. If you were to pair this CPU with a stronger GPU, the combo rank would likely improve significantly, since the CPU has headroom to spare.

Compared to the GPU's nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks, the RTX 3080 Ti is roughly on par with the RTX 5070 (2% faster in average benchmark score) and the Radeon Pro 5300 (0.8% faster), but those rivals may have different driver optimizations in Pc Building Simulator. The data does not include direct FPS comparisons for those GPUs, so the combo ranking is the best available measure. At 678th out of 3002, this combo is a mid-to-upper-tier performer — entirely playable, but not a top-10% configuration.

For a user building a PC specifically for Pc Building Simulator, this combo will handle the game well, but the ranking data suggests that investing in a newer, faster GPU would yield a better in-game experience than upgrading the CPU. The CPU's 90th percentile ranking shows it's not the weak link.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the best experience depends entirely on your display's resolution and refresh rate. For a 1080p monitor with a 144Hz or 165Hz refresh rate, the Ultra preset (174 FPS) is the right choice — it delivers well above the refresh rate with maximum visual quality. The High preset (183 FPS) is nearly identical in performance, so there is no reason to drop below Ultra at 1080p unless you have a 240Hz+ display, in which case Medium (259 FPS) is the only preset that gets you close to that range.

For 1440p, the Ultra preset (110 FPS) is the best value — it hits above 100 FPS, which is smooth on most 144Hz displays. If you have a 165Hz or 240Hz monitor, you would need to drop to Medium (163 FPS) to get closer to the refresh rate, but the visual hit is significant. High (115 FPS) is nearly identical to Ultra (110 FPS), so there is no reason to choose High over Ultra at 1440p — the 5 FPS difference is negligible.

For 4K, the situation is different. The Ultra preset (57 FPS) is just below the 60 FPS target, which many users find acceptable, but the High preset (60 FPS) is the better choice if you want to guarantee a locked 60. Medium (85 FPS) is the sweet spot for 4K if you want headroom above 60 FPS and can tolerate slightly reduced quality. Low (121 FPS) is overkill for 4K — the visual degradation is too severe to justify the frame rate.

The Medium preset is the only one with min/max data, and at 4K it ranges from 73 to 98 FPS, which is stable enough for most displays. At 1080p Medium, the 220-298 FPS range is wide but still far above any refresh rate in common use. For the best overall experience, the data suggests: 1080p Ultra for high-refresh displays, 1440p Ultra for most users, and 4K High for those prioritizing smoothness over absolute quality.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its highest frame rates. Low settings produce an average of 366 FPS, which is the single highest measured result in the dataset. Medium settings average 259 FPS, with a minimum of 220 and maximum of 298 FPS. High settings average 183 FPS, and Ultra settings average 174 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra is only 9 FPS, while the gap between Low and Medium is 107 FPS — the largest single-step drop in the entire dataset, indicating that Medium settings introduce a significant GPU load increase over Low.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates remain high but show the expected reduction. Low averages 231 FPS, Medium averages 163 FPS (min 139, max 188), High averages 115 FPS, and Ultra averages 110 FPS. The High-to-Ultra gap narrows to just 5 FPS, and the Low-to-Medium gap is 68 FPS. The Medium preset's min/max range of 49 FPS is narrower than at 1080p, showing more consistent frame delivery.

At 3840x2160, the frame rates drop to playable but not excessive levels. Low averages 121 FPS, Medium averages 85 FPS (min 73, max 98), High averages 60 FPS, and Ultra averages 57 FPS. The High-to-Ultra gap is just 3 FPS, and the Low-to-Medium gap is 36 FPS. The Medium preset's min/max range narrows to 25 FPS, the tightest of any resolution, confirming that the GPU is fully saturated at 4K and delivering uniform frames.

Across all resolutions, the pattern is consistent: Low is dramatically faster than Medium, Medium is moderately faster than High, and High and Ultra are nearly identical. This suggests that the Ultra preset adds minimal visual benefit over High in this game, while the jump from Low to Medium carries the largest performance cost. For users who want maximum frame rates, Low is the clear choice; for those who want balanced visuals, Medium offers the best compromise; and for those who want the best image quality, High is effectively the same as Ultra at a slightly higher frame rate.