Pc Building Simulator

Pc Building Simulator, a simulation title from 2019, presents an interesting case study for the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT combination. The benchmark data reveals a system that is overwhelmingly capable at mainstream resolutions, with performance characteristics that shift dramatically based on the graphics settings and resolution selected. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS results to understand the distinct roles each component plays in this specific title.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, and its 30 MB of shared L3 cache provides a substantial buffer for game data. The processor's performance profile, as indicated by its benchmark scores, is robust; it achieves a 93rd percentile ranking among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 64640. This places it in the upper echelon of processors, though its nearest rivals, such as the AMD EPYC 4464P and AMD EPYC 9124, are within a fraction of a percent in terms of average score (deltaPct of -0.3% and -0.7%, respectively), indicating that its raw compute power is competitive but not head-and-shoulders above the field.

In Pc Building Simulator, the CPU's role is less about raw physics or complex AI and more about managing the game's logic, the state of the simulated components, and the user interface. The high boost clock of 5.30 GHz is beneficial for single-threaded tasks, which often dictate frame pacing in simulation games. The data from the benchmark results shows that this CPU is not a bottleneck at lower resolutions. At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves an average of 283 FPS, which is a very high frame rate. This suggests that the CPU is capable of feeding frames to the GPU at a rapid pace. The 20 threads also ensure that background simulation tasks, such as tracking temperatures and power draw of virtual components, do not interfere with the main game loop.

The relationship between the CPU and the game's performance becomes clearer when examining the scaling from 1080p to 4K. At 1080p, the CPU's strong single-thread performance allows it to push frame rates to extremes, particularly at lower settings where the GPU has less work to do. However, as the resolution increases, the demand on the GPU grows, and the CPU's relative importance diminishes. The data shows that at 4K with Ultra settings, the average FPS drops to 44, a clear sign that the GPU is now the limiting factor. The CPU is not holding the system back; rather, the GPU is being fully utilized, and the frame rate is dictated by its output. The processor's 65W TDP confirms its efficiency, allowing it to maintain high clock speeds without excessive power draw, which is a plus for system builders.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT is a RDNA 2.0 architecture GPU with 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 432.0 GB/s. It has a base clock of 2150 MHz and a boost clock of 2600 MHz, with a game clock of 2495 MHz. Its compute capabilities are substantial, with 2560 shading units and a FP32 performance of 13.31 TFLOPS. The GPU holds a 71st percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 26011. Interestingly, its nearest rivals are not modern gaming cards but rather older professional or mobile parts, such as the AMD Radeon R9 M395X and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile, which are within 1.1% of its score. This suggests that while the GPU is capable, it sits in a specific performance tier that is now a generation or two behind the current-generation.

In Pc Building Simulator, the GPU's primary function is to render the 3D views of the computer components and the case. The 12 GB of VRAM is more than sufficient for this game, as it does not feature massive textures or complex geometric detail. The boost clock of 2600 MHz is crucial for maintaining smooth frame rates, as it allows the GPU to quickly process the draw calls for the various parts on screen. The benchmark data illustrates the GPU's performance limits clearly. At 1080p with Ultra settings, the system averages 135 FPS. This is a high frame rate, but it is notably lower than the 283 FPS at Low settings, indicating that the GPU is doing significantly more work at Ultra. The most telling data point is at 4K with Ultra settings, where the average FPS plummets to 44. This is a 68% drop from the 1080p Ultra result, showing that the GPU's processing power and memory bandwidth are being saturated at this resolution.

The scaling of FPS across settings at the same resolution highlights the GPU's workload. At 4K, moving from Low (93 FPS) to Medium (66 FPS) to High (47 FPS) to Ultra (44 FPS) shows a clear, steep decline in performance. This indicates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at this resolution, and the CPU is no longer a factor. The GPU's 250W TDP and dual-slot design suggest it is a power-hungry component, but the performance it delivers at 1080p and 1440p is solid. The data suggests that for this simulation title, the GPU is well-matched to the CPU at lower resolutions, but it is the component that will limit the experience at 4K.

FAQ

Q: At which resolution and settings does the system achieve the highest average frame rate?

A: The highest average frame rate is achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings, where the system reaches an average of 283 FPS.

Q: What is the performance difference between Low and Ultra settings at 2560x1440?

A: At 2560x1440, the average FPS drops from 178 at Low settings to 85 at Ultra settings, a difference of 93 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor at 4K resolution?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the limiting factor at 4K. The average FPS drops to 44 at Ultra settings, which is a significant reduction from the 141 FPS achieved at 1080p High settings, showing the GPU struggles with the higher pixel count.

Q: How does the system's performance at 1080p Medium settings compare to 4K Medium settings?

A: At 1080p Medium, the system averages 200 FPS, while at 4K Medium, it averages 66 FPS. This represents a 67% decrease in average FPS when moving from 1080p to 4K at Medium settings.

Q: Does the system maintain playable frame rates at all tested settings at 1440p?

A: Yes. The lowest average FPS at 2560x1440 is 85 at Ultra settings, which is still well above the standard 60 FPS threshold for playability.

Q: What is the frame time consistency like at 4K Medium, based on the data?

A: The data for 4K Medium shows an average FPS of 66, with a minimum of 56 and a maximum of 76. This indicates some frame time variance, but the minimum FPS is still reasonably high.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the best experience for a balance of visual fidelity and performance appears to be the Medium preset at 1440p, or High at 1080p. The Medium preset at 2560x1440 yields an average of 126 FPS, with a minimum of 107 FPS, ensuring a smooth and responsive experience. This is a significant step up from the 85 FPS average at Ultra, and the visual difference between Medium and Ultra in a game like this, which focuses on component models, is often less critical than in other genres. At 1080p, the High preset offers an average of 141 FPS, which is excellent for high-refresh-rate monitors, and it provides a more detailed visual experience than Medium without the performance cost of Ultra.

For users with a 4K display, the data suggests that Ultra settings are not viable, with an average of only 44 FPS. The Low preset at 4K provides a playable 93 FPS average, but the visual compromise is significant. The Medium preset at 4K, with an average of 66 FPS and a minimum of 56 FPS, is a more balanced choice, offering a playable experience with a moderate level of detail. The High preset at 4K, at 47 FPS average, is borderline, but could be acceptable for users who prioritize visual quality over frame rate. Ultimately, the data points to the Medium preset as the sweet spot for this game at higher resolutions, while High is ideal for 1080p.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT combination ranks 1327 out of 3002 tested combos in Pc Building Simulator. This places it in the 44th percentile of all tested system configurations, meaning that over half of the tested systems perform better in this specific game. This mid-pack ranking is an interesting result, given the individual components' strong benchmark scores. The CPU's 93rd percentile ranking and the GPU's 71st percentile ranking suggest that both parts are capable, but their combined performance in this game does not place them at the top of the charts.

The ranking suggests that there are many other combinations that yield higher frame rates in Pc Building Simulator. This could be due to the game's specific engine and its utilization of hardware. The game is not particularly demanding on the CPU, so a more powerful GPU than the RX 6750 XT would likely yield a better ranking. Conversely, the CPU's strength is not fully utilized in this title, as the GPU becomes the bottleneck at higher resolutions. The data indicates that the system is well-balanced for 1080p and 1440p gaming, but it is outclassed by combos with more powerful GPUs at 4K. The rank of 1327 out of 3002 is a clear indicator that while this is a capable system, it is not a top-tier performer in this specific simulation game.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rates for this combination provide a comprehensive view of its performance across different settings and resolutions.

At 1920x1080, the system delivers high frame rates across the board. With Low settings, the average FPS is 283. Moving to Medium settings, the average drops to 200 FPS, with a minimum of 170 and a maximum of 230. High settings yield an average of 141 FPS. At Ultra settings, the average FPS is 135. This shows a clear and consistent scaling, with the GPU handling the increased workload at higher settings.

At 2560x1440, the performance remains strong, though the scaling is more pronounced. Low settings produce an average of 178 FPS. Medium settings average 126 FPS, with a minimum of 107 and a maximum of 145. High settings average 89 FPS. Ultra settings average 85 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is significant, highlighting the increased GPU load, but the system remains highly playable at all settings.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly the limiting factor. Low settings average 93 FPS. Medium settings average 66 FPS, with a minimum of 56 and a maximum of 76. High settings average 47 FPS. Ultra settings average 44 FPS. The performance decline is steep, particularly from Low to Medium, and the system struggles to maintain high frame rates at this resolution. The data shows that while 4K is playable at lower settings, it is not a high-refresh-rate experience.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals critical information about the system's bottleneck. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 283 at 1080p to 178 at 1440p and then to 93 at 4K. This represents a 67% decrease in performance from 1080p to 4K. At Ultra settings, the average FPS drops from 135 at 1080p to 85 at 1440p and then to 44 at 4K, a 67% decrease as well. This consistent percentage drop across settings strongly suggests that the GPU is the primary limiting factor when increasing resolution.

The CPU's performance is sufficient to handle the game's logic at all resolutions, as evidenced by the high frame rates at 1080p. If the CPU were a bottleneck, we would expect to see a smaller FPS drop when moving to higher resolutions, as the GPU would be waiting for the CPU. Instead, the FPS drops proportionally with the increase in pixel count, which is a classic sign of a GPU-bound scenario. The data implies that the RX 6750 XT's rendering capabilities are the ceiling for this system. At 1080p, the GPU is under less stress, allowing the CPU to push frame rates to very high levels. But as the resolution increases, the GPU's workload grows, and its performance becomes the defining factor for the system's overall FPS. This scaling behavior indicates that for users wanting to play at 4K, a more powerful GPU would be necessary to achieve higher frame rates, while the CPU would not need an upgrade.