Pc Building Simulator

# Pc Building Simulator with Intel Core Ultra 7 265 + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 delivers a remarkably capable Pc Building Simulator experience, with the measured data showing that this combination ranks in the 74th percentile of all tested combos in this game (785th out of 3,002). The most striking finding is the CPU's dominance in this simulation title: at 1080p Low settings, the system produces 352 FPS, which is over three times the 4K Ultra result of 55 FPS, indicating that while the GPU handles the visual load, the processor's 20 cores and 20 threads provide ample headroom for the simulation's computational demands. The data reveals a system that can comfortably exceed 60 FPS at 4K with High settings and nearly double that at 1440p, making it a versatile configuration for both high-refresh-rate monitors and high-resolution displays.

Resolution Scaling

The resolution scaling behavior of this combo in Pc Building Simulator tells a clear story: this is a GPU-limited scenario at higher resolutions, but the CPU's strength becomes evident at lower settings and resolutions. Moving from 1080p to 1440p at High settings, the average FPS drops from 176 to 111, a 37% reduction, while the leap from 1440p to 4K at High settings sees a further decline from 111 to 58 FPS, a 48% reduction. These percentage drops are typical of a GPU-bound workload where pixel throughput becomes the limiting factor. However, the Low settings preset reveals a different dynamic: 1080p Low produces 352 FPS, 1440p Low produces 222 FPS, and 4K Low produces 116 FPS — the scaling here shows that even at 4K Low, the system maintains over 100 FPS, which points to the CPU's ability to feed frames quickly when the GPU's workload is lightened.

The Medium preset, which has the only complete min/max data in the measured results, provides additional insight into frame time consistency. At 1080p Medium, the average is 249 FPS with a minimum of 212 and maximum of 287, a spread of 75 FPS that represents a 30% variance from the average. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 157 FPS with a range of 134 to 181, a 47 FPS spread that is proportionally smaller at 30% of the average. At 4K Medium, the average falls to 82 FPS with a range of 70 to 95, a 25 FPS spread that again represents approximately 30% of the average. This consistent relative variance across resolutions suggests that frame pacing is stable and that the performance scaling follows a predictable pattern as pixel count increases.

The scaling from 1080p to 4K at Ultra settings is particularly telling: 168 FPS at 1080p, 106 FPS at 1440p, and 55 FPS at 4K. The 4K Ultra result is the only measured configuration that falls below 60 FPS, and it does so by a slim margin of 5 FPS. This indicates that the RTX 3080's 10 GB of GDDR6X memory and 760.3 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for the game's assets at 4K, but the sheer pixel count at Ultra quality exceeds what the GPU can comfortably handle. In contrast, the 4K High result of 58 FPS is nearly identical, suggesting that the jump from High to Ultra at 4K costs only 3 FPS, which could indicate that the game's Ultra preset introduces diminishing returns in visual fidelity relative to its performance cost at this resolution.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080, built on the Ampere architecture with 8,704 shading units and 68 RT cores, demonstrates its capabilities through the measured frame rates. The GPU's boost clock of 1710 MHz and 10 GB of GDDR6X memory with a 320-bit bus provide the foundation for the 4K performance observed in the data. The GPU's 68th percentile ranking among all tested GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 23,172, places it in a solid mid-to-upper tier, though its nearest rivals in the benchmark database — the NVIDIA P106-100 at 23,249 (0.3% higher) and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 at 23,250 (0.3% higher) — are surprisingly close in average score, highlighting that raw benchmark averages don't always translate directly to gaming performance.

The RTX 3080's memory configuration is a key factor in the resolution scaling observed. The 760.3 GB/s memory bandwidth and 10 GB capacity allow the GPU to maintain strong performance at 1440p, where it achieves 157 FPS on Medium and 106 FPS on Ultra. At 4K, the memory subsystem appears to reach its practical limits for this game, as evidenced by the 58 FPS at High and 55 FPS at Ultra. The GDDR6X memory type, running at 19 Gbps effective, provides the bandwidth necessary for high-resolution textures, but the 10 GB capacity may be a constraint at 4K Ultra in this simulation title, which could explain the relatively small performance gap between High and Ultra at that resolution.

The GPU's DirectX 12 Ultimate support and Vulkan 1.4 compatibility are relevant to Pc Building Simulator's rendering pipeline. The measured PassMark scores show the GPU achieving 25,086 in G3D and 14,397 in GPU compute, with the DirectX 12 score of 100 being notably lower than the DirectX 11 score of 207. This pattern suggests that the game may not fully leverage DirectX 12's features, which could explain why the performance scaling from 1080p to 4K follows a more traditional rasterization workload rather than benefiting from newer API optimizations. The GPU's 29.77 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 465.1 GTexel/s texture rate provide ample raw power for the simulation's rendering needs, as evidenced by the 4K High result of 58 FPS being close to the 60 FPS target.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 + RTX 3080 combination ranks 785th out of 3,002 tested combos in Pc Building Simulator, placing it in the top 26% of all configurations. This ranking is notable given that the CPU alone sits in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 64,640, while the GPU sits in the 68th percentile of all GPUs. The discrepancy between the CPU's high percentile and the combo's more modest ranking suggests that the game's performance is more dependent on GPU capabilities than CPU throughput, or that the specific combination of this CPU and GPU doesn't unlock the CPU's full potential in this title.

The CPU's nearest rivals in the benchmark database provide context for its processing power. The AMD EPYC 4464P has an average score of 64,823, which is 0.3% higher than the Ultra 7 265's 64,640, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F scores 64,438, just 0.3% lower. The AMD EPYC 7343 (64,202, 0.7% lower) and AMD EPYC 9124 (65,104, 0.7% higher) round out the immediate competition. These extremely tight margins — all within 0.7% — indicate that the Ultra 7 265 is positioned in a very competitive segment where small differences in synthetic benchmarks don't necessarily predict gaming performance differences, especially in a simulation game where the CPU's 20 cores and 20 threads can be utilized differently than in typical gaming workloads.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals in the benchmark database are all within 0.4% of the RTX 3080's average score of 23,172. The NVIDIA P106-100 (23,249, 0.3% higher), AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 (23,250, 0.3% higher), AMD Radeon RX 6600M (23,273, 0.4% higher), and AMD Radeon R9 M290X (23,276, 0.4% higher) form a tight cluster. This grouping is unusual because these GPUs span different generations and market segments, but their similar average scores in the database suggest that the RTX 3080's real-world gaming performance, as measured in this game, may exceed what its average benchmark score implies. The combo's 785th rank out of 3,002 (74th percentile) indicates that while the individual components are strong, the overall configuration is beaten by roughly a quarter of all tested combinations, which likely include more recent GPUs or more balanced CPU-GPU pairings.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides clear guidance on the optimal settings for this combo across different resolutions. At 1080p, every preset delivers well above 60 FPS, with Low at 352 FPS, Medium at 249 FPS, High at 176 FPS, and Ultra at 168 FPS. The 1080p Ultra result of 168 FPS is particularly strong, suggesting that users with 1080p displays can enable maximum quality without sacrificing smoothness. The gap between High and Ultra at 1080p is only 8 FPS (176 vs 168), which makes Ultra the clear choice for 1080p users who want the best visual experience.

At 1440p, the data shows that Ultra at 106 FPS is still well above the 60 FPS threshold, making it a viable option for high-refresh-rate 1440p monitors. The Medium preset at 157 FPS offers a 48% improvement over Ultra (157 vs 106), which could be preferable for competitive play or for users who prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity. The High preset at 111 FPS sits between these two, providing a balanced option. For 1440p users, the recommendation is to start with Ultra and only reduce to High if the 106 FPS average doesn't feel responsive enough, since the 5 FPS difference between High and Ultra at 4K (58 vs 55) suggests the visual quality jump is modest.

At 4K, the settings choices become more critical. The Low preset at 116 FPS is the only 4K option that provides a comfortable margin above 60 FPS, while Medium at 82 FPS is also viable for standard 60 Hz displays. The High preset at 58 FPS and Ultra at 55 FPS both fall slightly below the 60 FPS target, which could result in noticeable judder on 60 Hz monitors. For 4K users, the Medium preset at 82 FPS with a 70 FPS minimum represents the best balance of quality and performance, as it maintains a minimum above the 60 FPS threshold while offering substantially better visuals than Low. The measured min FPS data for Medium at 4K (70 FPS) confirms that even the worst-case frame times stay above 60 FPS, whereas the High and Ultra presets lack min FPS data and may exhibit dips below the 58 and 55 FPS averages respectively.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Pc Building Simulator at 4K 60 FPS?

A: Yes, but only on Medium or Low settings. The Medium preset at 4K averages 82 FPS with a minimum of 70 FPS, while Low averages 116 FPS. The High and Ultra presets at 4K average 58 FPS and 55 FPS respectively, both falling below the 60 FPS target.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 1440p gaming with this configuration?

A: The Ultra preset at 1440p delivers 106 FPS average, which is well above 60 FPS and suitable for high-refresh-rate displays. If higher frame rates are preferred, the Medium preset at 157 FPS offers a substantial improvement, while High sits at 111 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU's benchmark performance compare to its closest rivals?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 has an average benchmark score of 64,640, which is 0.3% lower than the AMD EPYC 4464P (64,823) and 0.3% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F (64,438). The AMD EPYC 7343 (64,202) is 0.7% lower, and the AMD EPYC 9124 (65,104) is 0.7% higher.

Q: Is the RTX 3080's 10 GB VRAM sufficient for 4K in this game?

A: The measured data shows that the RTX 3080 with 10 GB of GDDR6X memory achieves 58 FPS at 4K High and 55 FPS at 4K Ultra. The memory bandwidth of 760.3 GB/s appears adequate for these settings, though the performance drop from 1440p to 4K suggests the GPU is the limiting factor.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between 1080p and 4K at the same settings?

A: At High settings, 1080p averages 176 FPS while 4K averages 58 FPS, a 67% reduction. At Ultra settings, 1080p averages 168 FPS while 4K averages 55 FPS, a 67% reduction. At Medium settings, 1080p averages 249 FPS while 4K averages 82 FPS, a 67% reduction.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested configurations in the database?

A: This combination ranks 785th out of 3,002 tested combos in Pc Building Simulator, placing it in the top 26% of all configurations. The CPU alone ranks in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU ranks in the 68th percentile of all GPUs.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265's role in Pc Building Simulator is defined by its 20 cores and 20 threads, running at a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. This Arrow Lake-S architecture processor, built on TSMC's 3 nm process with 17,800 million transistors, delivers benchmark scores that place it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. The Cinebench R23 results are particularly revealing: a multicore score of 42,216 and a single-core score of 5,960. These numbers indicate that the CPU excels at both multithreaded workloads, which benefit from its 20 cores, and single-threaded tasks, which leverage its high boost clock.

The CPU's memory support for DDR5 with dual-channel configuration and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth provides the data throughput necessary for the simulation's system-building mechanics, where players manage multiple components and their interactions. The PassMark multithread score of 49,682 and single-thread score of 4,689 further confirm the processor's balanced performance profile. In Pc Building Simulator, where the simulation logic tracks component compatibility, power draw, and thermal outputs, the CPU's 20 threads can handle the background calculations while maintaining high frame rates, as evidenced by the 1080p Low result of 352 FPS.

The CPU's nearest rivals, all within 0.7% of its average score, are enterprise-focused EPYC processors, which suggests that the Ultra 7 265's performance in this game is competitive with much more expensive server chips. The 65 W TDP and 3 nm process node indicate efficient operation, which is relevant for a simulation game that might model system thermals. The CPU's 30 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB L2 cache per core provide the fast access to frequently used data that simulation games require. The measured data shows that the CPU is not the bottleneck in this configuration at any resolution or settings preset, as even the lowest FPS result (4K Ultra at 55 FPS) is still limited by the GPU's pixel throughput rather than the CPU's ability to feed frames. This is supported by the fact that the FPS scales consistently with resolution changes while settings changes at the same resolution produce smaller variations, indicating that the CPU maintains sufficient frame generation capacity even at the highest settings.