Pc Building Simulator

Pc Building Simulator is a simulation title that depends less on raw graphics horsepower than on consistent frame delivery, and this pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus with the AMD Radeon RX 6600 shows a clear split between high-refresh 1080p capability and 4K struggle. The measured data indicates that the best experience balances visual fidelity with frame rate stability, with the Medium preset at 1440p offering the most compelling mix of smoothness and quality, while 1080p Medium provides the headroom for high-refresh displays without sacrificing the clarity that makes the simulation readable.

Settings Recommendations

For this specific CPU-GPU combination, the Medium preset is the sweet spot across all three resolutions tested. At 1920x1080, Medium delivers an average of 146 FPS with a minimum of 124 FPS and a maximum of 168 FPS — these numbers show a frame time consistency that is critical for a game where you are constantly moving between menus, 3D viewports, and system monitoring screens. The 124 FPS minimum is particularly telling; it means that even in complex scene transitions, the frame rate does not dip below the 120 Hz refresh threshold that many modern monitors use. The Ultra preset at 1080p only drops to 98 FPS average, which is still playable, but the 48 FPS gap between Medium and Ultra (146 vs 98) is not justified by the visual improvements in a game that is largely interface-driven.

At 2560x1440, Medium again proves to be the recommended choice. The 92 FPS average with a 78 FPS minimum and 106 FPS maximum indicates that the Radeon RX 6600 is still comfortably within its comfort zone, and the 78 FPS minimum is above the 60 FPS baseline that most players consider acceptable for a simulation title. The High preset at 1440p yields 65 FPS, which is workable but leaves less headroom for demanding scenes, while Ultra at 62 FPS is borderline. The data suggests that the extra visual effects in High and Ultra at this resolution cost roughly 27-30 FPS over Medium, a significant penalty for what is likely a marginal visual upgrade in a game centered on workbench interactions and PC component installation.

For 4K, the recommendation changes drastically. No preset achieves a consistently smooth experience: Medium at 3840x2160 produces 48 FPS average with a 41 FPS minimum, while High drops to 34 FPS and Ultra to 32 FPS. The only 4K preset that clears the 60 FPS bar is Low, which hits 68 FPS. However, playing Pc Building Simulator at Low settings on a 4K display defeats the purpose of the higher resolution, as the visual clarity of component details and case interiors is a core part of the experience. The measured data strongly suggests that 4K is not a viable target for this combo; players should either use Medium at 1440p or Low at 4K depending on whether they prioritize resolution or visual fidelity. Given that the game is a simulation where readability of small text and component labels matters, 1440p Medium is the better overall recommendation.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 is the limiting component in this pairing, and the data makes this clear through the scaling of frame rates across settings. The GPU features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is adequate for 1080p and 1440p but becomes strained at 4K. The card's boost clock of 2491 MHz and game clock of 2044 MHz, built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with 1792 shading units, deliver 8.928 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. These specifications align with the measured results: the card is capable of high frame rates at lower resolutions but runs out of pixel throughput at 4K, where the 159.4 GPixel/s pixel rate is insufficient for maintaining 60 FPS in this title.

The VRAM capacity of 8 GB is not directly the bottleneck in the measured data, as the frame rates drop consistently across all settings when moving from 1440p to 4K, rather than showing a sudden cliff that would indicate memory exhaustion. Instead, the 4K results (68 FPS on Low, 48 FPS on Medium, 34 FPS on High, 32 FPS on Ultra) show a smooth degradation that is characteristic of a GPU that is compute-bound rather than memory-bound at high resolutions. The 128-bit memory bus and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for the texture loads in this simulation, but the raw shading power of the Navi 23 chip is what limits 4K performance.

The GPU's benchmark scores contextualize its position. It achieves a Passmark G3D score of 15096 and an average benchmark score of 19036, placing it in the 63rd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in terms of average score are the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 (19030, 0% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile (19049, -0.1% delta), and the NVIDIA Tesla K20m (19089, -0.3% delta). These comparisons show that the RX 6600 sits in a performance tier where 1080p high-refresh gaming is expected, but 4K is not a realistic target. The DirectX 12 benchmark score of 51 (Passmark) further indicates that the card is not optimized for the most modern API workloads, though this is less relevant for a 2019 simulation title that does not push API features hard.

How This Combo Ranks

The measured frame rate data places this specific CPU-GPU combination at rank 2894 out of 3723 tested combos in Pc Building Simulator. This ranking in the 22nd percentile (2894/3723) shows that the pairing is significantly below average for this game, which is expected given that the RX 6600 is a mid-range card and the CPU, while powerful, cannot compensate for GPU limitations in a graphics-bound title. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is an exceptionally strong processor — it ranks in the 96th percentile of all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 84003 — but its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K (83807, 0.2% delta) and AMD EPYC 4584PX (83090, 1.1% delta), showing that it is at the top of the desktop heap. However, this CPU strength does not translate into a high game-specific rank because Pc Building Simulator's frame rates are primarily GPU-limited, as evidenced by the consistent frame rate drops at higher resolutions.

The combo rank of 2894 out of 3723 indicates that most other test configurations, likely those pairing mid-range CPUs with stronger GPUs, achieve better performance in this game. The CPU's 24 cores and 24 threads with a boost clock of 5.80 GHz are overkill for a simulation that likely uses only a fraction of these resources, while the GPU's 8 GB VRAM and 8.928 TFLOPS are the actual determinants of the measured FPS. In essence, this combo represents a mismatch where a top-tier CPU is paired with a mid-tier GPU, resulting in a system that excels in CPU-bound tasks (as shown by the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51731) but underperforms in GPU-bound gaming scenarios. The data suggests that users with this CPU would achieve better game-specific rankings by pairing it with a more powerful GPU, but for this specific combo, the ranking reflects the GPU's 63rd percentile standing among all GPUs.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full range of settings shows the GPU's capability headroom. Low settings produce 206 FPS average, which is a remarkable figure that indicates the CPU is not a limiting factor even at this high frame rate — the Ultra 9 290K Plus easily feeds the RX 6600 enough draw calls to reach over 200 FPS. Medium settings at 1080p yield 146 FPS average with a 124 FPS minimum and 168 FPS maximum, showing that the step from Low to Medium costs 60 FPS but still maintains excellent playability. High settings drop to 103 FPS, which is still above the 100 FPS mark, while Ultra settings produce 98 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra at 1080p — 206, 146, 103, 98 — shows a steep initial drop when enabling Medium effects, but a much smaller gap between High and Ultra (only 5 FPS), suggesting that the Ultra preset's additional effects are less demanding than the jump from Low to Medium.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates scale down predictably. Low settings achieve 130 FPS, Medium delivers 92 FPS with a 78 FPS minimum and 106 FPS maximum, High produces 65 FPS, and Ultra yields 62 FPS. The resolution increase from 1080p to 1440p costs roughly 36-37% of the frame rate across all settings (e.g., Low drops from 206 to 130, a 36.9% reduction; Medium drops from 146 to 92, a 37% reduction). This consistent percentage drop indicates that the GPU is scaling linearly with pixel count, which is the expected behavior for a rasterization-bound workload. The 78 FPS minimum at 1440p Medium is notable because it shows that even in the most demanding moments, the frame rate stays above 75 FPS, which is a comfortable threshold for most gamers.

At 3840x2160, the GPU clearly hits its limits. Low settings produce 68 FPS, which is the only 4K preset above 60 FPS. Medium settings drop to 48 FPS with a 41 FPS minimum and 55 FPS maximum, High falls to 34 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 32 FPS. The 4K Medium frame rate of 48 FPS is interesting because it is close to the 1440p High result of 65 FPS, suggesting that the visual quality at 4K Medium is roughly equivalent to 1440p High in terms of GPU load, but the resolution increase makes it less fluid. The 41 FPS minimum at 4K Medium is the lowest recorded value in the entire dataset, indicating that even the "safe" Medium preset can have noticeable hitches in this game at 4K.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K provides clear evidence about which component is the bottleneck. Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440, the average frame rate across all settings drops by approximately 37%. Moving from 2560x1440 to 3840x2160, the drop is even steeper — for example, Medium settings go from 92 FPS at 1440p to 48 FPS at 4K, a 47.8% reduction. This accelerating decline with resolution is the hallmark of a GPU-limited scenario, because the CPU's workload (draw calls, physics, game logic) does not increase with resolution, while the GPU's pixel and fragment workload scales quadratically with pixel count (1080p has 2.07 million pixels, 1440p has 3.69 million, 4K has 8.29 million).

The fact that the 1080p Low preset reaches 206 FPS while the 4K Low preset only reaches 68 FPS — a 138 FPS difference — confirms that the CPU is not the limiting factor even at the highest frame rates. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see a plateau in frame rates as resolution decreases, because the CPU would not be able to feed the GPU faster than a certain rate. Instead, the frame rates continue to climb at 1080p, suggesting that the CPU's 5.80 GHz boost clock and 24 threads are more than sufficient to handle Pc Building Simulator's simulation logic, and the GPU's rendering throughput is the sole constraint.

This resolution scaling behavior also explains the combo's low rank in the game. The RX 6600's 8.928 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is simply not enough for 4K gaming in this title, and even at 1440p, the card is only able to maintain 92 FPS on Medium — a respectable figure, but not exceptional. The data indicates that users who want to play at 4K should either reduce to Low settings (68 FPS) or consider a GPU with higher pixel throughput, while those who want to stay at 1440p can enjoy a smooth experience on Medium without needing to overclock or tweak settings further.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for this CPU-GPU pairing?

A: The measured data shows that 1920x1080 Medium (146 FPS average, 124 FPS minimum) or 2560x1440 Medium (92 FPS average, 78 FPS minimum) provide the smoothest experience. At 4K, only Low settings (68 FPS average) achieve a playable frame rate above 60 FPS, but the visual quality is reduced.

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

A: Yes, but only at Low settings, which produce 68 FPS average. Medium at 4K drops to 48 FPS with a 41 FPS minimum, High reaches 34 FPS, and Ultra falls to 32 FPS. These lower frame rates are likely to cause noticeable stuttering in a simulation where precise mouse control is important.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon RX 6600 compare to its nearest rivals in benchmark scores?

A: The RX 6600 has an average benchmark score of 19036, which is essentially identical to the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 (19030, 0% delta), 0.1% lower than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile (19049), and 0.3% lower than the NVIDIA Tesla K20m (19089). It sits in the 63rd percentile of all GPUs.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus too powerful for this GPU in this game?

A: The CPU benchmarks show it is in the 96th percentile of all CPUs with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51731, but the game's frame rates are clearly GPU-limited, as shown by the resolution scaling. The CPU is not the bottleneck, but the combo rank of 2894 out of 3723 indicates that pairing this CPU with a stronger GPU would yield better game performance.

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

A: The measured data shows 62 FPS average at 2560x1440 Ultra. This is below the 60 FPS minimum that many players prefer for a smooth simulation experience, but it is playable. Medium at 1440p (92 FPS) provides a much larger safety margin.

Q: Does the GPU's 8 GB VRAM cause any issues at 4K?

A: The 4K performance drops are consistent across all settings (68 FPS Low, 48 FPS Medium, 34 FPS High, 32 FPS Ultra), which indicates a compute limitation rather than a VRAM capacity issue. If VRAM were the bottleneck, we would expect a more sudden drop between Medium and High settings as textures exceed available memory.