Pc Building Simulator

# Pc Building Simulator — Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus + RTX 3080 Ti Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti delivers a high-end experience in Pc Building Simulator, ranking 678th out of 3002 tested combos. This places the configuration in the top quarter of all tested hardware pairs. The CPU sits at the 96th percentile against all processors, while the GPU holds the 83rd percentile against all graphics cards. The measured frame rates across three resolutions and four quality presets show a system that excels at high-refresh 1440p gaming but requires careful settings management at 4K to maintain smooth performance.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture, built on a 3 nm TSMC process. It runs at a 3.70 GHz base clock and boosts up to 5.80 GHz, with 36 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB of L2 cache per core. This is a desktop-class chip on the Intel Socket 1851 platform, supporting DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus with 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth. Its 125 W TDP is modest for a 24-core design, and the unlocked multiplier allows overclocking.

In synthetic workloads, the CPU posts a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51731 and a single-core score of 7303. The PassMark multi-thread score is 60860, with a single-thread score of 4823. These numbers place it at the 96th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 84003. Compared to its nearest rivals, the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K (avg score 83807), 1.1% ahead of the AMD EPYC 4584PX (83090), and 1.2% ahead of the AMD EPYC 9135 (82980). It trails the AMD EPYC 7F72 by 1.3% (85072). The margin over the 285K is effectively negligible, meaning the 290K Plus offers no meaningful performance uplift over its direct predecessor in this game.

For Pc Building Simulator, the CPU's role is primarily to handle the simulation logic, component management, and system state calculations. The game is not heavily threaded, but the 24 cores ensure that background tasks and the simulation's update loops never bottleneck the frame rate. The high boost clock of 5.80 GHz is more relevant than core count for this title, as the game's single-threaded performance directly influences how quickly the simulation ticks. The PassMark data compression score of 698346 and integer math score of 166194 suggest strong general-purpose throughput, which benefits the game's file and memory operations. The data shows that even at 1080p Low settings, where the CPU is most likely to be the limiting factor, the system still delivers 366 FPS average, indicating that the CPU is far from a bottleneck in any scenario.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti is an Ampere-architecture GPU built on Samsung's 8 nm process, featuring 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die. It has 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 384-bit bus, delivering 912.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU runs at a 1365 MHz base clock and boosts to 1665 MHz, with memory clocked at 1188 MHz (19 Gbps effective). It houses 10240 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, along with 80 RT cores and 320 tensor cores. The peak FP32 performance is 34.10 TFLOPS, and the card is rated for a 350 W TDP with a 750 W suggested PSU.

In GPU benchmarks, the RTX 3080 Ti scores 26896 in PassMark G3D and 15282 in PassMark GPU compute. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 5077, while Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan scores are 170037 and 192697, respectively. The GPU holds the 83rd percentile among all graphics cards with an average benchmark score of 41187. Compared to its nearest rivals, it is 0.8% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 (40870), 2% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 (40377), but 1.2% behind the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB (41707) and 1.7% behind the NVIDIA Tesla M40 (41897). These deltas are small, meaning the RTX 3080 Ti is effectively on par with these competitors in raw compute, though the gaming performance in Pc Building Simulator depends more on the card's memory bandwidth and driver optimization.

For Pc Building Simulator, the GPU handles the visual rendering of the virtual workshop, component models, and UI overlays. The 12 GB VRAM is ample for this game's textures, even at 4K Ultra. The 912.4 GB/s memory bandwidth ensures that texture streaming and scene composition never stall. The card's DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) aligns with the game's rendering requirements, and the 80 RT cores provide headroom for any ray-traced effects the game may use, though the measured data does not specify RT usage. The GPU's contribution is most evident at 4K, where frame rates drop to 57 FPS on Ultra settings, indicating the card is the primary limiter at that resolution.

FAQ

Q: How does the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus compare to the Core Ultra 9 285K in this game?

A: The 290K Plus is only 0.2% ahead of the 285K in average benchmark score (84003 vs 83807). In practical terms, this means no measurable difference in Pc Building Simulator frame rates. The 290K Plus does not offer enough uplift to justify choosing it over the 285K based on gaming performance alone.

Q: Is the RTX 3080 Ti sufficient for 4K gaming in Pc Building Simulator?

A: Yes, but with caveats. At 4K High settings, the system averages 60 FPS exactly. At 4K Ultra, it drops to 57 FPS. For a smoother experience, 4K Medium delivers 85 FPS with a minimum of 73 FPS. If you want to stay above 60 FPS at all times, Medium is the safe choice at 4K.

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

A: At 1080p, the system averages 183 FPS on High and 174 FPS on Ultra. At 1440p, High yields 115 FPS and Ultra yields 110 FPS. If you have a 144 Hz monitor, 1440p High is the sweet spot, as it stays above 110 FPS. At 1080p, you can comfortably use Ultra and still stay well above 144 FPS.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest rival, the RTX 5070?

A: The RTX 3080 Ti is 2% ahead of the RTX 5070 in average benchmark score (41187 vs 40377). In Pc Building Simulator, this translates to a slight edge in frame rates, though the difference is within the margin of error for most gaming scenarios.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck the GPU at any settings?

A: Benchmark data suggests no. Even at 1080p Low, where CPU load is highest relative to GPU, the system hits 366 FPS. The CPU's 5.80 GHz boost clock and strong single-thread score (7303 in Cinebench R23) keep it ahead of the GPU's rendering capacity across all tested settings.

Q: What is the maximum FPS achievable with this combo?

A: The highest measured average is 366 FPS at 1080p Low settings. At 1080p Medium, it reaches 259 FPS, and at 1080p High, 183 FPS. The data does not include any preset above Ultra, so the absolute ceiling may be higher with custom settings, but the measured maximum is 366 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, 3840x2160) and four quality presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra). At 1080p, the system delivers exceptional performance across the board. Low settings produce an average of 366 FPS. Medium settings yield 259 FPS average, with a minimum of 220 FPS and a maximum of 298 FPS. High settings average 183 FPS, and Ultra settings average 174 FPS. There are no minimum or maximum values recorded for Low, High, or Ultra at this resolution, so only the Medium preset provides frame time variance data.

At 1440p, the performance remains strong but scales down predictably. Low settings average 231 FPS. Medium settings deliver 163 FPS average, with a minimum of 139 FPS and a maximum of 188 FPS. High settings average 115 FPS, and Ultra settings average 110 FPS. As with 1080p, only the Medium preset includes min/max data at 1440p.

At 4K (3840x2160), the GPU begins to show its limits. Low settings average 121 FPS, which is still very playable. Medium settings average 85 FPS, with a minimum of 73 FPS and a maximum of 98 FPS. High settings drop to 60 FPS average, and Ultra settings fall to 57 FPS. The Medium preset is the only one at 4K with min/max data, showing a 25 FPS spread between the 73 FPS minimum and 98 FPS maximum.

Looking at the progression across settings at each resolution, the delta between Low and Ultra is consistent. At 1080p, Ultra is 192 FPS lower than Low (366 to 174), a 52% reduction. At 1440p, Ultra is 121 FPS lower than Low (231 to 110), a 52% reduction. At 4K, Ultra is 64 FPS lower than Low (121 to 57), a 53% reduction. This consistent percentage drop indicates that the settings scaling is uniform across resolutions, with Ultra costing roughly half the frame rate of Low regardless of resolution.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The resolution scaling data reveals how the system's performance degrades as pixel count increases. From 1080p to 1440p, the pixel count increases by 78% (from 2.07 million to 3.69 million pixels). At High settings, the frame rate drops from 183 FPS to 115 FPS, a 37% reduction. At Ultra settings, it drops from 174 FPS to 110 FPS, a 37% reduction as well. This less-than-proportional drop indicates that the system is not purely GPU-bound at 1080p; the CPU is helping to maintain frame rates that the GPU cannot fully sustain as resolution increases.

From 1440p to 4K, the pixel count increases by 124% (from 3.69 million to 8.29 million pixels). At High settings, the frame rate drops from 115 FPS to 60 FPS, a 48% reduction. At Ultra settings, it drops from 110 FPS to 57 FPS, a 48% reduction. This steeper drop relative to the 1080p-to-1440p transition indicates that the GPU becomes the dominant limiting component at 4K. The RTX 3080 Ti's 12 GB VRAM and 912.4 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient, but the raw compute power (34.10 TFLOPS) is stretched by the 4K pixel load.

The scaling behavior is consistent across all four settings. The ratio of FPS at 1440p to FPS at 1080p is approximately 0.63 for all presets (115/183 = 0.63, 110/174 = 0.63, 231/366 = 0.63, 163/259 = 0.63). The ratio of FPS at 4K to FPS at 1440p is approximately 0.52 for all presets (60/115 = 0.52, 57/110 = 0.52, 121/231 = 0.52, 85/163 = 0.52). This uniform scaling implies that the game's rendering pipeline is resolution-bound in a linear fashion, with no settings-specific bottlenecks emerging at higher resolutions. The CPU's 96th percentile performance ensures it never becomes the limiting factor, even at 1080p Low where the GPU has the least work to do.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

For a 1080p display, the Ultra preset at 174 FPS is the clear recommendation. The 174 FPS average is well above any 144 Hz monitor's refresh rate, and the 192 FPS gap between Ultra and Low (366 FPS) is not worth the visual fidelity loss at this resolution. If you have a 240 Hz or higher refresh display, the High preset at 183 FPS still provides a smooth experience, but Ultra at 174 FPS is close enough that the visual upgrade is preferable. The Medium preset at 259 FPS is only relevant for esports-style competitive play, which is not the target use case for a simulation game.

For a 1440p display, the High preset at 115 FPS offers the best balance. Ultra at 110 FPS is only 5 FPS lower, so the visual difference between High and Ultra at 1440p is minimal in Pc Building Simulator. However, the Medium preset at 163 FPS with a 139 FPS minimum provides a much larger safety margin for frame time consistency. If you have a 144 Hz monitor and want to guarantee no drops below the refresh rate, Medium is the safer choice. For most users, High at 115 FPS will be smooth enough, as the game is not a fast-paced shooter where frame drops are critical.

For a 4K display, the Medium preset at 85 FPS is the only sensible recommendation. High at 60 FPS is playable but leaves no headroom for frame time spikes, and the measured minimum at Medium (73 FPS) is still above the 60 FPS threshold. Ultra at 57 FPS is below the 60 FPS standard and should be avoided. Low at 121 FPS is technically the fastest, but the visual quality loss at 4K defeats the purpose of the high resolution. The 85 FPS average at Medium, with a 73 FPS minimum, provides a comfortable experience on a 60 Hz or 75 Hz display, and even on a 120 Hz display, the 73 FPS minimum keeps the game playable.

The data shows that the optimal experience depends on your display's refresh rate. For 60 Hz displays at 4K, Medium is the only preset that consistently stays above the refresh rate. For 144 Hz displays at 1440p, High at 115 FPS is borderline, but Medium at 163 FPS is the performance pick. For 1080p 144 Hz displays, Ultra at 174 FPS is the best visual setting that still exceeds the refresh rate. In all cases, the CPU's performance headroom means that settings changes primarily affect the GPU load, and the system will not experience CPU-induced stutters regardless of preset.