Pc Building Simulator

Pc Building Simulator presents a unique benchmarking scenario for the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050. As a simulation title, its performance profile differs from typical shooters, and the measured data reveals a system that is heavily influenced by resolution and graphics settings. The combination ranks 2390th out of 3002 tested combos, placing it in the lower third of all configurations for this specific game. The data shows a playable experience at lower resolutions, but the system struggles to maintain smooth frame rates at 4K, indicating a clear bottleneck that shifts depending on the workload.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a dramatic and consistent drop in performance as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At the "Low" settings preset, the average frame rate falls from 196 FPS at 1080p to 124 FPS at 1440p, and finally to 65 FPS at 4K. This represents a 66.8% reduction in frame rate from 1080p to 4K, indicating that the rendering load scales heavily with pixel count. The pattern is similar across all settings presets, with the "Ultra" preset dropping from 93 FPS at 1080p to 59 FPS at 1440p and 31 FPS at 4K.

The scaling behavior reveals that the GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher resolutions. At 1080p, the system achieves high frame rates across all presets, with even the "Ultra" preset hitting 93 FPS. This suggests that the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU sufficiently at this resolution. However, the steep drop at 4K, where the "Ultra" preset yields only 31 FPS and "High" yields 32 FPS, points to the RTX 5050's 8 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory bus being overwhelmed by the pixel throughput required at 3840x2160. The transition from 1440p to 4K is particularly punishing, with frame rates roughly halving for most presets, which is a classic sign of GPU-bound rendering.

Comparing the scaling between presets provides further insight. At 1080p, the difference between "Low" (196 FPS) and "Ultra" (93 FPS) is 103 FPS, a 52.6% drop. At 1440p, the same preset comparison shows a drop from 124 FPS to 59 FPS, a 52.4% reduction. At 4K, the gap narrows to a 34 FPS difference (65 FPS to 31 FPS), representing a 52.3% decrease. This consistent percentage drop across resolutions suggests that the graphics settings have a multiplicative effect on rendering cost, while the resolution scaling adds an independent layer of GPU load. The data indicates that for 4K gaming, even the "Low" preset at 65 FPS is the only viable option, while "Medium" at 46 FPS and "High" at 32 FPS fall below acceptable smoothness thresholds.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with a 5 nm process node, featuring 2560 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Its memory configuration consists of 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 320.0 GB/s. The GPU operates at a base clock of 2317 MHz with a boost clock of 2572 MHz, and its memory runs at 2500 MHz (20 Gbps effective). These specifications place the RTX 5050 in the 66th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 21035.

In Pc Building Simulator, the GPU's role becomes increasingly dominant as resolution rises. The benchmark results show that at 1080p, the GPU has enough headroom to deliver high frame rates, but its limitations surface at 4K. The 8 GB VRAM capacity is likely a contributing factor to the steep performance drop at 3840x2160, as the game's texture and geometry data at that resolution can approach or exceed this memory limit. The 128-bit memory bus, with its 320.0 GB/s bandwidth, may also struggle to keep up with the data transfer demands of 4K rendering, particularly when higher quality settings increase the amount of data being processed.

The GPU's compute capabilities, measured at 13.17 TFLOPS for FP32, are modest by modern standards, and this is reflected in the 4K results. The "Ultra" preset at 4K yields 31 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target most gamers expect. However, the GPU's performance at lower resolutions is more respectable; the "Low" preset at 1080p achieves 196 FPS, suggesting that the RTX 5050 can handle this simulation game well when not pushed to extreme resolutions. The nearest rivals to the RTX 5050 in terms of average benchmark score include the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL (21153, 0.6% higher), AMD Radeon HD 8970M (21237, 1.0% higher), and AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (20713, 1.6% lower), indicating that the GPU sits in a competitive mid-range segment.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 combination ranks 2390th out of 3002 tested combos in Pc Building Simulator, placing it in the 79.6th percentile of all configurations. This rank indicates that the combo performs better than roughly 79% of other tested systems, but it is far from the top tier. The CPU, however, is a strong performer on its own, ranking in the 88th percentile of all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 44466. This disparity between CPU and combo rank suggests that the GPU is holding back the overall system performance in this game.

Looking at the CPU's nearest rivals provides context for its processing power. The AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D scores 44573, which is 0.2% higher than the Core Ultra X9 388H, while the Intel Core i9-13950HX scores 44342, 0.3% lower. The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 and Intel Core i5-13600 trail by 0.4% and 0.5% respectively. These close margins indicate that the Core Ultra X9 388H is competitive with some of the best processors available, yet the combo rank remains low due to the GPU's limitations.

The combo's low rank becomes more understandable when examining the GPU's percentile placement. The RTX 5050 sits in the 66th percentile of all GPUs, which is significantly lower than the CPU's 88th percentile. This mismatch means the system is likely GPU-bound in most scenarios, particularly at higher resolutions. The data supports this conclusion, as the frame rates at 4K are uniformly low across all settings, while 1080p performance is more variable and generally higher. In a simulation game like Pc Building Simulator, which may have less demanding graphics than AAA shooters, the CPU's strength could be partially masked by the GPU's inability to render frames quickly enough at high resolutions.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 1080p with Medium settings?

A: The average FPS at 1920x1080 with Medium settings is 139, with a minimum of 118 and a maximum of 160.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rival in terms of benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H has an average benchmark score of 44466, which is 0.2% lower than the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D (44573) and 0.3% higher than the Intel Core i9-13950HX (44342).

Q: What is the GPU's memory configuration?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering a bandwidth of 320.0 GB/s.

Q: What is the best 4K performance achieved by this combo?

A: The best 4K performance is 65 FPS, achieved with the Low settings preset at 3840x2160.

Q: What are the CPU's core and thread counts?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H has 16 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz.

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

A: The combo ranks 2390th out of 3002 tested combos in Pc Building Simulator.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is a mobile processor from the Core Ultra Series 3, built on Intel's 3 nm Panther Lake architecture. It features 16 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The CPU has a 25 W TDP and supports LPDDR5X memory on a dual-channel bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s. Its cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache.

In terms of raw processing power, the Core Ultra X9 388H performs admirably. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 18911 and single-core score of 2200.5 demonstrate strong multi-threaded and single-threaded capabilities. The PassMark multithread score of 36811 and single-thread score of 4280 further reinforce this, placing the CPU in the 88th percentile of all processors. The CPU's nearest rivals in benchmark scores are all within 0.5% of its average score, indicating that it trades blows with desktop-class processors like the Intel Core i5-13600 and AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D.

In Pc Building Simulator, the CPU's role appears to be secondary to the GPU, except at lower resolutions. At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves 196 FPS, which suggests the CPU is capable of delivering high frame rates when the GPU is not a bottleneck. However, the CPU's performance at higher resolutions is masked by the GPU's limitations. The data shows that the CPU's 16 cores and 16 threads are sufficient for this simulation game, as the frame rates at 1080p across all settings remain above 90 FPS. The lack of hyper-threading (16 threads for 16 cores) does not appear to hinder performance in this title, as the game likely does not require more than 16 threads to run efficiently.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings preset depends heavily on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For 1080p gaming, the "High" preset at 98 FPS provides a smooth experience with good visual quality, while "Medium" at 139 FPS offers even higher frame rates with potentially minimal visual differences. The "Ultra" preset at 93 FPS is also playable, but the marginal FPS gain from dropping to "High" is negligible, so "High" is recommended for the best balance of visual fidelity and performance at 1080p.

At 1440p, the "High" preset delivers 62 FPS, which is on the edge of smooth playability. The "Medium" preset at 88 FPS is a better choice for a consistent 60+ FPS experience, while "Low" at 124 FPS provides the highest frame rates for competitive play or if the user prioritizes smoothness over visuals. The "Ultra" preset at 59 FPS falls just below the 60 FPS threshold, so it is not recommended unless the user is willing to tolerate occasional dips.

For 4K resolution, the options are more constrained. The "Low" preset at 65 FPS is the only preset that achieves a playable frame rate above 60. The "Medium" preset at 46 FPS is borderline, but the "High" (32 FPS) and "Ultra" (31 FPS) presets are not recommended for a smooth experience. Therefore, for 4K gaming, the "Low" preset is the only viable choice, and users should be prepared to sacrifice visual quality for playable performance. In summary, the recommended settings are "High" at 1080p, "Medium" at 1440p, and "Low" at 4K to achieve the best experience per the measured data.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of the combo's performance across resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the "Low" preset achieves the highest average FPS of 196, followed by "Medium" at 139 FPS (with a minimum of 118 and maximum of 160), "High" at 98 FPS, and "Ultra" at 93 FPS. This resolution shows the widest spread in performance, with a 103 FPS difference between the lowest and highest settings.

At 2560x1440, the "Low" preset delivers 124 FPS, "Medium" achieves 88 FPS (minimum 74, maximum 101), "High" reaches 62 FPS, and "Ultra" drops to 59 FPS. The performance gap between presets narrows slightly, with a 65 FPS difference between "Low" and "Ultra". The 1440p results indicate that the system can handle medium-quality settings at a playable frame rate, but higher presets begin to strain the GPU.

At 3840x2160, the "Low" preset is the only one that achieves a frame rate above 60, hitting 65 FPS. The "Medium" preset drops to 46 FPS (minimum 39, maximum 53), "High" falls to 32 FPS, and "Ultra" reaches only 31 FPS. The 4K results show a 34 FPS difference between "Low" and "Ultra", but all presets except "Low" fall below the 60 FPS threshold, making 4K gaming challenging for this combo. The data also provides a direct comparison across resolutions: the "Medium" preset at 1080p (139 FPS) is over three times faster than the same preset at 4K (46 FPS), highlighting the significant impact of resolution on this system's performance.