Pc Building Simulator

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

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is a 16-core, 16-thread mobile processor built on the Panther Lake architecture using Intel's 3 nm process node. It operates with a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, drawing a 25 W TDP. The CPU's cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache, with dual-channel LPDDR5X memory support delivering 153.6 GB/s of bandwidth.

In synthetic benchmarks, this processor demonstrates strong multi-threaded capability. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score reaches 18,911, while the single-core score sits at 2,200.5. The R20 results show 13,101 multi-core and 1,849 single-core, and R15 shows 2,955 multi-core and 309.5 single-core. PassMark tests further quantify its workload-specific strengths: integer math scores 90,882, floating-point math scores 112,550, and data compression scores 361,763. The multithread score is 36,811, with a single-thread score of 4,280.

Benchmark results indicate that the CPU's percentile rank among all tested processors is 88, placing it in the upper tier. Its average benchmark score is 44,466, which sits remarkably close to its nearest rivals. The AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D scores 44,573, a delta of -0.2%, meaning the Intel part trails by just 0.2%. The Intel Core i9-13950HX scores 44,342, a delta of 0.3% in favor of the X9 388H. The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 scores 44,309 (0.4% behind), and the Intel Core i5-13600 scores 44,240 (0.5% behind). This clustering indicates that the X9 388H performs essentially at parity with these competitors, with differences well within noise margins.

For Pc Building Simulator, a simulation title, the CPU's 16-core/16-thread configuration provides ample parallelism for game logic, physics calculations, and the simulation of component interactions. The high boost clock of 5.10 GHz ensures strong single-thread performance, which matters for the game's UI responsiveness and menu navigation. The measured FPS data shows that at 1080p Low settings, the combo achieves 386 FPS average, which suggests the CPU can feed frames well beyond typical display refresh rates. At 4K Ultra, the average drops to 61 FPS, indicating the GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher resolutions and settings.

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H compare to its closest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D?

A: The X9 388H has an average benchmark score of 44,466, which is 0.2% lower than the Ryzen 5 7500X3D's score of 44,573. This delta is negligible in practical terms, meaning the two processors deliver statistically equivalent performance in aggregate benchmarks.

Q: What is the CPU's percentile ranking among all tested processors?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H ranks in the 88th percentile among all CPUs in the benchmark database. This places it in the upper echelon of processors, though not at the very top tier.

Q: How does the CPU's multi-threaded performance scale in Cinebench tests?

A: The Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 18,911, while the R20 multi-core score is 13,101 and the R15 multi-core score is 2,955. These results show progressive scaling across benchmark versions, with the R23 score representing the most demanding multi-threaded workload.

Q: What memory bandwidth does the CPU support, and how does this affect gaming?

A: The CPU supports dual-channel LPDDR5X memory with a bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s. For Pc Building Simulator, this bandwidth is sufficient to feed both the CPU's 16 cores and the RTX 5090's data demands, though the game's simulation nature may benefit more from raw CPU throughput than memory bandwidth.

Q: How does the CPU's single-thread performance compare to its multi-thread performance?

A: The single-thread Cinebench R23 score is 2,200.5, and the PassMark single-thread score is 4,280. The multi-thread-to-single-thread ratio in R23 is approximately 8.6x, which is reasonable for a 16-core processor with no hyperthreading (16 threads for 16 cores). The boost clock of 5.10 GHz drives strong single-thread results.

Q: What is the CPU's production status and market segment?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is an active production processor targeting the mobile market segment. It uses the Intel BGA 2540 socket and supports PCIe Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only). Its integrated graphics is the Arc B390.

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

The measured FPS data reveals a clear scaling pattern across resolutions. At 1080p Low settings, the combo achieves 386 FPS average. Moving to 1440p Low, the average drops to 244 FPS, a reduction of 36.8%. At 4K Low, the average is 127 FPS, which is 67.1% lower than the 1080p result. This dramatic drop with resolution suggests that at lower settings, the GPU workload scales heavily with pixel count, while the CPU remains capable of sustaining high frame rates.

For High settings, the pattern continues: 1080p High averages 193 FPS, 1440p High averages 122 FPS (a 36.8% drop), and 4K High averages 64 FPS (a 66.8% drop from 1080p). The consistency of these percentage drops across Low and High settings indicates that resolution scaling is uniform regardless of graphical complexity.

Medium settings show a similar trend: 1080p Medium averages 274 FPS, 1440p Medium averages 173 FPS (36.9% drop), and 4K Medium averages 90 FPS (67.2% drop). The min and max FPS values for Medium settings are also recorded: at 1080p, the range is 233 to 315 FPS; at 1440p, it's 147 to 199 FPS; and at 4K, it's 77 to 104 FPS. These ranges show that frame pacing becomes tighter at higher resolutions, with the gap between min and max narrowing from 82 FPS at 1080p to 27 FPS at 4K.

Ultra settings exhibit the lowest frame rates: 1080p Ultra averages 184 FPS, 1440p Ultra averages 116 FPS (36.9% drop), and 4K Ultra averages 61 FPS (66.8% drop from 1080p). The consistency of these percentage drops across all four settings presets—Low, Medium, High, and Ultra—strongly indicates that the GPU is the limiting component at higher resolutions. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect frame rates to plateau or drop less severely as resolution increases, since the CPU workload would remain constant while GPU load grows.

The data shows that from 1080p to 1440p, the average FPS drops by approximately 37% across all settings. From 1440p to 4K, the drop is approximately 48% further. This two-stage scaling suggests that the RTX 5090's rendering workload scales super-linearly with pixel count, particularly at the 4K resolution where pixel count quadruples from 1080p but frame rates only drop to about one-third. This indicates that the GPU is firmly the bottleneck at 4K, while at 1080p, the CPU's 16 cores and high boost clock are sufficient to keep up with the GPU's output.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 ranks 547th out of 3,002 tested combos in Pc Building Simulator. This places the combo in the top 18.2% of all tested configurations, which is a solid but not exceptional ranking given the high-end components involved.

This ranking reflects the game's simulation nature, which may not fully utilize the RTX 5090's immense graphical horsepower. The GPU's percentile rank among all GPUs is 92, and its average benchmark score is 79,842. Its nearest rivals show a tight cluster: the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB scores 79,605 (0.3% higher), the Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB scores 79,396 (0.6% higher), the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT scores 78,940 (1.1% higher), and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X scores 80,959 (1.4% lower). The RTX 5090 sits in the middle of this group, with performance deltas all within 1.4%.

The CPU's rank of 88th percentile and the GPU's rank of 92nd percentile suggest that both components are individually strong performers. However, the combo's rank of 547 out of 3,002 indicates that many other combinations achieve higher frame rates in this specific game. This discrepancy likely stems from the game's simulation-heavy workload, which may favor CPUs with higher single-thread performance or different cache architectures over the raw multi-threaded throughput that the X9 388H provides.

The combo's ranking also reflects the resolution and settings at which the measurements were taken. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 386 FPS, which is exceptionally high. At 4K Ultra, it drops to 61 FPS, which is still playable but not competitive with the top-ranked combos that may achieve higher 4K performance. The data suggests that for Pc Building Simulator, the CPU-GPU pairing is balanced, but the game's engine may not scale perfectly with the RTX 5090's capabilities, given its rank relative to the component individual percentiles.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the Medium settings preset at 1440p offers the best balance of visual quality and performance. At 1440p Medium, the combo achieves 173 FPS average, with min and max FPS of 147 and 199 respectively. This frame rate is well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay, and the 1440p resolution provides a significant visual upgrade over 1080p while maintaining high frame rates.

For users prioritizing maximum frame rates, 1080p Low delivers an average of 386 FPS, which is far beyond any display's refresh rate and ensures absolute smoothness. However, the Low preset sacrifices visual fidelity, which may detract from the game's simulation experience where reading component details and monitoring system stats is important.

At 4K resolution, the Medium preset averages 90 FPS, which is playable but with a min FPS of 77, there is some risk of noticeable frame drops during complex simulation scenes. The High preset at 4K averages 64 FPS, which is close to the 60 FPS target but may experience dips below that threshold. The Ultra preset at 4K averages 61 FPS, which is marginally above 60 but with no min FPS data available, the risk of stutter is unknown.

The data indicates that 1440p Medium is the sweet spot for this combo. It provides 173 FPS average, which is more than double the 60 FPS target, and the min FPS of 147 ensures that even during demanding scenes, the frame rate remains high. The jump from Medium to High at 1440p costs 51 FPS (from 173 to 122), which is a significant drop for a modest visual improvement. Similarly, the jump from Medium to Ultra at 1440p costs 57 FPS (to 116), making Medium the most efficient choice.

At 1080p, Medium offers 274 FPS average with a min of 233 FPS, which is excellent. However, the visual benefits of 1440p outweigh the marginal frame rate gains at 1080p for most users. The 4K Medium preset at 90 FPS is also viable for users with 4K displays, but the 1440p Medium preset provides a better balance of resolution, frame rate, and consistency.

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

At 1920x1080 resolution, the measured FPS values across settings are as follows: Low averages 386 FPS, Medium averages 274 FPS with a min of 233 and max of 315, High averages 193 FPS, and Ultra averages 184 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a steady decline, with the largest single-step drop occurring from Medium to High at 81 FPS (from 274 to 193). The drop from High to Ultra is only 9 FPS (from 193 to 184), indicating diminishing returns at the highest settings.

At 2560x1440 resolution, the measured values are: Low averages 244 FPS, Medium averages 173 FPS with a min of 147 and max of 199, High averages 122 FPS, and Ultra averages 116 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 71 FPS, from Medium to High is 51 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 6 FPS. This pattern mirrors the 1080p results, with the High-to-Ultra transition being the smallest step.

At 3840x2160 resolution, the measured values are: Low averages 127 FPS, Medium averages 90 FPS with a min of 77 and max of 104, High averages 64 FPS, and Ultra averages 61 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 37 FPS, from Medium to High is 26 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 3 FPS. At 4K, the differences between settings become smaller in absolute terms, but the percentage differences remain consistent with lower resolutions.

Comparing across resolutions at each setting: Low goes from 386 (1080p) to 244 (1440p) to 127 (4K). Medium goes from 274 (1080p) to 173 (1440p) to 90 (4K). High goes from 193 (1080p) to 122 (1440p) to 64 (4K). Ultra goes from 184 (1080p) to 116 (1440p) to 61 (4K). The consistent pattern of roughly 37% drops from 1080p to 1440p and additional 48% drops from 1440p to 4K holds across all settings.

The min and max FPS data is only available for Medium settings across all three resolutions. At 1080p Medium, the range is 233 to 315 FPS, a span of 82 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the range is 147 to 199 FPS, a span of 52 FPS. At 4K Medium, the range is 77 to 104 FPS, a span of 27 FPS. This narrowing range at higher resolutions indicates that frame pacing becomes more consistent as the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck, reducing the CPU-induced frame time variability.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture using TSMC's 5 nm process node. It features the GB202 chip with 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 122.9 million per square millimeter. The GPU has a base clock of 2017 MHz and a boost clock of 2407 MHz, with memory running at 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective).

The GPU is equipped with 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 1.79 TB/s. It has 21,760 shading units, 680 TMUs, and 176 ROPs, along with 170 RT cores and 680 tensor cores. The pixel rate is 423.6 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 1,636.8 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 104.8 TFLOPS, with FP16 matching at 104.8 TFLOPS (1:1).

In benchmark tests, the RTX 5090 scores 18,355 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 334,370 in Geekbench OpenCL, and 376,728 in Geekbench Vulkan. PassMark results show a G3D score of 39,650 and a GPU compute score of 26,756. The DirectX tests show scores of 226 for DirectX 10, 341 for DirectX 11, 185 for DirectX 12, and 395 for DirectX 9. The G2D score is 1,413.

The GPU's percentile rank among all GPUs is 92, with an average benchmark score of 79,842. Its nearest rivals show performance deltas within 1.4%, indicating that the RTX 5090 performs at parity with a cluster of high-end GPUs in aggregate benchmarks, despite its newer architecture.

For Pc Building Simulator, the GPU's role is primarily to render the simulation environment, including the 3D representation of PC components, case interiors, and system monitoring interfaces. The game's visuals are not extremely demanding compared to modern AAA titles, which explains why the RTX 5090 achieves such high frame rates at lower resolutions and settings. At 1080p Low, the combo reaches 386 FPS, and even at 4K Low, it maintains 127 FPS.

The GPU's 32 GB of VRAM is far more than Pc Building Simulator requires, as the game's textures and geometry are relatively modest. However, the high memory bandwidth of 1.79 TB/s ensures that any memory-intensive operations, such as loading component models or rendering high-resolution textures, are handled without bandwidth bottlenecks.

The measured FPS data shows that the GPU becomes the limiting factor at 4K resolution, where the average frame rates drop to 61-127 FPS depending on settings. At 1080p, the GPU's massive compute power allows it to push frame rates to 184-386 FPS, but the CPU's 16 cores and 5.10 GHz boost clock are sufficient to keep up, as evidenced by the consistent scaling patterns. The RTX 5090's boost clock of 2407 MHz and 104.8 TFLOPS FP32 performance are more than adequate for this simulation title, and the performance is ultimately constrained by the game's engine and the resolution at which it is run rather than the GPU's raw capabilities.