Microsoft Flight Simulator

The Intel Core i7-14700K paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 delivers exceptionally high frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator, with measured data showing every preset at every tested resolution clearing the 60 FPS threshold. Across 12 tested configurations spanning 1080p, 1440p, and 4K with Low through Ultra settings, the average frame rates range from a low of 75.1 FPS at 4K Ultra to a high of 235.1 FPS at 1080p Low, indicating that this combination provides substantial headroom for the game’s most demanding visual settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the data shows consistently high performance across all presets. The Low preset averages 235.1 FPS, which drops to 179.4 FPS at Medium, 135.6 FPS at High, and 129.5 FPS at Ultra. The scaling from Low to Ultra represents a reduction of 105.6 FPS, with the most significant single-step drop occurring between Medium and High at 43.8 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra is relatively modest at 6.1 FPS, suggesting diminishing returns from the highest preset tier at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, the measured averages remain elevated. Low settings produce 183.4 FPS, Medium delivers 144.4 FPS, High reaches 107 FPS, and Ultra maintains 103.3 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra narrows further to just 3.7 FPS at this resolution. The step from Medium to High costs 37.4 FPS, while the transition from Low to Medium reduces performance by 39 FPS. These figures indicate that 1440p imposes a roughly 20-25% performance penalty compared to 1080p across equivalent presets.

At 3840x2160, the results show the expected additional load. Low settings average 132.4 FPS, Medium drops to 108.6 FPS, High settles at 78 FPS, and Ultra records 75.1 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra remains small at 2.9 FPS, while the difference between Low and Medium is 23.8 FPS and between Medium and High is 30.6 FPS. Notably, 4K Ultra still maintains an average above 75 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS playability threshold used in this analysis.

Across all resolutions, the Low preset consistently delivers the highest frame rates, with the 1080p Low result of 235.1 FPS being the maximum recorded in the dataset. The Ultra preset never falls below 75.1 FPS at any resolution, which means the entire tested range of settings and resolutions remains comfortably playable.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals how the balance between CPU and GPU workload shifts as resolution increases. At 1920x1080, the frame rates are exceptionally high, with Low settings reaching 235.1 FPS. Such high frame rates typically indicate that the CPU is playing a more prominent role in limiting performance, as the GPU has less work to do at lower resolutions and can render frames faster than the CPU can feed it data. The fact that the RTX 4090 is among the fastest GPUs available further supports this interpretation.

At 2560x1440, the average frame rates drop by approximately 22-26% depending on the preset, with the Low preset falling from 235.1 to 183.4 FPS. This scaling suggests that the GPU is beginning to take on more responsibility, but the CPU remains capable of keeping up with the demands of the simulation at these frame rates. The relatively small difference between High and Ultra at 1440p (3.7 FPS) points to the GPU handling the extra visual complexity without significant strain.

The transition to 3840x2160 shows the most pronounced GPU influence. The Low preset drops from 183.4 FPS at 1440p to 132.4 FPS at 4K, a reduction of 27.8%. The Ultra preset falls from 103.3 to 75.1 FPS, a 27.3% decrease. This consistent proportional drop across presets indicates that the GPU is now the primary bottleneck, as the pixel workload at 4K is substantially higher than at lower resolutions. The CPU’s role diminishes at 4K because the GPU cannot generate frames fast enough to expose CPU limitations.

The scaling between presets also reveals the CPU’s contribution. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 105.6 FPS, while at 4K the same comparison yields a difference of 57.3 FPS. This narrowing gap at higher resolutions confirms that the GPU becomes the limiting factor as resolution increases, while the CPU’s influence is most visible at 1080p where frame rates are highest. The Intel Core i7-14700K, with its 20 cores and 28 threads, appears sufficient to avoid bottlenecking the RTX 4090 at any resolution tested.

Best Settings per Resolution

For 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, which averages 129.5 FPS. This is more than double the 60 FPS threshold, so there is no risk of dropping below playable levels at this resolution. The High preset would be a reasonable alternative at 135.6 FPS, but the data shows Ultra is fully viable.

At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset also remains the best choice, averaging 103.3 FPS. This clears the 60 FPS threshold by a margin of 43.3 FPS. The High preset delivers 107 FPS, but the difference is small enough that choosing Ultra for the improved visual quality costs only 3.7 FPS on average.

For 3840x2160, the Ultra preset again qualifies as the best setting, with an average of 75.1 FPS. This is 15.1 FPS above the 60 FPS playability threshold. The High preset at 78 FPS offers a slight performance advantage, but both presets remain above the threshold, and the data indicates that Ultra is the most demanding setting that can be used without falling below 60 FPS.

In all cases, the verdict data confirms that Ultra is the best setting at each resolution, with the lowest margin at 4K where the average is still 75.1 FPS. This suggests that users can confidently enable maximum settings without concern for performance drops below playable levels.

How This Combo Ranks

Among the 3,714 combinations tested in the database, this configuration ranks 109th in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the top 3% of all tested combos, indicating that it outperforms the vast majority of other CPU and GPU pairings for this specific title. The high ranking reflects the combination of the Core i7-14700K’s strong single-threaded performance and the RTX 4090’s substantial graphics throughput.

The rank of 109 means that 108 other combinations outperform this setup, but given the already high frame rates measured, those combinations likely achieve even higher averages at the same settings. The data does not specify which combinations rank higher, but the measured FPS results show that this combo already exceeds the playability threshold by a wide margin at every resolution and preset. The percentile data for the individual components supports this: the CPU ranks in the 94th percentile among all CPUs, and the GPU ranks in the 88th percentile among all GPUs, though the combination’s specific in-game rank of 109 out of 3,714 reflects the actual measured performance in this simulation.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the Intel Core i7-14700K, based on average benchmark scores, include the AMD EPYC 9115, which is 0.1% faster, and the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X, which is 0.2% slower. The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX is 0.7% slower, and the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F is 0.9% slower. These small deltaPct values indicate that swapping the CPU for any of these alternatives would produce nearly identical performance in Microsoft Flight Simulator, as the differences are all under 1%. The EPYC 9115 is a server-oriented chip, while the Ryzen 9 7950X is a desktop processor, so the choice would depend on platform preferences rather than meaningful FPS differences.

For the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090, the nearest rivals based on average benchmark scores are the Intel Arc Pro A60 with a deltaPct of 0%, meaning identical average scores, and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 at 0.3% faster. The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M is 2.5% slower, and the AMD Radeon PRO V710 is 2.9% faster. These are primarily professional or workstation GPUs rather than consumer gaming cards, but the data shows that their average benchmark scores are very close to the RTX 4090’s. In practice, the RTX 4090’s measured FPS in this game would likely be matched by these alternatives within a small margin, though the pro-oriented features and drivers could affect real-world gaming performance.

The Verdict

The verdict data is unambiguous: this PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator at all tested resolutions and presets with average frame rates above 60 FPS. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset averages 129.5 FPS, more than double the playable threshold. At 2560x1440, Ultra averages 103.3 FPS, providing a substantial cushion. At 3840x2160, Ultra averages 75.1 FPS, which is still 15.1 FPS above the threshold.

The verdictByResolution field lists all four settings (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) as playable at every resolution, with Ultra identified as the best setting in each case. This means the combination of the Intel Core i7-14700K and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 is not merely capable of running the game, but does so with enough headroom to handle complex scenes, weather effects, and dense scenery without dropping below 60 FPS. The lowest recorded average in the entire dataset is 75.1 FPS at 4K Ultra, so even the most demanding configuration remains comfortably playable.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 4K Ultra settings?

A: Yes, the measured average FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings is 75.1 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: What is the highest frame rate recorded for this combination?

A: The maximum average FPS in the dataset is 235.1 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 4K at Ultra settings?

A: At Ultra settings, the average FPS drops from 129.5 at 1920x1080 to 75.1 at 3840x2160, a reduction of 54.4 FPS.

Q: Are there any settings at any resolution that fall below 60 FPS?

A: No, every combination of resolution and preset in the measured data exceeds 60 FPS, with the lowest average being 75.1 FPS at 4K Ultra.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to other tested systems?

A: It ranks 109th out of 3,714 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the top 3% of all tested configs.

Q: What is the difference between High and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, High averages 107 FPS and Ultra averages 103.3 FPS, a difference of 3.7 FPS in favor of High.