Microsoft Flight Simulator

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 is an exceptionally strong combination for Microsoft Flight Simulator, delivering playable frame rates at every preset and resolution tested. The data shows that this system clears the 60 FPS threshold with significant headroom even at the most demanding settings, making it a top-tier choice for sim enthusiasts. At 4K Ultra, the combo produces an average of 70 FPS, while at 1440p and 1080p Ultra, it reaches 95 FPS and 117 FPS respectively, indicating that the bottleneck shifts from the GPU to the CPU only at lower resolutions and lower presets.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data reveals a consistent scaling pattern across resolutions and settings, with the RTX 4080 providing ample performance for the flight simulator’s demanding rendering engine. At 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the system achieves its highest frame rates: 211 FPS on Low, 164 FPS on Medium, 123 FPS on High, and 117 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset at this resolution includes min/max readings of 139 FPS and 188 FPS, showing a tight frame time distribution that indicates smooth gameplay without stutters. The jump from Low to Medium costs 47 FPS, while the step from High to Ultra costs only 6 FPS, suggesting that the Ultra preset is remarkably efficient at 1080p.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance remains exceptionally high, with the system producing 170 FPS on Low, 132 FPS on Medium, 99 FPS on High, and 95 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset at 1440p shows min/max values of 112 FPS and 152 FPS, which represents a 40 FPS spread, slightly wider than at 1080p but still well within playable territory. The delta between High and Ultra at this resolution narrows to just 4 FPS, indicating that the visual upgrade from High to Ultra comes at a minimal performance cost. The data suggests that at 1440p, the CPU begins to play a more significant role, as the frame rates at Low (170 FPS) are not proportionally higher than at 1080p Low (211 FPS).

At 3840x2160, the resolution where the GPU is most stressed, the system still delivers impressive results: 125 FPS on Low, 97 FPS on Medium, 73 FPS on High, and 70 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset at 4K shows min/max values of 83 FPS and 112 FPS, which is a 29 FPS spread, demonstrating that even at 4K, the frame pacing remains consistent. The gap between High and Ultra at 4K is only 3 FPS, making Ultra the clear choice for maximum visual fidelity. Notably, the 4K Low preset at 125 FPS is still well above the 60 FPS threshold, meaning that even the most demanding resolution leaves substantial performance headroom.

Comparing across resolutions, the scaling is nearly linear for the Low preset: 211 FPS at 1080p drops to 170 FPS at 1440p (a 19% reduction) and then to 125 FPS at 4K (a further 26% reduction). For the Ultra preset, the scaling is less steep: 117 FPS at 1080p, 95 FPS at 1440p (a 19% drop), and 70 FPS at 4K (a 26% drop). This pattern indicates that the RTX 4080’s 16 GB of GDDR6X memory and 716.8 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient to handle the texture and geometry demands of the simulator at all resolutions, with the performance degradation primarily attributed to pixel fill rate and shader workload.

FAQ

Q: Can this system maintain 60 FPS at 4K Ultra settings?

A: Yes. The measured average FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings is 70 FPS, which is 10 FPS above the 60 FPS playable threshold. This provides a comfortable margin for demanding scenes with dense scenery or weather effects.

Q: What is the best resolution to play at if I want the highest frame rates?

A: At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the system achieves 211 FPS, which is the highest measured frame rate across all configurations. However, even at 4K Low, the system still produces 125 FPS, making any resolution viable for high-refresh-rate displays.

Q: How does the 4K Medium preset compare to the 4K High preset in terms of frame rate?

A: The 4K Medium preset delivers an average of 97 FPS with min/max of 83/112 FPS, while the 4K High preset delivers 73 FPS. This represents a 24 FPS difference, or approximately 33% higher performance on Medium compared to High, making Medium a strong choice for competitive play or high-refresh-rate 4K monitors.

Q: Is there a significant performance difference between 1440p and 1080p at Ultra settings?

A: Yes, the difference is 22 FPS. At 2560x1440 Ultra, the system averages 95 FPS, while at 1920x1080 Ultra, it averages 117 FPS. The 22 FPS advantage at 1080p represents a 23% performance uplift, which could be noticeable on a 144Hz monitor.

Q: What are the minimum FPS values recorded for the Medium preset at each resolution?

A: At 1920x1080 Medium, the minimum FPS is 139. At 2560x1440 Medium, the minimum FPS is 112. At 3840x2160 Medium, the minimum FPS is 83. All three minimum values remain well above the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: Does the system ever drop below 60 FPS in any tested configuration?

A: No. The lowest recorded average FPS is 70 at 4K Ultra, and the lowest minimum FPS recorded is 83 at 4K Medium. The data shows no configuration falls below the 60 FPS threshold, indicating consistent playability across all settings.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, which achieves an average of 70 FPS. This is the highest visual quality setting available, and it still provides 10 FPS of headroom above the playable threshold. The data shows that all four presets at 4K (Low at 125 FPS, Medium at 97 FPS, High at 73 FPS, and Ultra at 70 FPS) clear the 60 FPS mark, so users can select any preset based on their preference for visual fidelity versus frame rate.

At 2560x1440, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is also Ultra, with an average of 95 FPS. This provides 35 FPS of headroom above the threshold, making it an ideal resolution for high-refresh-rate displays. The 1440p Ultra preset offers a 25 FPS advantage over the 4K Ultra preset, which translates to a 36% performance improvement while still maintaining excellent image quality on most monitors.

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, with an average of 117 FPS. This is nearly double the playable threshold and provides 57 FPS of headroom, making it the best choice for competitive play or for users who prefer maximum frame rates. The 1080p Ultra preset is 22 FPS faster than the 1440p Ultra preset and 47 FPS faster than the 4K Ultra preset, demonstrating that this system has no trouble at any resolution.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU’s nearest rivals, based on average benchmark scores, include the AMD EPYC 4464P, which scores 64823 compared to the Core Ultra 7 265’s 64640, a delta of -0.3%. This means the EPYC 4464P is effectively identical in performance, differing by less than 1%. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265F scores 64438, a 0.3% delta, making it the closest match. The AMD EPYC 7343 scores 64202, a 0.7% delta, and the AMD EPYC 9124 scores 65104, a -0.7% delta. All four rivals fall within a 0.7% performance range, indicating that any of these CPUs would deliver nearly identical frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator.

For the GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER is the nearest rival, with an average score of 54209 compared to the RTX 4080’s 54247, a delta of 0.1%. This means the 4080 SUPER is essentially a performance match, and users would see no measurable difference in FPS. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X scores 54828, a -1.1% delta, while the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB scores 55698, a -2.6% delta, and the AMD Radeon 8060S scores 55757, a -2.7% delta. The latter two cards are slightly faster in synthetic benchmarks, but the difference is small enough that real-world gameplay would be indistinguishable.

When combining these alternatives, a system with an AMD EPYC 4464P and an RTX 4080 SUPER would behave nearly identically to the tested configuration, with frame rates likely within 1-2 FPS of the measured values. Similarly, the Core Ultra 7 265F with the RTX 4080 would be a drop-in replacement with zero performance impact. The data suggests that this performance tier is well-populated, giving users flexibility in component selection without sacrificing gameplay experience.

The Verdict

This PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator with exceptional performance at all resolutions and presets. The verdict by resolution confirms that all three tested resolutions (3840x2160, 2560x1440, and 1920x1080) list High, Low, Medium, and Ultra as playable settings, with the best settings being Ultra at each resolution. At 4K Ultra, the system averages 70 FPS, which is 10 FPS above the 60 FPS playable threshold. At 1440p Ultra, it averages 95 FPS, providing 35 FPS of headroom. At 1080p Ultra, it averages 117 FPS, offering 57 FPS of headroom.

The data indicates that this combination is not just playable but exceptionally smooth, with no configuration tested falling below 60 FPS. Even the most demanding scenario — 4K Ultra — maintains a comfortable margin, meaning that users can expect consistent performance during heavy scenes such as landing at complex airports or flying through dense urban areas. The RTX 4080’s 16 GB of GDDR6X memory and 9728 shading units, combined with the Core Ultra 7 265’s 20 cores and 20 threads, provide a balanced platform that does not exhibit a clear bottleneck at any tested setting.

For users with high-refresh-rate monitors, the 1080p and 1440p results are particularly compelling, with 117 FPS and 95 FPS at Ultra respectively. These frame rates are suitable for 120Hz or 144Hz displays, allowing for a smooth and responsive experience. At 4K, the 70 FPS average on Ultra is ideal for 60Hz displays, and users could opt for the High preset at 73 FPS or Medium at 97 FPS if they prefer higher frame rates over maximum visual fidelity.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 combination ranks 215th out of 3714 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the top 5.8% of all systems tested. This percentile ranking reflects the exceptional performance demonstrated in the measured FPS data, where the system consistently delivers frame rates well above the 60 FPS playable threshold across all resolutions and presets. The rank of 215 out of 3714 places this combo in the upper echelon of systems, indicating that only a small fraction of tested configurations outperform it.

The CPU’s percentile ranking of 93rd out of 100 versus all CPUs, combined with the GPU’s 86th percentile versus all GPUs, suggests that both components are strong performers individually and work well together in this game. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 64640 and the GPU’s average benchmark score of 54247 contribute to the overall system ranking, with the combination benefiting from the CPU’s high single-thread performance (5960 in Cinebench R23 single-core) which is critical for flight simulator’s physics and AI calculations. The data shows that this combo is well-positioned for future updates to the simulator, as the substantial headroom above the 60 FPS threshold at 4K Ultra indicates that there is performance in reserve for more demanding scenarios or higher-fidelity settings that may be introduced in future patches.