Microsoft Flight Simulator

Resolution Scaling

The benchmark data for Microsoft Flight Simulator on this AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX + AMD Radeon 880M combo reveals a steep performance cliff as resolution climbs. At 1080p with Low settings, the system delivers 47 FPS average. Moving to 1440p Low drops that to 38 FPS, a 19% reduction. At 4K Low, the average falls to 28 FPS, which is 40% below the 1080p figure. This scaling pattern is consistent with an integrated GPU that is heavily pixel-bound — the Radeon 880M's 16 ROPs and 4.454 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput are simply overwhelmed as the render target grows.

The Medium preset tells a similar story. At 1080p Medium, the combo averages 37 FPS with a minimum of 31 FPS and maximum of 42 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 29 FPS (min 25, max 34), and at 4K Medium it falls to 22 FPS (min 18, max 25). The delta between 1080p and 4K at Medium is 15 FPS, or roughly 41% lower. Notably, the minimum FPS at 4K Medium (18 FPS) is below the 1080p average at Ultra (26 FPS), indicating that even the most forgiving settings at high resolution struggle to maintain playable frame rates.

High settings amplify the resolution penalty. The system manages 28 FPS at 1080p High, 22 FPS at 1440p High, and just 16 FPS at 4K High. That is a 43% drop from 1080p to 4K. Ultra settings are the most demanding, with 26 FPS at 1080p, 21 FPS at 1440p, and 16 FPS at 4K. The 4K Ultra result matches 4K High exactly at 16 FPS, suggesting the GPU has hit a hard floor where additional settings changes no longer matter — it is simply maxed out.

The data indicates the limiting component is unequivocally the GPU. The CPU, a 16-core Zen 4 part with a 5.40 GHz boost clock, has ample headroom. The scaling from 1080p to 4K at every settings tier shows a consistent 35-45% performance loss, which is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the resolution scaling would be far flatter. The fact that 4K Low (28 FPS) barely exceeds 1080p Ultra (26 FPS) underscores that the Radeon 880M's pixel throughput is the ceiling — the CPU is not the constraint in any resolution/settings combination tested.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX is a 16-core, 32-thread processor based on Zen 4 architecture, built on a 5nm process at TSMC. It carries a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, with 64 MB of L3 cache. This is a Dragon Range mobile part with a 55W TDP, designed for high-performance laptops. In synthetic benchmarks, it scores 42,713 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 6,030 in single-core, placing it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs.

Microsoft Flight Simulator is known for its heavy single-thread dependency, particularly for flight model and scenery loading. The 8945HX's single-core performance — evidenced by a 6,030 R23 score and a Passmark single-thread score of 3,907 — is strong enough to feed the integrated GPU without becoming the limiting factor. The CPU's multi-core muscle (Passmark multithread score of 51,405, Cinebench R20 multi-core of 17,939) is largely idle in this workload, as the GPU-bound frame rates show.

The nearest rival comparisons reinforce the CPU's capability. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX scores an average of 76,155, a delta of just 0.1% from the 8945HX's average benchmark score of 76,212. The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D scores 75,779, a 0.6% delta. These are effectively identical performance tiers. The Threadripper PRO 9945WX and EPYC Embedded 8224P are slightly ahead at 76,513 and 76,492 respectively, but the deltas are under 0.5%. None of these differences would manifest meaningfully in a GPU-limited game like Flight Simulator.

What matters for this specific title is that the CPU's single-thread performance is not the bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the combo reaches 47 FPS, which is respectable for an iGPU setup. The fact that the frame rate does not improve dramatically at lower resolutions (e.g., from 28 FPS at 4K High to 28 FPS at 1080p High — actually identical) confirms the CPU is not holding things back. A weaker CPU would show frame rate plateaus even at 1080p, but the data shows pure resolution-driven scaling. The 8945HX's 5.40 GHz boost clock and 64 MB L3 cache provide the headroom needed to avoid CPU-side stalls, even in complex flight scenarios.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX and AMD Radeon 880M ranks 2,924 out of 2,996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. That places it in the bottom 2.4% of all configurations tested. This is a poor rank, driven almost entirely by the integrated GPU's limitations. The CPU is a top-tier mobile part, but the Radeon 880M's 43rd percentile standing among all GPUs (average benchmark score of 8,436) drags the overall combo down.

The GPU's nearest rivals put its performance in context. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX scores 8,427, a 0.1% delta from the 880M. The NVIDIA GeForce MX330 scores 8,458, a -0.3% delta. The AMD Radeon HD 8870M scores 8,462, also -0.3%. These are all older discrete GPUs from a decade ago, yet the modern integrated 880M (RDNA 3.5, 4nm) trades blows with them. The AMD Radeon R9 M375X scores 8,325, which is 1.3% behind the 880M. This positioning — near the bottom of the GPU hierarchy — explains the combo's 2,924 rank.

For a game as demanding as Microsoft Flight Simulator, which pushes both CPU and GPU heavily, this rank is not surprising. The combo sits below the vast majority of systems with discrete GPUs. The 2,996 total combos tested include many desktop and high-end laptop configurations that vastly outperform this iGPU setup. The rank of 2,924 means only 72 combos tested worse. This is a niche configuration — a high-end mobile CPU paired with an entry-level integrated GPU — and the data reflects that mismatch.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its best results. Low settings yield 47 FPS average. Medium settings produce 37 FPS average, with a minimum of 31 FPS and maximum of 42 FPS. High settings drop to 28 FPS average. Ultra settings are the lowest at 26 FPS average. The spread from Low to Ultra is 21 FPS, indicating that settings have a significant impact at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, performance degrades across the board. Low settings average 38 FPS. Medium averages 29 FPS, with a minimum of 25 FPS and maximum of 34 FPS. High averages 22 FPS. Ultra averages 21 FPS. The delta from 1080p to 1440p is roughly 8-9 FPS at each settings tier, a consistent 20-24% penalty.

At 3840x2160, the results are largely unplayable for smooth gameplay. Low settings average 28 FPS. Medium averages 22 FPS, with a minimum of 18 FPS and maximum of 25 FPS. High averages 16 FPS. Ultra averages 16 FPS. Notably, the High and Ultra results are identical at 16 FPS, suggesting the GPU has reached its absolute limit regardless of settings at 4K. The 4K Medium minimum of 18 FPS is below the 1080p Ultra average of 26 FPS, highlighting how resolution is the dominant factor.

The only settings tier with complete min/max data is Medium across all three resolutions. At 1080p Medium, the range is 31-42 FPS. At 1440p Medium, it narrows to 25-34 FPS. At 4K Medium, it tightens further to 18-25 FPS. The narrowing range at higher resolutions indicates that frame time variance decreases when the GPU is more consistently saturated.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 880M is an integrated GPU based on RDNA 3.5 architecture, built on a 4nm process at TSMC. It features 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with 12 ray tracing cores. The boost clock is 2900 MHz, with a base clock of 400 MHz. Its FP32 throughput is 4.454 TFLOPS, and its pixel rate is 46.40 GPixel/s. The GPU has no dedicated VRAM — memory is System Shared, with bandwidth dependent on the system's DDR5 memory configuration.

In synthetic benchmarks, the 880M scores 7,615 in Passmark G3D and 4,454 TFLOPS in FP32 compute. Its Passmark DirectX 11 score is 73, DirectX 12 is 32, and DirectX 9 is 97. The Geekbench OpenCL score is 31,285, and Vulkan is 40,006. These scores place it in the 43rd percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 8,436.

The GPU's role in this game is the primary constraint. Microsoft Flight Simulator is a graphically intensive title with heavy draw calls, terrain rendering, and weather effects. The 880M's 16 ROPs are a severe limitation at higher resolutions — 4K requires four times the pixel fill rate of 1080p, and the data shows the GPU cannot keep up. The shared memory architecture also means the GPU competes with the CPU for system memory bandwidth, which is system-dependent.

The nearest rivals for the 880M are all older discrete GPUs, which is telling. The GTX 675MX (a 2012 Kepler part) and the MX330 (a 2020 entry-level chip) both score within 0.3% of the 880M. This means the modern integrated solution is roughly equivalent to a low-end discrete GPU from years ago. For Flight Simulator, this level of performance is insufficient for smooth gameplay at any resolution above 1080p Low. The GPU's 16 ROPs and 4.454 TFLOPS simply cannot handle the pixel and shader workload required by this title at higher settings.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal configuration for this combo is 1080p Low, which delivers 47 FPS average. This is the only settings/resolution combination that approaches a playable 60 FPS, though it still falls short. The 1080p Medium preset offers 37 FPS average, which is playable but not smooth. For users prioritizing frame rate, 1080p Low is the clear choice.

At 1440p, the best option is Low settings at 38 FPS. This is marginally playable but below the 40 FPS threshold that many consider the minimum for a flight sim. The 1440p Medium preset drops to 29 FPS, which will feel stuttery. 4K is not recommended — even Low settings only achieve 28 FPS, and Medium drops to 22 FPS with a minimum of 18 FPS. These frame rates are below playable thresholds for a game that requires precise control inputs.

For visual quality, 1080p Medium at 37 FPS offers a reasonable balance between fidelity and performance. The min of 31 FPS ensures it stays above 30 FPS most of the time. The 1080p High preset at 28 FPS and Ultra at 26 FPS are only suitable for static screenshots or very slow flight, not dynamic gameplay. The data shows that High and Ultra settings at any resolution above 1080p produce average frame rates in the teens or low twenties, which are not viable for an interactive experience.

The Medium preset's complete min/max data across all resolutions reveals it is the most stable settings tier. At 1080p it ranges from 31 to 42 FPS, at 1440p from 25 to 34 FPS, and at 4K from 18 to 25 FPS. This consistency suggests Medium is the best-tuned preset for this hardware, offering predictable performance. However, only the 1080p Medium variant stays above 30 FPS at its minimum, making it the only Medium option that is consistently playable.

Given the combo's rank of 2,924 out of 2,996, users should temper expectations. This is not a system built for Microsoft Flight Simulator at high settings. The recommended path is 1080p Low for playable frame rates, or 1080p Medium for improved visuals if the user can tolerate occasional dips to 31 FPS. Higher resolutions and settings tiers are effectively off-limits for this title with this hardware configuration. The data is clear: this iGPU combo is suited for 1080p gaming at modest settings, and Flight Simulator's demanding engine will not yield more.