Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is a uniquely demanding title, and the combination of the Intel Core i5-14600KF and the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT produces a data set that clearly illustrates the distinct roles of each component. The benchmark results show a system that is heavily balanced toward GPU throughput, yet the CPU’s architectural strengths are what keep frame pacing stable at lower resolutions. This analysis breaks down the measured frames per second (FPS) across three resolutions and four quality presets, interpreting what the numbers reveal about the hardware pairing and its standing relative to other tested configurations.

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

The Intel Core i5-14600KF is a 14-core, 20-thread processor built on Raptor Lake architecture, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. It features a 24 MB shared L3 cache and supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, though the benchmark data here does not specify which memory type was used. In synthetic tests, this CPU achieves a single-core Geekbench score of 2445 and a multi-core score of 17085, while Cinebench R23 results show 4594 single-core and 32544 multi-core points. These figures place it at the 90th percentile against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 49394.

For a flight simulator like Microsoft Flight Simulator, single-thread performance is often the primary driver of simulation logic—physics, flight modeling, and scenery generation. The 14600KF’s boost clock of 5.30 GHz is a direct contributor to the strong 1080p results observed in the measured FPS. At 1080p with Low settings, the average FPS reaches 164, which is a clear indicator that the CPU is not the bottleneck at this resolution. The single-core Cinebench R23 score of 4594 is particularly relevant, as it aligns with the processor’s ability to handle the game’s heavy per-core workloads without stalling.

However, the data also suggests that the CPU’s multi-core capabilities are not fully utilized by this title, at least not beyond a certain point. The multi-core score of 32544 in Cinebench R23 is strong, but the measured FPS scaling from 1080p to 1440p and 4K shows a significant drop that is more attributable to the GPU. The CPU’s 20 threads are available, but the game’s engine appears to rely more on a few high-frequency cores. The passmark single-thread score of 4273 reinforces this, as it is a metric that directly correlates with the kind of responsiveness needed for complex flight scenarios.

Compared to its nearest rivals in the CPU benchmark database, the 14600KF is within 0.8% of the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (deltaPct 0.3), the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (deltaPct 0.4), and the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 (deltaPct 0.8). It is 0.8% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 (deltaPct -0.8). These deltas are minimal, indicating that the 14600KF sits at the top tier of consumer desktop processors for general compute, but the differences are small enough that game-specific performance will be dictated more by GPU pairing and software optimizations.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT is the dominant factor in this pairing, as evidenced by the measured FPS across all settings. It is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture with a Navi 48 chip, manufactured on a 4 nm process by TSMC. The GPU has a base clock of 1660 MHz, a game clock of 2400 MHz, and a boost clock of 2970 MHz, with 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus providing 644.6 GB/s of bandwidth. Its FP32 performance is rated at 48.66 TFLOPS, and it includes 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU’s role is primarily to render vast landscapes, detailed aircraft models, and dynamic weather. The 16 GB VRAM is a critical asset, as the game is known for high memory consumption at higher resolutions and settings. The 4K Ultra preset still averages 55 FPS, which indicates that the GPU is not running out of memory, and the bandwidth from the 256-bit bus is sufficient to feed the render pipeline. The boost clock of 2970 MHz is a key factor in the GPU’s ability to maintain high frame rates, as it allows for rapid shader execution.

The GPU’s benchmark scores place it at the 55th percentile against all GPUs, with an average score of 13543. However, this percentile is misleading, as the nearest rivals listed are significantly older and less powerful—the AMD Radeon HD 7770M (deltaPct 0.1), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570 (deltaPct 0.2), the NVIDIA P106-090 (deltaPct 0.5), and the AMD Radeon Pro 555 (deltaPct 1.0). These deltas are all under 1%, but the absolute scores are vastly different in real-world gaming; the RX 9070 XT’s 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 7260 is a more representative metric of its modern capabilities.

The measured FPS data shows that the GPU is the limiting factor at 4K, where the average FPS drops to 55 at Ultra settings. This is not a sign of weakness, but rather a reflection of the game’s extreme graphical demands. At 1080p, the GPU is often underutilized, as the CPU can feed it frames faster than it can render them, resulting in high FPS but not necessarily maximum utilization.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Intel Core i5-14600KF and the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT is ranked 861 out of 3714 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the top 23.2% of all configurations tested, which is a strong position given the sheer number of possible pairings. While the rank is not in the top 10%, it is important to consider that the database includes many combinations with higher-end GPUs or CPUs that may have better synergy.

The rank of 861 suggests that while this combo is capable, there are many other pairings that achieve higher average FPS in this specific title. This is likely due to the CPU’s position relative to other high-end processors, as the GPU is a top-tier card. The CPU’s 90th percentile ranking against all CPUs is solid, but the combo rank indicates that other CPUs with higher single-thread performance or more cache might pair better with the RX 9070 XT.

The measured FPS data supports this by showing that at 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 55, which is playable but not exceptionally high. In contrast, a combo with a faster CPU might push that number higher if the GPU is the bottleneck, but the data here cannot confirm that without direct comparison. The combo’s rank is a holistic measure, and it indicates that this pairing is above average, but not at the absolute pinnacle of performance for this game.

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

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive picture of how this combo performs across different settings and resolutions. At 1920x1080, the average FPS ranges from 92 at Ultra settings to 164 at Low settings. The Medium preset averages 128 FPS with a minimum of 109 and a maximum of 147, while High averages 96 FPS. These numbers show that at 1080p, the system is capable of high refresh rate gaming, even at Ultra settings, which is impressive for a flight simulator.

Moving to 2560x1440, the average FPS drops but remains highly playable. Low settings average 133 FPS, Medium averages 103 FPS with a minimum of 88 and a maximum of 119, High averages 78 FPS, and Ultra averages 74 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is roughly 20-25% across most settings, which is a typical scaling for a GPU-bound title.

At 3840x2160, the results show the GPU’s limits. Low settings average 98 FPS, Medium averages 76 FPS with a minimum of 65 and a maximum of 88, High averages 57 FPS, and Ultra averages 55 FPS. The 4K Ultra result is just above the 50 FPS threshold, which is playable but not ideal for a smooth experience. The 4K Low result of 98 FPS indicates that the GPU has headroom when settings are reduced, but the high settings presets quickly bring it to its knees.

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

The scaling from 1080p to 4K is stark and reveals the bottleneck. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 96 at 1080p to 78 at 1440p (an 18.75% decrease), and then to 57 at 4K (a 40.6% decrease from 1080p). At Ultra settings, the drop is similar: 92 at 1080p to 74 at 1440p (19.6% decrease), and then to 55 at 4K (40.2% decrease from 1080p). This pattern is consistent with a GPU-bound scenario, where increasing resolution directly impacts the GPU’s workload.

The fact that the FPS drops by roughly 20% from 1080p to 1440p, and then another 20% from 1440p to 4K, is a clear sign that the RX 9070 XT is the limiting component. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect the FPS to remain relatively flat as resolution increases, because the CPU would be working at its maximum capacity regardless of the graphical load. Instead, the data shows a linear decrease in FPS with resolution, which is the classic signature of a GPU-bound system.

At Low settings, the scaling is more pronounced. The drop from 1080p Low (164 FPS) to 1440p Low (133 FPS) is 18.9%, and then to 4K Low (98 FPS) is 40.2% from 1080p. This suggests that even at Low settings, the GPU is still the primary constraint, albeit with more headroom. The 4K Low result of 98 FPS is notably higher than the 4K Ultra result of 55 FPS, indicating that the game’s graphical effects, such as shadows and textures, have a significant impact on the GPU’s performance.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: What is the highest average FPS achievable with this combo in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The highest average FPS is 164, which is achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: Does the combo maintain playable frame rates at 4K with Ultra settings?

A: Yes, the 4K Ultra preset averages 55 FPS, which is above the 50 FPS threshold typically considered playable, though it is not ideal for high-refresh-rate displays.

Q: How does the CPU’s single-thread performance compare to its multi-thread performance in this title?

A: The CPU’s single-thread performance, with a Cinebench R23 score of 4594, is more critical for this game, as the 1080p Low results (164 FPS) suggest the CPU can handle the simulation load without bottlenecking the GPU.

Q: Is the GPU’s 16 GB VRAM sufficient for this game at high resolutions?

A: The data indicates that the 16 GB VRAM is sufficient, as the 4K Ultra preset still achieves 55 FPS without any reported minimum FPS drops, though minimum FPS data is not provided for that preset.

Q: What is the combo’s rank relative to all tested configurations in this game?

A: The combo is ranked 861 out of 3714 tested combos, placing it in the top 23.2% of all configurations tested for Microsoft Flight Simulator.

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

A: At 2560x1440, the High preset averages 78 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 74 FPS, a difference of 4 FPS or approximately 5%.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the user’s resolution and preference for visual fidelity versus frame rate. At 4K, the High preset averages 57 FPS, which is playable but close to the edge. The Ultra preset at 4K averages 55 FPS, which is only slightly lower, suggesting that the visual difference between High and Ultra is not worth the performance cost. For the best balance at 4K, the Medium preset is a strong choice, with an average of 76 FPS and a minimum of 65 FPS, which provides a smoother experience with acceptable visual quality.

At 1440p, the High preset averages 78 FPS, which is a good target for most users. The Ultra preset at 74 FPS is also viable, but the 4 FPS difference is minimal, and the Medium preset at 103 FPS offers a much more responsive experience. For users with high-refresh-rate monitors, the Low preset at 133 FPS is the only option that approaches 144 Hz, but the visual compromise is significant.

At 1080p, the High preset averages 96 FPS, which is excellent. The Ultra preset at 92 FPS is also very playable, and the difference between High and Ultra is only 4 FPS. For the best visual experience without sacrificing too much performance, the Ultra preset is recommended at 1080p, as it achieves nearly the same frame rate as High. The Medium preset at 128 FPS is the best choice for those seeking a higher refresh rate, as it provides a 33% increase over High while retaining decent visual quality.

In summary, the data suggests that the Medium preset is the best all-around choice at 4K and 1440p, while Ultra is acceptable at 1080p. The Low preset is only recommended for users who prioritize frame rate over everything else.