Microsoft Flight Simulator

The benchmark data for Microsoft Flight Simulator, paired with an Intel Core i5-14600KF and an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080, reveals a system that is exceptionally well-balanced for this demanding simulator. The results across resolutions and settings show a combination that can handle the game's heavy CPU and GPU loads, though the scaling patterns indicate a clear shift in bottleneck behavior depending on the configuration. This analysis breaks down the measured data to explain how the CPU and GPU contribute to the final frame rates.

FAQ

Q: What is the overall ranking of this CPU and GPU combination for Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The combo ranks 215th out of 3714 tested combinations, placing it in the top percentile of all tested systems for this specific title.

Q: How much faster is the RTX 4080 compared to its nearest rival, the RTX 4080 SUPER?

A: The average benchmark score difference is minimal, with the RTX 4080 SUPER having a deltaPct of 0.1 compared to the RTX 4080, indicating they perform virtually identically in synthetic benchmarks.

Q: What is the best performance jump seen when switching from High to Low settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the average FPS jumps from 99 on High settings to 170 on Low settings, representing a significant 71 FPS increase for users willing to lower visual fidelity.

Q: Does the CPU or GPU appear to be the limiting factor at 4K Ultra settings?

A: At 3840x2160 Ultra, the system produces an average of 70 FPS. Given that 4K Low yields 125 FPS, the massive drop from lowering resolution indicates the GPU is the primary limiting factor at this high resolution and settings level.

Q: What is the CPU's multi-core performance score in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core i5-14600KF scores 32,544 points in the Cinebench R23 multi-core test, and it ranks in the 90th percentile compared to all CPUs.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does the RTX 4080 have available?

A: The GPU has a memory bandwidth of 716.8 GB/s, facilitated by its 256-bit bus and 16 GB of GDDR6X memory running at an effective speed of 22.4 Gbps.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture and is a powerhouse for rendering the complex scenery of a flight simulator. Its 16 GB of GDDR6X memory is a critical asset, as Microsoft Flight Simulator is known for loading vast amounts of high-resolution textures for terrain, aircraft, and cities. The 716.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth ensures that this data can be fed to the GPU's processing cores quickly, preventing texture pop-in and maintaining consistent frame rates in dense areas.

The GPU's clock speeds are also a significant factor. With a base clock of 2205 MHz and a boost clock of 2505 MHz, the RTX 4080 can sustain high throughput. The data strongly suggests that at 4K resolution, the GPU's raw compute power becomes the primary determinant of performance. The measured FPS at 3840x2160 drops from 125 on Low to 70 on Ultra. This 55 FPS reduction illustrates how increasing the pixel count and shader complexity places a massive load on the GPU's shading units, TMUs, and ROPs. In synthetic tests, the RTX 4080 achieves a Passmark G3D score of 34,457 and an OpenCL score of 214,739, which supports its strong standing in the 86th percentile of all GPUs.

The data implies that the RTX 4080 is not a bottleneck at lower resolutions. At 1080p, the GPU is so powerful that it can easily render frames, and the performance ceiling is likely dictated by the CPU. However, as the resolution climbs to 4K, the GPU's workload expands massively, and the frame rates become much more sensitive to settings changes. The GPU's transistor count of 45,900 million and its 9728 shading units provide the sheer parallel processing power needed to handle the game's detailed world, but the data shows that even this level of performance is challenged when pushing for maximum visual fidelity at 4K.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-14600KF is a 14-core, 20-thread processor from the Raptor Lake Refresh generation. This core count is particularly relevant for Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known to be highly demanding on single-thread performance for the main simulation loop, while also utilizing multiple cores for tasks like scenery loading, physics, and AI traffic. The processor's high boost clock of 5.30 GHz is likely a key factor in maintaining strong frame rates at lower resolutions where the GPU is not the bottleneck.

The CPU's benchmark scores paint a picture of a very capable processor. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32,544 and single-core score of 4,594 are strong indicators of both multi-threaded and single-threaded prowess. It ranks in the 90th percentile of all CPUs, and its average benchmark score of 49,394 puts it in the same league as the AMD Ryzen 9 7900, which has an average score of 49,228 (a deltaPct of 0.3). This suggests the i5-14600KF is a top-tier performer. The 24 MB of shared L3 cache also helps keep frequently accessed data close to the cores, which can reduce latency and improve performance in simulation-heavy tasks.

The data suggests that the CPU is the limiting factor at 1080p. For instance, at 1920x1080, the FPS difference between Low (211 FPS) and Ultra (117 FPS) is substantial, but this is because the GPU has the headroom to render more frames if the CPU can feed it data fast enough. The game's simulation logic, which is often single-threaded, can only update the world state so quickly. As the resolution increases to 1440p and 4K, the GPU's rendering load becomes the dominant constraint, and the CPU's role in limiting frame rates diminishes. This dynamic balance is crucial for understanding the system's performance profile.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of the system's performance across different resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the system is exceptionally fast, with an average of 211 FPS on Low settings. This number drops to 164 FPS on Medium, 123 FPS on High, and 117 FPS on Ultra. The Medium setting shows a minimum FPS of 139 and a maximum of 188, indicating some variance but generally smooth performance.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance remains high but shows the expected scaling. Low settings yield an average of 170 FPS, while Medium and High produce 132 FPS and 99 FPS, respectively. Ultra settings bring the average down to 95 FPS. The Medium setting at this resolution has a minimum of 112 FPS and a maximum of 152 FPS, suggesting that even in complex scenes, the frame rate stays well within a playable range.

At 3840x2160, the GPU's workload becomes much more significant. Low settings produce a strong 125 FPS average, but this falls to 97 FPS on Medium, 73 FPS on High, and 70 FPS on Ultra. The Medium setting shows a minimum of 83 FPS and a maximum of 112 FPS. This data confirms that while the system can handle 4K, users will need to adjust settings to achieve their preferred frame rate target. The progression from 211 FPS at 1080p Low to 70 FPS at 4K Ultra illustrates the immense computational demand of 4K rendering in this simulator.

Resolution Scaling

The scaling of FPS from 1080p to 4K reveals the shifting bottleneck between the CPU and GPU. At 1080p Low, the system produces 211 FPS. When the resolution is increased to 1440p Low, the FPS drops to 170, and at 4K Low, it falls to 125. This is a gradual decline, but the relative drop from 1440p to 4K (a 45 FPS loss) is larger than the drop from 1080p to 1440p (a 41 FPS loss). This pattern indicates that the GPU is starting to become more of a limiting factor as the pixel count grows.

The trend is even more pronounced at Ultra settings. At 1080p Ultra, the system achieves 117 FPS. This drops to 95 FPS at 1440p Ultra and then to 70 FPS at 4K Ultra. The decline from 1440p to 4K is a 25 FPS loss, which is proportionally significant. This suggests that at 1080p and 1440p, the CPU has enough power to keep up with the GPU, but at 4K, the GPU's rendering workload becomes the primary constraint on performance.

The data implies that for users with high-refresh-rate 1080p or 1440p monitors, this system will be heavily CPU-bound, with the GPU capable of rendering far more frames than the simulation can update. Conversely, at 4K, the system becomes more GPU-bound, and the performance is more sensitive to graphics settings. This scaling behavior is classic for a high-end system in a simulation game, where the CPU's single-threaded performance is critical for game logic, but the GPU's raw power is essential for high-resolution rendering.

Settings Recommendations

For users targeting the highest possible frame rates at 1080p, the High preset offers a good balance, delivering 123 FPS average. While Low yields 211 FPS, the visual compromise is likely too significant for most players. The Ultra preset at 1080p provides 117 FPS, which is only marginally slower than High, suggesting that the CPU is the limiting factor here, and the extra GPU load from Ultra settings is relatively minor. Therefore, the Ultra preset at 1080p is a viable choice for those who want maximum visual quality without a significant FPS penalty.

At 1440p, the High preset delivers an average of 99 FPS, which is a solid target for a smooth experience. The Medium preset offers a higher 132 FPS average, which might be preferable for competitive or fast-paced scenarios, but the visual fidelity difference may be noticeable. The Ultra preset at 95 FPS is also viable and provides the best image quality. Given that the difference between High and Ultra is only 4 FPS, the Ultra preset is an excellent choice for 1440p users with capable displays.

For 4K gaming, the data shows that the Ultra preset is demanding, yielding an average of 70 FPS. The High preset improves this to 73 FPS, which is only a marginal gain. The Medium preset provides a much more comfortable 97 FPS average, which is a significant jump from the higher presetsestr. For a 60 FPS target, the High preset is sufficient, but for those with high-refresh-rate 4K displays, the Medium preset is the recommended choice to ensure a smoother experience. The Low preset, at 125 FPS, offers the highest frame rate but sacrifices too much visual quality for most users. The best experience per the measured rows is arguably the Medium preset at 4K, as it provides a substantial FPS boost over High and Ultra while still maintaining a higher level of detail than Low.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-14600KF and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 combination ranks 215th out of 3714 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places the system in the top 5.8% of all combinations tested, which is a strong indicator of its high-end performance. This ranking reflects the synergy between a top-tier CPU and a high-end GPU.

The CPU itself is a very strong performer, placing in the 90th percentile of all CPUs. Its average benchmark score of 49,394 is nearly identical to its closest rival, the AMD Ryzen 9 7900, which scores 49,228. The data shows the i5-14600KF is 0.3% faster than the Ryzen 9 7900 and 0.8% faster than the Intel Core Ultra 5 245. This suggests that for this game, the i5-14600KF's high clock speeds and core count are highly effective.

The GPU also ranks well, sitting in the 86th percentile of all GPUs. Its average benchmark score of 54,247 is virtually identical to the RTX 4080 SUPER, which shows a deltaPct of just 0.1%. This indicates that the RTX 4080 is on par with its successor in terms of raw compute power. The combination of a 90th percentile CPU and an 86th percentile GPU results in a system that is well above the median for gaming performance. The 215th rank out of 3714 combos confirms that this is a high-end pairing that should provide an excellent experience for Microsoft Flight Simulator, especially when considering the measured frame rates at various settings and resolutions.