Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator combines a heavily threaded simulation engine with a demanding real-time renderer, and the Intel Core i5-14600KF with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER sits at a point where both components matter. The CPU’s 14 cores and 20 threads, running from a 3.50 GHz base clock up to a 5.30 GHz boost, provide the raw throughput needed for the flight model and world-streaming logic. Its 24 MB of shared L3 cache and 2 MB per-core L2 cache help feed the simulator’s constant asset loading. In synthetic workloads, this processor scores 32,889 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 4,643 in single-core, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core i5-14600K, is essentially a match at 0.4% ahead, while the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X trails by 0.6%. This CPU is not the bottleneck in most scenarios, but the data shows its performance ceiling is well above what this GPU pairing needs at lower resolutions.

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

The Intel Core i5-14600KF’s architecture, Raptor Lake-R on a 10 nm process, delivers a balance of high single-thread speed and substantial multi-thread capacity. With a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, the processor excels at the single-threaded tasks that Microsoft Flight Simulator relies on for core simulation updates. The 14 cores and 20 threads handle the background loading of terrain and aircraft systems without stealing cycles from the main rendering thread. In the measured frames, the impact of this CPU becomes visible when comparing 1080p results across settings. At 1080p Low, the average FPS reaches 207.1, which is 45.2 FPS higher than the 4K Low result of 121.9. That gap of 85.2 FPS between 1080p Low and 4K Low shows that at 1080p, the CPU is still feeding frames faster than the GPU can render them, but the gap narrows as resolution increases. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4,643 indicates the i5-14600KF can sustain high clock speeds without throttling, which is critical for this simulator’s frame pacing. Compared to its nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 4345P, the i5-14600KF trails by 0.5% in average benchmark score, but that server-class chip lacks the same clock speed headroom. The data suggests the CPU is never the primary limiter in this pairing; even at 1080p Ultra, the average FPS of 114.6 remains high, and the gap to 4K Ultra is 47.7 FPS. This CPU’s 125 W TDP and unlocked multiplier allow for sustained performance, though the measured results do not indicate any thermal throttling scenarios.

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

The measured FPS rows for this combo provide a clear picture of how settings affect playability. At 1080p, the Low preset delivers 207.1 FPS, which is far beyond what any display can show, while Medium drops to 160.9 FPS, a 22.3% reduction. High at 1080p yields 122.4 FPS, and Ultra lands at 114.6 FPS. The step from High to Ultra at 1080p costs only 7.8 FPS, making Ultra a viable choice for users with high-refresh monitors. Moving to 1440p, the Low preset still achieves 165.9 FPS, but Medium falls to 127.5 FPS, and High reaches 95.7 FPS. At 1440p Ultra, the average is 94.5 FPS, which is a marginal 1.2 FPS drop from High. This suggests that at 1440p, the GPU begins to take over as the limiting factor, but the difference between High and Ultra is negligible. At 4K, the story changes: Low produces 121.9 FPS, Medium 93.1 FPS, High 72.3 FPS, and Ultra 66.9 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra at 4K is 5.4 FPS, which is small enough that Ultra is the better experience if visual fidelity matters. The data indicates that the 1440p Ultra setting offers the best balance, with 94.5 FPS providing smooth gameplay while maintaining high detail. For 4K users, High at 72.3 FPS is playable, but Ultra at 66.9 FPS is still above the 60 FPS threshold, so the choice depends on preference for sharpness over frame rate.

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

The FPS scaling across resolutions reveals where the bottleneck shifts. From 1080p Low to 4K Low, the average FPS drops from 207.1 to 121.9, a reduction of 85.2 FPS or 41.1%. At 1080p Medium to 4K Medium, the drop is from 160.9 to 93.1, a 67.8 FPS decrease (42.1%). The High preset drops from 122.4 at 1080p to 72.3 at 4K, a 50.1 FPS decline (40.9%). Ultra shows the smallest absolute drop: from 114.6 to 66.9, a 47.7 FPS decrease (41.6%). The consistency of these percentage drops, all hovering around 41%, indicates that the scaling is uniform across settings. This uniformity suggests that the GPU is the primary limiter at higher resolutions, as the CPU’s frame generation capacity is not being exhausted. At 1080p, the CPU can push 207.1 FPS on Low, but the GPU cannot keep up with the rendering demands at 4K, hence the proportional drop. The measured data shows that the RTX 4080 SUPER’s 16 GB of GDDR6X memory and 736.3 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient to avoid VRAM bottlenecks, as the FPS does not collapse at 4K Ultra. The 52.22 TFLOPS of FP32 compute power is what drives the resolution scaling, and the 41% drop across every preset indicates a well-balanced system where the GPU’s rasterization limits are exposed as pixel count increases.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

In the benchmark database, this specific combination of the Intel Core i5-14600KF and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER ranks 119th out of 1,795 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. That puts this pairing in the top 6.6% of all configurations tested, which is a strong result given the simulator’s demanding nature. The rank reflects the balance between the CPU’s 93rd percentile standing and the GPU’s 88th percentile among all hardware. The RTX 4080 SUPER’s nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT, has an average benchmark score 0.2% lower, while the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M is 0.4% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti trails by 2.9%, indicating that the RTX 4080 SUPER is competitive with newer cards in synthetic tests. For the CPU, the nearest rival is the Intel Core i5-14600K at 0.4% ahead, which means the KF variant is virtually identical in performance. The ranking of 119 out of 1,795 suggests that while there are faster combos, this setup is far above the median. The data shows that the combination’s performance is limited more by the GPU than the CPU at higher resolutions, as the CPU’s percentile rank is higher than the GPU’s. This ranking also implies that users with this combo can expect consistent frame rates across a variety of settings, as the hardware is well-matched.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER is built on the AD103 chip with Ada Lovelace architecture, using a 5 nm process from TSMC. Its 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus provides 736.3 GB/s of bandwidth, which is crucial for Microsoft Flight Simulator’s high-resolution textures and streaming world data. The GPU’s boost clock of 2550 MHz and base clock of 2295 MHz allow it to maintain high throughput in sustained loads. With 10,240 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, the card’s pixel rate of 285.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 816.0 GTexel/s are directly relevant to the simulator’s dense scenery rendering. The 80 RT cores and 320 tensor cores support advanced lighting and DLSS features, though the measured FPS values do not specify whether upscaling was enabled. The GPU’s 88th percentile ranking among all GPUs is reflected in the 4K results, where it achieves 72.3 FPS on High and 66.9 FPS on Ultra. The nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT, is only 0.2% behind in average benchmark score, yet the measured FPS at 4K Ultra is comfortably above 60. The 320 W TDP and triple-slot design indicate this is a high-power card, and the 1x 16-pin power connector requires a robust power supply, as suggested by the 700 W PSU recommendation. The FP32 performance of 52.22 TFLOPS is what allows the card to maintain playable frame rates even at 4K Ultra, where the 66.9 FPS result shows the GPU is still the dominant factor.

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

At 1920x1080, the data shows a clear hierarchy: Low produces 207.1 FPS, Medium 160.9 FPS, High 122.4 FPS, and Ultra 114.6 FPS. The step from Low to Medium is a 46.2 FPS drop, while Medium to High costs 38.5 FPS, and High to Ultra only 7.8 FPS. This indicates that the Low preset leaves significant performance on the table, as the CPU can push far beyond what is needed. At 2560x1440, the numbers are 165.9 FPS for Low, 127.5 FPS for Medium, 95.7 FPS for High, and 94.5 FPS for Ultra. The difference between High and Ultra at 1440p is just 1.2 FPS, making Ultra the obvious choice for this resolution. The 1440p Low result of 165.9 FPS is still well above the refresh rate of most monitors, while Ultra at 94.5 FPS offers a smooth experience with maximum detail. At 3840x2160, the results are 121.9 FPS for Low, 93.1 FPS for Medium, 72.3 FPS for High, and 66.9 FPS for Ultra. The gap between Low and Medium at 4K is 28.8 FPS, while Medium to High costs 20.8 FPS, and High to Ultra drops 5.4 FPS. These 4K numbers show that the GPU is the limiting factor, as the CPU’s potential is not fully utilized. Across all resolutions, the Ultra preset consistently delivers between 66.9 and 114.6 FPS, which means this combo can handle the simulator’s highest settings at any resolution, though 4K Ultra requires a tolerance for frame rates near 60. The measured data confirms that the RTX 4080 SUPER’s 16 GB VRAM is sufficient, as there are no anomalous FPS drops that would indicate memory pressure.