Microsoft Flight Simulator

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

The Intel Core i7-12700KF is a 12-core, 20-thread desktop processor based on the Alder Lake architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, with a 125 W TDP. The chip includes a hybrid layout of performance and efficiency cores, though the FACT PACK does not specify the exact core distribution. Its cache configuration includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 25 MB of shared L3 cache. The processor supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, and it uses the Intel Socket 1700 platform with PCIe Gen 4 (20 lanes from the CPU alone).

Benchmark data places this CPU in the 89th percentile among all tested processors, with an average benchmark score of 35355. Its nearest rival is the Intel Core i5-14400, which scores 35336, a delta of 0.1% — essentially a tie. The Intel Core i7-13800H scores 35416 (0.2% higher), while the Intel Core i9-12900HX scores 35289 (0.2% lower). The Intel Core i5-13600T trails by 0.3% at 35256. These margins are negligible, meaning the 12700KF sits in a tightly grouped performance band.

For Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's multi-threaded capacity is relevant because the simulator must manage complex flight dynamics, terrain streaming, and AI traffic simultaneously. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 28979 and Geekbench multicore score of 13596 indicate strong parallel throughput, while the single-core score of 4091 in Cinebench R23 and 2526 in Geekbench single-core show respectable per-thread performance. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 9282 and max-thread score of 9983 suggest that the processor scales well with additional threads, which helps when the game engine distributes simulation workloads.

The measured FPS data in this game shows that at 1080p Low, the combo reaches 183.1 FPS, which is far above display refresh rates for most monitors. At 1080p Ultra, it drops to 99.9 FPS, still smooth. The CPU's 20 threads allow the game to maintain frame pacing even when the weather system, photogrammetry, and aircraft systems are all active. However, the data does not isolate CPU-bound vs. GPU-bound scenarios directly; the resolution scaling analysis below will clarify which component dominates at each setting.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture using TSMC's 5 nm process, with a chip designated AD104 containing 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. It features 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock is listed as 1313 MHz with 21 Gbps effective transfer rate. The GPU has a base clock of 1980 MHz and a boost clock of 2475 MHz. Its 7168 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 80 raster operation pipelines provide substantial fill rates: 198.0 GPixel/s pixel rate and 554.4 GTexel/s texture rate. The FP32 compute throughput is 35.48 TFLOPS, with FP16 also at 35.48 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio). The TDP is 220 W, requiring a 550 W suggested PSU and a single 16-pin power connector.

This GPU ranks in the 84th percentile among all tested graphics cards, with an average benchmark score of 42576. Its closest rival is the NVIDIA RTX A6000, which scores 42653 (0.2% higher). The AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE scores 42723 (0.3% higher), while the AMD Radeon Pro 580X trails by 1.4% at 41991, and the NVIDIA Tesla M40 is 1.6% lower at 41897. These deltas are small, placing the 4070 SUPER in a competitive mid-to-high tier.

For Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU's 12 GB VRAM is a critical factor. The game streams high-resolution textures for terrain, aircraft, and scenery, and the data shows that at 4K Ultra the combo achieves 58.3 FPS, which suggests the GPU is handling the load but not with much headroom. The 504.2 GB/s memory bandwidth helps when the game loads large texture batches during flight. The boost clock of 2475 MHz allows the GPU to push higher frame rates at lower resolutions, as evidenced by the 183.1 FPS at 1080p Low. The ray tracing cores (56) and tensor cores (224) are present, but the FACT PACK does not specify whether the game uses these features in the measured rows.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Intel Core i7-12700KF and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER ranks 299th out of 1795 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This puts it in the top 16.7% of all configurations tested (calculated as 299/1795). The rank reflects the balance between CPU and GPU: the 12700KF's 89th percentile CPU performance pairs with the 4070 SUPER's 84th percentile GPU performance. Neither component is a bottleneck at the extreme end, but the combo is not at the very top either, as higher-end GPUs like the RTX 4090 series (not in the FACT PACK) would likely rank higher.

The rank of 299 indicates that most of the 1795 combos tested are slower, but there are 298 configurations that outperform this pairing. This is consistent with the CPU's position among rivals: the 12700KF is nearly identical to the i5-14400, i7-13800H, and i9-12900HX in average benchmark scores, so the differentiation in game performance comes primarily from the GPU. The 4070 SUPER's rivals — the RTX A6000, RX 7650 GRE, Radeon Pro 580X, and Tesla M40 — cover a range of workstation and consumer cards, but none of those are top-tier gaming GPUs either.

The data shows that this combo is well-suited for high-refresh 1440p gaming and playable 4K at High settings. Being in the 299th spot out of 1795 means the combo outperforms roughly 83% of tested configurations, which is a strong result for a mid-to-high-tier pairing. The rank also implies that users with this combo can expect consistent performance across the game's demanding flight scenarios, though they may need to adjust settings for ultra-wide or multi-monitor setups (not in the FACT PACK).

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

At 1920x1080 (1080p), the combo delivers the following average FPS across four quality presets:

• Low: 183.1 FPS
• Medium: 140.7 FPS
• High: 109.2 FPS
• Ultra: 99.9 FPS

The spread from Low to Ultra is 83.2 FPS, showing that the game's settings have a significant impact on frame rate at this resolution. Even at Ultra, the combo stays above 99 FPS, which is smooth for a flight simulator where camera panning and terrain detail are constant.

At 2560x1440 (1440p), the measured results are:

• Low: 147.8 FPS
• Medium: 111.9 FPS
• High: 84.7 FPS
• Ultra: 79.9 FPS

The drop from 1080p to 1440p is noticeable but not dramatic. At Ultra, the combo loses 20.0 FPS (from 99.9 to 79.9), while at Low it loses 35.3 FPS (from 183.1 to 147.8). The game remains playable at all settings, with Ultra still above 79 FPS.

At 3840x2160 (4K), the measured results are:

• Low: 104.5 FPS
• Medium: 84.2 FPS
• High: 63.6 FPS
• Ultra: 58.3 FPS

At 4K Ultra, the combo dips to 58.3 FPS, which is just below the 60 FPS threshold for many users. At High, it reaches 63.6 FPS, which is playable but with less headroom. The Low preset at 4K still achieves 104.5 FPS, indicating that the GPU can handle 4K if the graphics load is reduced.

The data shows a consistent pattern: as resolution increases, the gap between Low and Ultra narrows. At 1080p, the difference is 83.2 FPS; at 1440p, it is 67.9 FPS; at 4K, it is 46.2 FPS. This suggests that at higher resolutions, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, reducing the relative impact of settings changes.

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

Examining the FPS drop from 1080p to 4K at each setting reveals which component is the bottleneck. At Low settings, the FPS drops from 183.1 (1080p) to 147.8 (1440p) to 104.5 (4K). The percentage drop from 1080p to 4K is approximately 42.9% (calculated as 1 - 104.5/183.1). At Medium settings, the FPS goes from 140.7 to 111.9 to 84.2, a drop of 40.2% from 1080p to 4K. At High settings, it goes from 109.2 to 84.7 to 63.6, a drop of 41.8%. At Ultra settings, it goes from 99.9 to 79.9 to 58.3, a drop of 41.6%.

The consistency of these drops — all around 40-43% — indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting factor when moving to higher resolutions. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS would stay relatively flat across resolutions because the CPU workload would not change much with pixel count. Instead, the FPS scales down as pixel count increases, which is a classic sign of GPU-bound performance. The 12 GB VRAM and 504.2 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for 4K, but the GPU's raw compute cannot maintain 60+ FPS at Ultra 4K, as shown by the 58.3 FPS result.

The fact that the CPU's benchmark scores are in the 89th percentile while the GPU's are in the 84th percentile also supports this interpretation. The CPU has enough headroom to feed the GPU at all resolutions, but the GPU's 35.48 TFLOPS of FP32 compute is the constraint at 4K Ultra. At 1080p, the CPU and GPU are more balanced, with the CPU able to push high frame rates above 180 FPS on Low.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For 1080p users, the Ultra preset at 99.9 FPS provides the best visual quality while staying comfortably above 60 FPS. The High preset at 109.2 FPS offers a marginal FPS improvement (9.3 FPS) with a slight visual downgrade, but Ultra is recommended for the best experience since the frame rate is still high.

For 1440p, the Ultra preset at 79.9 FPS is playable and delivers the highest fidelity. The High preset at 84.7 FPS is only 4.8 FPS faster, so Ultra is again the better choice for visual quality. If a user prioritizes frame rate above all, the Medium preset at 111.9 FPS offers a 32 FPS improvement over Ultra, but the visual compromise may not be worth it for a flight simulator where scenery detail matters.

For 4K, the situation is different. The Ultra preset at 58.3 FPS is just below the 60 FPS target, which could cause noticeable stutter on some displays. The High preset at 63.6 FPS reaches above 60 FPS and is the recommended choice for 4K. The Medium preset at 84.2 FPS provides a substantial frame rate boost (20.6 FPS over High) and is a strong option for users who want smoother motion at 4K. The Low preset at 104.5 FPS is only recommended for users with high-refresh 4K monitors who prioritize speed over visuals.

Across all resolutions, the data shows that the High preset is the most balanced option, offering a consistent frame rate above 60 FPS at every resolution (63.6 FPS at 4K, 84.7 FPS at 1440p, 109.2 FPS at 1080p). For the best overall experience, the High preset at 4K or the Ultra preset at 1440p are the standout choices. Users with 1080p displays can safely run Ultra, while 4K users should drop to High to maintain smoothness. The Medium preset is a good fallback for 4K users who want higher frame rates without going to Low.