Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator presents one of the most demanding real-time workloads in PC gaming, and this combination of the Intel Core i7-13700K and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 yields a dataset that reveals clear performance hierarchies. The measured frames per second across resolutions and settings show a system capable of high refresh rates at 1080p and firmly playable, smooth experiences at 4K. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS data, contextualizes the hardware's standing among tested combos, and interprets what the numbers indicate about the balance between CPU and GPU responsibilities in this specific simulator.

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

The Intel Core i7-13700K is a 16-core, 24-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. Its cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 30 MB L3 cache. This configuration places it in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 47282. In synthetic tests, it scores 39000 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 5505 in single-core, while Geekbench results show 17731 multicore and 2850 single-core. The Passmark multithread score is 45887, with a single-thread score of 4333.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is heavily tied to simulation logic, physics, and draw-call preparation, which benefit from high single-thread performance and substantial multicore headroom. The 5.40 GHz boost clock is critical for maintaining frame pacing in dense urban areas or complex weather scenarios, where the simulation thread can become a bottleneck. The data shows that at 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves 226.5 FPS, which is a strong indicator that the CPU can feed the GPU effectively at lower graphical loads. However, the gap between Low and Ultra settings at the same resolution (226.5 FPS vs. 135.8 FPS) suggests that while the CPU is capable, the game's engine still scales significantly with GPU load, even at 1080p. The 16-core, 24-thread layout ensures that background tasks, AI traffic, and scenery streaming do not starve the main simulation threads, which is reflected in the stable performance across different settings presets.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific pairing of the Core i7-13700K and RTX 5090 ranks 7th out of 1795 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This is an exceptional standing, placing it in the top 0.4% of all recorded configurations. The rank underscores that this combination is near the pinnacle of what the game can utilize, though the data also implies that there are a handful of other CPU-GPU pairings that deliver slightly higher average frame rates. The CPU's nearest rivals in overall benchmark scores include the Intel Core i7-13700KF, which is 0.1% faster, and the AMD EPYC 4364P, which is 0.3% slower. The Intel Core i9-12900F is 0.4% slower, while the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 5945 is 0.5% faster. These deltas are minimal, indicating that the 13700K is positioned in a tightly contested performance bracket. For the GPU, the RTX 5090's nearest rivals include the RTX 5090 D, which is 0.1% faster, and the RTX 5050 Mobile, which is 0.2% faster. The AMD Radeon PRO W6600 is 1.3% slower, and the NVIDIA CMP 40HX is 1.6% slower. The top-7 ranking suggests that the combination's performance is driven by both components working in concert, as the game is known to be sensitive to both CPU and GPU capabilities.

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

Q: What is the highest average frame rate recorded for this combo?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 226.5, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: How does the combo perform at 4K Ultra settings?

A: At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the combo delivers an average of 78.1 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth playability but lower than the 81 FPS seen at High settings.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more likely to be the limiting factor at 1080p?

A: The data suggests the CPU is more limiting at 1080p, as the FPS drops from 226.5 at Low to 135.8 at Ultra, a 40% reduction, indicating that the GPU becomes more engaged as settings increase, but the CPU still holds back the absolute maximum frame rate.

Q: What is the performance difference between 1440p High and 4K High?

A: At 2560x1440 with High settings, the average FPS is 112.6, while at 3840x2160 with High settings, it drops to 81. This represents a 28% performance decrease when moving from 1440p to 4K.

Q: How does the combo's rank in this game compare to its overall hardware percentile?

A: The combo ranks 7th out of 1795 tested combos in this game, which is a higher relative standing than either component's individual percentile (CPU is 93rd, GPU is 94th), suggesting that the pairing is particularly well-suited for Microsoft Flight Simulator.

Q: What is the average FPS difference between Low and Medium settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Low settings yield 194.1 FPS, while Medium settings yield 152.4 FPS, a difference of 41.7 FPS, showing a significant scaling cost for modest visual improvements.

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

The measured data provides a complete matrix of performance across four resolution and four settings configurations. At 1920x1080, the combo achieves 226.5 FPS on Low, 188.8 FPS on Medium, 140.2 FPS on High, and 135.8 FPS on Ultra. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 1080p shows a 40% reduction in frame rate, with the most significant drop occurring between Medium and High (188.8 to 140.2, a 25.7% decrease). At 2560x1440, the results are 194.1 FPS on Low, 152.4 FPS on Medium, 112.6 FPS on High, and 107 FPS on Ultra. The drop from Low to Ultra at 1440p is 44.9%, with the High to Ultra transition being minimal (112.6 to 107, a 5% decrease), indicating diminishing returns at the highest settings. At 3840x2160, the frame rates are 137.9 FPS on Low, 107.5 FPS on Medium, 81 FPS on High, and 78.1 FPS on Ultra. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 4K is 43.4%, with the Medium to High drop being the most substantial (107.5 to 81, a 24.7% decrease). Across all resolutions, the Ultra preset consistently delivers the lowest frame rates, but the gap between High and Ultra narrows as resolution increases, suggesting that at 4K, the GPU is nearing its limits regardless of the slight settings change.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with a 5 nm process node from TSMC, featuring 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die. It comes with 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus, delivering a bandwidth of 1.79 TB/s. The GPU's base clock is 2017 MHz with a boost clock of 2407 MHz, and memory runs at 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective). It has 21760 shading units, 680 TMUs, and 176 ROPs, with 170 ray tracing cores. The FP32 performance is 104.8 TFLOPS, and the pixel rate is 423.6 GPixel/s. In synthetic benchmarks, the RTX 5090 scores 39650 in Passmark G3D and 26756 in Passmark GPU Compute, with a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 14411. It sits in the 94th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 84306.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU's role is primarily to render the vast, detailed terrain, dynamic lighting, and cloud systems. The 32 GB VRAM is a notable asset, as the game can load high-resolution textures across large areas without stuttering. The data shows that at 4K Ultra, the combo maintains 78.1 FPS, which is a strong result given the game's complexity. The GPU's boost clock of 2407 MHz is crucial for sustaining high frame rates at 4K, where the pixel throughput demand is immense. The 1.79 TB/s memory bandwidth ensures that texture streaming from VRAM to the render pipeline does not become a bottleneck, particularly when flying at high speeds over photogrammetry data. The benchmark results indicate that the RTX 5090 is not the limiting factor at 1080p or 1440p, as the FPS scales significantly with settings, but at 4K Ultra, the GPU's workload becomes more balanced with the CPU's output.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings preset depends on the target resolution and desired frame rate. At 1920x1080, the High preset delivers 140.2 FPS, which is well above the 120 FPS threshold for competitive play, while Ultra drops to 135.8 FPS, a marginal difference of 3.2%. The data suggests that for 1080p, the Ultra preset is viable without significant performance cost, offering the best visual fidelity while maintaining high frame rates. At 2560x1440, the High preset achieves 112.6 FPS, while Ultra delivers 107 FPS. The difference is only 5%, so Ultra is also recommended here for users with high-refresh-rate monitors, as it stays above 100 FPS. At 3840x2160, the situation changes. High settings yield 81 FPS, while Ultra drops to 78.1 FPS. The 3.6% difference is negligible, and both are above 60 FPS, making Ultra the best choice for 4K users who prioritize visual immersion over the slight frame rate gain. The Medium preset at 4K offers 107.5 FPS, which is a significant 32.7% increase over High, but the visual quality trade-off may not be worth it for a simulator where realism is paramount. The data indicates that for the best balance of performance and visuals, the High preset at 1080p is the "sweet spot," but for maximum quality, Ultra is recommended at all resolutions, as the FPS penalty is consistently under 5% when compared to High.

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

Examining the scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals the classic transition from a CPU-bound to a GPU-bound workload. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 226.5 at 1080p to 137.9 at 4K, a 39.1% reduction. This indicates that even at the lowest graphical settings, the GPU is still heavily taxed by the resolution increase. At Medium settings, the drop is from 188.8 to 107.5, a 43.1% reduction, showing that the GPU's workload scales almost linearly with pixel count. At High settings, the FPS goes from 140.2 at 1080p to 81 at 4K, a 42.2% reduction. Finally, at Ultra settings, the drop is from 135.8 to 78.1, a 42.5% reduction. The consistency of these reductions across all settings presets—hovering around 40-43%—strongly suggests that the RTX 5090 is the primary limiting factor when moving to 4K. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect the FPS to remain closer to the 1080p values at 4K, as the resolution increase would not affect the CPU's simulation workload. The fact that FPS drops proportionally with resolution indicates that the GPU is fully saturated at all settings when the pixel count increases. Conversely, at 1080p, the relatively small gap between High (140.2 FPS) and Ultra (135.8 FPS), combined with the large gap between Medium (188.8 FPS) and High (140.2 FPS), suggests that the CPU is capable of driving high frame rates, but the GPU's rendering pipeline becomes the constraint as settings increase. This data implies that for users seeking higher frame rates at 4K, reducing resolution to 1440p offers a 40-50% FPS boost, depending on settings, which is a more effective lever than lowering graphical presets. The scaling pattern confirms that Microsoft Flight Simulator is a well-balanced workload for this hardware combination, with neither component overwhelmingly dominating the performance profile at any single resolution.