Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is a uniquely demanding title, and the benchmark data for the Intel Core i9-14900K paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 reveals a system that is pushed hard even at the top end. The measured frames per second (FPS) across resolutions and settings tell a story of a GPU that is the primary driver of performance, but with a CPU that still has a significant role to play in the simulation's complex world. The data indicates this is an exceptionally high-performing combination, ranking in the 81st spot out of 3714 tested combos, placing it within the top 2.2% of all configurations in this game.

Resolution Scaling

The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is substantial and clearly demonstrates where the bottleneck lies. At the High preset, the average FPS falls from 136 at 1920x1080 to 110 at 2560x1440, a reduction of 19.1%. Moving to 3840x2160, the average FPS drops to 81, a further 26.4% decrease from the 1440p figure. This steep decline as resolution increases is the classic signature of a GPU-bound scenario; the RTX 4090 is being tasked with rendering an increasing number of pixels, and its workload scales accordingly.

The scaling pattern is consistent across all settings presets. At Low, the system achieves 233 FPS at 1080p, which falls to 188 FPS at 1440p (a 19.3% drop) and then to 138 FPS at 4K (a 26.6% drop from 1440p). Similarly, the Medium preset sees averages of 181, 146, and 108 FPS across the three resolutions. This uniform percentage drop across different quality levels strongly suggests that the limiting factor is the GPU's raw rendering throughput rather than a specific setting like shadows or textures. The data implies that the RTX 4090 is the component that is being fully utilized, and its performance ceiling is what determines the final frame rate at higher resolutions.

This behavior is expected for a flight simulator, which often has vast draw distances and dense scenery. The 4K Ultra result of 77 FPS is notably lower than the 1080p Ultra result of 130 FPS, representing a 40.8% performance hit. This significant penalty highlights that users seeking the highest visual fidelity at 4K will be operating near the limits of even this flagship GPU. The data suggests that for a smooth 60+ FPS experience at 4K, the High preset is the most demanding setting that can be comfortably maintained, while the Ultra preset pushes the average down to 77 FPS, which might be acceptable but leaves less headroom for demanding scenes.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 is clearly the workhorse in this configuration for Microsoft Flight Simulator. Its 24 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 384-bit bus provides a massive 1.01 TB/s of bandwidth. This is likely a critical factor for a game that streams vast amounts of terrain and texture data, as the high bandwidth allows for quick loading of assets without stuttering. The benchmark results, particularly the steep FPS drops at higher resolutions, underscore that the GPU's compute and memory resources are the primary constraint.

With a boost clock of 2520 MHz and 16384 shading units, the RTX 4090's raw processing power is immense, capable of 82.58 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. The data shows that even with this power, the simulator can push the card to its limits. The 4K Medium result of 108 FPS with a minimum of 92 FPS suggests that the card is consistently working hard, and the variance between the average and minimum frames indicates that complex scenes can cause momentary dips. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 9223 and the Passmark G3D score of 38194, while not game-specific, corroborate the card's top-tier standing in synthetic benchmarks.

The GPU's performance is also reflected in its percentile ranking, where it sits at the 88th percentile against all GPUs. This is a high score, but notably not the very top, which suggests that there are a few other cards that can outperform it in some synthetic tests. However, within the context of this game, the 4090's combination of massive memory bandwidth and compute power makes it the dominant force. The data shows that the 4K resolution results are separated by a clear margin from the 1440p results, reinforcing that the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth are the defining factors for performance at higher resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i9-14900K and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 combination ranks 81st out of 3714 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the top 2.18% of all systems that have been benchmarked with this game, which is an outstanding result. This high ranking is not surprising given the caliber of the components involved, but it does confirm that this pairing is exceptionally well-suited for this particular simulator.

Examining the individual components' benchmark scores provides context. The CPU's average benchmark score is 79097, placing it in the 95th percentile against all CPUs. Its nearest rivals, such as the Intel Core i9-14900KF (with a -0.3% delta) and the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus (with a -0.6% delta), are extremely close in performance, indicating the 14900K is at the very top of the consumer CPU hierarchy. The GPU's average benchmark score is 60347, which is in the 88th percentile, with its nearest rival, the Intel Arc Pro A60, having a 0% delta. This shows that in the broader benchmark database, the RTX 4090's average score is not the absolute highest, but it is still a top-tier performer.

The disparity between the CPU's 95th percentile ranking and the GPU's 88th percentile ranking, combined with the game's FPS scaling, suggests that the GPU is the limiting factor in this pairing. The CPU has more headroom relative to its peers than the GPU does. The combo's rank of 81 out of 3714 reflects the overall balance and power of the system, but the data indicates that the RTX 4090 is the component that will determine the final playable frame rates, especially at higher resolutions and settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of the system's capabilities at each resolution and settings combination. At 1920x1080, the system is incredibly fast, with the Low preset achieving an average of 233 FPS. The Medium preset delivers 181 FPS with a minimum of 154 FPS, while the High preset reaches 136 FPS. The Ultra preset, which is the most demanding, still manages a very playable 130 FPS. This indicates that at 1080p, the system is not significantly constrained by the GPU, and the CPU's high single-thread performance is sufficient to feed the frames.

Moving to 2560x1440, the averages remain high. Low produces 188 FPS, Medium 146 FPS (with a minimum of 124 FPS), High 110 FPS, and Ultra 105 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra at this resolution is only 5 FPS, suggesting that the Ultra preset's extra settings do not cause a proportional performance penalty. At 3840x2160, the performance drops more noticeably. Low averages 138 FPS, Medium 108 FPS (with a minimum of 92 FPS), High 81 FPS, and Ultra 77 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra at 4K is just 4 FPS, which is within a margin of error and suggests a different bottleneck, or that the Ultra settings are not heavily impacting the GPU at this point.

The data shows a clear trend: the performance difference between the High and Ultra presets shrinks as resolution increases. At 1080p, the gap is 6 FPS; at 1440p, it is 5 FPS; and at 4K, it is 4 FPS. This narrowing gap suggests that at higher resolutions, the GPU's pixel throughput becomes the dominant constraint, and the additional load from the Ultra settings is relatively smaller. Conversely, the difference between Low and Medium presets remains significant across all resolutions, indicating that the Medium preset introduces a substantial increase in GPU workload compared to Low.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i9-14900K, with its 24 cores (8 performance and 16 efficiency) and 32 threads, is a powerhouse for multi-threaded workloads, as evidenced by its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 39399.5. However, Microsoft Flight Simulator is known to be heavily dependent on single-thread performance. The CPU's strong single-core results, such as a Geekbench single-core score of 2655 and a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2262.5, are likely crucial for maintaining stable frame rates in this simulation.

The data from the measured FPS suggests that while the GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions, the CPU is still a vital component. At 1080p, where the GPU load is lower, the CPU's ability to process game logic, AI, and physics becomes more apparent. The high frame rates at 1080p (e.g., 233 FPS on Low) demonstrate that the CPU is capable of keeping up with the GPU, preventing it from becoming a limiting factor at lower resolutions. The CPU's 125W TDP and boost clock of 6.00 GHz indicate a high-power, high-performance part designed for demanding tasks.

The CPU's performance is also reflected in its benchmark scores, such as a Passmark multithread score of 58674 and a Passmark single-thread score of 4697. Its nearest rivals, including the Intel Core i9-14900KF with a negligible -0.3% difference, highlight that this CPU is essentially at the top of its class. In the context of this game, the data implies that the CPU provides a solid foundation, ensuring that the GPU is not starved of data, but it is not the component that will be pushed to its absolute limit when the resolution is increased to 4K.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combination depend heavily on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For users with a 1920x1080 display, the Ultra preset is a clear recommendation, as it delivers an average of 130 FPS, which is well above the threshold for smooth gameplay. The High preset at 136 FPS offers a slight performance increase, but the visual fidelity of Ultra is likely worth the minor frame rate difference.

At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset provides an average of 105 FPS, which is still excellent for a flight simulator. The High preset at 110 FPS is also viable, but the difference is small. For those with high refresh rate 1440p monitors, the Medium preset at 146 FPS would be the best choice to maximize smoothness, but the visual trade-off from Ultra is significant. The data suggests that High is the most balanced preset at 1440p, offering a good compromise between visual quality and performance.

For 4K (3840x2160), the data points to the High preset as the best option for a consistently smooth experience, with an average of 81 FPS. The Ultra preset at 77 FPS is still playable, but the minimum frame rate data is not available for this setting, which could be a concern for stuttering in complex scenes. The Medium preset at 108 FPS is the best option for a very stable, high-refresh-rate experience at 4K, but it requires a reduction in visual fidelity. Given that the gap between High and Ultra is only 4 FPS at 4K, choosing High is a sensible recommendation, as it likely provides most of the visual benefits of Ultra with less risk of performance dips.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this CPU and GPU combo in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The data shows that 2560x1440 offers the best balance, with the High preset achieving 110 FPS and Ultra achieving 105 FPS. At 4K, the Ultra preset drops to 77 FPS, which is lower but still playable, while 1080p provides the highest frame rates but does not utilize the GPU's full potential.

Q: How does this combo's performance rank against other tested systems?

A: This specific combination of the Intel Core i9-14900K and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 ranks 81st out of 3714 tested combos in this game, placing it in the top 2.2% of all systems benchmarked.

Q: Is the CPU or the GPU the main bottleneck in this game?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the primary limiting factor, especially at higher resolutions. The FPS drops significantly from 1080p to 4K, which is characteristic of a GPU-bound workload. The CPU's performance is sufficient to support high frame rates at 1080p, but it is not the constraint at 4K.

Q: What is the difference in performance between the High and Ultra settings at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, the average FPS drops from 81 on High to 77 on Ultra, a difference of only 4 FPS. This is a very small margin, suggesting that the Ultra preset does not impose a significantly heavier load on the GPU at this resolution.

Q: What is the lowest average FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The lowest average FPS recorded in the data is 77 FPS, which occurs at the 3840x2160 resolution with the Ultra settings preset. This is still a playable frame rate, but it indicates the system is being pushed to its limit.

Q: Are there any measured minimum FPS values for the High or Ultra presets?

A: In the provided data, minimum FPS values are only recorded for the Medium preset at each resolution. For example, at 4K Medium, the minimum is 92 FPS, and at 1440p Medium, it is 124 FPS. No minimum FPS data is available for the High or Ultra settings.