Microsoft Flight Simulator

# FAQ

Q: What is the comboRankInGame for this Intel Core Ultra 5 125H + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 pairing in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: This combination ranks 917th out of 2996 tested combos, placing it in the 69th percentile of all tested system configurations for this game.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 125H posts an average benchmark score of 27507, which is effectively tied with the AMD Ryzen 7 5800 (27535, -0.1% delta) and the Intel Core i5-12600K (27578, -0.3% delta). It sits 0.5% above the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355G (27382).

Q: What is the GPU's percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 holds an 86th percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 54247. Its closest rival is the RTX 4080 SUPER at 54209 (0.1% delta), while the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X trails at 54828 (-1.1% delta).

Q: What is the maximum average FPS recorded in the measured data?

A: The highest average FPS is 151, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. The same resolution with Medium settings produces 118 FPS, while High and Ultra produce 88 and 84 FPS respectively.

Q: How much VRAM does the GPU have and what memory type does it use?

A: The RTX 4080 features 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 716.8 GB/s. The memory clock runs at 1400 MHz with 22.4 Gbps effective data rate.

Q: What are the CPU's core and thread counts?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 125H has 14 cores and 18 threads, with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. It belongs to the Core Ultra Series 1 (Meteor Lake architecture) and is built on Intel's 7 nm process.

# GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 serves as the primary rendering engine in this Microsoft Flight Simulator configuration, and its 16 GB of GDDR6X memory proves substantial for the game's demanding scenery streaming. The 716.8 GB/s memory bandwidth allows the GPU to feed its 9728 shading units efficiently, particularly when loading high-resolution terrain textures and aircraft models. The 256-bit memory bus width combined with the effective 22.4 Gbps data rate means texture-heavy scenes at 4K resolution remain within the GPU's memory capacity without spilling to system RAM.

Clock speeds play a direct role in the observed frame rates. The base clock of 2205 MHz and boost clock of 2505 MHz represent the GPU's operating envelope, and the data suggests that thermal and power headroom (320 W TDP) allow sustained boost behavior during flight simulation sessions. The Ada Lovelace architecture, built on TSMC's 5 nm process with 45,900 million transistors across a 379 mm² die, delivers 48.74 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. This raw compute power directly influences the pixel rate of 280.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 761.5 GTexel/s, both of which are critical for rendering the game's detailed cockpit instruments and ground scenery.

The GPU's 76 ray tracing cores and 304 tensor cores are relevant for Microsoft Flight Simulator's optional ray-traced shadows and reflections. Benchmark results indicate the GPU achieves a Passmark G3D score of 34457, ranking it in the 86th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the RTX 4080 SUPER, scores 54209 on average — a mere 0.1% difference — suggesting the two cards perform nearly identically in synthetic workloads. The data shows diminishing returns from the RTX 4080's 16 GB VRAM at 1080p, where the CPU appears to become the limiting factor; however, at 4K resolution, the GPU's memory capacity and bandwidth become essential for maintaining playable frame rates.

# Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear resolution scaling pattern that shifts the bottleneck between CPU and GPU. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the system achieves 151 FPS, which drops to 122 FPS at 2560x1440 (a 19% reduction) and further to 90 FPS at 3840x2160 (a 40% reduction from 1080p). This scaling behavior at Low settings suggests the CPU remains heavily involved even at lower graphical loads, as the 14-core, 18-thread Intel Core Ultra 5 125H must process flight dynamics, AI traffic, and world simulation data alongside the GPU's rendering tasks.

Medium settings show a similar pattern: 118 FPS at 1080p, 95 FPS at 1440p (a 19% drop), and 70 FPS at 4K (a 41% drop from 1080p). The consistent percentage reductions across Low and Medium settings indicate that resolution scaling affects performance proportionally, with the GPU becoming increasingly dominant as pixel count rises. However, the absolute frame rates remain high enough that the GPU is not severely constrained at any resolution tested.

High settings tell a different story. The system produces 88 FPS at 1080p, 71 FPS at 1440p (a 19% drop), and 53 FPS at 4K (a 40% drop from 1080p). The nearly identical percentage drops across all settings suggest that resolution scaling follows a predictable curve for this game, regardless of graphical preset. Ultra settings follow suit: 84 FPS at 1080p, 68 FPS at 1440p (a 19% drop), and 50 FPS at 4K (a 40% drop).

This consistency implies that Microsoft Flight Simulator's rendering pipeline scales linearly with pixel count, and the RTX 4080's 16 GB VRAM prevents any memory-related stutters or texture thrashing at higher resolutions. The 4K Ultra result of 50 FPS indicates the GPU is approaching its limits with maximum settings, but the 4K Low result of 90 FPS shows there is ample headroom when graphical fidelity is reduced.

# Measured FPS Breakdown

3840x2160 (4K): The data shows a clear progression across settings. Low settings produce 90 FPS average, Medium settings deliver 70 FPS with a minimum of 59 and maximum of 80 FPS, High settings achieve 53 FPS, and Ultra settings drop to 50 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 20 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is only 3 FPS, suggesting that Ultra settings impose diminishing returns on visual quality while consuming additional GPU resources.

2560x1440 (1440p): Low settings reach 122 FPS, Medium settings deliver 95 FPS with a range of 81-109 FPS, High settings produce 71 FPS, and Ultra settings achieve 68 FPS. The 27 FPS difference between Low and Medium is notable, while the 3 FPS difference between High and Ultra mirrors the 4K pattern. At this resolution, all settings except Ultra remain comfortably above 70 FPS, making 1440p a sweet spot for high refresh rate displays.

1920x1080 (1080p): Low settings hit 151 FPS, Medium settings produce 118 FPS with a range of 100-135 FPS, High settings achieve 88 FPS, and Ultra settings deliver 84 FPS. The 33 FPS drop from Low to Medium is the largest single-setting gap in the entire dataset, indicating that Medium settings introduce significant additional rendering work. The 4 FPS difference between High and Ultra is the smallest gap across all resolutions, reinforcing that Ultra settings offer marginal gains over High.

Across all resolutions, Medium settings consistently show the widest min-max FPS ranges (20-27 FPS), while Low, High, and Ultra settings lack reported minimum and maximum values, suggesting more stable frame pacing at those presets. The 4K Ultra result of 50 FPS is the lowest average in the dataset, yet it remains playable for a flight simulator where frame rates above 30 FPS are generally acceptable.

# Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the Medium preset offers the best balance of visual quality and performance across all three resolutions. At 1080p, Medium produces 118 FPS with a minimum of 100 FPS, ensuring smooth gameplay even during complex scenery loads. At 1440p, Medium delivers 95 FPS with an 81 FPS minimum, which remains well above the threshold for fluid camera movement and instrument scanning. At 4K, Medium achieves 70 FPS with a 59 FPS minimum, providing a stable experience for users with 60 Hz displays.

High settings reduce performance by approximately 25-27% compared to Medium across all resolutions: 88 FPS at 1080p, 71 FPS at 1440p, and 53 FPS at 4K. The visual improvement from Medium to High is not quantified in the data, but the frame rate cost is significant. Ultra settings offer only marginal gains over High — 4 FPS at 1080p, 3 FPS at 1440p, and 3 FPS at 4K — making Ultra the least efficient preset in terms of performance per visual step.

For users prioritizing maximum frame rates, Low settings at 1080p provides 151 FPS, which exceeds the refresh rate of most standard monitors. However, the visual compromise is substantial. The data suggests that Medium at 1440p (95 FPS) provides nearly the same performance as High at 1080p (88 FPS) while offering higher resolution, making it the recommended configuration for users with 1440p displays. For 4K users, Medium at 70 FPS is the optimal choice, as High drops to 53 FPS and Ultra to 50 FPS — both approaching the threshold where frame rate variability becomes noticeable during fast maneuvers.

# CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 125H's 14 cores and 18 threads are directly relevant to Microsoft Flight Simulator's simulation workload, which includes flight dynamics calculations, weather system updates, AI aircraft pathfinding, and world data streaming. The CPU's 18 MB of shared L3 cache, combined with 2 MB L2 cache per core and 112 KB L1 cache per core, provides ample fast storage for the game's frequently accessed simulation data. The 3.60 GHz base clock and 4.50 GHz boost clock allow the CPU to handle both single-threaded physics calculations and multi-threaded world generation tasks.

Benchmark results show the CPU achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12804.5 and a single-core score of 1647.5, placing it in the 79th percentile of all CPUs. Its Passmark multi-thread score of 21100 and single-thread score of 3399 further confirm its balanced performance profile. The CPU's nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 7 5800, scores 27535 on average — just 0.1% higher than the Intel part's 27507. This near-identical performance suggests that users upgrading between these CPUs would see negligible differences in Microsoft Flight Simulator's CPU-bound sections.

The 28 W TDP and mobile market segment indicate this CPU is designed for laptops, yet its performance rivals desktop parts from the same era. The dual-channel DDR5 memory support with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth provides sufficient memory throughput for the game's streaming world data, though the 18 MB L3 cache is modest compared to some desktop competitors. At 1080p with Low settings, the 151 FPS result indicates the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU at high frame rates, but the drop to 84 FPS at Ultra settings suggests the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck as graphical load increases.

The CPU's 7 nm Meteor Lake architecture, released December 2023, includes integrated Arc Xe-LPG 96EU graphics, but the discrete RTX 4080 handles all rendering duties in this configuration. The CPU's Passmark data compression score of 236209 and floating point math score of 51670 indicate strong computational throughput for the game's physics calculations.

# How This Combo Ranks

The comboRankInGame of 917 out of 2996 tested combinations places this Intel Core Ultra 5 125H + RTX 4080 pairing in the upper 69% of all tested systems for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This ranking reflects the combined capabilities of both components, and the data suggests the GPU contributes more significantly to the overall ranking than the CPU. The RTX 4080's 86th percentile GPU ranking is notably higher than the CPU's 79th percentile ranking, indicating the GPU is the stronger component in this pairing.

Comparing to other potential combinations, the CPU's near-identical performance to the AMD Ryzen 7 5800 (0.1% delta) and Intel Core i5-12600K (0.3% delta) suggests that pairing the RTX 4080 with any of these CPUs would yield similar results. The GPU's closest rival, the RTX 4080 SUPER, performs within 0.1% of the standard 4080, meaning users with either card would see virtually identical frame rates in this game.

The 2996 total tested combos represent a wide range of hardware configurations, and ranking 917th indicates this system outperforms roughly 69% of tested setups. However, the ranking also implies that 917 combinations achieve better performance, likely featuring higher-end CPUs or more recent GPU generations. The 4K Ultra result of 50 FPS and 1080p Low result of 151 FPS bracket the system's performance envelope, showing that while it cannot max out the game at 4K, it delivers excellent frame rates at more moderate settings.

The gap between CPU and GPU percentiles (79th vs 86th) suggests that upgrading the CPU would provide diminishing returns for this game, as the GPU is already the limiting factor at higher resolutions. Conversely, upgrading the GPU would yield more significant gains, particularly at 4K Ultra where the 50 FPS result indicates the GPU is nearing its limits. The data ultimately shows a well-balanced pairing where the RTX 4080's strengths compensate for the mobile CPU's relatively modest performance, resulting in a system that handles Microsoft Flight Simulator competently across all tested resolutions and settings.