Microsoft Flight Simulator

# How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT lands at rank 2210 out of 2996 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator. That places this combo in the 26th percentile of all tested systems, meaning roughly three-quarters of configurations deliver higher average frame rates in this title. The ranking reflects a pairing where the GPU, a 2019-era RDNA 1.0 part, is the primary constraint at higher resolutions, while the CPU, a 2025 Arrow Lake desktop chip, provides ample headroom.

Benchmark results indicate this is a mid-to-low tier combination for a flight simulator that is notoriously demanding on both processor and graphics hardware. The combo's position in the database stems from measured data, not extrapolation, and it suggests that users seeking smooth 4K experiences will need to make significant settings concessions. At 1080p, the system performs respectably, but the ranking is dragged down by steep performance drops as resolution increases. The CPU's 85th percentile standing among all processors contrasts sharply with the GPU's 59th percentile, and the measured FPS data reflects that imbalance — the processor is rarely the bottleneck in this configuration.

# GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its clocks are specified at 1605 MHz base, 1755 MHz game, and 1905 MHz boost, with memory running at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The GPU houses 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs, with a pixel rate of 121.9 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 304.8 GTexel/s. Compute throughput is rated at 9.754 TFLOPS FP32 and 19.51 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). The card uses a dual-slot design, requires 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 550 W.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU's role is decisive at higher resolutions. The measured data shows the card's limits clearly: at 4K Ultra, the average FPS drops to 33, which is below playable thresholds for most users. Even at 4K High, the average is only 34 FPS. The 8 GB VRAM capacity is a potential concern for a game that streams vast terrain and photogrammetry data, though the measured results do not explicitly indicate VRAM exhaustion. The GPU's 59th percentile ranking among all graphics cards places it in the lower half, and its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M (0.1% higher average score) and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell (-0.3% delta), which shows how tight the competitive cluster is around this performance tier.

The RX 5700 XT's RDNA 1.0 architecture lacks dedicated ray tracing cores, and while Microsoft Flight Simulator does not heavily rely on ray tracing in its default rendering paths, the absence of that hardware places it at a disadvantage in newer titles. The GPU's DirectX 12 (12_1) support and Vulkan 1.4 API compatibility are sufficient for this game, but the measured FPS at 4K indicates that the card is simply outclassed for high-resolution flight simulation. At 1080p Low, the card delivers 98 FPS, showing its capability at lower loads, but the scaling curve is steep and unforgiving.

# Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of resolution-dependent performance. At 1080p, the combo delivers 98 FPS on Low, 77 FPS on Medium (with min/max of 65/88), 58 FPS on High, and 55 FPS on Ultra. Moving to 1440p, those numbers drop to 79 FPS on Low, 62 FPS on Medium (min/max 52/71), 46 FPS on High, and 44 FPS on Ultra. At 4K, the averages fall to 59 FPS on Low, 46 FPS on Medium (min/max 39/52), 34 FPS on High, and 33 FPS on Ultra.

The scaling from 1080p to 4K at each settings tier shows a consistent drop of roughly 40-45% in average FPS. For example, on Low settings, the system goes from 98 FPS at 1080p to 59 FPS at 4K, a reduction of about 40%. On High settings, the drop is from 58 FPS to 34 FPS, a 41% decrease. On Ultra, 55 FPS becomes 33 FPS, a 40% reduction. This consistent percentage drop across settings tiers indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor — the workload scales nearly linearly with pixel count, and the RX 5700 XT cannot keep pace at higher resolutions.

The data suggests that the CPU is not a bottleneck at any resolution tested. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225, with its 10 cores and 10 threads, provides sufficient processing power to feed the GPU even at 4K, where the frame rate is constrained by the graphics card's fill rate and shader throughput. The fact that FPS drops proportionally with resolution — rather than plateauing at a CPU-limited ceiling — confirms that the GPU is the performance limiter. At 1080p Low, the 98 FPS result shows the ceiling of what this GPU can achieve in this title, and it is unlikely that a faster CPU would meaningfully improve that number.

# FAQ

Q: What is the best average FPS this combo achieves in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The highest measured average FPS is 98, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. At Medium settings, the average drops to 77 FPS, and at High it is 58 FPS, with Ultra at 55 FPS.

Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: At 4K, the average FPS ranges from 59 on Low settings to 33 on Ultra. The Medium preset yields 46 FPS with a minimum of 39 FPS, which is borderline playable, but High and Ultra presets fall below 35 FPS, making them unsuitable for smooth gameplay.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 has an average benchmark score of 36938, placing it at 85th percentile among all CPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F, scores 36945, a delta of 0%. The AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D is 0.2% lower, and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 is 0.4% lower.

Q: What is the GPU's synthetic benchmark standing relative to its peers?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT has an average benchmark score of 16361, ranking at the 59th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M, scores 16351 (0.1% higher), while the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell scores 16408 (-0.3% delta).

Q: Which resolution and settings combo provides the most balanced experience?

A: The data suggests 1080p Medium is a strong choice, with 77 FPS average and a minimum of 65 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the average is 62 FPS with a minimum of 52 FPS, which is also acceptable for most users seeking higher resolution.

Q: Is there a significant FPS difference between High and Ultra settings at any resolution?

A: The difference is minimal. At 1080p, High averages 58 FPS and Ultra averages 55 FPS, a 3 FPS gap. At 1440p, the gap narrows to 2 FPS (46 vs 44), and at 4K, it is just 1 FPS (34 vs 33). This indicates that the Ultra preset adds visual fidelity without a proportional FPS cost in this particular game scenario.

# Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and acceptable frame rates. For 1080p gaming, the Medium preset delivers 77 FPS on average with a minimum of 65 FPS, providing a smooth experience with good visual quality. The High preset at 58 FPS is still playable, but the jump from Medium to High only yields a modest visual improvement while costing 19 FPS. Ultra at 55 FPS offers negligible gains over High, making it an inefficient choice for this hardware.

At 1440p, the Medium preset is the recommended sweet spot, with 62 FPS average and 52 FPS minimum. This provides a stable experience for a flight simulator where smooth panning and terrain rendering are critical. The High preset at 46 FPS is acceptable but begins to show stutter in dense scenery, and Ultra at 44 FPS is not worth the extra load. For users who prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate, High at 1440p may be tolerable, but the data suggests Medium is the safer choice.

For 4K, the situation is more challenging. The Low preset yields 59 FPS, which is the only 4K setting that approaches playable smoothness. Medium drops to 46 FPS with a minimum of 39 FPS, which can cause noticeable hitches during complex maneuvers or over detailed terrain. High and Ultra at 34 and 33 FPS respectively are not recommended for anything other than static screenshots. The data indicates that this combo is not suited for 4K flight simulation unless users are willing to compromise heavily on visual quality.

The measured data reveals that the FPS difference between High and Ultra is consistently small across all resolutions — just 3 FPS at 1080p, 2 FPS at 1440p, and 1 FPS at 4K. This suggests that the Ultra preset's additional settings (likely higher shadow quality, draw distance, and texture filtering) have minimal impact on this particular GPU, making High a more efficient choice. The Medium preset offers the best balance of frame rate and visual quality for most users, particularly at 1080p and 1440p.

# CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 is a 10-core, 10-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on TSMC's 3 nm process node. It has a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, with a TDP of 65 W. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU supports DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, and it uses the Intel Socket 1851 with PCIe Gen 5 (20 lanes from CPU). It also integrates Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 16 execution units, though this is unlikely to be used for gaming when a discrete GPU is present.

In synthetic benchmarks, the Core Ultra 5 225 achieves a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 25891 and a single-core score of 3655. Its Passmark multithread score is 30459, with a single-thread score of 4412. The processor's average benchmark score of 36938 places it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs, indicating strong overall performance. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F (0% delta), AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D (-0.2%), AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 (-0.4%), and Intel Core i9-12900T (-0.5%), showing that it sits in a tight competitive cluster.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role appears secondary to the GPU based on the measured data. The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K follows a pattern consistent with GPU limitation, as described earlier. However, the CPU's strong single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3655) is relevant for a flight simulator, which relies heavily on a single main thread for game logic and scenery loading. The 10-core configuration with 10 threads means there is no hyperthreading, but the high boost clock of 4.90 GHz compensates for that in lightly threaded workloads.

The processor's 85th percentile ranking suggests that it is not the limiting factor in this combo. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 98 FPS, which is likely near the GPU's maximum output in this title. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see a plateau in FPS regardless of settings or resolution, but the data shows a consistent scaling pattern with resolution changes. The CPU's memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s and 20 MB of L3 cache provide adequate support for the GPU's data demands, and the PCIe Gen 5 interface (20 lanes) ensures no bandwidth bottleneck for the RX 5700 XT, which uses PCIe 4.0 x16.

The launch MSRP for the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 is $246. The CPU's release date of 2025-01-06 places it well after the game's 2020-08-17 launch, meaning it benefits from architectural improvements and instruction set enhancements that older processors lack. Its process node advantage (3 nm vs the GPU's 7 nm) further underscores the generational gap between the two components. While the CPU is clearly capable of driving higher frame rates in this game, the RX 5700 XT's performance ceiling at 98 FPS (1080p Low) limits the overall system. Users upgrading their GPU in the future would find the Core Ultra 5 225 has sufficient headroom to support a faster graphics card, based on its benchmark scores and percentile ranking.