Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is a notoriously demanding title, and the pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 with the AMD Radeon RX 580 produces a predictable but instructive outcome. The benchmark data, measured across three resolutions and four quality presets, reveals a system that is almost entirely constrained by its graphics card, with the capable Arrow Lake CPU left waiting on the GPU at every turn. This analysis breaks down the measured frame rates, contextualizes the combo’s standing among nearly three thousand tested configurations, and offers guidance on how to extract the most playable experience from this hardware.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a steep and consistent penalty as resolution climbs, which is the classic signature of a GPU-bound scenario. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo averages 54 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 Low drops that to 43 FPS, a decline of roughly 20%. At 3840x2160 Low, the average falls to 32 FPS, which is another 26% reduction from the 1440p figure. This linear scaling pattern indicates that the Radeon RX 580’s pixel throughput and memory bandwidth are the limiting factors; the CPU is not the bottleneck at these settings.

The story is similar but more compressed at higher quality presets. At High settings, the averages are 31 FPS at 1080p, 25 FPS at 1440p, and 19 FPS at 4K. The percentage drops are consistent—about 19% from 1080p to 1440p and 24% from 1440p to 4K. This consistency across presets confirms that the GPU is saturated regardless of the workload. The RX 580’s 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, with 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth, is simply not enough to feed the frame buffer at higher resolutions without severe bottlenecks.

Ultra settings paint the grimmest picture. The averages are 30 FPS at 1080p, 24 FPS at 1440p, and 18 FPS at 4K. The gap between 1080p and 1440p is 20%, and the gap between 1440p and 4K is 25%. Notice that the absolute FPS values at Ultra are only slightly below High, suggesting that the RX 580 is already maxed out even at 1080p Ultra; the extra shading work from Ultra settings does not meaningfully change the frame rate because the GPU is the hard ceiling. The data shows that resolution scaling is almost perfectly linear, which is a textbook indicator of a pure GPU limit. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225, with its 10 cores and 10 threads, is nowhere near the constraint.

A key observation is the difference between Low and Ultra at any given resolution. At 1080p, Low yields 54 FPS while Ultra yields 30 FPS—a 44% performance swing purely from settings. At 1440p, Low gives 43 FPS and Ultra gives 24 FPS, a similar 44% swing. At 4K, Low gives 32 FPS and Ultra gives 18 FPS, a 44% swing once again. This consistent ratio across resolutions reinforces that the GPU is the sole performance arbiter. The CPU’s role is static; it delivers the same instruction stream regardless of resolution, but the GPU’s workload scales with pixel count and quality.

For a flight simulator, where smoothness matters more than raw detail, the scaling data suggests that 1080p is the only viable resolution for playable frame rates, and even then only at Low or Medium presets. The RX 580’s 6.175 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 193.0 GTexel/s texture rate are modest by modern standards, and the measured results reflect that. The 4K numbers—19 FPS High, 18 FPS Ultra—are effectively slideshows for a game that requires precise control. The 1440p numbers are borderline, with Medium averaging 34 FPS and Low averaging 43 FPS, but the min FPS of 29 at Medium suggests stutter-prone scenes.

How This Combo Ranks

The combined Intel Core Ultra 5 225 and AMD Radeon RX 580 configuration ranks 2733 out of 2996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the bottom 9% of all tested systems, which is a direct reflection of the GPU’s age and performance class. The RX 580, released in 2017, sits at the 53rd percentile among all GPUs in the database’s aggregate benchmarks, with an average benchmark score of 12928. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (score 12940, delta -0.1%), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER (score 12986, delta -0.4%), and the AMD Radeon 740M (score 12870, delta 0.5%). These deltas are all within 1% of the RX 580, meaning the GPU is effectively tied with those parts in raw compute potential, yet none of those are desktop powerhouses for modern flight simulation.

The CPU, by contrast, is a much stronger component. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 sits at the 85th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 36938. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F (score 36945, delta 0%), the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D (score 37018, delta -0.2%), the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 (score 37093, delta -0.4%), and the Intel Core i9-12900T (score 37112, delta -0.5%). All of these deltas are essentially noise, indicating the Ultra 5 225 is a solid mid-range processor. In Cinebench R23, it scores 25891 multi-core and 3655 single-core, which are respectable numbers for a 10-core, 10-thread part with a 3.30 GHz base and 4.90 GHz boost clock.

The disconnect between the CPU’s strength and the combo’s low rank is stark. The combo rank of 2733 is not a reflection of the CPU’s capability but rather the GPU’s inability to keep pace. In a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is heavily dependent on single-thread performance for the simulation loop and GPU throughput for rendering, the RX 580 becomes the anchor. The data shows that this combo performs like a low-end system despite having a top-15% CPU. The rank is dragged down by the GPU’s 53rd percentile standing, which is far below the CPU’s 85th percentile.

This mismatch means that users of this combo are leaving significant performance on the table. If the RX 580 were swapped for a stronger GPU, the CPU would likely allow much higher frame rates, given its high single-core score of 3655 in Cinebench R23. But as measured, the combo’s rank of 2733 out of 2996 places it in the company of budget laptops and older integrated graphics solutions, not desktop gaming rigs. The only saving grace is that the data is measured, not estimated, so these figures represent real-world behavior for this exact pairing.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to play Microsoft Flight Simulator with this CPU and GPU combo?

A: Based on the measured FPS, 1920x1080 is the only resolution that offers playable performance. At Low settings, the combo averages 54 FPS, and at Medium it averages 42 FPS. At 1440p and 4K, averages drop below 34 FPS and 32 FPS respectively, which is too low for a smooth flight experience.

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 bottleneck the AMD Radeon RX 580 in this game?

A: No. The data shows that the GPU is the limiting component across all resolutions and settings. The CPU’s aggregate benchmark score of 36938 places it at the 85th percentile, while the GPU’s score of 12928 is at the 53rd percentile. The measured FPS scaling with resolution is purely GPU-driven.

Q: How does this combo compare to other tested systems in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: It ranks 2733 out of 2996 tested combos, placing it in the bottom 9%. This low rank is due to the RX 580’s age and performance, not the CPU, which is a top-15% part.

Q: What is the difference in average FPS between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, Low settings average 54 FPS while Ultra settings average 30 FPS. That is a 24 FPS difference, or a 44% reduction, which is a substantial trade-off for visual fidelity.

Q: Is the RX 580’s 8 GB of VRAM sufficient for this game at 4K?

A: The measured 4K performance suggests it is not. At 4K High, the average FPS is 19, and at 4K Ultra it is 18. These figures are far below playable thresholds, indicating that both the GPU’s compute power and memory bandwidth are overwhelmed at that resolution.

Q: What is the CPU’s boost clock and how many cores does it have?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 has 10 cores and 10 threads, with a boost clock of 4.90 GHz and a base clock of 3.30 GHz. Its single-core Cinebench R23 score is 3655, which is strong for simulation tasks.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of performance across all twelve tested configurations. At 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the combo achieves its best results. Low settings produce an average of 54 FPS, which is the highest average in the entire dataset. Medium settings drop to 42 FPS, with a minimum of 36 FPS and a maximum of 48 FPS. High settings average 31 FPS, and Ultra settings average 30 FPS. The min and max values for Medium show the frame pacing is reasonably tight, but the overall averages are low enough to make High and Ultra uncomfortable for fast-paced flight maneuvers.

At 2560x1440, the performance degrades noticeably. Low settings average 43 FPS, which is still playable but with less headroom. Medium settings average 34 FPS, with a minimum of 29 FPS and a maximum of 39 FPS. High settings drop to 25 FPS, and Ultra settings fall to 24 FPS. The Medium min FPS of 29 is concerning, as it indicates that taxing scenes—such as dense urban areas or heavy weather—will likely cause stutter. High and Ultra at 1440p are not recommended for sustained play.

At 3840x2160, the results are uniformly poor. Low settings average 32 FPS, which is technically above the 30 FPS threshold but still not smooth for a simulator. Medium settings average 25 FPS, with a minimum of 21 FPS and a maximum of 29 FPS. High settings average 19 FPS, and Ultra settings average 18 FPS. The 4K data confirms that this combo is entirely unsuited for 4K gaming in Microsoft Flight Simulator. The RX 580’s 256-bit memory bus and 8 GB of GDDR5 simply cannot handle the pixel load.

The settings scaling at each resolution is telling. At 1080p, the jump from Low to Medium costs 12 FPS, from Medium to High costs 11 FPS, and from High to Ultra costs only 1 FPS. This suggests that Ultra settings are not much more demanding than High for this GPU, or that the GPU hits a hard ceiling around 30 FPS. At 1440p, the drops are 9 FPS from Low to Medium, 9 FPS from Medium to High, and 1 FPS from High to Ultra. At 4K, the drops are 7 FPS from Low to Medium, 6 FPS from Medium to High, and 1 FPS from High to Ultra. The diminishing returns at Ultra indicate the GPU is saturated.

For the medium preset, which has the only min/max data across all resolutions, the frame ranges are consistent: 36-48 at 1080p, 29-39 at 1440p, and 21-29 at 4K. This shows a stable but low performance envelope. The min FPS at 4K Medium of 21 is the lowest recorded value in the entire dataset, confirming the GPU is overmatched at that resolution.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured data, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the user’s priority: smoothness or visual fidelity. For a consistently playable experience, 1920x1080 with Low settings is the clear choice. The average FPS of 54 is the only configuration that approaches the 60 FPS ideal for a smooth simulation, and it provides enough headroom for terrain loading and weather effects. The data shows that Low settings at 1080p are the only tested configuration above 50 FPS.

If the user prefers Medium quality, 1920x1080 Medium at 42 FPS is a reasonable compromise. The min FPS of 36 indicates that even in demanding scenes, the frame rate stays above 30 FPS, which is the minimum threshold for playability in a flight simulator. This preset offers a better visual experience than Low without sacrificing too much fluidity. The 42 FPS average is a 22% reduction from Low, but the visual upgrade is substantial.

At 1440p, Low settings at 43 FPS are the only viable option. Medium at 34 FPS is borderline, and the min FPS of 29 suggests occasional dips below the playable threshold. High and Ultra at 1440p are not recommended, as averages of 25 and 24 FPS respectively will feel sluggish during critical flight phases. For users with a 1440p monitor, the recommendation is to stick with Low settings and accept the visual compromise.

The 4K resolution is not viable for this combo under any tested settings. The best 4K result is 32 FPS at Low, which is still below the 60 FPS target and will be subject to stutters in complex scenes. The data shows that 4K Medium drops to 25 FPS, and High/Ultra fall below 20 FPS. Users with a 4K display should either reduce the resolution in-game to 1080p or accept that this game will not run smoothly at native 4K with this hardware.

The optimal preset across all measured rows is 1920x1080 Low. It offers the highest average FPS (54) and avoids the sub-30 FPS dips seen elsewhere. For users who prioritize visuals over frame rate, 1920x1080 Medium at 42 FPS is the best balance, as it provides a 36 FPS minimum that keeps the experience playable. No other tested configuration achieves both an average above 40 FPS and a minimum above 30 FPS. The data clearly shows that Ultra settings are a waste of GPU resources for this combo, as the average FPS at Ultra is within 1-2 FPS of High across all resolutions.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 is a 10-core, 10-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It has a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The CPU’s cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3. This is a modern desktop part, released on 2025-01-06, with a launch MSRP of $246. In the database’s CPU benchmarks, it scores 3655 in Cinebench R23 single-core and 25891 in multi-core, placing it at the 85th percentile among all CPUs.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU’s role is to handle the simulation logic, flight dynamics, and AI traffic, which are heavily single-threaded tasks. The high single-core score of 3655 is well-suited for this workload. However, the measured FPS data shows that the CPU is never the bottleneck in this combo. The evidence is that FPS scales almost exactly with resolution changes, which is a GPU-bound signature. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the FPS would remain relatively flat across resolutions because the CPU’s workload does not change with pixel count.

The CPU’s 10 threads are sufficient for this game, as Flight Simulator typically uses fewer than 8 threads for most of its workload. The 20 MB of L3 cache helps with terrain data streaming, but the GPU’s 8 GB VRAM is the real constraint for texture loading. The CPU’s memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s and dual-channel DDR5 support are more than adequate for feeding the RX 580, which has a 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth of its own.

The nearest CPU rivals, including the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F and AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D, have nearly identical aggregate scores (36945 and 37018, respectively), with deltas of 0% and -0.2%. This indicates that the Ultra 5 225 is comparable to those parts in general compute performance. However, in this game, the combo rank is determined by the GPU, not the CPU. The data shows that swapping the RX 580 for a stronger GPU would likely unlock significantly higher frame rates, given the CPU’s strong single-thread performance.

The CPU’s boost clock of 4.90 GHz is high enough for the simulation loop, and its 10 cores provide headroom for background tasks like streaming terrain and updating AI aircraft. But the measured results are clear: the Radeon RX 580, with its 2304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, is the component that decides this combo’s fate. The CPU is a capable partner that is simply underutilized due to the GPU’s limitations. The 65 W TDP of the CPU, contrasted with the GPU’s 185 W TDP, further underscores that the graphics card is the dominant power draw and performance limiter in this pairing.