Microsoft Flight Simulator

# Microsoft Flight Simulator: Intel Core Ultra 5 225 + AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT delivers a workable but not exceptional experience in Microsoft Flight Simulator, ranking 1524th out of 2996 tested configurations. The measured frame rates show a system that can handle 1080p comfortably, struggles at 4K Ultra, and exhibits a clear pattern of GPU-bound behavior as resolution increases. This analysis breaks down the data across resolutions, settings, and component roles to help benchmark-driven buyers understand what this pairing actually delivers in this specific flight simulator.

FAQ

Q: What is the overall ranking of this CPU/GPU combo in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The combination ranks 1524th out of 2996 tested combos, placing it in the lower-middle tier of configurations tested for this game.

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 1080p with Medium settings?

A: The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 with Medium settings is 94, with a minimum of 80 and maximum of 108 FPS.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 scores 36,938 in average benchmark score, which is essentially identical to the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F at 36,945 (0% difference) and slightly ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D at 37,018 (-0.2% delta).

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

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT sits in the 72nd percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 27,425.

Q: Which settings preset provides the highest average frame rate at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, the Low preset delivers the highest average at 72 FPS, followed by Medium at 56 FPS, High at 42 FPS, and Ultra at 40 FPS.

Q: Is the system capable of 60+ FPS at 1440p across all settings?

A: No. Only the Low preset achieves this at 2560x1440 with 97 FPS average. Medium delivers 76 FPS, but High drops to 57 FPS and Ultra falls to 54 FPS.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with the Navi 22 chip, produced on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It features 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, yielding 384.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The GPU operates with a base clock of 2321 MHz, a game clock of 2424 MHz, and a boost clock of 2581 MHz. Memory runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective speed. The card's shading units number 2560, paired with 160 TMUs and 64 ROPs, while 40 RT cores provide ray tracing capability. Pixel rate is 165.2 GPixel/s and texture rate is 413.0 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance rated at 13.21 TFLOPS.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU's role becomes increasingly dominant as resolution rises. At 1080p Low, the system hits 121 FPS average, but this drops to 72 FPS at 4K Low—a 49 FPS reduction that points directly at the GPU's fill rate limits. The 12 GB VRAM capacity is sufficient for the game's demands at these settings, and the 384.0 GB/s bandwidth keeps texture streaming responsive. The GPU's 72nd percentile ranking among all GPUs places it as a mid-range performer, and the data reflects this: it can handle 1080p Ultra at 67 FPS, but 4K Ultra falls to just 40 FPS. The card's nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile (0% delta), RTX 3090 (-0.5% delta), and RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell (1.1% delta), which contextualizes its position within the broader GPU landscape.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific pairing of Intel Core Ultra 5 225 and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT ranks 1524th out of 2996 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator. That places it just past the halfway point of the field, indicating that while the hardware is competent, many other configurations deliver higher frame rates in this title. The rank reflects the measured FPS data across all settings and resolutions, weighted by the game's demands.

The CPU's synthetic benchmark percentile of 85th among all CPUs suggests the processor is not the primary limitation in most scenarios, especially at higher resolutions where the GPU takes over. The GPU's 72nd percentile ranking, combined with the overall combo rank, tells a consistent story: this is a system where the graphics card is the more constrained component. The nearest CPU rivals—AMD Ryzen 5 5600F (0% delta), Ryzen 5 5500X3D (-0.2% delta), Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 (-0.4% delta), and Core i9-12900T (-0.5% delta)—all show nearly identical synthetic scores, meaning the CPU choice would not meaningfully shift the game's performance. The combo rank of 1524 suggests that swapping the GPU would yield larger gains than changing the processor, based on the measured FPS patterns.

Settings Recommendations

For users targeting 60 FPS as a baseline, the data shows that 1080p Medium is the sweet spot: 94 FPS average with a minimum of 80 and maximum of 108. This provides headroom above the 60 FPS threshold while maintaining visual quality above Low. At 1080p High, the average drops to 71 FPS, still playable but with less margin for demanding scenes. 1080p Ultra delivers 67 FPS average, which is borderline acceptable for a flight simulator where frame pacing matters less than in competitive titles.

At 1440p, the recommendations shift. Medium delivers 76 FPS average (minimum 64, maximum 87), which is the best balance of quality and smoothness at this resolution. High drops to 57 FPS, below the 60 FPS target, while Ultra falls to 54 FPS. Low at 1440p achieves 97 FPS but sacrifices too much visual fidelity for a game that emphasizes scenery detail. For 4K, only Low settings provide a truly smooth experience at 72 FPS average. Medium at 4K offers 56 FPS, which may be acceptable for slower flight phases, but High (42 FPS) and Ultra (40 FPS) are likely to feel sluggish. The measured data indicates that Medium settings at 1080p or 1440p offer the best experience per frame rate, while 4K users should stick to Low or Medium depending on tolerance for occasional dips below 60 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the frame rates scale predictably with settings. Low settings produce an average of 121 FPS, which is the highest figure measured across all configurations. Medium averages 94 FPS with a observed range of 80 to 108 FPS. High drops to 71 FPS average, and Ultra settles at 67 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 27 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is only 4 FPS, suggesting diminishing returns at the upper end of the settings range.

Moving to 2560x1440, the average FPS figures are 97 (Low), 76 (Medium, with a range of 64 to 87), 57 (High), and 54 (Ultra). The reduction from 1080p to 1440p is consistent: Low loses 24 FPS, Medium loses 18 FPS, High loses 14 FPS, and Ultra loses 13 FPS. This pattern indicates that lower settings become more resolution-sensitive, while higher settings are already constrained by other factors.

At 3840x2160, the averages fall to 72 (Low), 56 (Medium, with a range of 47 to 64), 42 (High), and 40 (Ultra). The drop from 1440p to 4K is steeper: Low loses 25 FPS, Medium loses 20 FPS, High loses 15 FPS, and Ultra loses 14 FPS. The 4K Medium range of 47 to 64 FPS shows significant variability, which could be problematic in scenes with dense terrain or weather effects. The full dataset shows a clear ceiling: no 4K setting exceeds 72 FPS average, and only Low breaks the 60 FPS barrier.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 is a 10-core, 10-thread processor from the Core Ultra Series 2, built on Arrow Lake architecture with a 3 nm process node at TSMC. 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. Memory support is DDR5 via dual-channel, providing 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The CPU uses the Intel Socket 1851 and supports PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes. It launched in January 2025 with a launch MSRP of $246.

In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU scores 25,891 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 3,655 in single-core. PassMark multi-thread score is 30,459, with single-thread at 4,412. The CPU sits in the 85th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 36,938. Its nearest rivals—AMD Ryzen 5 5600F, Ryzen 5 5500X3D, Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450, and Core i9-12900T—all have average scores within 0.5% of this processor, indicating that the Ultra 5 225 is not a differentiator in raw compute terms.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is most apparent at lower resolutions and settings. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 121 FPS, which suggests the CPU can feed the GPU sufficiently at this level. However, as resolution increases, the FPS drop pattern reveals the GPU becoming the bottleneck. The CPU's 10 threads, while not as numerous as higher-end parts, are sufficient for this game's single-thread-heavy flight model and scenery loading. The 4.90 GHz boost clock provides the single-core throughput that flight simulators favor, and the 20 MB L3 cache helps with the large world data this game streams. The data does not show a scenario where the CPU limits performance below what the GPU can deliver, given that FPS scales downward consistently with resolution.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS across resolutions reveals a classic GPU-bound scaling curve. From 1080p Low (121 FPS) to 1440p Low (97 FPS), the drop is 19.8%. From 1440p Low to 4K Low (72 FPS), the drop is 25.8%. For Medium settings, the drops are 19.1% (1080p to 1440p) and 26.3% (1440p to 4K). High settings show drops of 19.7% and 26.3%, while Ultra shows 19.4% and 25.9%. The consistency of these percentages—roughly 20% from 1080p to 1440p and 26% from 1440p to 4K—indicates that the GPU is the limiting component across all settings.

If the CPU were the primary constraint, the FPS would remain relatively flat as resolution increases, since the CPU workload would not scale with pixel count. Instead, the proportional FPS drops track the pixel count increases: 1440p has 1.78 times the pixels of 1080p, and 4K has 2.25 times the pixels of 1440p. The FPS reductions do not exactly match these ratios—which would imply perfect scaling—but the consistent percentage drops across all settings confirm that the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT is the bottleneck at every resolution above 1080p Low.

This has practical implications. At 1080p, the system has headroom: even Ultra maintains 67 FPS, suggesting the CPU can handle the game's simulation overhead while the GPU manages the rendering. At 1440p, the system is balanced, with Medium providing 76 FPS and Ultra just below 60 at 54 FPS. At 4K, the GPU is clearly overmatched, with even Medium falling to 56 FPS and showing a minimum of 47 FPS. Users targeting 4K would need to reduce settings to Low (72 FPS) or accept frame rates below the 60 FPS threshold. The data shows no setting at 4K that combines high visual quality with smooth performance, which is consistent with the GPU's 72nd percentile ranking and its position relative to higher-tier cards.