Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator presents an unusually demanding workload that stresses both the processor and graphics card simultaneously. The benchmark data for the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT reveals a configuration that delivers playable performance across all tested settings, with the balance of the load shifting predictably as resolution changes. The measured results show a system that can handle the simulator's complex scenery and physics calculations, though the interplay between CPU and GPU becomes the defining characteristic of the experience.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate progression from 1080p to 4K clearly demonstrates where the performance ceiling lies for this combination. At 1080p with Low settings, the system produces an average of 177 FPS, but this drops by 19.2% to 143 FPS at 1440p, and then by a further 25.9% to 106 FPS at 4K. This scaling pattern suggests that at lower resolutions, the CPU is the primary limiting factor, as the GPU has ample headroom to render frames quickly, but the processor's ability to feed the simulation's calculations becomes the bottleneck.

Moving to Medium settings, the scaling becomes more pronounced. The system achieves 138 FPS at 1080p, falls to 111 FPS at 1440p (a 19.6% decrease), and then drops to 82 FPS at 4K (a 26.1% decrease from 1440p). The consistent percentage drops across these resolution steps indicate that the GPU is beginning to take on more of the load, though the CPU still has a significant role in determining the final frame rate. The min FPS values at Medium settings—117 at 1080p, 95 at 1440p, and 70 at 4K—show that even in the most demanding moments, the system maintains a playable floor.

At High settings, the resolution scaling steepens further. The average frame rate moves from 104 FPS at 1080p to 84 FPS at 1440p (a 19.2% drop) and finally to 62 FPS at 4K (a 26.2% drop from 1440p). This pattern suggests that as the graphics load increases, the GPU becomes more of a limiting factor, though the CPU still contributes to the overall performance picture. The Ultra preset shows the most dramatic scaling: 99 FPS at 1080p, 80 FPS at 1440p, and 59 FPS at 4K, representing a 40.4% total reduction from 1080p to 4K.

The data indicates that this combination is well-balanced for 1440p gaming, where the frame rates remain comfortably high across all settings. At 4K, the system can still deliver playable performance, but the Ultra preset drops to 59 FPS average, which is borderline for smooth gameplay. The scaling behavior suggests that the GPU is the more significant bottleneck at higher resolutions, while the CPU plays a larger role at 1080p, particularly at Low settings.

How This Combo Ranks

Among the 2,996 tested combinations in this game, this pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 with the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT achieves a rank of 489. This places it in the top 16.3% of all tested configurations, indicating that it performs significantly better than the majority of systems in Microsoft Flight Simulator. The rank reflects the combined capabilities of both components, and the data shows that this is a strong pairing for this specific title.

The CPU's individual benchmark performance relative to its peers helps contextualize this ranking. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 has an average benchmark score of 46,062, placing it in the 89th percentile of all CPUs tested. Its nearest rivals in terms of average score are the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 at 46,030 (a 0.1% difference), the Intel Core i9-13900HX at 46,098 (a -0.1% difference), the AMD EPYC 4364P at 45,970 (a 0.2% difference), and the AMD EPYC 7303 at 45,960 (a 0.2% difference). This tight grouping shows that the CPU is competitive with other high-end processors, though not at the absolute top of the performance spectrum.

The GPU's benchmark position is more nuanced. The AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT has an average benchmark score of 13,745, placing it in the 55th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon 660M at 13,812 (a -0.5% difference), the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile at 13,821 (a -0.5% difference), the AMD Radeon RX 570X at 13,871 (a -0.9% difference), and the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT at 13,543 (a 1.5% difference). This grouping suggests that while the GPU is capable, its raw benchmark performance does not place it in the upper echelon of graphics cards, which partially explains why the combo ranks in the top 16% rather than higher.

The disparity between the CPU's 89th percentile ranking and the GPU's 55th percentile ranking is telling. It suggests that in Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's strong performance helps boost the overall combo ranking, even though the GPU is not as dominant in its own benchmarks. This is consistent with the game's reputation for being CPU-intensive, and the data supports that interpretation.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 is a 14-core, 14-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture. It operates with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and can boost up to 5.00 GHz, which provides the single-thread performance that flight simulators often depend on for calculating physics and flight dynamics. The processor has a 24 MB shared L3 cache and supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel configuration, offering a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s.

In Cinebench R23, the processor scores 14,769 in multicore and 2,085 in single-core tests. These numbers indicate solid multi-threaded capability for handling the various background tasks in Microsoft Flight Simulator, such as scenery loading and AI traffic, while the single-core score is crucial for the main simulation loop. The PassMark single-thread score of 4,516 further confirms the processor's strength in tasks that rely on a single core.

The processor's 14 cores and 14 threads mean it is not using hyper-threading, which can be beneficial in games that have predictable thread counts. Microsoft Flight Simulator can utilize multiple cores, but the primary simulation thread often limits performance. The boost clock of 5.00 GHz helps mitigate this, and the data shows that at 1080p Low settings, the system achieves 177 FPS, which suggests the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU at that resolution.

The CPU's percentile ranking of 89th among all tested CPUs indicates that it outperforms the vast majority of processors available. However, its nearest rivals in terms of average benchmark score are all within 0.2% of its score, showing that it is in a highly competitive performance tier. The core count and clock speeds are well-suited for the demands of this game, and the benchmark results support the notion that the CPU is a strong partner for the GPU in this configuration.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rates provide a comprehensive view of how this system performs across different resolutions and settings. At 1080p with Low settings, the system averages 177 FPS, which is the highest result in the entire dataset. Moving to Medium settings, the average drops to 138 FPS, with minimum and maximum values of 117 and 159 FPS respectively. High settings produce an average of 104 FPS, while Ultra settings yield 99 FPS average.

At 1440p, the performance scales down appropriately. Low settings average 143 FPS, representing a 19.2% decrease from the 1080p Low result. Medium settings average 111 FPS, with a minimum of 95 and maximum of 128 FPS. High settings average 84 FPS, and Ultra settings drop to 80 FPS. These numbers show that 1440p remains highly playable, with even the most demanding preset maintaining an average above 60 FPS.

The 4K results demonstrate the system's capability at the highest resolution. Low settings average 106 FPS, which is still very smooth. Medium settings average 82 FPS, with a minimum of 70 FPS and maximum of 94 FPS. High settings produce an average of 62 FPS, which is just above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. Ultra settings average 59 FPS, dipping below that threshold but remaining playable for a flight simulator where frame rate consistency is less critical than in fast-paced action games.

The data reveals that the transition from Medium to High settings has a significant impact on performance. At 1080p, the drop from Medium to High is 24.6%, while at 4K, the drop is 24.4%. This suggests that the High preset introduces a substantial increase in graphical complexity that the GPU must process. The Ultra preset has a smaller additional impact, with a 4.8% drop from High to Ultra at 1080p and a 4.8% drop at 4K, indicating that the main performance cost is in the High settings tier.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture and features the Navi 31 chip. It comes with 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 320-bit bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 800.0 GB/s. The GPU has a base clock of 1387 MHz and a boost clock of 2394 MHz, with a game clock of 2025 MHz. These specifications give it substantial bandwidth and compute capability for rendering the detailed scenery and weather effects in Microsoft Flight Simulator.

In PassMark's G3D benchmark, the GPU scores 29,009, and its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 5,623. The Geekbench OpenCL score is 12,756, while the Vulkan score is 71,068. These scores place the GPU in the 55th percentile of all GPUs tested, indicating that while it is a capable card, it does not lead its class. The GPU's average benchmark score of 13,745 puts it in close competition with cards like the AMD Radeon 660M and NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile, though those are mobile parts with different performance characteristics.

The GPU's 20 GB of VRAM is more than sufficient for Microsoft Flight Simulator, even at 4K with Ultra settings, as the game's texture requirements are unlikely to exceed this capacity. The 800.0 GB/s memory bandwidth ensures that texture streaming and loading do not become bottlenecks. The boost clock of 2394 MHz provides the raw compute power needed to render the complex geometry of aircraft and terrain.

In the measured frame rates, the GPU's role becomes more prominent at higher resolutions and settings. At 4K Ultra, the system averages 59 FPS, which is only a 40.4% reduction from the 1080p Low result. This scaling behavior indicates that the GPU is capable of handling the increased resolution, but the absolute performance at the highest settings is constrained. The GPU's 55th percentile ranking in its own benchmarks is reflected in the fact that this combo does not rank higher than 489th overall, despite the CPU's strong performance.

FAQ

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

A: The highest average frame rate is 177 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: How does the combo perform at 4K Ultra settings?

A: At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the system averages 59 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay but still playable for a flight simulator.

Q: What is the combo's rank among all tested configurations in this game?

A: The combo ranks 489th out of 2,996 tested combinations, placing it in the top 16.3% of all systems.

Q: Which component has a higher benchmark percentile ranking?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 CPU ranks in the 89th percentile of all CPUs, while the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT GPU ranks in the 55th percentile of all GPUs.

Q: What are the minimum FPS values at Medium settings across resolutions?

A: At 1080p Medium, the minimum FPS is 117; at 1440p Medium, it is 95; and at 4K Medium, it is 70.

Q: How much does performance drop from 1080p to 4K at High settings?

A: At High settings, the average FPS drops from 104 at 1080p to 62 at 4K, representing a 40.4% decrease.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured frame rates, the optimal experience depends on the user's resolution preference and performance priorities. For 1080p displays, the High settings preset delivers an average of 104 FPS, which is smooth and visually detailed. The Ultra preset at 1080p averages 99 FPS, which is only a 4.8% reduction from High, making it the recommended choice for users who prioritize visual fidelity over a marginal frame rate increase.

For 1440p, the Medium settings preset provides an average of 111 FPS with a minimum of 95 FPS, ensuring consistent performance throughout the simulation. The High preset at 1440p averages 84 FPS, which is still smooth, but the Medium preset offers a 32.1% higher frame rate. Users who prefer maximum visual quality can opt for Ultra, which averages 80 FPS, but this is only a 4.8% reduction from High, so High may be the better balance.

At 4K, the Medium settings preset is the recommended choice, as it averages 82 FPS with a minimum of 70 FPS, providing a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold. The High preset averages 62 FPS, which is close to the threshold and may experience occasional dips in demanding scenes. The Ultra preset averages 59 FPS, which is below the threshold and may not provide the smoothest experience. For users with 4K displays, Medium settings offer the best combination of visual quality and performance, while those who accept lower frame rates can use High.

The Low settings preset achieves 177 FPS at 1080p, 143 FPS at 1440p, and 106 FPS at 4K, but the visual compromise is significant. Given that the Medium preset at 4K still delivers 82 FPS, there is no need to use Low settings for performance reasons. The data suggests that Medium at 4K, High at 1440p, and Ultra at 1080p are the most balanced choices for this combination in Microsoft Flight Simulator.