Microsoft Flight Simulator

# Microsoft Flight Simulator — Intel Core Ultra 5 235 + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090

The data for this combination represents a measured dataset from 12 distinct configurations across three resolutions and four quality presets. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235, with 14 cores and 14 threads, pairs with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090, which carries 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus. The overall combo rank of 38 out of 2996 tested combinations places this system in the top 1.3% of all recorded pairings, though the benchmark results reveal a nuanced performance profile that shifts significantly depending on resolution and settings.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and consistent pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At the High preset, the average frame rate drops from 139 FPS at 1080p to 112 FPS at 1440p, then further to 83 FPS at 4K. This represents a 19.4% reduction from 1080p to 1440p, and a 40.3% reduction from 1080p to 4K. The scaling is nearly linear in terms of pixel count, suggesting that the GPU is becoming the primary limiting factor at higher resolutions.

The Low preset shows the most dramatic scaling, with 238 FPS at 1080p dropping to 192 FPS at 1440p and then to 142 FPS at 4K. The percentage drops are 19.3% and 40.3% respectively, which closely mirrors the High preset scaling pattern. This consistency across presets indicates that the resolution-dependent performance penalty is largely independent of the graphical settings applied.

The Medium preset, which is the only one with recorded minimum and maximum FPS values, shows a similar trajectory: 185 FPS average at 1080p, 149 FPS at 1440p, and 110 FPS at 4K. The minimum FPS values scale from 158 at 1080p to 127 at 1440p and 94 at 4K, while maximum values go from 213 to 172 to 127. The gap between minimum and maximum FPS remains relatively stable around 55-58 FPS across all three resolutions at Medium settings, indicating that frame time variance does not worsen disproportionately at higher resolutions.

The Ultra preset delivers the lowest absolute numbers but follows the same proportional pattern: 133 FPS at 1080p, 107 FPS at 1440p, and 79 FPS at 4K. The resolution scaling penalty from 1080p to 4K is 40.6% at Ultra, nearly identical to the other presets. This uniformity strongly suggests that the scaling behavior is governed primarily by the GPU's pixel throughput capabilities rather than by CPU-side bottlenecks or settings-specific effects. The RTX 5090's pixel rate of 423.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 1,636.8 GTexel/s provide the raw throughput, and the measured data shows this hardware is being exercised consistently across all quality levels.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 serves as the dominant performance driver in this configuration, particularly at higher resolutions and quality settings. The GPU's 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus delivers 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth, which is more than sufficient for Microsoft Flight Simulator's demanding texture streaming requirements. The dual-slot card runs at a base clock of 2017 MHz with a boost clock of 2407 MHz, and the 5 nm process node houses 92,200 million transistors across a 750 mm² die.

The memory configuration is particularly relevant for this flight simulator, which is known for loading vast terrain and scenery data. The 1.79 TB/s bandwidth ensures that texture streaming does not become a bottleneck even at 4K resolution with Ultra settings, where the measured 79 FPS average indicates the GPU is still delivering playable performance. The GDDR7 memory runs at 1750 MHz with 28 Gbps effective speed, and the 512-bit bus width provides the wide data path needed for high-resolution asset delivery.

The GPU's compute capabilities include 21,760 shading units, 680 texture mapping units, and 176 raster output units. The FP32 throughput of 104.8 TFLOPS and the 1:1 FP16 ratio of 104.8 TFLOPS indicate substantial compute headroom that may not be fully utilized by this game's rendering workload. The 170 ray tracing cores and 680 tensor cores provide additional specialized processing power, though the measured FPS data suggests that traditional rasterization performance is the primary determinant of the scores observed.

The RTX 5090's benchmark scores place it in the 92nd percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 79,842. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB at 79,605 (0.3% lower) and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X at 80,959 (1.4% higher). The game-specific results show that at 1080p Low settings, the GPU achieves 238 FPS, which is well above the refresh rate of most displays and indicates that the GPU is not being fully utilized at lower resolutions and settings. However, at 4K Ultra, the 79 FPS average suggests the GPU is approaching its practical limit for this workload, particularly given the game's simulation overhead.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 achieves a combo rank of 38 out of 2996 tested combinations, placing it in the 98.7th percentile of all recorded pairings. This ranking reflects the overall performance across all tested games and benchmarks, not just Microsoft Flight Simulator. The CPU's percentile ranking of 89 among all processors, combined with the GPU's 92nd percentile ranking, produces a synergistic pairing that performs at a level higher than either component's individual percentile would suggest.

The CPU's average benchmark score of 46,062 places it remarkably close to its nearest rivals, with the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 scoring 46,030 (0.1% higher) and the Intel Core i9-13900HX scoring 46,098 (0.1% lower). This tight grouping indicates that the Ultra 5 235 sits at a performance parity point within its class, and the overall combo ranking of 38 is likely driven more by the GPU's contribution than by CPU dominance.

The GPU's average benchmark score of 79,842 and its nearest rival comparisons show a similar pattern of close competition. The NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB trails by only 0.3%, while the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT is 1.1% lower. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X leads by 1.4%. This clustering suggests that the RTX 5090's raw compute performance is competitive but not universally dominant, yet in Microsoft Flight Simulator specifically, the measured FPS figures demonstrate strong real-world performance that justifies the high combo ranking.

The rank of 38 out of 2996 means that only 37 other CPU-GPU combinations in the entire database outperform this pairing. This places the system in elite company, particularly considering the CPU is a mid-range desktop processor rather than a flagship offering. The data indicates that for this specific flight simulator, the GPU is the primary performance differentiator, and the CPU's 14 cores and 14 threads provide sufficient processing power to avoid becoming a limiting factor.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides clear guidance for optimal settings selection across different resolutions. At 1920x1080, all four presets deliver playable frame rates, with Low at 238 FPS, Medium at 185 FPS, High at 139 FPS, and Ultra at 133 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra at 1080p is only 6 FPS (4.5%), suggesting that Ultra provides minimal additional visual quality for the performance cost. However, the gap between Medium and High is 46 FPS (24.9%), making High the better choice for users who want improved visuals without sacrificing significant frame rate.

At 2560x1440, the performance hierarchy remains consistent: Low at 192 FPS, Medium at 149 FPS, High at 112 FPS, and Ultra at 107 FPS. The High to Ultra difference narrows to just 5 FPS (4.5%), while the Medium to High drop is 37 FPS (24.8%). The 1440p High preset at 112 FPS provides an excellent balance for high-refresh-rate displays, while Ultra at 107 FPS remains comfortable for 100 Hz monitors. The Medium preset at 149 FPS offers headroom for users prioritizing frame rate over visual fidelity.

At 3840x2160, the recommendations shift toward lower presets to maintain smooth gameplay. The Ultra preset delivers 79 FPS, which is below the 80 FPS threshold that many users consider the minimum for a smooth experience. The High preset at 83 FPS is marginally better, while Medium at 110 FPS provides a significant improvement. The Low preset at 142 FPS is the only 4K configuration that exceeds 120 FPS. For 4K gaming, the Medium preset at 110 FPS appears to be the optimal balance, offering a 32.7% improvement over High while presumably retaining a reasonable level of visual detail.

The Medium preset is the only configuration with recorded minimum FPS values, showing 158 FPS at 1080p, 127 FPS at 1440p, and 94 FPS at 4K. This data indicates that even the minimum frame rates remain above 90 FPS at all resolutions, suggesting that the Medium preset provides consistent performance without significant frame drops.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS values are 238 (Low), 185 (Medium), 139 (High), and 133 (Ultra). The Medium preset records a minimum of 158 FPS and a maximum of 213 FPS, giving a frame time variance window of 55 FPS. The progression from Low to Medium shows a 53 FPS drop (22.3%), from Medium to High a 46 FPS drop (24.9%), and from High to Ultra a 6 FPS drop (4.3%). This pattern indicates that the most significant performance cost comes from moving from Medium to High, while the High to Ultra transition is relatively inexpensive.

At 2560x1440, the measured average FPS values are 192 (Low), 149 (Medium), 112 (High), and 107 (Ultra). The Medium preset records a minimum of 127 FPS and a maximum of 172 FPS, with a variance window of 45 FPS. The percentage drops are 22.4% from Low to Medium, 24.8% from Medium to High, and 4.5% from High to Ultra. This scaling pattern closely mirrors the 1080p results, confirming that the relative cost of each preset tier is consistent across resolutions.

At 3840x2160, the measured average FPS values are 142 (Low), 110 (Medium), 83 (High), and 79 (Ultra). The Medium preset records a minimum of 94 FPS and a maximum of 127 FPS, with a variance window of 33 FPS. The percentage drops are 22.5% from Low to Medium, 24.5% from Medium to High, and 4.8% from High to Ultra. The consistency of these percentage drops across all three resolutions is striking, with the Low-to-Medium transition always costing approximately 22-23%, the Medium-to-High transition always costing approximately 24-25%, and the High-to-Ultra transition always costing approximately 4-5%.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 provides 14 cores and 14 threads, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The processor is built on the Arrow Lake architecture using a 3 nm process node from TSMC, with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s.

In the context of Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is primarily to handle the simulation and physics calculations that are inherent to the flight model. The game's single-threaded performance is critical for the main simulation loop, and the Ultra 5 235's single-core benchmark results show a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,085. The multi-core score of 14,769 in the same test indicates that the 14 cores provide substantial parallel processing capability for background tasks and terrain generation.

The CPU's PassMark results show a multi-thread score of 37,816 and a single-thread score of 4,516. The physics score of 2,570 and the floating-point math score of 117,951 suggest that the CPU handles complex numerical calculations efficiently. The data compression score of 390,711 and encryption score of 29,293 indicate strong general-purpose computing performance.

The measured FPS data shows that the CPU does not appear to be a bottleneck in this configuration, as evidenced by the consistent scaling patterns across resolutions. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect to see similar FPS at 1080p and 1440p, but the data shows clear resolution-dependent scaling. The 238 FPS at 1080p Low settings demonstrates that the CPU can feed the GPU with enough data to achieve very high frame rates, and the 142 FPS at 4K Low settings shows that even at higher resolutions, the CPU maintains sufficient throughput.

The CPU's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (0.1% faster), the Intel Core i9-13900HX (0.1% slower), and two AMD EPYC server processors (both 0.2% faster). This tight grouping indicates that the Ultra 5 235 performs at a level comparable to much higher-tier processors in general benchmarks, though its 65 W TDP and 14-thread configuration suggest it may not sustain peak performance in heavily threaded workloads.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this CPU-GPU combination in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The data shows that 2560x1440 with the High preset delivers 112 FPS average, which is the highest resolution and quality combination that maintains a three-digit frame rate. At 4K, the Medium preset at 110 FPS provides the best balance, while the High preset at 83 FPS and Ultra at 79 FPS require accepting lower frame rates for higher visual fidelity.

Q: How does the RTX 5090's 32 GB of VRAM affect performance in this game?

A: The 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus with 1.79 TB/s bandwidth ensures that texture streaming is not a bottleneck. The measured FPS data shows consistent scaling patterns across all settings, indicating that memory bandwidth is sufficient even at 4K Ultra settings where the game loads extensive terrain data.

Q: What is the performance difference between the High and Ultra presets?

A: Across all three resolutions, the High to Ultra transition costs approximately 4-5% of frame rate. Specifically, the difference is 6 FPS at 1080p (139 to 133), 5 FPS at 1440p (112 to 107), and 4 FPS at 4K (83 to 79). This minimal performance cost suggests that Ultra settings may be worth enabling if the visual improvements are noticeable.

Q: How does this combo rank against other tested combinations?

A: This pairing ranks 38th out of 2996 tested combinations, placing it in the top 1.3% of all recorded CPU-GPU pairings. The CPU's 89th percentile and GPU's 92nd percentile individually combine to produce a system that outperforms 98.7% of all tested configurations in the database.

Q: What are the minimum FPS values for the Medium preset?

A: The Medium preset records minimum FPS values of 158 at 1080p, 127 at 1440p, and 94 at 4K. These minimums indicate that even the lowest frame rates remain above 90 FPS, providing consistent performance without significant drops during intensive simulation scenes.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor at 1080p?

A: At 1080p Low settings, the combination achieves 238 FPS, which suggests the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU at very high rates. The consistent resolution scaling pattern indicates the GPU becomes the limiting factor as resolution increases, while the CPU maintains sufficient performance to avoid being a bottleneck at any tested resolution.