Microsoft Flight Simulator

# Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for Microsoft Flight Simulator with the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D reveals a clear pattern of GPU-bound scaling as resolution increases, but with notable CPU headroom at lower resolutions. At 1920x1080 with Ultra settings, the combo delivers 142 FPS average, while at 2560x1440 Ultra it drops to 114 FPS, and at 3840x2160 Ultra it falls to 84 FPS. This progression shows a 19.7% reduction from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 26.3% reduction from 1440p to 4K, indicating that the RTX 5090 D remains the dominant factor throughout the resolution range.

The scaling pattern shifts dramatically when examining Low settings. At 1080p Low, the system produces 238 FPS average, which drops to 205 FPS at 1440p Low (a 13.9% reduction) and 151 FPS at 4K Low (a 26.3% reduction from 1440p). The relatively modest drop between 1080p and 1440p at Low settings suggests that the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 begins to approach its limits around the 200 FPS mark, as the CPU's 14 cores and 14 threads with a boost clock of 5.00 GHz handle the simulation logic. The larger drop from 1440p to 4K at Low settings confirms that even at lower graphical loads, the GPU workload at 4K becomes substantial.

Comparing the scaling across presets, Medium settings show the most consistent frame rate behavior. At 1080p Medium, the average is 198 FPS with a minimum of 168 FPS and maximum of 227 FPS. Moving to 1440p Medium, the average drops to 159 FPS with a minimum of 136 FPS and maximum of 183 FPS. At 4K Medium, the average is 118 FPS with a minimum of 100 FPS and maximum of 135 FPS. The measured minimum and maximum values at Medium settings across all three resolutions demonstrate that frame pacing remains stable, with the spread between minimum and maximum FPS staying within 27-35 FPS regardless of resolution.

The High preset tells a similar story with slightly different magnitudes. From 1080p High at 149 FPS to 1440p High at 120 FPS (a 19.5% reduction), and then to 4K High at 88 FPS (a 26.7% reduction from 1440p), the scaling is consistent with the Ultra preset's behavior. This consistency across High and Ultra suggests that Microsoft Flight Simulator's rendering pipeline scales predictably with pixel count once the CPU can maintain adequate simulation throughput. The data indicates that at 1080p, the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 with its 24 MB of shared L3 cache and 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth provides sufficient headroom, but the RTX 5090 D's raw compute power becomes the limiting factor as resolution increases.

The overall scaling analysis points to a system that is well-balanced for high refresh rate gaming at 1440p, but the RTX 5090 D's 32 GB of GDDR7 memory and 1.79 TB/s bandwidth are clearly the primary drivers of 4K performance. The 4K Ultra result of 84 FPS, while respectable, shows that even this flagship GPU cannot fully overcome the demands of Microsoft Flight Simulator at maximum settings and native 4K resolution.

# GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D plays a pivotal role in these benchmark results, particularly at higher resolutions where its 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus with 1.79 TB/s bandwidth provides exceptional memory throughput. The GPU's boost clock of 2407 MHz with a base clock of 2017 MHz, combined with 21,760 shading units and 176 ROPs, delivers the raw rasterization power needed for Microsoft Flight Simulator's complex scenery rendering. The 104.8 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 1,636.8 GTexel/s texture rate ensure that terrain textures and aircraft models can be processed without bottlenecks.

The RTX 5090 D's memory configuration is particularly relevant for Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known for loading large amounts of geographical data. The 32 GB capacity ensures that even at 4K Ultra settings, the entire scene can reside in VRAM without streaming stalls. This is reflected in the measured FPS data: at 4K Ultra, the combo maintains 84 FPS average, while at 4K High it achieves 88 FPS. The relatively small difference between High and Ultra at 4K (4 FPS) suggests that the GPU's memory bandwidth is not the limiting factor at this resolution; instead, the compute load from Ultra's increased draw distances and object density creates the bottleneck.

Comparing the RTX 5090 D to its nearest rivals in the benchmark database provides context for its performance ceiling. The GPU's average benchmark score of 77,712 places it in the 92nd percentile of all GPUs. Its closest competitor, the AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT, scores 76,904, which is 1.1% lower, while the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT scores 78,940, which is 1.6% higher. The NVIDIA Tesla P100 variants score 79,396 and 79,605, representing 2.1% and 2.4% advantages respectively. These narrow margins indicate that the RTX 5090 D sits in a tightly contested performance tier, though its 92nd percentile ranking confirms it outperforms the vast majority of GPUs in the database.

The GPU's role becomes more pronounced when examining the scaling from Low to Ultra settings at each resolution. At 1080p, the jump from Low (238 FPS) to Ultra (142 FPS) represents a 40.3% reduction in performance, while at 4K, the same settings change from Low (151 FPS) to Ultra (84 FPS) shows a 44.4% reduction. This larger percentage drop at 4K underscores that the RTX 5090 D is working progressively harder as both resolution and graphical complexity increase. The GPU's 575 W TDP and dual-slot design reflect its high-power design, though the benchmark data does not include power consumption measurements.

The RTX 5090 D's Blackwell 2.0 architecture with 170 RT cores and 680 tensor cores also contributes to Microsoft Flight Simulator's rendering efficiency, though the game does not heavily utilize ray tracing in its standard presets. The GPU's DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support ensures compatibility with the game's rendering features, while its PCIe 5.0 x16 interface provides ample bandwidth for data transfer from the CPU's Gen 5, 20-lane PCIe connection.

# Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the Medium preset at 1440p offers the most balanced experience for this combo, delivering 159 FPS average with a minimum of 136 FPS and maximum of 183 FPS. This configuration provides smooth gameplay while maintaining visual quality appropriate for a flight simulator where terrain detail and cockpit readability are important. The 136 FPS minimum is particularly notable because it ensures that even in dense scenery areas, the frame rate remains well above the 100 FPS threshold for a responsive experience.

For users prioritizing maximum visual fidelity, the Ultra preset at 1440p achieves 114 FPS average, which is playable but leaves less headroom for demanding scenarios. The 4K Ultra setting drops to 84 FPS, which may be acceptable for slower-paced flight simulation but could feel less fluid during rapid maneuvers. The 4K High preset at 88 FPS shows that dropping from Ultra to High at 4K only gains 4 FPS, making this an inefficient trade-off; users at 4K should either accept Ultra's 84 FPS or drop to Medium at 118 FPS for a more substantial improvement.

The High preset at 1080p produces 149 FPS average, which is only 7 FPS higher than Ultra at 1080p (142 FPS). This marginal difference suggests that at 1080p, the CPU or game engine limits performance more than GPU settings, making High and Ultra nearly interchangeable at this resolution. Conversely, the jump from Medium (198 FPS) to High (149 FPS) at 1080p represents a 24.7% reduction, indicating that Medium is the sweet spot for high refresh rate displays at 1080p.

At 4K, the Medium preset at 118 FPS with a 100 FPS minimum emerges as the recommended choice for users who want to maintain smooth performance while still enjoying detailed graphics. The 4K High preset at 88 FPS does not justify its 25.4% performance penalty over Medium, especially since the visual difference between Medium and High in Microsoft Flight Simulator is often subtle in many scenes. The 4K Ultra preset at 84 FPS offers diminishing returns over High, making it suitable only for users with G-SYNC displays who prioritize maximum image quality over frame rate consistency.

The Low preset, while achieving 238 FPS at 1080p and 151 FPS at 4K, sacrifices too much visual detail for a flight simulator where situational awareness depends on reading instruments and identifying landmarks. The data suggests that users should avoid Low settings unless they are benchmarking or using very high refresh rate monitors at 1080p.

# How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D ranks 13th out of 2,996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the top 0.4% of all configurations in the database. This ranking reflects the strong synergy between the CPU's 14-core Arrow Lake architecture and the GPU's massive compute resources. The CPU's average benchmark score of 46,062 places it in the 89th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU's 77,712 average score sits in the 92nd percentile, indicating that both components contribute to this high ranking.

The CPU's nearest rivals provide context for its performance contribution. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 scores 46,030, which is 0.1% lower, while the Intel Core i9-13900HX scores 46,098, which is 0.1% higher. The AMD EPYC 4364P and EPYC 7303 score 45,970 and 45,960 respectively, both 0.2% lower. These near-identical scores suggest that the Core Ultra 5 235 performs at parity with these competitors in general benchmarks, but its specific characteristics—such as 24 MB of shared L3 cache and 5.00 GHz boost clock—may influence Microsoft Flight Simulator's simulation-heavy workload differently.

The GPU's rival comparisons show a similar pattern. The AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT at 76,904 (1.1% lower) and RX 6850M XT at 78,940 (1.6% higher) bracket the RTX 5090 D's performance, while the NVIDIA Tesla P100 models at 79,396 and 79,605 (2.1% and 2.4% higher) represent data center-oriented alternatives. Despite these competitors being close in average benchmark scores, the RTX 5090 D's 32 GB VRAM gives it a distinct advantage in Microsoft Flight Simulator, which can utilize large memory pools for terrain and scenery data.

The rank of 13 out of 2,996 combos indicates that this pairing is highly optimized for this specific game, outperforming the vast majority of configurations that likely include lower-tier GPUs or CPUs with less capable simulation performance. The data shows that the Core Ultra 5 235's 14 threads (14 cores, no hyperthreading) are sufficient to feed the RTX 5090 D, as evidenced by the strong scaling from Low to Ultra settings at each resolution.

# FAQ

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

A: The highest measured average FPS is 238 at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The highest at Ultra settings is 142 FPS at 1920x1080.

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

A: At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the combo delivers 84 FPS average. This is the lowest measured average across all resolution-settings combinations in the data.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more likely to be the bottleneck at 1080p Low?

A: At 1080p Low with 238 FPS average, the CPU is likely the limiting factor, as the Intel Core Ultra 5 235's 14 cores and 14 threads with a 5.00 GHz boost clock appear to cap performance around this range. The GPU's 104.8 TFLOPS compute is underutilized at this low graphical load.

Q: What is the difference between High and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, High settings achieve 120 FPS average while Ultra achieves 114 FPS average, a difference of 6 FPS or 5.3%. This small gap suggests diminishing returns from Ultra settings at this resolution.

Q: Does the combo's ranking in this game match its component percentiles?

A: The combo ranks 13th out of 2,996 tested combos (top 0.4%), while the CPU ranks in the 89th percentile and the GPU ranks in the 92nd percentile. The combo ranking is higher than either component's individual percentile, indicating excellent synergy for this game.

Q: What are the minimum FPS values recorded for Medium settings?

A: For Medium settings, the minimum FPS is 168 at 1920x1080, 136 at 2560x1440, and 100 at 3840x2160. These values represent the lowest measured frame rates during the benchmark runs.

# Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured FPS data for Microsoft Flight Simulator with the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D is as follows:

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 238 FPS average
• Medium: 198 FPS average, 168 FPS minimum, 227 FPS maximum
• High: 149 FPS average
• Ultra: 142 FPS average

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 205 FPS average
• Medium: 159 FPS average, 136 FPS minimum, 183 FPS maximum
• High: 120 FPS average
• Ultra: 114 FPS average

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 151 FPS average
• Medium: 118 FPS average, 100 FPS minimum, 135 FPS maximum
• High: 88 FPS average
• Ultra: 84 FPS average

The Medium preset is the only settings level that includes both minimum and maximum FPS measurements across all three resolutions, providing the most complete picture of frame time consistency. At 1080p Medium, the spread between minimum and maximum is 59 FPS, while at 1440p Medium it is 47 FPS, and at 4K Medium it narrows to 35 FPS. This narrowing spread at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU's workload becomes more consistent as pixel count increases, reducing the impact of scene complexity variations.

The performance deltas between settings follow a consistent pattern. From Low to Medium, the average FPS drops by 16.8% at 1080p (238 to 198), 22.4% at 1440p (205 to 159), and 21.9% at 4K (151 to 118). The Medium to High transition shows reductions of 24.7% at 1080p (198 to 149), 24.5% at 1440p (159 to 120), and 25.4% at 4K (118 to 88). The High to Ultra transition is smallest, with reductions of 4.7% at 1080p (149 to 142), 5.0% at 1440p (120 to 114), and 4.5% at 4K (88 to 84). This consistent pattern across resolutions confirms that the High to Ultra step provides minimal performance impact while adding the most demanding visual features.

The resolution scaling from 1080p to 4K for each preset shows that Low settings suffer the largest absolute drop (87 FPS, from 238 to 151), while Ultra settings show the smallest absolute drop (58 FPS, from 142 to 84). This indicates that at Ultra settings, the game is already heavily GPU-bound even at 1080p, so additional pixel count has proportionally less impact. Conversely, at Low settings, the 1080p result is likely CPU-limited, allowing the GPU's full capability to be expressed only as resolution increases.