Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is a notoriously demanding title, and the combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and the AMD Radeon RX 580 produces a specific performance profile that is heavily skewed by the GPU. The data shows a system that can achieve playable frame rates at lower settings and resolutions, but one that is fundamentally constrained by its graphics hardware at higher presets and 4K. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS results, the role of each component, and how this pairing ranks against other tested configurations.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 is a 14-core, 14-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, providing strong single-thread performance that is often critical for simulation games. The CPU’s benchmark results support this, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4648 and a multi-core score of 32924. In the context of Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known for heavy single-threaded simulation logic, this processor has ample headroom to handle the game's complex flight and weather calculations.

However, the measured FPS data reveals that the CPU is not the limiting factor in this system for this particular game. At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves 54 FPS; when the resolution is increased to 1440p, it drops to 43 FPS, and at 4K, it falls to 32 FPS. This scaling pattern indicates that the frame rate is being dictated by the graphics card, not the processor. The Core Ultra 5 245’s 24 MB of shared L3 cache and support for DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s provide a solid foundation, but the RX 580 cannot consistently feed frames fast enough to let the CPU stretch its legs. The CPU’s PassMark single-thread score of 4394 places it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs, suggesting it is more than capable of powering this simulation, yet the GPU bottleneck prevents the system from realizing its full potential.

The processor’s performance is close to several rivals, according to the nearestRivals data. Its average benchmark score of 48995 is nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (49196, deltaPct -0.4%) and the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (49228, deltaPct -0.5%). It is also within 1% of the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H and Intel Core i5-14600K. This shows that while the CPU is competitive, its performance in this game is secondary to the GPU's output. The data suggests that if paired with a more powerful graphics card, the Core Ultra 5 245 would likely deliver significantly higher frame rates, as it has the raw compute power to keep up with faster GPUs.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: What is the best measured average FPS for this combo, and at what settings?

A: The highest measured average frame rate is 54 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This is the only configuration that reaches a comfortable playable threshold, as all other settings at this resolution stay at or below 42 FPS.

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

A: The performance at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings is the worst in the dataset, yielding an average of just 18 FPS. This indicates that the RX 580 is severely overburdened at 4K with maximum visual fidelity, making the game unplayable at that preset.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this system?

A: Benchmark results indicate the GPU is the primary bottleneck. Evidence for this is the significant frame rate drop when moving from 1080p Low (54 FPS) to 1080p High (31 FPS), which is a 23 FPS decrease. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rates would be more consistent across different graphics settings.

Q: What is the combo's ranking among all tested combinations?

A: The combo ranks 2733rd out of 2996 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the lower percentile of all tested systems, reflecting the age and limited performance of the RX 580 in this demanding title.

Q: What is the average FPS at 1440p with Medium settings?

A: At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the system produces an average of 34 FPS, with a minimum of 29 FPS and a maximum of 39 FPS. This shows that even at a mid-range resolution and preset, the system struggles to maintain a smooth 60 FPS experience.

Q: How does the RX 580's performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RX 580's average benchmark score is 12928, which is nearly identical to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (12940, deltaPct -0.1%) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER (12986, deltaPct -0.4%). It is also close to the AMD Radeon 740M and AMD FirePro W5100, showing that it performs in line with these other mid-range options.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The resolution scaling data provides clear evidence of a GPU-bound system. At Low settings, the average frame rate decreases from 54 FPS at 1080p to 43 FPS at 1440p, a 20% drop, and then further down to 32 FPS at 4K, a 41% drop from 1440p. This pattern is consistent with a graphics card that is running out of pixel-pushing power. The RX 580’s 8 GB of GDDR5 memory and 256-bit bus are being saturated at higher resolutions, causing the frame rate to plummet.

This is even more pronounced at High settings. The average FPS at 1080p is 31, dropping to 25 FPS at 1440p and just 19 FPS at 4K. The gap between 1080p and 4K is a 12 FPS loss, which is significant. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect the frame rates to be much closer together, as the resolution increase would not affect the CPU's workload as heavily. Instead, the data shows that the GPU is struggling to maintain even moderate frame rates as the pixel count increases. The fact that the 4K Medium settings (25 FPS) are lower than the 1440p Low settings (43 FPS) further reinforces that the GPU is the primary constraint, as the increase in resolution has a more substantial impact than the increase in graphical fidelity.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combo of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and AMD Radeon RX 580 ranks 2733rd out of 2996 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places the system in the bottom 9% of all tested configurations. This low ranking is almost entirely attributable to the GPU, as the CPU is a modern, capable part. The data suggests that this pairing is severely unbalanced for a game as demanding as Microsoft Flight Simulator, where the graphics card cannot keep up with the CPU's potential.

This rank of 2733 indicates that the vast majority of other tested combos deliver higher average frame rates. The system's best-case scenario of 54 FPS at 1080p Low is likely lower than the average performance of most other systems in the database. The ranking reflects the reality that the RX 580, while a popular card in its day, is now end-of-life and not equipped to handle the heavy rendering loads of this 2020 title at higher settings. The CPU's high percentile ranking (90th) contrasts sharply with the combo's overall low rank, highlighting the GPU bottleneck. This is a classic example of a system where the processor is not the weak link, but the overall performance is dragged down by the graphics solution.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Radeon RX 580 is an end-of-life graphics card based on the Polaris 20 chip and GCN 4.0 architecture, built on a 14 nm process. It features 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. Its base clock is 1257 MHz with a boost clock of 1340 MHz, and it has 2304 shading units. The card’s compute performance is rated at 6.175 TFLOPS for FP32. While these specs were respectable for its time, they are insufficient for the demands of Microsoft Flight Simulator at higher resolutions and settings.

The measured FPS data shows the RX 580's limitations clearly. At 1080p, the card can only manage 54 FPS at Low settings, which is the only preset that approaches a smooth experience. Moving to Medium settings drops the average to 42 FPS, and High and Ultra settings fall to 31 FPS and 30 FPS, respectively. At 1440p and 4K, the card's performance degrades further, with even Low settings failing to reach 45 FPS. The 8 GB VRAM buffer is likely being filled by the game's high-resolution textures, but the core compute performance of the GPU is the primary bottleneck, as evidenced by the steep drop in FPS when increasing the resolution or settings. The card's PassMark G3D score of 8813 and its 53rd percentile ranking among all GPUs confirm its mid-range status, but its performance in this game is on the lower end of that spectrum due to the title's heavy demands on fill rate and shading.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The following data represents the measured average FPS for the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and AMD Radeon RX 580 combination. Where available, minimum and maximum FPS are also listed.

1920x1080

• Low: Average 54 FPS.
• Medium: Average 42 FPS, with a minimum of 36 FPS and a maximum of 48 FPS.
• High: Average 31 FPS.
• Ultra: Average 30 FPS.

2560x1440

• Low: Average 43 FPS.
• Medium: Average 34 FPS, with a minimum of 29 FPS and a maximum of 39 FPS.
• High: Average 25 FPS.
• Ultra: Average 24 FPS.

3840x2160

• Low: Average 32 FPS.
• Medium: Average 25 FPS, with a minimum of 21 FPS and a maximum of 29 FPS.
• High: Average 19 FPS.
• Ultra: Average 18 FPS.

The data reveals that the system is only truly playable at 1080p with Low settings, where it hits 54 FPS. At 1080p Medium, the frame rate drops to 42 FPS, which is borderline, and anything above that is below 31 FPS. At 1440p, the system falls below 45 FPS even at Low settings, and at 4K, it struggles to reach 32 FPS at any setting. The minimum FPS values observed (36 at 1080p Medium, 29 at 1440p Medium, and 21 at 4K Medium) indicate that there are noticeable frame hitches, making the experience less smooth than the average FPS might suggest. The performance gap between Low and Ultra settings at the same resolution is substantial, showing a 24 FPS difference at 1080p and a 14 FPS difference at 4K, which underscores the GPU's inability to handle the increased graphical load.