Microsoft Flight Simulator

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT sits at rank 882 out of 2996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places the pairing in the top 30% of all tested configurations, which is a strong position for a flight simulator that tends to punish both CPU and GPU heavily. The combo outperforms roughly 70% of the tested field, meaning that most systems tested will deliver lower frame rates in this specific title.

What makes this ranking noteworthy is the balance between the two components. The CPU sits at the 90th percentile among all tested processors, while the GPU rests at the 85th percentile among all tested graphics cards. Neither component is dramatically holding the other back, which is reflected in the combo ranking being close to both individual percentile positions. The data suggests this is a harmonious pairing for Microsoft Flight Simulator, where the heavy draw-call and physics workloads benefit from the CPU's strong single-thread performance while the GPU handles the vast scenery rendering.

In practical terms, a rank of 882 means this system will deliver smooth, playable performance in most scenarios, but it will not be at the very top tier where the absolute highest frame rates live. The top 881 combos tested include configurations with newer and more expensive hardware, so this pairing represents a solid mid-to-upper tier setup rather than an enthusiast flagship. The measured data confirms that this combo can push high frame rates at lower settings and maintain playable performance at maximum quality presets.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT brings substantial graphics horsepower to Microsoft Flight Simulator. Built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with the Navi 21 chip, this GPU features 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 512.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The 16 GB frame buffer is particularly relevant for flight simulation, as the game loads extensive terrain textures, aircraft models, and weather effects that can consume significant video memory at higher resolutions and quality settings.

Clock speeds are substantial, with a base clock of 1825 MHz, a game clock of 2015 MHz, and a boost clock of 2250 MHz. The GPU contains 4608 shading units, 288 texture mapping units, and 128 render output units, along with 72 ray accelerators. The pixel rate of 288.0 GPixel/s and texture rate of 648.0 GTexel/s indicate strong raw throughput that helps maintain frame rates when flying over densely detailed urban areas or through complex weather systems.

The GPU's compute capabilities are equally impressive, with FP32 performance rated at 20.74 TFLOPS and FP16 at 41.47 TFLOPS. In benchmark tests, the RX 6800 XT scores 24980 in Passmark G3D and 13245 in Passmark GPU Compute, placing it at the 85th percentile among all tested GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile (1.5% higher average score) and the Intel Arc A550M (2.5% lower), with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti and AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 both about 3% lower in average score.

For Microsoft Flight Simulator specifically, the GPU's role becomes more pronounced at higher resolutions. The measured data shows that at 4K Ultra settings, the average frame rate drops to 51 FPS, indicating the GPU is working near its limits. The 16 GB memory buffer provides headroom for high-resolution textures, but the raw compute power determines the final frame rate at maximum quality settings.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 is a 14-core, 14-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process at TSMC. With a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, this CPU delivers strong single-thread performance that is critical for Microsoft Flight Simulator's simulation loop. The processor includes 24 MB of shared L3 cache, which helps keep frequently accessed data close to the cores.

Benchmark results show the CPU achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32924 and a single-core score of 4648, placing it at the 90th percentile among all tested CPUs. The Passmark multi-thread score of 38706 and single-thread score of 4394 further confirm its balanced performance profile. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (0.4% lower average score) and the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (0.5% lower), with the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H and Intel Core i5-14600K both within 1% of its average score.

For Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is twofold. First, the simulation engine that handles flight physics, weather modeling, and AI traffic is heavily single-thread dependent, making the 5.10 GHz boost clock valuable. Second, the game's draw-call processing for scenery and airport environments benefits from the 14 cores when multiple objects are being rendered simultaneously. The CPU's memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s over a dual-channel DDR5 interface ensures the GPU receives data without becoming a bottleneck.

The measured data shows that the CPU keeps pace with the GPU across all settings and resolutions. At 1080p Low settings, the combo achieves 153 FPS, which is well above the refresh rate of most monitors and indicates the CPU is not limiting performance at lower graphical loads. The CPU's 65W TDP also suggests efficient operation, though the actual power draw will vary based on workload and motherboard power delivery settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rates for Microsoft Flight Simulator with this combo show clear scaling across resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the combo ranges from 153 FPS on Low settings to 85 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset delivers 119 FPS average with a minimum of 101 FPS and maximum of 137 FPS, while the High preset achieves 90 FPS. These numbers indicate that at 1080p, the system is capable of high-refresh-rate gameplay even at Medium quality, and remains comfortably playable at Ultra.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance scales down as expected. Low settings produce 123 FPS, Medium delivers 96 FPS with a minimum of 82 FPS and maximum of 110 FPS, High achieves 72 FPS, and Ultra drops to 69 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra at 1440p is only 3 FPS, suggesting that the visual improvements from Ultra over High come at a relatively small performance cost at this resolution. The Medium preset's minimum of 82 FPS ensures smooth gameplay for most users, while the Ultra preset's 69 FPS average remains within a playable range for flight simulation.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the primary limiting factor. Low settings yield 91 FPS, Medium produces 71 FPS with a minimum of 60 FPS and maximum of 81 FPS, High drops to 53 FPS, and Ultra falls to 51 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra at 4K is only 2 FPS, indicating that the GPU is saturated and additional graphical features have minimal impact on frame rate. The Medium preset's 60 FPS minimum is exactly at the threshold for smooth gameplay, making it the most viable option for 4K users who want consistent performance.

Across all resolutions, the Medium preset consistently provides the highest minimum frame rates, which is important for flight simulation where sudden dips in frame rate can be jarring. At 1080p and 1440p, the Medium preset offers a minimum of 101 FPS and 82 FPS respectively, providing substantial headroom above the 60 FPS threshold. At 4K, the Medium preset's 60 FPS minimum is exactly at the playability threshold, making it the recommended choice for high-resolution users.

FAQ

Q: How does this combo perform at 4K resolution in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: At 3840x2160, the combo achieves 91 FPS on Low settings, 71 FPS on Medium, 53 FPS on High, and 51 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset provides the best balance with a 60 FPS minimum and 81 FPS maximum.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 1440p gaming?

A: At 2560x1440, the Medium preset delivers 96 FPS average with a minimum of 82 FPS and maximum of 110 FPS. This provides smooth performance with a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold, while the Ultra preset still achieves a playable 69 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more limiting for this game?

A: The data shows the CPU ranks at the 90th percentile while the GPU ranks at the 85th percentile. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo reaches 153 FPS, indicating the CPU can push high frame rates. At 4K Ultra, the frame rate drops to 51 FPS, showing the GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

Q: How does this combo compare to similar hardware in benchmark scores?

A: The CPU's average benchmark score of 48995 is within 1% of the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 and Intel Core i5-14600K. The GPU's average score of 48477 is approximately 3% lower than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti and AMD Radeon RX Vega 64.

Q: What frame rates can I expect at 1080p with high refresh rate monitors?

A: At 1920x1080, the combo achieves 153 FPS on Low, 119 FPS on Medium, 90 FPS on High, and 85 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset's minimum of 101 FPS ensures consistent performance above 100 FPS, making it suitable for 144Hz displays.

Q: Does the combo maintain consistent frame rates or are there drops?

A: The measured data includes minimum and maximum frame rates only for the Medium preset at each resolution. At 1080p, the range is 101-137 FPS; at 1440p, it is 82-110 FPS; and at 4K, it is 60-81 FPS. The consistent minimums suggest the combo maintains stable performance without severe dips.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience with this combo in Microsoft Flight Simulator, the Medium preset emerges as the most balanced option across all resolutions. At 1080p, Medium delivers 119 FPS average with a minimum of 101 FPS, providing smooth performance that exceeds the refresh rate of most standard monitors. The 101 FPS minimum ensures that even in demanding scenarios such as dense airport areas or heavy weather, the frame rate will not drop below a very playable level. Users with 144Hz monitors can confidently use Medium settings at 1080p without worrying about frame rate drops ruining the experience.

At 1440p, the Medium preset remains the recommendation, delivering 96 FPS average with an 82 FPS minimum and 110 FPS maximum. This provides a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold, ensuring smooth gameplay even during complex flight maneuvers or when flying over detailed cityscapes. The 82 FPS minimum means that even the most demanding scenes will remain fluid. While the High preset at 1440p achieves 72 FPS, the Medium preset's higher minimum frame rate makes it the safer choice for consistent performance.

For 4K users, the Medium preset is the only viable option for consistent performance, with a 71 FPS average and a 60 FPS minimum. The High and Ultra presets at 53 FPS and 51 FPS respectively are technically playable but leave no headroom for demanding scenes, and any additional load could cause noticeable stuttering. The Medium preset's 60 FPS floor provides a stable experience, though users with variable refresh rate monitors may find the 51-53 FPS of Higher presets acceptable if they prioritize visual quality over frame rate consistency.

The data suggests that the High preset offers diminishing returns over Medium at all resolutions. At 1080p, the difference is 29 FPS (119 vs 90), at 1440p it is 24 FPS (96 vs 72), and at 4K it is 18 FPS (71 vs 53). The Low preset provides the highest frame rates but sacrifices too much visual quality for flight simulation, where seeing terrain details and airport markings matters for the experience. The Ultra preset offers minimal gains over High (3-5 FPS at most resolutions) and is not worth the performance cost.

For users prioritizing visual fidelity over frame rate, the High preset at 1440p provides a good middle ground with 72 FPS average. However, for most users, the Medium preset at 1440p or 1080p offers the best combination of smoothness and visual quality. The measured data consistently shows that Medium provides the highest minimum frame rates, which is the most important factor for a game where frame time consistency directly affects the sense of flight realism. The recommendation is clear: use Medium settings for the best overall experience with this hardware combination.