Microsoft Flight Simulator

The pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 with the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX in Microsoft Flight Simulator produces a dataset that clearly delineates the boundaries between CPU and GPU responsibility. The measurements across three resolutions and four quality presets reveal a system that is primarily held back by processor throughput at lower resolutions, while the sheer graphical load at 4K brings the high-end RDNA 3.0 GPU into the spotlight. This analysis breaks down the measured frames per second (FPS) data, contextualizes the hardware within its performance percentiles, and answers key questions about optimizing the experience.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS data collected for this combination shows a predictable but steep penalty as resolution increases, yet the magnitude of that penalty is highly dependent on the quality preset selected. At the Low preset, the average frame rate drops from 192 FPS at 1080p to 114 FPS at 2160p—a reduction of 78 FPS, or roughly a 40.6% loss. This is a massive hit that points directly at the GPU becoming the primary bottleneck at 4K, as the CPU is more than capable of feeding frames at lower resolutions. The gap between 1080p and 1440p Low is 37 FPS (192 to 155), and the step from 1440p to 4K Low is 41 FPS (155 to 114). The scaling is remarkably consistent, indicating that the Radeon RX 7900 XTX is the limiting factor across all three resolution steps when settings are at their lowest.

Moving to the High preset, the trend becomes more nuanced. The 1080p High result is 112 FPS, which drops to 91 FPS at 1440p and then to 67 FPS at 2160p. The 21 FPS reduction from 1080p to 1440p is nearly identical to the 24 FPS reduction from 1440p to 4K, again suggesting a smooth, GPU-bound scaling curve. However, the delta between Low and High settings at 1080p is 80 FPS (192 vs 112), which is larger than the resolution scaling itself. This indicates that the CPU can still push high frame rates at 1080p, but the GPU is already being taxed by the increased graphical load. At 4K, the High preset only manages 67 FPS, which is a fraction of the 114 FPS achieved at Low, showing that the GPU is now the dominant constraint, and the CPU's headroom is irrelevant.

The Medium preset offers the only complete dataset with min and max FPS values. At 1080p Medium, the average is 149 FPS with a min of 127 and a max of 172. Moving to 1440p Medium, the average is 120 FPS with min 102 and max 138. At 2160p Medium, the average is 89 FPS with min 76 and max 102. The FPS range tightens as resolution increases; the spread between min and max is 45 FPS at 1080p, 36 FPS at 1440p, and 26 FPS at 4K. This compression of variance indicates that at lower resolutions, the CPU can drive frame times to very low values, but at 4K, the GPU's workload evens out the delivery. The average FPS drops of 29 FPS from 1080p to 1440p and 31 FPS from 1440p to 2160p show a nearly linear relationship with the pixel count increase.

The Ultra preset is the most demanding, with 107 FPS at 1080p and just 64 FPS at 4K. The 43 FPS drop from 1080p to 2160p is the largest absolute penalty of any preset. The gap between High and Ultra is smaller at 1080p (112 vs 107 FPS) than at 4K (67 vs 64 FPS), suggesting that the Ultra preset's extra effects are less impactful at lower resolutions when the CPU is still the bottleneck, but the GPU is already saturated at 4K and the settings make a difference. The data clearly shows that resolution scaling is not linear, but the GPU is the limiting factor at high resolutions, while the CPU maintains a more influential role at 1080p.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS rows provide a clear picture of which settings preset delivers the best balance between visual quality and frame rate for this specific hardware combination. The Ultra preset, while visually impressive, demands a heavy toll. It yields an average of 107 FPS at 1080p, 86 FPS at 1440p, and 64 FPS at 4K. The 4K Ultra result is the lowest score in the entire dataset, and even the 1440p Ultra score is well below the 120 FPS that many users consider the threshold for high-refresh-rate displays. The data suggests that Ultra is only viable if the user prioritizes visual fidelity over frame-rate smoothness.

The High preset is a more balanced option. It produces 112 FPS at 1080p, 91 FPS at 1440p, and 67 FPS at 4K. The 4K High score is just 3 FPS higher than the Ultra score, but the 1440p High result (91 FPS) is 5 FPS higher than the Ultra preset at the same resolution. This indicates that High is the most efficient preset for maintaining a high refresh-rate experience. The 1080p High result is also the second-highest in the dataset, trailing only the Low preset's 192 FPS.

However, the Low preset is the only one that delivers frame rates above 100 FPS at all three resolutions. It achieves 192 FPS at 1080p, 155 FPS at 1440p, and 114 FPS at 4K. This makes Low the only preset where the 4K resolution can sustain a high refresh rate, but it does at the cost of visual quality. For a flight simulator like Microsoft Flight Simulator, where visual immersion is a key selling point, the Low preset may be too visually sparse for many users.

The Medium preset occupies a middle ground, with 149 FPS at 1080p, 120 FPS at 1440p, and 89 FPS at 4K. It offers the highest frame rates outside of Low and provides the only complete min/max data, showing a stable frame time distribution. The 4K Medium average of 89 FPS is significantly higher than the High preset's 67 FPS, and the 1440p Medium score of 120 FPS is a solid result. For users with high refresh-rate 1440p or 4K displays who cannot tolerate the visual downgrade of Low, Medium is the optimal preset. It delivers a 33% improvement over High at 4K (89 vs 67) and a 32% improvement at 1440p (120 vs 91). The data clearly suggests that Medium provides the best experience per the measured rows, offering the largest FPS gain for a single step down from High.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 features 14 cores and 14 threads, a 3.50 GHz base clock, and a 5.10 GHz boost clock. This architecture, based on the Arrow Lake design and manufactured on a 3 nm process, also includes 24 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory support. The CPU's average benchmark score is 48995, which places it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs.

In this game, the CPU's role is most apparent at 1080p, where the frame rates are highest. The 192 FPS at Low settings is a strong indicator that the CPU can produce high frame counts when the GPU is not overwhelmed. The 14 cores and 14 threads are not as many as some competing high-core-count parts, but the boost clock of 5.10 GHz helps maintain high single-thread performance, which is crucial for Flight Simulator's flight mechanics. The 3.50 GHz base clock provides a solid foundation for sustained loads.

The benchmark results from the FACT PACK show that the Core Ultra 5 245 performs within 1% of several rivals. Its average benchmark score of 48995 is 0.4% lower than the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G's 49196 and 0.5% lower than the AMD Ryzen 9 7900's 49228. It also sits 0.6% above the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H's 48698 and 0.8% above the Intel Core i5-14600K's 48618. This tight grouping indicates that the CPU's compute performance is very close to those parts, but the ACTUAL frame rates in this game are influenced by other factors like memory latency and the specific game engine's use of the cores.

The CPU's architecture is RDNA 3.0, which is a surprising detail, but the data is clear: it has 14 cores, 14 threads, and a 5.10 GHz boost. The CPU's 24 MB of L3 cache (shared) and 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth are typical for a mainstream desktop part. The 4K resolution results show that the CPU is not the bottleneck at that resolution; the frame rates are consistently lower than those at 1080p, with the GPU being the limiting factor. The fact that the CPU's score is in the 90th percentile suggests it is a capable part, but the game's scaling indicates that the GPU is the primary constraint at high resolutions.

The CPU's performance in Microsoft Flight Simulator is robust, but it is not the star of the show. At 1080p, it can drive frame rates up to 192 FPS at Low, which is excellent. However, as the resolution increases, the CPU's influence fades, and the GPU takes over. The CPU's 90th percentile score and the near-identical performance to its rivals indicate it is a solid choice, but the game's data shows that the GPU is the key to high-resolution performance.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX ranks 463rd out of 3714 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the top 12.5% of all configurations, which is a strong result. The combo's rank is driven by the CPU's solid performance (90th percentile) and the GPU's high-end capabilities, but the GPU's 64th percentile relative to all GPUs is a surprising factor. The GPU's average benchmark score is 19410, which is 1% lower than the NVIDIA Quadro K5200's 19602 and 1.2% lower than the AMD FirePro D300's 19637. It is also 0.4% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3GB's 19334 and 1.2% higher than the NVIDIA TITAN Xp's 19177. This puts the RX 7900 XTX in a tricky spot, as its 64th percentile is lower than expected for a high-end part.

The combo's rank of 463 indicates that many other CPU/GPU pairings achieve higher frame rates in this specific game. The CPU's 14-core and 14-thread configuration is not the most powerful, and the GPU, while capable, is not the top-dog. The dataset shows that the combo is competitive but not dominant. The CPU's 90th percentile score and the GPU's 64th percentile score combine to produce a mid-pack overall performance in the game. The rank is 463 out of 3714, which is a solid result, but there are many combos that are faster. The measured results show that the combo can produce frame rates up to 192 FPS at 1080p Low, which is excellent, but at 4K Ultra, it falls to 64 FPS.

The combo's performance is well above the 50th percentile (463/3714 is 12.5%), meaning it outpaces the majority of tested configurations. This rank confirms the balance between the CPU and GPU. The CPU's high percentile compensates for the GPU's mediocre percentile, but the game's engine is likely more GPU-bound at high resolutions, so the GPU's rank is more influential. The data shows that the combo is a good pairing, but not a top-tier one.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average frame rate achieved by this combo at 1080p?

A: The highest average is 192 FPS, which occurs at 1080p with the Low preset.

Q: How does the 4K Medium preset compare to 4K High?

A: The Medium preset averages 89 FPS, while the High preset averages 67 FPS, a 22 FPS difference in favor of Medium.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor at 4K with High settings?

A: The data shows a 67 FPS average at 4K High, which is 45 FPS lower than the 1080p High result, indicating the GPU is the primary bottleneck at high resolutions.

Q: What are the minimum and maximum FPS for the 1440p Medium preset?

A: The minimum is 102 FPS and the maximum is 138 FPS, with an average of 120 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU's benchmark score compare to the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 scores 0.4% lower than the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G in average benchmark score.

Q: What rank does this combo achieve in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The combo ranks 463rd out of 3714 tested combinations.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The dataset includes 12 measured FPS rows, covering four quality presets at three resolutions. The 1080p results are the highest, with the Low preset hitting an average of 192 FPS, the Medium preset at 149 FPS with a min of 127 and a max of 172, the High preset at a 112 FPS average, and the Ultra preset at 107 FPS. The 1440p results show a clear step down: Low averages 155 FPS, Medium averages 120 FPS (min 102, max 138), High averages 91 FPS, and Ultra averages 86 FPS. The 4K results are the most demanding, with Low achieving 114 FPS, Medium averaging 89 FPS (min 76, max 102), High averaging 67 FPS, and Ultra averaging 64 FPS. The data shows a consistent drop of roughly 40% from 1080p to 4K for Low, about 40% for Medium (149 to 89), 40% for High (112 to 67), and 40% for Ultra (107 to 64). The Medium preset is the only one with full min/max data at all resolutions, showing a stable frame output. The Low preset is the only one that maintains an average above 100 FPS at all resolutions. The Ultra preset is the most consistent in terms of average FPS between 1440p and 4K, with only a 22 FPS drop (86 vs 64). The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and Radeon RX 7900 XTX provides a wide range of frame rates depending on settings, but the 4K Ultra result of 64 FPS is the lowest in the entire dataset.