Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is a uniquely demanding title, one that stresses both the processor and the graphics card in ways few other games do. The benchmark data for the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER reveals a system that is capable of a solid experience, but one where the balance of power shifts dramatically depending on the resolution and settings you choose. This analysis digs into the measured frames to understand where the bottlenecks lie and what this specific combination offers to the virtual pilot.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and predictable trend: as resolution increases, performance drops, but the rate of that drop tells a compelling story about the limiting component in this system. At 1080p with High settings, the combo produces 65 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 drops that to 52 FPS, a 20% decrease. Pushing further to 4K (3840x2160) at High settings results in 39 FPS, which is a 25% drop from 1440p and a full 40% drop from the 1080p figure.

This scaling pattern is the fingerprint of a system that starts to lean heavily on the GPU as the resolution climbs. At 1080p, the CPU has enough headroom to feed the GPU, but as pixel count increases, the rendering workload on the RTX 2070 SUPER becomes the dominant factor. The jump from 1080p to 1440p is significant, but the subsequent jump to 4K is even more punishing, indicating that the GPU is running out of shader and memory bandwidth headroom. The data suggests that while the CPU is a strong partner, the GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER is the primary gatekeeper for high-resolution, high-fidelity flight.

The pattern holds across all settings tiers. With Low settings, the drop from 1080p (111 FPS) to 1440p (89 FPS) is a 19.8% reduction, and then to 4K (66 FPS) it’s a further 25.8% reduction. This consistency across quality presets reinforces the idea that the scaling is resolution-bound, not settings-bound. The game’s demand for pixel throughput at 4K is simply immense, and even when the visual load is lightened, the GPU still struggles to maintain high frame rates. This suggests that for a smoother 4K experience, the user would need to look at a GPU with significantly more horsepower than the RTX 2070 SUPER.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 is a 14-core, 14-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture. Its benchmark scores, such as a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32924 and a single-core score of 4648, place it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs. This indicates a very capable processor for both threaded and lightly-threaded workloads. In the context of Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known to be sensitive to strong single-core performance for its simulation and physics logic, this CPU provides a solid foundation.

The data shows that the CPU is not the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions. For instance, at 4K Ultra settings, the system only manages 37 FPS. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect to see frame rates that are more consistent across resolutions, as the CPU workload doesn't scale with pixel count. Instead, we see a significant drop from 62 FPS at 1080p Ultra to 50 FPS at 1440p Ultra, and then to 37 FPS at 4K Ultra. This decline is far too steep to be attributed to CPU limitations; it is the GPU struggling to keep up with the increased pixel rendering demands.

However, the CPU’s role becomes more apparent at 1080p. Even on Low settings, the system maxes out at 111 FPS. While this is a high number, it suggests that the game’s simulation thread is creating a ceiling of sorts, preventing the frame rate from climbing even higher with a less demanding GPU workload. The 14 cores and 14 threads are more than adequate for the game's multi-threaded tasks, but the lack of hyper-threading might slightly limit performance in some edge cases. The boost clock of 5.10 GHz is a key asset here, providing the high-frequency responsiveness that the sim's core logic requires to keep the frame pacing smooth.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER, built on the Turing architecture, features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. With a boost clock of 1770 MHz and 2560 shading units, it delivers 9.062 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. Its average benchmark score of 20282 places it in the 65th percentile of all GPUs, indicating it’s a solid mid-range performer from its generation. Yet, in the context of a modern, demanding title like Microsoft Flight Simulator, its age and memory configuration are apparent.

The GPU's role as the primary bottleneck at high resolutions is undeniable. The measured frame rates at 4K (39 FPS High, 37 FPS Ultra) are below the threshold for a consistently smooth experience. The 8 GB VRAM is a likely suspect here. While the data doesn't explicitly show VRAM usage, the performance cliff between 1440p and 4K suggests that the card is not only processing more pixels but may also be hitting a memory capacity wall, forcing texture streaming and causing stutters or frame drops. The min FPS of 44 at 4K Medium, compared to the 59 at 1440p Medium, further indicates that the GPU is struggling to maintain a stable framebuffer at the higher resolution.

The GPU's 160 TMUs and 64 ROPs are also taxed heavily. The texture rate of 283.2 GTexel/s sounds high, but rendering the detailed terrain and aircraft models in Flight Simulator at 4K requires a massive amount of texture fetches, which can saturate the TMUs. The data suggests that the RTX 2070 SUPER is a capable 1080p and 1440p card for this game, but at 4K, it is out of its depth, with the frame rate dropping to levels that would be noticeably less fluid for a flight sim where smooth visuals are important for immersion.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of the system's capabilities. Here is the exact breakdown:

• 1920x1080 (1080p):
• Low: Average 111 FPS. This is the highest frame rate recorded for the entire combo, showing the system's peak potential when GPU load is minimized.
• Medium: Average 86 FPS, with a min of 73 and a max of 99. This is a very playable range, offering a smooth experience.
• High: Average 65 FPS. A solid 60+ FPS experience, good for standard monitors.
• Ultra: Average 62 FPS. Surprisingly close to the High preset, suggesting the CPU is beginning to limit performance at this resolution.

• 2560x1440 (1440p):
• Low: Average 89 FPS. Still very high, showing that the CPU can push a lot of frames at this resolution when the GPU isn't heavily loaded.
• Medium: Average 70 FPS, with a min of 59 and a max of 80. This is a sweet spot for a 60Hz monitor, providing a stable and fluid experience.
• High: Average 52 FPS. This is a noticeable step down, crossing below the 60 FPS threshold.
• Ultra: Average 50 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra is small here, indicating that the GPU is the primary constraint.

• 3840x2160 (4K):
• Low: Average 66 FPS. The only 4K preset to break the 60 FPS barrier, showing the GPU can still do it if the visual load is drastically reduced.
• Medium: Average 51 FPS, with a min of 44 and a max of 59. This is a playable range for those who prioritize resolution over maximum detail, but min FPS can dip.
• High: Average 39 FPS. A significant drop, making the experience feel less smooth.
• Ultra: Average 37 FPS. The lowest recorded score, indicating this setting is too demanding for this GPU at 4K.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combination to maintain a 60 FPS average?

A: The data shows that 1080p with High settings (65 FPS) and 1440p with Medium settings (70 FPS) are the highest quality presets that achieve an average above 60 FPS. For a more consistent 60 FPS, 1440p Low (89 FPS) or 1080p Ultra (62 FPS) are also viable options.

Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: Yes, but with significant compromises. The data shows that at 4K, only the Low preset (66 FPS) achieves a 60 FPS average. All other presets fall below that, with Medium at 51 FPS, High at 39 FPS, and Ultra at 37 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the main limiting factor at 4K Ultra settings?

A: The data strongly indicates the GPU is the bottleneck. The frame rate drops significantly from 1080p (62 FPS) to 4K (37 FPS), a decline that is characteristic of GPU-bound performance, as the CPU's workload does not increase with pixel count.

Q: Is there a big difference between High and Ultra settings for this system?

A: The performance cost is small, but the frame rate impact is noticeable in some cases. At 1080p, the difference is 3 FPS (65 vs 62). At 1440p, it is 2 FPS (52 vs 50). At 4K, it is also 2 FPS (39 vs 37). The data suggests the visual upgrade might not be worth the slight FPS loss for a smoother experience.

Q: How does the combo rank among all tested configurations?

A: This specific combination ranks 1697 out of 2996 tested combos in this game. This places it in the lower half of the field, reflecting the age of the GPU compared to more modern options.

Q: What is the most stable experience in terms of minimum FPS?

A: The data shows that the Medium preset at 1440p has a min FPS of 59, which is the highest min FPS recorded for a preset above Low. At 1080p Medium, the min FPS is 73. These settings provide the best frame pacing with less risk of sudden drops.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured rows, the best experience for a standard 60Hz monitor is the Medium preset at 2560x1440. It delivers an average of 70 FPS with a minimum of 59 FPS, ensuring the frame rate stays consistently within the V-Sync window of a 60Hz display. This provides a significant visual upgrade over 1080p while maintaining smooth playback. The 1440p Medium setting appears to be the sweet spot for this hardware, balancing resolution, detail, and performance.

For users with a 1080p monitor, the High preset is the recommended choice. It provides a solid 65 FPS average, which is above the 60 FPS target, and offers better visual fidelity than Medium. Pushing to Ultra at 1080p gains very little (only 3 FPS) and risks more frequent dips below 60 FPS, making High the more consistent option. If a user prioritizes maximum visual detail and has a G-Sync or FreeSync monitor, the Ultra preset at 1080p is still playable at 62 FPS.

For those who want to play at 4K, the Low preset is the only viable option for a smooth experience, averaging 66 FPS. However, the visual sacrifices are substantial. The Medium preset at 4K (51 FPS average) is a compromise, but the minimum FPS of 44 might lead to noticeable stutters during complex scenes. The data suggests that settling for 1440p Medium is a far better use of the system's capabilities than attempting 4K with reduced details, offering a better balance of visual fidelity and smoothness.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER ranks 1697 out of 2996 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the bottom half of all configurations, which is a telling statistic. While the CPU is a strong performer in its own right, ranking in the 90th percentile of all CPUs, the GPU is the limiting factor, ranking in the 65th percentile of all GPUs.

This ranking suggests that the system is held back by the graphics card in this specific title. The CPU has the headroom to drive higher frame rates, but the RTX 2070 SUPER cannot deliver the necessary pixel throughput at higher resolutions and settings. The data implies that this combo is a better match for 1080p and light 1440p gaming in this simulator, rather than a high-end 4K experience. Upgrading the GPU would likely yield a substantial improvement in the overall ranking and in-game performance, as the CPU would be able to stretch its legs further. The ranking reflects a system that is well-balanced for its intended purpose but falls behind when pushed to the extremes of resolution and fidelity.