Microsoft Flight Simulator

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with a GB203 chip, and its specifications align closely with the demands of Microsoft Flight Simulator. The GPU packs 16 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 896.0 GB/s of bandwidth. In a flight simulator that streams vast terrain and scenery data, this memory capacity and bandwidth are directly relevant: the card can hold large texture sets and geometry buffers without stalling, which helps maintain consistent frame delivery in dense urban or mountainous areas.

Clock behavior plays a notable role in the measured results. The RTX 5070 Ti runs at a base clock of 2295 MHz and boosts to 2452 MHz. These clocks are not exceptionally high for a modern GPU, but the architecture compensates with 8960 shading units, 280 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The FP32 throughput is 43.94 TFLOPS, which is substantial for a flight sim that often becomes geometry- and shading-bound at high settings. The card also includes 70 RT cores and 280 tensor cores, though Microsoft Flight Simulator's primary workload is rasterization rather than ray tracing, so those resources matter less here.

The GPU's pixel rate of 235.4 GPixel/s and texture rate of 686.6 GTexel/s are strong indicators of its fill-rate capability. In this game, texture filtering and pixel throughput become critical at higher resolutions, especially when flying low over detailed scenery. The data confirms this: at 4K Ultra, the combo averages 66 FPS, while at 1080p Ultra it reaches 110 FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 4K at Ultra settings shows a 40% drop, which is typical for a GPU-bound scenario where the RTX 5070 Ti is pushed to its limits.

Comparatively, the RTX 5070 Ti sits in the 86th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 49957. Its nearest rivals in aggregate benchmarks include the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT (2% higher score) and the AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT (3.1% lower score). These deltas are small, indicating that the RTX 5070 Ti is competitively positioned, though in this specific title, the game's engine appears to favor the NVIDIA architecture's memory subsystem and driver optimization.

The 16 GB VRAM is worth emphasizing because Microsoft Flight Simulator is known for consuming large memory pools, particularly with high-resolution texture packs and photogrammetry data. The measured 4K results show that even at Ultra settings, the combo does not appear to be VRAM-limited; the average of 66 FPS suggests compute and fill-rate limits rather than memory capacity issues. At 1080p Low, the GPU reaches 198 FPS, indicating that the card has ample headroom when the CPU is not the bottleneck.

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

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for this GPU-CPU pair in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The data shows the highest average FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings, hitting 198 FPS. For a balanced experience, 2560x1440 Medium delivers 124 FPS, while 3840x2160 High averages 69 FPS. The 4K Ultra setting drops to 66 FPS, which is still playable but near the lower bound for smooth flight simulation.

Q: How does the RTX 5070 Ti compare to its closest rivals in aggregate GPU benchmarks?

A: The RTX 5070 Ti scores 49957 on average, placing it in the 86th percentile. It trails the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT by 2% (50951 vs. 49957) and the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 by a negligible 0.1% (50001 vs. 49957). It leads the Intel Arc A550M by 0.4% and the AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT by 3.1% (48477 vs. 49957).

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 CPU bottleneck the RTX 5070 Ti in this game?

A: The evidence suggests some CPU limitation at lower resolutions. At 1080p Low, the combo reaches 198 FPS, but at 4K Low, it drops to 118 FPS—a 40% reduction that is mostly GPU-driven. However, the CPU's single-thread score of 4648 in Cinebench R23 and its 90th percentile ranking among all CPUs indicate it is strong enough to avoid severe bottlenecks in most scenarios.

Q: What is the CPU's performance rating relative to its nearest rivals?

A: The Core Ultra 5 245 has an average benchmark score of 48995, placing it in the 90th percentile. It is nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (49196, 0.4% higher) and the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (49228, 0.5% higher). It edges out the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H by 0.6% and the Intel Core i5-14600K by 0.8% (48618 vs. 48995).

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested combinations for this game?

A: The combo ranks 251st out of 2996 tested combinations, placing it in the top 8.4% of all systems tested. This indicates that the Core Ultra 5 245 and RTX 5070 Ti pairing is a high-performing setup for Microsoft Flight Simulator, though not at the very top tier.

Q: What are the minimum and maximum FPS figures available in the data?

A: The only settings with min/max data are at Medium: at 1920x1080, the combo ranges from 131 to 177 FPS (avg 154); at 2560x1440, it ranges from 106 to 143 FPS (avg 124); and at 3840x2160, it ranges from 78 to 106 FPS (avg 92). No min/max data is provided for Low, High, or Ultra settings.

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, manufactured on TSMC's 3 nm process. Its base clock of 3.50 GHz and boost clock of 5.10 GHz are solid for a desktop chip, and the 24 MB of shared L3 cache helps with the large working sets common in flight simulation. The CPU supports DDR5 memory with dual-channel bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, which is adequate for feeding the RTX 5070 Ti without starving it.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, CPU performance is often the primary constraint at lower resolutions because the game's simulation logic—weather, physics, AI traffic, and flight dynamics—is heavily single-threaded. The Core Ultra 5 245's single-core Cinebench R23 score of 4648 is respectable, placing it in the 90th percentile among all CPUs. Its multi-core score of 32924 in the same test indicates strong parallel performance, but the game's engine does not always exploit all 14 cores effectively.

The CPU's nearest rivals in aggregate benchmarks are closely matched: the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G scores 49196 (0.4% higher), the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 scores 49228 (0.5% higher), and the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H scores 48698 (0.6% lower). The Intel Core i5-14600K is 0.8% lower with a score of 48618. These small deltas suggest that the Core Ultra 5 245 is competitively positioned, but it does not hold a decisive advantage over its peers in this title.

The 65W TDP is modest for a 14-core chip, which means thermal headroom is not a concern for sustained flight-sim sessions. The CPU's PCIe Gen 5 support with 20 lanes provides ample bandwidth for the RTX 5070 Ti's PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, though in practice, the game's frame rates are unlikely to be limited by bus throughput. The integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU is present but irrelevant for gaming when a discrete GPU is installed.

At 1080p, the CPU's influence is evident. The combo achieves 198 FPS at Low settings, but this drops to 116 FPS at High and 110 FPS at Ultra. The relatively small gap between High and Ultra at 1080p (116 vs. 110 FPS) suggests that the CPU is beginning to limit performance as settings rise, since the GPU should be able to handle the increased load without such a modest gain. At 4K, the CPU's role diminishes, and the GPU becomes the clear bottleneck.

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

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of scaling across resolutions, which helps identify whether the CPU or GPU is the limiting factor in this combo. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 198 at 1080p to 160 at 1440p and further to 118 at 4K—a 40% reduction from 1080p to 4K. This is a significant drop, but the absolute numbers remain high, indicating that the GPU is still capable of maintaining playable frame rates even at the lowest settings.

At Medium settings, the scaling is more gradual: 154 FPS at 1080p, 124 FPS at 1440p, and 92 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 19.5%, and from 1440p to 4K is 25.8%. This pattern suggests that the GPU is becoming increasingly dominant as resolution rises, but the CPU still has a role at 1080p where the simulation logic can bottleneck.

At High settings, the averages are 116 FPS (1080p), 94 FPS (1440p), and 69 FPS (4K). The 1080p-to-4K drop is 40.5%, almost identical to the Low-settings drop. This consistency indicates that the GPU's fill-rate and shading capacity are the primary constraints at 4K, regardless of the quality preset.

At Ultra settings, the averages are 110 FPS (1080p), 89 FPS (1440p), and 66 FPS (4K). The 1080p-to-1440p drop is 19.1%, and the 1440p-to-4K drop is 25.8%. The Ultra preset's results are remarkably close to the High preset's (116 vs. 110 FPS at 1080p, 94 vs. 89 FPS at 1440p, 69 vs. 66 FPS at 4K), suggesting that the game's Ultra settings do not impose a significantly heavier load than High in this configuration.

The scaling data points to a hybrid bottleneck: at 1080p, the CPU is likely limiting frame rates, as evidenced by the small delta between High and Ultra (116 vs. 110 FPS) and the fact that even Low settings cannot exceed 200 FPS. At 4K, the GPU is clearly the limiting component, as the frame rates drop proportionally with resolution increases. The fact that 4K Low (118 FPS) is still higher than 1080p Ultra (110 FPS) further confirms that the GPU has headroom at lower resolutions but is saturated at higher ones.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti ranks 251st out of 2996 tested combinations for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places the combo in the top 8.4% of all systems tested, which is a strong result for a mid-to-high-end desktop setup. The ranking reflects the balance between the CPU's 90th percentile performance and the GPU's 86th percentile performance, indicating that neither component is a weak link.

In practical terms, a rank of 251 means that the vast majority of tested combos—2745 of them—score lower, while only 250 achieve higher frame rates in this game. The top performers are likely to be systems with higher-end CPUs like the Core Ultra 9 or Ryzen 9 series paired with flagship GPUs like the RTX 5090 or RX 7900 XTX, but the data does not specify those configurations.

The combo's rank relative to its component percentiles is notable. The CPU ranks in the 90th percentile, and the GPU in the 86th percentile, yet the combo manages to land in the top 8.4% of all tested systems. This suggests that the pairing works synergistically for this specific title—the CPU's strong single-thread performance complements the GPU's high fill-rate, avoiding the kind of bottleneck that might drag down other combinations.

For context, the nearest CPU rival (AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G) and nearest GPU rival (AMD Radeon RX Vega 64) are closely matched in aggregate benchmarks, but this combo's rank indicates that the specific architecture of the Core Ultra 5 245 and RTX 5070 Ti is well-suited to Flight Simulator's workload. The measured FPS data supports this: the combo delivers 66 FPS at 4K Ultra, which is above the 60 FPS threshold that many flight-sim enthusiasts consider minimum for a smooth experience.

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

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of how this combo performs across three resolutions and four quality presets. Below is the full breakdown, with all figures taken directly from the dataset.

1920x1080:

• Low: 198 FPS average
• Medium: 154 FPS average (min 131, max 177)
• High: 116 FPS average
• Ultra: 110 FPS average

At 1080p, the combo delivers consistently high frame rates, with even the Ultra preset maintaining 110 FPS. The Medium preset's min/max range (131-177) shows a 35% variance, which is typical for flight sims where terrain complexity and weather effects cause frame-time spikes. The gap between High and Ultra (116 vs. 110 FPS) is modest, suggesting that the CPU is beginning to limit performance at this resolution.

2560x1440:

• Low: 160 FPS average
• Medium: 124 FPS average (min 106, max 143)
• High: 94 FPS average
• Ultra: 89 FPS average

At 1440p, the frame rates remain strong, with Low settings still hitting 160 FPS. The Medium preset's min/max range (106-143) is tighter than at 1080p, indicating that the GPU is taking on more of the workload. The High-to-Ultra gap (94 vs. 89 FPS) is 5.3%, slightly larger than at 1080p, which hints at the GPU becoming more influential. The 1440p Ultra average of 89 FPS is well above the 60 FPS target, making this a sweet spot for high-quality flight simulation.

3840x2160:

• Low: 118 FPS average
• Medium: 92 FPS average (min 78, max 106)
• High: 69 FPS average
• Ultra: 66 FPS average

At 4K, the combo's performance drops significantly, with Ultra averaging just 66 FPS. The Medium preset's min/max range (78-106) shows a 36% variance, indicating that the GPU is working near its limits. The High-to-Ultra gap narrows to 4.3% (69 vs. 66 FPS), suggesting that the Ultra preset's additional effects are not the primary cost—rather, the raw resolution is the dominant factor. The 4K Low average of 118 FPS is still respectable, but the 4K Ultra figure of 66 FPS is the lowest in the dataset, making it marginal for competitive or high-refresh-rate play.

Across all resolutions, the scaling from Low to Ultra shows consistent trends: at 1080p, the drop is 44.4% (198 to 110 FPS); at 1440p, it is 44.4% (160 to 89 FPS); and at 4K, it is 44.1% (118 to 66 FPS). This uniformity indicates that the performance penalty for higher settings is stable regardless of resolution, which is a sign of a well-balanced system. The Medium preset consistently offers the best compromise between visual quality and frame rate, with 154 FPS at 1080p, 124 FPS at 1440p, and 92 FPS at 4K.