Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator presents an exceptionally demanding workload for the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H paired with the AMD Radeon 760M integrated graphics. The measured frame rates place this combination at rank 2989 out of 2996 tested configurations, indicating that this system sits at the very bottom of the performance spectrum for this title. The data shows that this is not a setup capable of delivering smooth, playable experiences at mainstream resolutions, and the benchmark results consistently point to the integrated GPU as the primary bottleneck.

Resolution Scaling

The performance degradation from 1080p to 4K is severe and reveals a system that is almost entirely constrained by its graphics solution. At 1080p with Low settings, the average frame rate is 34 FPS. Moving to 1440p at the same Low settings drops the average to 28 FPS, a 17.6% reduction. The jump to 4K at Low settings further crushes performance to an average of 20 FPS, which is a 41.2% drop from the 1080p baseline. This steep decline is a classic indicator that the GPU is working at its absolute limit, with each additional pixel exacting a heavy toll on frame output.

The scaling pattern becomes even more telling when examining the High preset. At 1080p High, the average is 20 FPS. At 1440p High, it falls to 16 FPS, and at 4K High, it bottoms out at 12 FPS. The percentage drops are 20% and then another 25%, showing that the hardware is hitting a performance wall where even modest resolution increases cause disproportionate frame rate losses. These results indicate that the limiting component is unambiguously the AMD Radeon 760M, as the CPU has enough headroom to feed the GPU, but the integrated graphics simply cannot process the scene data fast enough to maintain playable frame rates.

The data suggests that the game's engine is heavily dependent on fill rate and memory bandwidth, both of which are severely limited on this integrated solution. The frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K is not linear but exponential in its impact, meaning that users should not expect to simply lower settings to compensate for higher resolutions. The Radeon 760M, with its 512 shading units and 16 ROPs, is overwhelmed by the demands of Microsoft Flight Simulator's detailed terrain and aircraft models, and the resolution scaling confirms that any attempt to play at 4K is futile, as even the Low preset fails to break the 20 FPS barrier.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 760M is the decisive factor in this system's performance, and its specifications explain the consistently low frame rates. The GPU operates with a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2599 MHz, but these clocks are insufficient for the demands of this flight simulator. The GPU's memory configuration is "System Shared," meaning it relies on the CPU's memory bandwidth, which is rated at 89.6 GB/s for the Core Ultra 7 155H. This shared memory architecture introduces significant latency and bandwidth bottlenecks, which are particularly detrimental to a game that streams vast amounts of terrain data.

The GPU's benchmark scores place it in the 35th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 6019. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 6400, which scores 6001 (a 0.3% difference), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M, also at 6000 (0.3% difference). This places the Radeon 760M in the company of older discrete mobile GPUs, which is telling for a game released in 2020 that demands modern hardware features. The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), but its raw compute power of 5.323 TFLOPS is not enough to translate that API support into playable performance.

In the context of Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU's limitations are exposed across all settings. The measured FPS at 1080p Ultra is 19 FPS, which is barely better than the 20 FPS achieved at 1080p High. This indicates that the GPU is so constrained that even reducing the graphical fidelity from Ultra to High yields almost no performance benefit, as the bottleneck lies in the core rendering pipeline rather than in specific settings like shadows or reflections. The GPU's 16 ROPs and 32 TMUs are simply too few to handle the pixel and texture throughput required by this game, and the data shows that the Radeon 760M is the sole reason why this system fails to deliver a playable experience.

FAQ

Q: What is the best average frame rate this system can achieve in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The highest measured average frame rate is 34 FPS, which is achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with the Low settings preset.

Q: How does this system compare to other hardware configurations in the benchmark database?

A: This Intel Core Ultra 7 155H and AMD Radeon 760M combination ranks 2989 out of 2996 tested configurations, placing it in the bottom 0.2% of all systems tested for this game.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor for performance in this game?

A: The data shows that the AMD Radeon 760M is the limiting component, as the CPU has a multi-core score of 15028 in Cinebench R23, while the GPU's Passmark G3D score is only 5310, indicating a significant imbalance.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between 1080p and 4K at the same settings?

A: At Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 34 FPS at 1080p to 20 FPS at 4K, representing a 41.2% reduction in performance.

Q: Does increasing the graphics settings from Medium to Ultra provide any benefit?

A: No, the data shows that at 1080p, the average frame rate only drops from 27 FPS at Medium to 19 FPS at Ultra, but both are below playable thresholds, so the visual quality gain does not justify the performance hit.

Q: What is the minimum frame rate recorded for this system?

A: The only recorded minimum frame rate is 13 FPS, which occurs at 3840x2160 resolution with Medium settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rates reveal a consistent pattern of sub-30 FPS performance across all tested configurations. At 1920x1080, the most common resolution, the system produces an average of 34 FPS on Low settings, which is the only configuration that approaches playability. The Medium preset at 1080p yields an average of 27 FPS, with a minimum of 23 FPS and a maximum of 31 FPS, showing that even this mid-range setting causes noticeable stutter. High settings at 1080p drop the average to 20 FPS, and Ultra settings further reduce it to 19 FPS, indicating that the GPU is unable to differentiate between these higher presets due to its fundamental performance ceiling.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates become more challenging. Low settings produce an average of 28 FPS, which is a 17.6% reduction compared to the same settings at 1080p. Medium settings at 1440p average 22 FPS, with minimum and maximum values of 18 and 25 FPS respectively. High settings at 1440p drop the average to 16 FPS, and Ultra settings bottom out at 15 FPS. The data shows that at 1440p, no setting combination achieves a playable 30 FPS average, and the system is effectively limited to Low settings for any semblance of smoothness.

At 3840x2160, the results are uniformly poor. Low settings produce an average of 20 FPS, which is identical to the 1080p High setting, showing that the resolution increase negates any setting reduction. Medium settings at 4K average 16 FPS, with a minimum of 13 FPS and a maximum of 18 FPS, indicating severe frame pacing issues. High settings at 4K average 12 FPS, and Ultra settings average 11 FPS. These numbers demonstrate that 4K is entirely unplayable on this hardware, as even the lowest settings fail to maintain a stable frame rate above 20 FPS.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the only viable configuration for Microsoft Flight Simulator on this system is the Low preset at 1920x1080 resolution, which delivers an average of 34 FPS. This is the single configuration that approaches a playable frame rate, and it is the only setting that allows for a reasonably smooth experience when flying over detailed terrain. All other settings at 1080p, including Medium, High, and Ultra, produce average frame rates below 30 FPS, which will result in noticeable stuttering and a less immersive experience.

At 1440p and 4K resolutions, the data indicates that no setting is recommended for actual gameplay. The Low preset at 1440p produces 28 FPS, which is borderline, but the frame rate is inconsistent and will likely drop below 25 FPS in dense urban areas or during complex weather effects. The Medium preset at 1440p, with a minimum of 18 FPS, is not viable for sustained flight. For users who must play at higher resolutions, the data suggests that they should prioritize resolution over settings, as the Low preset at 1440p outperforms the High preset at 1080p by 8 FPS, but this is still below the playability threshold.

The best experience per the measured rows is unequivocally the Low preset at 1080p. This configuration provides the highest average frame rate and the least amount of stutter, as evidenced by the lack of a reported minimum FPS, which suggests it is more stable than the Medium preset that has a 23 FPS minimum. Users should accept the reduced visual fidelity of the Low preset to achieve the most consistent performance, as any increase in settings or resolution leads to a disproportionate drop in frame rate, making the game feel sluggish and unresponsive.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 155H plays a secondary but necessary role in this system's performance, as its capabilities far exceed what the AMD Radeon 760M can utilize. The CPU features 16 cores and 22 threads, with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 15028 places it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 32697. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-14600T, which scores 32707 (a 0% difference), and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360, which scores 32662 (a 0.1% difference). These scores indicate that the CPU is more than capable of handling the simulation's physics and AI calculations.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is to manage the complex flight model, weather systems, and AI traffic, all of which require substantial processing power. The Core Ultra 7 155H's 24 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel memory support with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth provide a solid foundation for these tasks. The CPU's Passmark multi-thread score of 24873 and single-thread score of 3468 further confirm that it is not the bottleneck in this system. The data shows that the CPU is effectively waiting for the GPU to render frames, as evidenced by the fact that lowering resolution from 1080p to 4K results in a significant frame rate drop, which is a GPU-bound behavior.

The CPU's integrated graphics, the Arc Xe-LPG 128EU, is not used in this configuration, as the system relies on the AMD Radeon 760M. However, the CPU's memory controller and bus interface are critical, as the GPU shares system memory, and the 89.6 GB/s bandwidth is a limiting factor for the GPU's performance. The benchmark results indicate that the CPU is not the limiting component, as its percentile rank of 83rd is far higher than the GPU's 35th percentile. Therefore, any performance improvements for this system would need to come from upgrading the GPU, as the CPU has ample headroom to support a more powerful graphics solution.