Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is one of the most demanding titles in the benchmark database, and this particular combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H and the AMD Radeon 890M integrated GPU produces a very specific set of constraints. The data shows a system that is firmly limited by its graphics solution at every resolution, with the CPU’s substantial multi-threaded capabilities largely left untapped. Across all measured settings, the frame rates hover in ranges that prioritize visual fidelity over smooth motion, and the performance curve indicates that users must make deliberate trade-offs to achieve playable conditions.

Resolution Scaling

The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is severe and consistent, revealing that the AMD Radeon 890M is the definitive bottleneck in this pairing. At 1080p Low, the system averages 50 FPS, but at 4K Low, that figure collapses to 30 FPS—a 40% reduction in average frame rate. This scaling pattern is typical of a GPU that is overwhelmed by pixel count, as the Core Ultra 7 155H’s processing power is not the limiting factor.

Looking at the Medium preset, the trend continues with precision. The 1080p Medium average of 39 FPS falls to 31 FPS at 1440p, a drop of roughly 20.5%, and then to 23 FPS at 4K, which is another 25.8% decrease from the 1440p figure. The High preset tells a similar story: 29 FPS at 1080p, 23 FPS at 1440p, and only 17 FPS at 4K. The Ultra preset is the most punishing, starting at just 28 FPS at 1080p and descending to 22 FPS at 1440p and 16 FPS at 4K.

The data suggests that the gap between resolutions is not linear but rather steepens as the load increases. For instance, moving from 1440p to 4K on the High preset costs 6 FPS, while moving from 1080p to 1440p on the same preset also costs 6 FPS. However, the relative percentage loss is larger at higher resolutions because the baseline is lower. This indicates that the Radeon 890M’s shading units and memory bandwidth are saturated early, and additional pixels directly translate to fewer rendered frames.

Crucially, the CPU’s potential is never the limiting factor here. The Core Ultra 7 155H, with its 16 cores and 22 threads, is capable of far higher frame rates in less GPU-bound scenarios. The fact that the 1080p Low preset yields 50 FPS while the 1080p Ultra preset yields 28 FPS—a difference of 22 FPS—shows that the graphics settings, not the processor, dictate performance. This is a textbook case of an iGPU holding back a capable mobile CPU in a simulation title that is notoriously heavy on both components.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average frame rate achievable with this combo?

A: The best result in the measured data is 50 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with the Low preset. This is the only configuration that breaks the 50 FPS barrier, and it comes at the cost of most visual features.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H or the AMD Radeon 890M the primary bottleneck?

A: The benchmark results point overwhelmingly to the GPU. The frame rates scale dramatically with resolution and settings, which is a signature of graphics-bound performance. The CPU’s benchmark scores, such as a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 15028, are not reflected in any FPS gains across the measured rows.

Q: How does the Radeon 890M compare to its nearest rivals in general GPU benchmarks?

A: The Radeon 890M has an average benchmark score of 9210, placing it in the 45th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Vega 8, scores 9221, which is a negligible 0.1% difference. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 is slightly faster at 9273, a 0.7% lead.

Q: Can this system run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 4K?

A: Technically yes, but the experience is not smooth. At 4K with the Low preset, the average FPS is 30, which is borderline playable. At 4K Medium, it drops to 23 FPS, and at 4K Ultra, it falls to 16 FPS. The data shows that 4K is only viable on the lowest settings.

Q: What is the performance difference between the Low and Ultra presets at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset averages 50 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 28 FPS. This represents a 44% reduction in frame rate when switching from Low to Ultra, highlighting the massive cost of the Ultra preset’s visual enhancements.

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

A: The combo ranks 2829 out of 2996 total tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 5.6% of all systems tested for this game. This low ranking is consistent with the modest performance of the integrated GPU.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 890M is a integrated graphics processor built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture, and its role in this game is defined by its specifications and measured outcomes. The GPU has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz, which is a wide frequency range that allows for aggressive dynamic scaling when thermal and power headroom permit. However, the data shows that even at peak boost, the GPU cannot maintain high frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator.

The memory configuration is "System Shared," meaning the GPU uses the same DDR5 memory as the CPU. The bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent," which in this case draws from the Core Ultra 7 155H’s dual-channel memory bus rated at 89.6 GB/s. This shared memory setup is a significant weakness for the Radeon 890M, as the GPU must compete with the CPU for memory bandwidth, and the game’s vast scenery data requires substantial memory throughput.

With 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, the Radeon 890M has the compute resources of a low-end discrete GPU. Its FP32 performance is rated at 5.939 TFLOPS, which is respectable for an iGPU but insufficient for a demanding simulator at high resolutions. The GPU also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which is a requirement for modern game features, but the frame rates indicate that enabling those features cripples performance.

The GPU’s standalone benchmark scores corroborate the in-game results. Its Passmark G3D score is 8076, and its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 590, placing it in the 45th percentile of all GPUs. This percentile ranking is notably low, and the nearest rival comparison shows it trading blows with the aging NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 and even the older GTX 465. For a flight simulator that renders dense terrain and complex aircraft models, this level of GPU performance is simply insufficient for high-fidelity settings.

The VRAM situation is particularly critical. Since the memory size is "System Shared," the GPU has no dedicated VRAM pool. In practice, this means the system must allocate a portion of the main system memory for graphics, which can lead to stuttering if the memory bandwidth is exceeded. The absence of a dedicated VRAM bus width and bandwidth figure in the data underscores that this is a fundamental architectural limitation. The measured FPS drops at 4K are likely exacerbated by this memory sharing, as the GPU must fetch data from the same memory controller as the CPU.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full range of settings produces a spread of 22 FPS between the best and worst presets. The Low preset delivers an average of 50 FPS, which is the only playable option for smooth flight. The Medium preset averages 39 FPS, with a minimum of 33 FPS and a maximum of 44 FPS, indicating noticeable frame pacing variability. The High preset drops to 29 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 28 FPS. The delta between High and Ultra is minimal, suggesting that the Ultra preset’s additional effects are not worth the performance cost.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance degrades predictably. The Low preset averages 40 FPS, which is still technically playable but lacks the headroom of the 1080p result. The Medium preset averages 31 FPS, with a minimum of 26 FPS and a maximum of 36 FPS. This window of 10 FPS shows that the experience is inconsistent, with potential drops below 30 FPS during demanding scenes. The High preset averages 23 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 22 FPS, both of which are below the threshold for smooth gameplay.

At 3840x2160, the performance becomes marginal. The Low preset is the only option that averages 30 FPS, which is the absolute minimum for acceptable playability. The Medium preset averages 23 FPS, with a minimum of 20 FPS and a maximum of 26 FPS, indicating that the frame rate frequently dips into the low 20s. The High preset averages 17 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 16 FPS, both of which are effectively unplayable for a simulation that requires precise control.

The data also reveals a pattern in the minimum and maximum FPS values. For the Medium preset, the spread between min and max is 11 FPS at 1080p, 10 FPS at 1440p, and 6 FPS at 4K. This narrowing spread at higher resolutions suggests that the GPU is consistently saturated, leaving little room for variation. At 1080p, there is more headroom, which allows for larger fluctuations based on scene complexity.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H and AMD Radeon 890M ranks 2829 out of 2996 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the bottom 5.6% of all systems tested, which is a clear indication of its performance tier. The ranking is heavily influenced by the GPU, as the CPU’s own percentile ranking is much higher.

The Core Ultra 7 155H sits in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 32697. This places it in the upper echelon of mobile processors, close to the Intel Core i5-14600T, which scores 32707 (a 0% delta), and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360, which scores 32662 (a 0.1% delta). The CPU is clearly not the weak link in this system.

Conversely, the Radeon 890M sits in the 45th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 9210. This is a middling result, and its nearest rivals—the Radeon Vega 8, GTX 960, GTX 465, and GTX 850M—are all within a 1% delta of its score. This indicates that the GPU is performing as expected for its class, but that class is simply not competitive for a high-end simulator.

The disparity between the CPU’s 83rd percentile and the GPU’s 45th percentile explains the overall combo ranking. The system is unbalanced, with a processor that can handle far more demanding graphics loads than the iGPU can deliver. This is a common issue with thin-and-light laptops that pair high-performance CPUs with integrated graphics, and the data confirms that the GPU is the primary constraint.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured data, the optimal settings for this combo depend heavily on the user’s priority for smoothness versus visual quality. For a playable experience, the Low preset is the only reliable choice across all resolutions. At 1080p Low, the 50 FPS average provides enough headroom for the frame drops that are common in flight simulators during complex scenery loading. At 1440p Low, the 40 FPS average is acceptable, but users should be prepared for occasional dips. At 4K Low, the 30 FPS average is the bare minimum, and only recommended for users who prioritize resolution over smoothness.

The Medium preset is a viable compromise for users with a 1080p display. The 39 FPS average, with a minimum of 33 FPS, remains above the 30 FPS threshold for most of the time. This preset offers a noticeable improvement in visual detail over Low, including better textures and lighting, without completely sacrificing playability. At 1440p Medium, the 31 FPS average is borderline, and the 26 FPS minimum suggests that users will experience stutters. The Medium preset is not recommended at 4K.

The High and Ultra presets are effectively reserved for static screenshots or ground-based viewing. At 1080p, both presets hover around 28-29 FPS, which is below the smoothness threshold. The Ultra preset’s 28 FPS at 1080p is only 1 FPS lower than High, indicating that the extra settings are not worth the minimal performance difference. At higher resolutions, both presets drop into the teens, making them unsuitable for dynamic flight.

The data suggests that the best balance for this system is 1080p with the Medium preset. This configuration offers a 39 FPS average with a maximum of 44 FPS, which allows for a reasonably responsive experience. Users who demand higher frame rates should select the Low preset at 1080p, while those who insist on 1440p should stick to Low settings. The 4K resolution is only feasible on Low, and even then, the 30 FPS average is likely to feel sluggish. Ultimately, the Radeon 890M’s performance ceiling dictates that Microsoft Flight Simulator is best experienced at 1080p with reduced settings.