Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is a notoriously demanding title, and the benchmark data for the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 570 illustrates a system that is heavily constrained by its graphics card. The measured frame rates across all resolutions and settings are low, indicating that this combination is only suitable for the most modest visual configurations. The following analysis breaks down the performance characteristics of this specific hardware pairing, drawing exclusively from the measured data.

Resolution Scaling

The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is severe, confirming that the AMD Radeon RX 570 is the primary bottleneck in this system. At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 28 FPS at 1920x1080 to 17 FPS at 3840x2160, a reduction of 11 FPS. This represents a performance loss of roughly 39% when moving from 1080p to 4K, which is a significant scaling penalty that points directly at the GPU's limited rendering capabilities.

The trend is consistent across all quality presets. At Low settings, the average frame rate declines from 48 FPS at 1080p to 29 FPS at 4K, a drop of 19 FPS. At Medium settings, the average falls from 38 FPS to 22 FPS, and at Ultra settings, it drops from 27 FPS to 16 FPS. The absolute FPS loss from 1080p to 4K is larger at lower settings (19 FPS at Low) than at higher settings (11 FPS at High), which suggests that at lower settings, the GPU is being pushed harder in raw pixel throughput, making the resolution scaling more pronounced.

The data indicates that the CPU is not the limiting factor in this scaling behavior. A CPU-bound scenario would typically show a smaller frame rate difference between 1080p and 4K, as the GPU would be less burdened at lower resolutions. Here, the consistent and large FPS drop with every step up in resolution is a classic sign of a GPU-limited configuration. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 has the headroom to feed frames, but the RX 570 cannot process them fast enough as the pixel count increases, making 4K resolutions effectively unplayable for this combination.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture. Its high core count and 5.30 GHz boost clock suggest it is capable of handling the complex simulation and physics calculations that Microsoft Flight Simulator is known for. However, given the low overall FPS numbers, the CPU's potential is largely untapped in this specific pairing.

The CPU's benchmark scores reinforce its capability. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 42216, and its single-core score is 5960. These are strong numbers, placing the processor in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. The data suggests that this processor is far more powerful than what the GPU can utilize in this game. The measured FPS values are so low that they are far more consistent with a GPU bottleneck than a CPU one, as the frame rates do not fluctuate wildly in a way that would indicate processor thread saturation.

Even at 1080p Low settings, where CPU load is typically highest relative to GPU load, the average FPS is only 48. While this is the highest average FPS recorded for this combo, it is still a modest result for a processor of this caliber. The nearest rivals to the Core Ultra 7 265, such as the AMD EPYC 4464P and the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F, have very similar average benchmark scores (64823 and 64438, respectively, with a deltaPct of -0.3 and 0.3). This indicates that the CPU's performance is in line with its class, and the low game FPS is not due to a deficient processor. The CPU is providing the necessary data, but the RX 570 is unable to translate that into high frame rates.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 570 is the clear performance limiter in this configuration. With 4 GB of GDDR5 memory and a 256-bit memory bus providing 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth, the card is a legacy part from the Polaris generation. Its 14 nm process node and 5.095 TFLOPS of FP32 compute are simply insufficient for the demands of Microsoft Flight Simulator at higher resolutions and settings.

The GPU's benchmark data shows it sits in the 74th percentile of all GPUs, but its nearest rivals, such as the AMD Radeon RX 470 and the AMD Radeon RX 6800M, have similar average scores (28996 and 28874, respectively). This places the RX 570 in a performance tier that is inadequate for this game's heavy visual load. The 4 GB VRAM is also a likely point of concern, as modern flight simulators with high-resolution textures can easily exceed this capacity, leading to texture streaming issues and frame rate hitches, though this specific data does not show min FPS for most settings.

The GPU's clock speeds (1168 MHz base, 1244 MHz boost) are relatively low compared to modern cards, and its memory operates at an effective 7 Gbps. These specifications, combined with its age (released in 2017), explain why the measured FPS is so low. For instance, at 1080p Ultra, the card averages only 27 FPS, and at 1440p Ultra, it drops to 22 FPS. The RX 570 is unable to maintain playable frame rates even at 1080p with high settings, confirming that any upgrade path for this system would need to start with the graphics card.

FAQ

Q: What is the best average FPS this combination can achieve?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 48, which occurs at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: Is this system capable of 4K gaming in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: No. At 4K, the average FPS ranges from 16 (Ultra settings) to 29 (Low settings), which is far below playable levels.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 has an average benchmark score of 64640, which is within 0.7% of its closest rivals, such as the AMD EPYC 7343 and Intel Core Ultra 7 265F.

Q: How much faster is 1080p compared to 4K at High settings?

A: At High settings, the average FPS is 28 at 1920x1080 and 17 at 3840x2160, making 1080p roughly 65% faster than 4K.

Q: What is the performance difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the average FPS is 39 at Low settings and 22 at Ultra settings, a difference of 17 FPS.

Q: Does the data show a CPU or GPU bottleneck?

A: The data indicates a GPU bottleneck. The frame rates drop significantly with increased resolution and settings, which is characteristic of a graphics card limitation, not a processor one.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following data shows the exact average FPS for each resolution and settings combination.

1920x1080 (1080p)

• Low: 48 FPS
• Medium: 38 FPS (min 32, max 43)
• High: 28 FPS
• Ultra: 27 FPS

2560x1440 (1440p)

• Low: 39 FPS
• Medium: 30 FPS (min 26, max 35)
• High: 23 FPS
• Ultra: 22 FPS

3840x2160 (4K)

• Low: 29 FPS
• Medium: 22 FPS (min 19, max 26)
• High: 17 FPS
• Ultra: 16 FPS

The data shows a consistent pattern: each increase in resolution or settings tier results in a substantial loss of average frame rate. The only settings with min and max FPS data are the Medium presets, which show a narrow band of performance, suggesting stability within that preset but at a low overall level. For example, at 1080p Medium, the FPS ranges from 32 to 43, but at 4K Medium, it only ranges from 19 to 26. This highlights how quickly the GPU's performance ceiling is hit as resolution increases.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured performance, the only viable option for a reasonably smooth experience is to play at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only configuration that achieves an average FPS above 40, hitting 48 FPS. While this is not a high refresh rate experience, it is the most playable scenario in the data.

Choosing Medium settings at 1080p drops the average to 38 FPS, which is still borderline playable but shows a significant 10 FPS penalty for the visual upgrade. High and Ultra settings at 1080p are too demanding, with averages of 28 and 27 FPS respectively. These frame rates are below the threshold for a smooth simulation experience and should be avoided.

At 1440p and 4K, all settings result in average FPS below 40. The best 1440p option is Low at 39 FPS, which is only slightly worse than 1080p Medium. For users who prioritize resolution over smoothness, 1440p Low might be a consideration, but the frame rate is marginal. The 4K resolution is not recommended at any setting, as even Low settings only yield 29 FPS. The data strongly suggests that users should stick to 1080p Low or, at most, 1080p Medium, to get the most playable experience from this hardware combination.

How This Combo Ranks

In the grand scheme of tested hardware combinations for Microsoft Flight Simulator, this pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and AMD Radeon RX 570 ranks very poorly. The combo is ranked 2870 out of 2996 total tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 5% of all systems.

This low ranking is a direct consequence of the GPU's limitations. While the CPU is a high-end part in the 93rd percentile of all processors, the GPU's 74th percentile standing is not enough to overcome the game's heavy graphics demands. The ranking indicates that most other tested systems, even those with weaker CPUs, will likely outperform this combination due to having a more capable graphics card.

The data confirms that the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is not the source of the poor performance. The processor is a powerful, modern part that is being held back by an aging GPU. In a system with a stronger graphics card, this CPU would likely produce significantly higher frame rates and a much better ranking. As it stands, the 2870th place ranking out of 2996 combos is a clear indicator that this specific pairing is not well-suited for Microsoft Flight Simulator, and the GPU is the component that needs the most urgent upgrade.