Microsoft Flight Simulator

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and AMD Radeon RX 9060 combination delivers a playable, but not luxurious, experience in Microsoft Flight Simulator, with performance that scales predictably across resolutions and settings. The data shows that this pairing is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, where it can achieve smooth frame rates at medium-to-high presets, while 4K remains a challenge for the most demanding settings.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this CPU and GPU combo in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: Based on the measured FPS data, 1920x1080 is the optimal resolution, offering an average of 111 FPS on Low settings and 65 FPS on High. The 2560x1440 resolution is also viable, with an average of 89 FPS on Low and 52 FPS on High, while 3840x2160 performance dips below 60 FPS on all but the Low preset.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 compare to its nearest rivals in overall CPU benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 has an average benchmark score of 64640, placing it 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F and 0.7% ahead of the AMD EPYC 7343. It trails the AMD EPYC 4464P by 0.3% and the AMD EPYC 9124 by 0.7%, showing it is highly competitive with these server-class processors in synthetic tests.

Q: What is the GPU's performance class based on its average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9060 has an average benchmark score of 16014, which places it in the 59th percentile of all GPUs. This puts it in a similar performance tier to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, which scores 16129, and the AMD Radeon RX 7700, which scores 15852, with the RX 9060 trailing the RTX 3060 Ti by 0.7%.

Q: What is the difference in average FPS between the Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the difference is significant. The Low preset yields an average of 111 FPS, while the Ultra preset yields an average of 62 FPS. This represents a 44% reduction in performance when moving from the lowest to the highest visual fidelity.

Q: Is the 8 GB VRAM of the RX 9060 a limiting factor at 4K resolution?

A: The data indicates that at 3840x2160, the GPU struggles to maintain high frame rates, with the Ultra preset averaging only 37 FPS and the High preset averaging 39 FPS. While the VRAM capacity is a factor, the overall GPU compute performance appears to be the primary bottleneck, as even the Medium preset only reaches 51 FPS.

Q: What is the game's release date and how does the combo rank among all tested configurations?

A: Microsoft Flight Simulator was released on 2020-08-17. In the database of tested combinations, this specific CPU and GPU pairing ranks 1712 out of 2996 total combos, placing it in the lower-middle portion of the performance chart for this particular title.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, with a TDP of 65 W. This processor also features 30 MB of shared L3 cache and supports dual-channel DDR5 memory, which provides a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is critical for handling the complex simulation logic, including flight physics, weather systems, and the vast amount of world data streaming. The benchmark results for this processor show a strong single-threaded performance, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 5960, which is essential for the game's main simulation thread. The multi-core score of 42216 in the same test indicates that the processor has ample headroom for background tasks and the game's various subsystems.

The processor's performance in synthetic tests is comparable to several high-end server chips. Its average benchmark score of 64640 places it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, and its nearest rivals are all AMD EPYC processors, with score deltas ranging from -0.7% to 0.7%. This suggests that the Core Ultra 7 265 provides a level of processing power that is more than sufficient for the game's CPU demands, and it is unlikely to be the primary bottleneck in most scenarios, especially at lower resolutions where the GPU is more stressed. The data shows that the CPU's strong single-thread performance is a key asset, as Microsoft Flight Simulator is known to be sensitive to single-core speed.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture and features the Navi 44 chip, manufactured on a 4 nm process. It has a base clock of 1700 MHz and a boost clock of 2990 MHz, with a game clock of 2400 MHz. The GPU is equipped with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s. It also has 1792 shading units and 28 RT cores, which are used for ray tracing effects.

For Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU is responsible for rendering the detailed scenery, aircraft models, and lighting effects. The 8 GB VRAM is a notable consideration, as the game's high-resolution textures can be demanding. The benchmark results show that the RX 9060 performs at a level comparable to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, with a 0.7% difference in average benchmark scores. This positions it as a mid-range graphics card capable of handling the game at 1080p and 1440p with adjusted settings.

The GPU's compute capabilities, as measured by its Passmark G3D score of 17631, suggest that it can handle the graphical load of the game, but the measured FPS data reveals its limitations at higher resolutions. The 4K results show a significant performance drop, which points to the GPU being the primary limiting factor at that resolution. The combination of 8 GB VRAM and the GPU's raw compute power means that users will need to be selective about their graphics settings to achieve a smooth experience, particularly at 1440p and above.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and AMD Radeon RX 9060 ranks 1712 out of 2996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the lower half of the performance spectrum, indicating that while it is a capable system, it is not among the top-tier configurations for this demanding title. The ranking is a direct result of the GPU's mid-range performance, as the CPU is a high-end part that is unlikely to bottleneck the system.

The performance of this combo is heavily influenced by the GPU. The measured FPS data shows a clear trend where the game's frame rate is more sensitive to changes in resolution and graphics settings, which are GPU-bound tasks. The CPU's strong benchmark scores, including a Passmark multithread score of 49682 and a single-thread score of 4689, suggest that it has ample headroom to support the GPU, and the bottleneck at higher resolutions is the graphics card.

The rank of 1712 is a holistic measure of the system's ability to run the game. It reflects that this combo is best suited for 1080p gaming, where it can perform well, but struggles to maintain high frame rates at 4K. The data shows that for users prioritizing high refresh rates at 1080p or a balance of quality and performance at 1440p, this combo is a reasonable choice. However, for those seeking a premium 4K experience, the performance would be inadequate.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a detailed look at how this combo performs across different resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the system shows its strongest performance. The Low preset achieves an average of 111 FPS, which is excellent for a smooth experience. The Medium preset averages 86 FPS with a minimum of 73 and a maximum of 99 FPS. The High preset averages 65 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 62 FPS, which is still playable but begins to show the GPU's limits.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance drops as expected. The Low preset averages 89 FPS, which remains highly playable. The Medium preset averages 69 FPS with a minimum of 59 and a maximum of 80 FPS, providing a good balance. The High preset averages 52 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 50 FPS, which are on the edge of smoothness and may be acceptable for a flight simulator where frame pacing is less critical than in fast-paced action games.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly the bottleneck. The Low preset averages 66 FPS, which is the only 4K setting that provides a consistently smooth experience. The Medium preset averages 51 FPS with a minimum of 44 and a maximum of 59 FPS, which is borderline. The High preset averages 39 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 37 FPS, both of which are below the threshold for a fluid experience and would likely result in noticeable stuttering.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal experience for this combo is achieved at 1920x1080 with the Medium preset, which yields an average of 86 FPS. This setting provides a good balance between visual fidelity and performance, ensuring a smooth and responsive experience. The High preset at this resolution, averaging 65 FPS, is also a solid choice for users who prefer higher visual quality, as it remains above the 60 FPS threshold.

For users with a 2560x1440 monitor, the Medium preset is the recommended starting point, with an average of 69 FPS. This provides a good balance, though users sensitive to frame drops should be aware of the 59 FPS minimum. The Low preset at this resolution, averaging 89 FPS, is a better option for those who prioritize a consistently high frame rate over visual detail.

At 3840x2160, the data suggests that the Low preset is the only viable option for a playable experience, with an average of 66 FPS. The Medium preset, at 51 FPS, is acceptable but may not be ideal for all users. It is recommended that users avoid the High and Ultra presets at this resolution, as the frame rates of 39 FPS and 37 FPS, respectively, are too low for a smooth experience. In summary, the data indicates that this combo is best utilized with Medium settings at 1080p or 1440p, with Low settings being the only practical choice for 4K.