Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is an exceptionally demanding title, and the combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER produces a dataset that clearly illustrates the balance between CPU and GPU limitations. The measured frames per second across three resolutions and four quality presets show a system that is heavily constrained by the graphics card at higher settings, while the processor provides a robust foundation that prevents the experience from collapsing at lower resolutions. This analysis examines the specific numbers from the benchmark data to characterize the performance envelope of this pairing.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS data reveals a predictable and steep decline as resolution increases, but the magnitude of that decline varies significantly depending on the graphics preset. At Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 111 FPS at 1920x1080 to 89 FPS at 2560x1440, a reduction of 22 FPS. Moving from 2560x1440 to 3840x2160 at Low settings brings the average down further to 66 FPS, another 23 FPS loss. This progression indicates that even at the lowest graphical load, the RTX 2070 SUPER is still the primary bottleneck, as the pixel count nearly quadruples from 1080p to 4K while performance falls by roughly 40%.

The scaling pattern changes character when moving to Medium settings. At 1920x1080, the average is 86 FPS, which drops to 70 FPS at 2560x1440 and then to 51 FPS at 3840x2160. The percentage drop from 1080p to 1440p is about 18.6%, while the drop from 1440p to 4K is about 27.1%. This non-linear scaling suggests that the GPU is becoming progressively more saturated as the resolution increases, with the 4K resolution pushing the card into a territory where memory bandwidth and compute throughput are heavily taxed.

High settings exhibit a similar downward slope but start from a lower baseline. The average FPS at 1920x1080 is 65, falling to 52 at 2560x1440 and finally to 39 at 3840x2160. The absolute deltas between resolutions are roughly 13 FPS in both steps, but the relative impact is larger at the higher resolution step. Ultra settings show the most constrained performance, with averages of 62 FPS at 1080p, 50 FPS at 1440p, and 37 FPS at 4K. The difference between High and Ultra at 1080p is only 3 FPS, whereas at 4K the difference is just 2 FPS, indicating that the visual fidelity gains from Ultra are not translating into meaningful performance costs at the GPU limit.

What the resolution scaling reveals is that this system is firmly GPU-bound in nearly all scenarios. The RTX 2070 SUPER, with its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 256-bit bus, cannot maintain fluid frame rates at 3840x2160 on any preset, with the highest average being 66 FPS at Low. The CPU, with its 20 cores and 5.30 GHz boost clock, appears capable of feeding the GPU adequately at 1080p, as evidenced by the 111 FPS result at Low settings, which is a strong indicator that the processor is not the limiting factor in this configuration.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, running at a base clock of 2.40 GHz with a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. In the context of Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known for heavy single-threaded and moderate multi-threaded usage, this CPU provides substantial headroom. The benchmark data shows that at 1920x1080 with Low settings, the system achieves 111 FPS, a figure that would be difficult to reach if the CPU were struggling to process the game’s simulation and physics logic.

The processor’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42216 and single-core score of 5960 place it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, indicating strong overall capability. In the nearest rivals comparison, the Core Ultra 7 265 scores 0.3% higher than the Core Ultra 7 265F and 0.7% higher than the AMD EPYC 7343, while being 0.3% lower than the AMD EPYC 4464P and 0.7% lower than the AMD EPYC 9124. These deltas are minuscule, suggesting that the CPU’s performance is well within the expected range for its class, and none of these rivals would likely change the FPS outcome in this game.

The Passmark single-thread score of 4689 reinforces the CPU’s strength in tasks that rely on high clock speeds. For a flight simulator that often has a single primary simulation thread, this is a critical attribute. The fact that the 1080p Low preset reaches 111 FPS demonstrates that the CPU can push frame rates well above the 60 FPS threshold, and the drop to 89 FPS at 1440p Low, and then 66 FPS at 4K Low, is almost entirely attributable to the GPU’s inability to render the increased pixel count at the same rate. The CPU’s role here is to ensure that the frame rate is not artificially capped by processor limitations, and the data confirms it fulfills that role effectively.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER holds a rank of 1697 out of 2996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the lower-middle portion of the database, which is consistent with the GPU being an older, mid-range part relative to the current landscape. The RTX 2070 SUPER sits in the 65th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 20282, while the CPU is in the 93rd percentile. This disparity between CPU and GPU percentile rankings is a clear sign that the graphics card is the weaker link in this pairing.

Looking at the GPU’s nearest rivals, the RTX 2070 SUPER is 1% behind the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M, 1.2% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile, 1.3% behind the Intel Arc B570, and 1.5% behind the Intel Arc A750. These are all very close scores, within a 1.5% band, meaning that swapping to any of these alternatives would likely produce nearly identical FPS results in this game. The combo rank of 1697 out of 2996 suggests that while there are many slower combinations, there are also many faster ones, and the primary constraint is the GPU’s compute and memory throughput.

The rank also implies that the CPU is not holding the combo back. If the processor were the limiting factor, one would expect the combo rank to be closer to the CPU’s percentile ranking. Instead, the rank aligns more closely with the GPU’s position, confirming that the RTX 2070 SUPER is the determining factor for overall performance in this title. For users looking to improve performance, the data suggests that upgrading the graphics card would yield a more significant benefit than changing the processor.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS achievable with this combo at 1080p?

A: The highest average FPS at 1920x1080 is 111, achieved with the Low settings preset. This indicates the CPU and GPU can work together to produce a very playable frame rate when graphical demands are minimized.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 a bottleneck in this game?

A: No, the data does not indicate a CPU bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 111 FPS, which is a high frame rate that suggests the processor is capable of feeding the GPU more than enough data. The performance drops at higher resolutions are consistent with GPU limitations.

Q: How does this combo compare to other tested configurations?

A: This combo ranks 1697 out of 2996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. The GPU is in the 65th percentile of all GPUs, while the CPU is in the 93rd percentile, indicating the graphics card is the weaker component and the primary reason for the mid-pack ranking.

Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: At 3840x2160, the average FPS ranges from 66 at Low settings to 37 at Ultra settings. While Low settings are playable, Medium and higher presets result in average frame rates below 51 FPS, which may not be smooth enough for many users.

Q: What is the difference in performance between High and Ultra settings?

A: The difference is minimal. At 1920x1080, High yields 65 FPS and Ultra yields 62 FPS, a difference of only 3 FPS. At 3840x2160, the difference is just 2 FPS, with High at 39 FPS and Ultra at 37 FPS, suggesting the Ultra preset offers little additional performance cost but also little benefit at these settings.

Q: Is the RTX 2070 SUPER’s 8 GB of VRAM sufficient?

A: The data shows that the card can run all presets at all resolutions, but the performance at 4K is limited. The 8 GB of GDDR6 memory with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient to load the game, but the overall compute power of the GPU is the limiting factor, as evidenced by the steep FPS drops at higher resolutions.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER is built on the Turing architecture with a TU104 chip, featuring 2560 shading units and 64 ROPs. Its base clock is 1605 MHz with a boost clock of 1770 MHz, and it comes with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s. In this game, the GPU’s role is to handle the rendering of complex scenery, lighting, and textures, and the measured results show that it is the dominant factor in determining frame rates.

The Passmark G3D score of 18169 places the card in the 65th percentile of all GPUs, which is moderate for a card that was released in 2019. The benchmark results in this game show that the GPU’s performance scales predictably with resolution and settings. At 1080p, the card can push 111 FPS at Low, which is a strong result, but at 4K Ultra, it drops to 37 FPS. This 74 FPS swing from the least to most demanding scenario highlights the GPU’s limited headroom for high-resolution gaming.

The GPU’s FP32 performance of 9.062 TFLOPS is modest by modern standards, and the data suggests that it is simply not powerful enough to maintain high frame rates at 4K in a simulation as demanding as Microsoft Flight Simulator. The nearest rivals, such as the Intel Arc A750 and the RTX 3070 Mobile, are all within 1.5% of the RTX 2070 SUPER’s average score, indicating that this level of performance is a common baseline for mid-range GPUs. The GPU’s role in this combo is clearly to provide playable frame rates at 1080p and 1440p, while 4K is only viable on the lowest settings.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend heavily on the target resolution and the desired frame rate. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset offers an average of 86 FPS, which is smooth and well above the 60 FPS threshold. High settings drop to 65 FPS, which is still playable, but Medium provides a better balance of visual quality and performance. Ultra settings at 1080p yield 62 FPS, which is only slightly lower than High, so if visual fidelity is paramount, Ultra is a viable choice without a significant FPS penalty.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset is the clear recommendation, with an average of 70 FPS. Low settings achieve 89 FPS but sacrifice too much visual detail for a flight simulator where scenery is a major part of the experience. High settings at 1440p drop to 52 FPS, which may be acceptable for some users, but the jump from Medium to High costs 18 FPS, making Medium the better choice for maintaining fluidity. Ultra at 1440p is 50 FPS, which is only 2 FPS lower than High, so both are less ideal than Medium.

At 3840x2160, the data indicates that only Low settings provide a playable experience, with an average of 66 FPS. Medium drops to 51 FPS, which is borderline, and High and Ultra fall to 39 FPS and 37 FPS, respectively, which are likely too choppy for a smooth experience. For 4K users, the recommendation is to use Low settings for playability, or to consider reducing the resolution to 1440p and using Medium for a better visual experience. The overall best experience across all resolutions is the Medium preset at 1080p or 1440p, as it provides the highest average FPS above 60 while maintaining a reasonable level of detail.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete set of measured FPS data for this combo is as follows, organized by resolution and settings.

At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 111 FPS. The Medium preset yields an average of 86 FPS, with a minimum of 73 FPS and a maximum of 99 FPS. High settings produce an average of 65 FPS, and Ultra settings produce an average of 62 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset delivers an average of 89 FPS. The Medium preset yields an average of 70 FPS, with a minimum of 59 FPS and a maximum of 80 FPS. High settings produce an average of 52 FPS, and Ultra settings produce an average of 50 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset delivers an average of 66 FPS. The Medium preset yields an average of 51 FPS, with a minimum of 44 FPS and a maximum of 59 FPS. High settings produce an average of 39 FPS, and Ultra settings produce an average of 37 FPS.

These numbers show a consistent pattern: each step up in resolution reduces performance by roughly 20-25% regardless of the preset, and each step up in settings from Low to Ultra reduces performance by roughly 10-20% at a given resolution. The minimum FPS values recorded for the Medium preset at all resolutions indicate that the frame rate can dip noticeably below the average, particularly at 4K where the minimum is 44 FPS. This suggests that while the average may be acceptable in some cases, the frame pacing could be inconsistent in busy scenes.