Microsoft Flight Simulator

# Microsoft Flight Simulator with Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX + AMD Radeon 760M

This combination pairs a 20-core Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX processor with an integrated AMD Radeon 760M GPU, placing it at rank 2989 out of 2996 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. The data shows a system that is heavily constrained by graphics performance, with the CPU's substantial compute resources largely unable to compensate for the integrated GPU's limitations. The measured frame rates across all resolutions and settings presets indicate this combo is suited only for the most forgiving configurations, and even then, playability remains marginal.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K reveals a classic GPU-bound scenario. At Low settings, the average FPS falls from 34 at 1920x1080 to 28 at 2560x1440, then to 20 at 3840x2160. That represents a 41% reduction from 1080p to 4K, which is a steep decline but not as severe as the settings-driven drops. The scaling pattern is consistent with a GPU that runs out of pixel throughput quickly as resolution increases.

At Medium settings, the progression is 27 FPS at 1080p, 22 FPS at 1440p, and 16 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is about 19%, while the drop from 1440p to 4K is about 27%. This non-linear scaling suggests that memory bandwidth or fill rate becomes more critical at higher resolutions, which makes sense given the Radeon 760M's system-shared memory configuration. The GPU's memory bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent," meaning it relies on the CPU's dual-channel DDR5 interface rated at 102.4 GB/s — a figure that is shared with the processor's other memory needs.

High settings show 20 FPS at 1080p, 16 FPS at 1440p, and 12 FPS at 4K. The absolute differences shrink as the GPU becomes more saturated, but the relative penalties remain similar. Ultra settings are the most punishing, with 19 FPS at 1080p, 15 FPS at 1440p, and 11 FPS at 4K. The gap between High and Ultra at each resolution is small (1 FPS at 1080p, 1 FPS at 1440p, 1 FPS at 4K), indicating that the GPU is already near its ceiling before Ultra effects are fully applied.

The limiting component is clearly the GPU. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX, with its 20 cores and 5.30 GHz boost clock, posts a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 40642 and a single-core score of 5737, placing it in the 93rd percentile against all CPUs. This processor has ample headroom for simulation logic, but the Radeon 760M's 5.323 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 16 ROPs simply cannot feed frames fast enough. The GPU's percentile rank against all GPUs is 35, and its Passmark G3D score of 5310 places it near the AMD Radeon RX 6400 (6001, +0.3% delta) and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M (6000, +0.3% delta). Those are entry-level discrete GPUs from previous generations, and the integrated part matches them — but that is nowhere near enough for a demanding flight simulator at high resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

Out of 2996 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator, this pairing ranks 2989th. That places it in the bottom 0.2% of all tested configurations, which is a sobering position. The rank reflects the integrated GPU's limitations more than the CPU's capabilities. The Core Ultra 7 265HX, when compared to its nearest rivals in general CPU benchmarks, holds its own: it is 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i7-13790F (63080 avg score vs. 63173), 0.2% behind the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G (63331), 0.5% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 (62839), and 0.7% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX (62738). These are all within a narrow band, showing the CPU is competitive with other high-end mobile and desktop parts.

However, the GPU's rank tells a different story. The Radeon 760M sits at the 35th percentile against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 6019. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 6400 (6001, +0.3% delta), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M (6000, +0.3% delta), and NVIDIA Quadro P2000 (6049, -0.5% delta). The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server also appears at 5996 with a +0.4% delta, though that is likely a data anomaly given the massive performance gap such a professional card would normally exhibit. The practical takeaway is that the 760M performs like a low-end discrete GPU from roughly a decade ago, which explains the combo's near-bottom ranking.

The delta between this combo's actual game performance and what the CPU alone could achieve is stark. The processor's Passmark multithread score of 47985 and physics score of 2978 suggest it can handle complex flight simulation calculations, but the frame rates are entirely bound by the GPU's rendering output. In a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known for heavy draw calls and terrain streaming, the CPU's 30 MB of L3 cache and 20 threads help with loading and logic, but they cannot render pixels.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data shows that Low settings are the only viable path to something approaching playable frame rates. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo achieves 34 FPS average. That is the single highest measured result across all configurations. Medium settings at 1080p drop to 27 FPS, which is a 21% reduction. High settings yield 20 FPS, and Ultra yields 19 FPS — both are below the threshold for smooth gameplay.

At 2560x1440, Low settings produce 28 FPS, which might be tolerable for less demanding flight phases, but the 18 FPS minimum at Medium (22 FPS average) shows that dips below 20 FPS are common. At 4K, even Low settings only reach 20 FPS, with Medium dropping to 16 FPS and a 13 FPS minimum. These numbers suggest that 4K is not a realistic option for this combo, regardless of settings.

The recommendation is straightforward: run at 1920x1080 with Low settings for the best experience. The 34 FPS average is still below the 60 FPS target that most simmers prefer, but it is the only configuration that stays above 30 FPS. If visual fidelity is more important than frame rate, Medium at 1080p (27 FPS) is the highest preset that remains marginally playable, though the 23 FPS minimum indicates stutter-prone scenes. Avoid High and Ultra entirely — the 1 FPS difference between them at 1080p (20 vs. 19) shows the GPU is already maxed out, and the extra visual load only degrades consistency.

For users with 1440p displays, the choice is between Low (28 FPS) and Medium (22 FPS). The data does not show a minimum for Low at 1440p, but the Medium minimum of 18 FPS suggests that Low would likely hover in the mid-20s with occasional dips. If the display supports dynamic resolution scaling, starting at Low and letting the system adjust upward could be a workable strategy, but the measured data does not include such a mode.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured dataset covers three resolutions and four settings presets, with average FPS provided for all twelve combinations. Minimum and maximum FPS are only available for the Medium preset at each resolution, which limits the depth of analysis but still reveals useful patterns.

At 3840x2160, the results are uniformly poor. Low settings average 20 FPS, Medium averages 16 FPS with a minimum of 13 and maximum of 18, High averages 12 FPS, and Ultra averages 11 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is only 9 FPS, showing that the GPU is so saturated at 4K that settings changes have diminishing returns. The Medium preset's 5 FPS range between minimum and maximum also indicates tight frame pacing, which is unusual for a GPU-bound scenario — it suggests the bottleneck is consistent rather than spiky.

At 2560x1440, Low settings average 28 FPS, Medium averages 22 FPS (minimum 18, maximum 25), High averages 16 FPS, and Ultra averages 15 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 6 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is only 1 FPS. This compression at the top end indicates that the GPU's shading units and ROPs are fully utilized by High settings, leaving no headroom for Ultra's additional effects. The Medium preset's 7 FPS range shows more variability than at 4K, likely because the CPU can occasionally keep up with the GPU's demands at lower pixel counts.

At 1920x1080, the results are the most usable. Low settings average 34 FPS, Medium averages 27 FPS (minimum 23, maximum 31), High averages 20 FPS, and Ultra averages 19 FPS. The gap from Low to Medium is 7 FPS, from Medium to High is 7 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 1 FPS. This pattern mirrors the 1440p results, with diminishing returns above Medium. The Medium preset's 8 FPS range (23 to 31) is the widest of any measured configuration, suggesting that at 1080p the system alternates between GPU-bound and CPU-bound phases. The CPU's strong single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core score of 5737) helps in lightly loaded scenes, but the GPU limits sustained output.

The data includes no minimum or maximum FPS for Low, High, or Ultra presets, so the analysis relies on averages. However, the Medium preset's minimums — 13 FPS at 4K, 18 FPS at 1440p, and 23 FPS at 1080p — serve as a warning that even the average figures can dip significantly during complex scenes like city flyovers or dense cloud layers.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 760M is an integrated GPU based on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs, with 8 ray tracing cores. The boost clock reaches 2599 MHz, and the base clock is 800 MHz. The GPU's pixel rate is 41.58 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 83.17 GTexel/s. These specifications place it firmly in the entry-level segment, with a Passmark G3D score of 5310 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 400.

The most critical limitation is memory. The GPU uses "System Shared" memory, with the bus width and bandwidth also listed as "System Dependent." This means the Radeon 760M draws from the same DDR5 pool as the CPU, sharing the 102.4 GB/s dual-channel bandwidth. In a flight simulator that streams terrain and scenery data continuously, this shared memory arrangement causes contention between the CPU's simulation logic and the GPU's texture fetching. The measured frame rates reflect this: even at Low settings, the average FPS does not exceed 34 at any resolution, and the GPU's 35th percentile rank against all GPUs confirms its low position.

The GPU's nearest rivals in benchmark scores are the AMD Radeon RX 6400 (6001, +0.3% delta) and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M (6000, +0.3% delta). These are both discrete GPUs with dedicated memory, yet the integrated 760M matches their average scores. This reflects the efficiency of RDNA 3.0 at low power — the GPU's TDP is 15 W — but it also highlights how far behind modern discrete solutions the integrated part remains. The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server at 5996 (+0.4%) is an outlier in the rival list, likely due to a benchmark anomaly, but its inclusion does not change the overall picture.

The GPU's FP32 performance of 5.323 TFLOPS is respectable for an integrated part, and the FP16 output matches at 5.323 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio). However, Microsoft Flight Simulator's rendering workload is heavily pixel-bound, and the 16 ROPs are simply too few to fill high-resolution frames quickly. The 4K results show this clearly: 11-20 FPS across all settings, with no configuration breaking past 20 FPS. Even at 1080p, the GPU cannot sustain 60 FPS at any preset, and the maximum measured average is 34 FPS at Low.

The GPU's DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4 API compatibility mean it can technically run modern rendering features, but the hardware lacks the throughput to benefit from them. The ray tracing cores are present, but enabling ray-traced effects would likely halve the already-low frame rates. The data does not include ray tracing benchmarks, so no specific numbers are available, but the baseline performance suggests such features are impractical.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for this system?

A: The measured data shows 1920x1080 with Low settings producing the highest average FPS at 34. Medium settings at the same resolution average 27 FPS, which is the second-best result. Any configuration at 2560x1440 or above drops below 30 FPS on average.

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

A: It ranks 2989th out of 2996 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the bottom 0.2%. The CPU alone is competitive with rivals like the Intel Core i7-13790F (0.1% delta) and AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G (-0.2% delta), but the GPU's 35th percentile rank drags the overall performance down.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor?

A: The GPU is the clear bottleneck. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX has strong compute scores (Cinebench R23 multi-core 40642, single-core 5737, 93rd percentile), but the Radeon 760M's 5310 Passmark G3D score and 16 ROPs cannot render frames fast enough. The frame rate drops with resolution and settings confirm GPU saturation.

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

A: The data shows 4K results ranging from 11 FPS at Ultra to 20 FPS at Low. Even Low settings average only 20 FPS, which is below playable thresholds. The Medium preset has a 13 FPS minimum, indicating severe dips during demanding scenes.

Q: What is the highest playable configuration?

A: Based on the measured averages, 1920x1080 at Low settings (34 FPS) is the only configuration that stays above 30 FPS. Medium at 1080p (27 FPS) is borderline, with a 23 FPS minimum that may cause noticeable stutter in dense areas.

Q: How does the Radeon 760M compare to its benchmark rivals?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score is 6019, which is 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6400 (6001) and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M (6000), and 0.5% behind the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 (6049). These are all entry-level parts, and the integrated 760M matches them despite its 15 W TDP.