Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is one of the most demanding titles in the PC landscape, and this benchmark pairing places the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K alongside the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D. The measured results show a combination that ranks first out of 2,996 tested hardware combos in this game, indicating that this specific CPU-GPU pairing sits at the very top of the performance hierarchy. The data reveals a system capable of delivering high frame rates across all resolution and settings combinations, though the scaling patterns expose distinct bottlenecks that shift depending on the workload.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process node from TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, with a 30 MB shared L3 cache and 3 MB of L2 cache per core. The processor supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, which is relevant for a simulation title that streams large amounts of terrain and scenery data. Its benchmark scores are formidable: a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 35,850 and a single-core score of 2,020, alongside a Geekbench multicore score of 23,085 and single-core score of 2,713.

In the context of this game, the CPU's role is primarily to handle the complex flight model, weather simulation, and AI traffic that Microsoft Flight Simulator generates. The data shows that at 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves 254 FPS average, which is the highest measured value in the entire dataset. This figure suggests that at lower resolutions and reduced graphical loads, the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU at a very high rate. However, the processor's performance relative to its nearest rivals is tight; the Intel Xeon 6511P scores 71,051 (a 0.2% advantage), while the Intel Core i7-14700KF scores 70,163 (a 1% deficit). The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F trails by 1.3% with a score of 69,996, meaning the 265K sits in a narrow competitive band where small percentage differences separate the top performers.

The processor's 94th percentile ranking among all CPUs confirms that it is a high-end part, though not the absolute fastest available. In this simulation, the CPU's single-thread performance is likely the more critical factor, given that flight simulators often have a primary simulation thread. The 5.50 GHz boost clock and strong single-core Cinebench R15 score of 708 provide the necessary headroom for the game's physics and logic calculations. The data indicates that the CPU is not the limiting factor at 1080p Low, where the 254 FPS average demonstrates that the processor can handle the game's demands without throttling the GPU. The balanced core configuration, with 20 threads across performance and efficiency cores, seems well-suited to managing the background tasks that flight simulation requires.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D is a Blackwell 2.0 architecture GPU with 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus, delivering a memory bandwidth of 1.79 TB/s. It operates at a base clock of 2017 MHz with a boost clock of 2407 MHz, and the memory runs at 1750 MHz, effective 28 Gbps. The GPU features 21,760 shading units, 680 texture mapping units, and 176 raster operation pipelines, along with 170 ray tracing cores and 680 tensor cores. Its compute capabilities are substantial, with FP32 performance rated at 104.8 TFLOPS and a texture rate of 1,636.8 GTexel/s. In synthetic benchmarks, it scores 44,065 in Passmark G3D and 14,326 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, placing it in the 92nd percentile among all GPUs.

The RTX 5090 D's nearest rivals in the database are interestingly mobile and data center parts: the AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT is 1.1% slower, while the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT is 1.6% faster, and the NVIDIA Tesla P100 variants are 2.1% to 2.4% faster. This indicates that the 5090 D sits in a performance tier where the delta between the 92nd and 94th percentiles is minimal. For this game, the GPU's enormous 32 GB VRAM capacity is a key asset, as Microsoft Flight Simulator is known for loading high-resolution textures for terrain, aircraft, and airports. The 1.79 TB/s bandwidth ensures that texture streaming can keep up with the display output without stuttering.

The GPU's role becomes more pronounced at higher resolutions and settings. At 4K Ultra, the average frame rate drops to 84 FPS, which is the lowest measured in the dataset, indicating that the GPU is heavily loaded under these conditions. The 84 FPS figure at 4K Ultra shows that even a top-tier GPU is challenged by the game's maximum settings at UHD resolution. The GPU's rasterization throughput of 423.6 GPixel/s helps maintain playable frame rates, but the data shows a clear scaling pattern where settings and resolution directly impact performance. The GPU is the primary bottleneck at 4K and at Ultra settings, where the CPU has more headroom to feed it frames.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a consistent pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases, which is expected given the GPU's role in rendering pixel counts. At Low settings, the average frame rates are 254 FPS at 1080p, 205 FPS at 1440p, and 151 FPS at 4K. This represents a 19.3% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 26.3% drop from 1440p to 4K. The scaling at Low settings is primarily GPU-limited, as the CPU is able to maintain high frame rates even at 4K, given the reduced graphical complexity.

At Medium settings, the frame rates are 198 FPS at 1080p, 159 FPS at 1440p, and 118 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 19.7%, and from 1440p to 4K is 25.8%, showing a similar percentage decline to Low settings. The Medium settings also provide minimum and maximum frame rate data, which is valuable for understanding frame time consistency. At 1080p Medium, the range is 168 to 227 FPS, at 1440p Medium it is 136 to 183 FPS, and at 4K Medium it is 100 to 135 FPS. The minimum frame rates scale proportionally, indicating that the game maintains consistent performance without sudden drops.

At High settings, the frame rates are 149 FPS at 1080p, 120 FPS at 1440p, and 88 FPS at 4K, representing drops of 19.5% and 26.7% respectively. At Ultra settings, the frame rates are 142 FPS at 1080p, 114 FPS at 1440p, and 84 FPS at 4K, with drops of 19.7% and 26.3%. The similarity in percentage drops across all settings suggests that the scaling is resolution-bound, meaning that the GPU's pixel throughput is the limiting factor. The data shows that the gap between 1080p and 1440p is consistently around 19-20%, while the gap between 1440p and 4K is consistently around 26-27%, which aligns with the pixel count increase from 2.07 million to 3.69 million to 8.29 million pixels.

The resolution scaling analysis indicates that at 1080p, even Ultra settings can achieve 142 FPS, which is well above the refresh rate of most monitors. At 1440p, Ultra settings still deliver 114 FPS, making it a viable resolution for high-refresh-rate displays. At 4K, the frame rates drop below 90 FPS for High and Ultra settings, which may require adaptive sync technologies for smooth gameplay. The data suggests that the system is well-balanced at 1440p, where the CPU and GPU workloads are more evenly matched, while at 4K the GPU becomes the clear bottleneck.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides clear guidance on which settings preset offers the best experience for this hardware combination. At 1080p, all settings presets deliver frame rates above 140 FPS, with Low achieving 254 FPS, Medium at 198 FPS, High at 149 FPS, and Ultra at 142 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra at 1080p is only 7 FPS, or approximately 4.7%, which suggests that Ultra settings provide the best visual quality without sacrificing meaningful performance. The 142 FPS at 1080p Ultra is well above the 60 FPS threshold and likely sufficient for high-refresh-rate gaming.

At 1440p, the recommendation shifts slightly. High settings deliver 120 FPS, while Ultra drops to 114 FPS, a difference of 6 FPS or 5%. Both are playable, but the 114 FPS at Ultra may be preferable for users who prioritize visual fidelity, as the performance hit is minimal. However, Medium settings at 159 FPS provide a significant margin above 144 Hz refresh rates, making it the best option for competitive or very smooth gameplay. The data shows that at 1440p, the system can comfortably run Ultra settings at over 100 FPS, which is the sweet spot for this combination.

At 4K, the recommendations become more nuanced. Ultra settings deliver 84 FPS, which is above 60 FPS but below the 90 FPS threshold that some users consider ideal for smooth flight simulation. High settings at 88 FPS offer a slight improvement, while Medium at 118 FPS provides a substantial boost. For 4K, the Medium preset offers the best balance between visual quality and performance, delivering 118 FPS with a minimum of 100 FPS, ensuring smooth gameplay even in dense scenery areas. The Low preset at 151 FPS is available for users who prioritize frame rate above all else, but the visual compromise is significant. Based on the measured rows, the Medium preset at 4K provides the best experience, while Ultra at 1440p and 1080p offers the best visual quality without sacrificing playability.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average frame rate this combination achieves?

A: The highest measured average frame rate is 254 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rival in multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K scores 70,879 in average benchmark, which is 0.2% behind the Intel Xeon 6511P and 1% ahead of the Intel Core i7-14700KF.

Q: What is the minimum frame rate at 4K Medium settings?

A: At 3840x2160 resolution with Medium settings, the minimum frame rate is 100 FPS, with a maximum of 135 FPS and an average of 118 FPS.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU the limiting factor at 1080p Low settings?

A: The data shows 254 FPS at 1080p Low, which indicates the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU at very high rates, suggesting the GPU is the primary limiter even at this low workload.

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

A: At 2560x1440, High settings deliver 120 FPS average, while Ultra delivers 114 FPS, a difference of 6 FPS or approximately 5%.

Q: How does the GPU rank among all GPUs in the database?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D is in the 92nd percentile among all GPUs, with its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT, being 1.1% slower.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured frame rate data for this combination is as follows, organized by resolution and settings preset.

At 1920x1080, the Low settings preset achieves an average of 254 FPS. The Medium settings preset achieves an average of 198 FPS, with a minimum of 168 FPS and a maximum of 227 FPS. The High settings preset achieves an average of 149 FPS. The Ultra settings preset achieves an average of 142 FPS. The 1080p results show a clear hierarchy where reducing settings from Ultra to Low nearly doubles the frame rate, from 142 FPS to 254 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the Low settings preset achieves an average of 205 FPS. The Medium settings preset achieves an average of 159 FPS, with a minimum of 136 FPS and a maximum of 183 FPS. The High settings preset achieves an average of 120 FPS. The Ultra settings preset achieves an average of 114 FPS. The 1440p results show a similar scaling pattern, with Low settings delivering nearly double the frame rate of Ultra settings.

At 3840x2160, the Low settings preset achieves an average of 151 FPS. The Medium settings preset achieves an average of 118 FPS, with a minimum of 100 FPS and a maximum of 135 FPS. The High settings preset achieves an average of 88 FPS. The Ultra settings preset achieves an average of 84 FPS. The 4K results show that even the most demanding settings combination, Ultra at 4K, maintains an average of 84 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS standard for smooth gameplay.

The data across all resolutions and settings reveals that this hardware combination ranks first out of 2,996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it at the absolute top of the performance chart. The scaling from 1080p to 4K is consistent, with approximately a 20% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a further 26% drop from 1440p to 4K, regardless of the settings preset. This consistency indicates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions, while the CPU has sufficient headroom to maintain high frame rates at lower resolutions. The system delivers playable frame rates at every combination tested, with the lowest average being 84 FPS at 4K Ultra, which is still above the standard 60 FPS threshold.