Microsoft Flight Simulator

# Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for Microsoft Flight Simulator with the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 reveals a steep performance curve as resolution climbs. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo delivers 106 FPS. Dropping to 2560x1440 at Low brings that down to 86 FPS, a decline of 20 FPS. At 3840x2160 Low, the average falls further to 63 FPS. This pattern — from 106 to 86 to 63 across the three resolutions — shows a roughly 40% total reduction from 1080p to 4K at the lowest preset.

The Medium preset tells a similar story with slightly higher absolute numbers. At 1080p Medium, the average is 83 FPS, with a minimum of 70 FPS and maximum of 95 FPS. Moving to 1440p Medium, the average drops to 67 FPS, with the min/max range shifting to 57-77 FPS. At 4K Medium, the average sits at 49 FPS, with a minimum of 42 FPS and maximum of 57 FPS. The min FPS numbers are worth noting: at 4K Medium, the 42 FPS floor suggests occasional stutter can occur, though the range is consistent.

High settings follow the same downward trajectory. At 1080p High, the average is 62 FPS. At 1440p High, it falls to 50 FPS. At 4K High, the average reaches only 37 FPS. The gap between Low and High at each resolution is substantial — at 1080p, the difference is 44 FPS (106 vs 62); at 1440p, it's 36 FPS (86 vs 50); and at 4K, it's 26 FPS (63 vs 37). This shrinking delta as resolution increases hints at a growing GPU bottleneck, since the CPU has more headroom at lower resolutions but the GPU becomes the limiting factor as pixel count rises.

Ultra settings produce the lowest results across the board. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 59 FPS — barely below High's 62 FPS. At 1440p Ultra, it's 48 FPS versus High's 50 FPS. At 4K Ultra, the average is 35 FPS versus High's 37 FPS. The small differences between High and Ultra at every resolution suggest diminishing returns from the highest preset, a point reinforced by the fact that Ultra at 1080p (59 FPS) is nearly identical to High at 1440p (50 FPS) in feel.

What does this imply about the limiting component? The scaling from 1080p to 4K is dramatic at every settings level, with 4K averages roughly 40-50% lower than their 1080p counterparts. This magnitude of drop points squarely at the RTX 4060 as the primary constraint at higher resolutions. The GPU's 8 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory bus are modest by modern standards, and the data suggests that at 4K, even Low settings (63 FPS) barely reach playable territory, while Ultra (35 FPS) falls short of smoothness.

# How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations for Microsoft Flight Simulator, this pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 holds a combo rank of 1804 out of 2996 combos. That places it in the 60th percentile of all tested configurations — meaning about 40% of combos tested faster, and about 60% were slower. For a mobile CPU paired with a mid-range GPU, this rank reflects the GPU's position in the overall hierarchy more than the CPU's.

The CPU itself sits at the 85th percentile among all processors, with an average benchmark score of 35670. Its nearest rivals in the CPU benchmark database are tightly clustered: the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 scores 35719, a delta of -0.1%; the Intel Core 7 250H scores 35728, a delta of -0.2%; the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 scores 35802, a delta of -0.4%; and the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X scores 35909, a delta of -0.7%. All four rivals are within 1% of the Core Ultra 9 185H's score, indicating that CPU performance here is essentially average for its class — neither a standout nor a laggard.

The GPU, by contrast, ranks at the 61st percentile among all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 17639. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon HD 7790 at 17666 (-0.2%), the AMD Radeon 780M at 17588 (+0.3%), the AMD Radeon Pro 560 at 17551 (+0.5%), and the AMD Radeon Pro 460 at 17509 (+0.7%). The RTX 4060's position relative to these older or integrated GPUs is telling: it's in the same performance band as a 2013 desktop card and a 2024 integrated GPU, which contextualizes why the Flight Simulator results cap out where they do.

The combo rank of 1804 out of 2996 suggests that this pairing is not optimized for high-end Flight Simulator play. Given that the CPU is near the top of its class (85th percentile) while the GPU is mid-pack (61st percentile), the bottleneck is evident. The data implies that this configuration is better suited to 1080p or 1440p gaming than to 4K, and that users seeking higher framerates at 4K would need a more powerful GPU to pair with this capable CPU.

# GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 is built on the AD107 chip using TSMC's 5 nm process, with 18,900 million transistors on a 159 mm² die. It features 3072 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, and 48 raster output units. The boost clock runs at 2460 MHz, with a base clock of 1830 MHz. Memory consists of 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 272.0 GB/s. The memory clock is 2125 MHz, which translates to 17 Gbps effective.

These specifications directly influence the measured FPS in Flight Simulator. The 8 GB VRAM capacity is a key constraint at higher resolutions and settings. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS drops to 35, and at 4K High it's 37 — both figures suggest the GPU is running out of both raw compute and memory bandwidth. The 128-bit memory bus, while paired with relatively fast GDDR6, limits the data throughput available for large texture loads and draw calls typical of a flight simulator's detailed scenery.

The GPU's FP32 performance is 15.11 TFLOPS, with FP16 also at 15.11 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio). The pixel rate is 118.1 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 236.2 GTexel/s. These numbers place the RTX 4060 in a mid-range tier, which aligns with its 61st percentile ranking. The 24 RT cores and 96 tensor cores provide ray tracing and DLSS capabilities, though the benchmark data here does not include any DLSS or ray tracing results — the measured FPS is purely rasterized performance.

Comparing the RTX 4060 to its nearest rivals in the GPU database, the AMD Radeon 780M (an integrated GPU) scores 17588, just 0.3% below the RTX 4060's 17639 average. This close proximity is remarkable — it means an integrated GPU in some modern laptops can approach the raw benchmark performance of this discrete card. However, in actual Flight Simulator testing, the RTX 4060's dedicated VRAM and higher sustained clocks likely provide an advantage that synthetic benchmarks don't fully capture.

The GPU's TDP is 115 W, with a suggested PSU of 300 W, and it uses a single 12-pin power connector. The dual-slot design at 240 mm length is standard for a mid-range card. The PCIe 4.0 x8 interface is half the width of the x16 standard, though for this game's workload, the bandwidth difference is unlikely to be a limiting factor given the measured FPS numbers.

# Settings Recommendations

Examining the measured FPS rows, the data offers clear guidance for optimal settings at each resolution. At 1920x1080, Low settings deliver 106 FPS, Medium delivers 83 FPS (min 70, max 95), High delivers 62 FPS, and Ultra delivers 59 FPS. The jump from Medium to High costs 21 FPS, while High to Ultra costs only 3 FPS. This suggests that Medium is the sweet spot at 1080p — it's 34% faster than High, and the visual difference between Medium and High in a flight simulator (where you're often looking at distant terrain) may not justify the framerate loss.

At 2560x1440, the pattern shifts. Low gives 86 FPS, Medium gives 67 FPS (min 57, max 77), High gives 50 FPS, and Ultra gives 48 FPS. Here, Medium remains the most balanced choice, offering a 17 FPS advantage over High. The min FPS of 57 at Medium is still comfortably above the 50 FPS threshold that many players consider the floor for smooth sim gameplay. High at 50 FPS is borderline, and Ultra at 48 FPS dips below that threshold.

At 3840x2160, the options narrow considerably. Low delivers 63 FPS, Medium delivers 49 FPS (min 42, max 57), High delivers 37 FPS, and Ultra delivers 35 FPS. At 4K, only Low achieves a consistently smooth experience above 60 FPS. Medium at 49 FPS is playable but with a 42 FPS minimum that could cause noticeable hitches during busy scenes. High and Ultra are below 40 FPS, which is generally too choppy for a simulator that requires precise control.

The data implies that for this combo, Medium settings provide the best overall experience across all resolutions. At 1080p, Medium offers 83 FPS with a 70 FPS minimum — well within smooth territory. At 1440p, Medium's 67 FPS average and 57 FPS minimum keep the experience fluid. Even at 4K, Medium's 49 FPS average is more acceptable than High's 37 FPS, and the min of 42 FPS is only slightly below the 50 FPS threshold. Ultra, meanwhile, offers marginal gains over High at every resolution — 3 FPS at 1080p, 2 FPS at 1440p, 2 FPS at 4K — making it the least efficient preset in terms of performance per visual uplift.

# Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured FPS dataset for Microsoft Flight Simulator with the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 is as follows:

1920x1080:

• Low: 106 FPS average
• Medium: 83 FPS average, 70 FPS min, 95 FPS max
• High: 62 FPS average
• Ultra: 59 FPS average

2560x1440:

• Low: 86 FPS average
• Medium: 67 FPS average, 57 FPS min, 77 FPS max
• High: 50 FPS average
• Ultra: 48 FPS average

3840x2160:

• Low: 63 FPS average
• Medium: 49 FPS average, 42 FPS min, 57 FPS max
• High: 37 FPS average
• Ultra: 35 FPS average

The Medium preset is the only one with full min/max data across all resolutions, providing insight into frametime consistency. At 1080p, the 70-95 FPS range shows a 25 FPS spread, indicating some variance but generally stable performance. At 1440p, the 57-77 FPS range narrows to a 20 FPS spread, suggesting slightly better consistency. At 4K, the 42-57 FPS range shows a 15 FPS spread — the tightest relative variance, though at a lower absolute level.

The scaling efficiency can be quantified: moving from 1080p to 1440p at Medium reduces FPS by 19% (83 to 67), and from 1440p to 4K reduces FPS by 27% (67 to 49). The larger drop at higher resolutions reinforces the GPU-bound nature of the workload. Similarly, at Low settings, the drops are 19% (106 to 86) and 27% (86 to 63), respectively. At High settings, the drops are 19% (62 to 50) and 26% (50 to 37). The consistency of these percentages across settings levels suggests a uniform scaling factor tied to pixel count rather than settings complexity.

# FAQ

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

A: Based on the measured FPS, 1920x1080 is the only resolution where all settings levels achieve above 59 FPS average. At 2560x1440, Low and Medium exceed 60 FPS, but High and Ultra fall to 50 and 48 FPS respectively. At 3840x2160, only Low reaches 63 FPS, with all other settings below 50 FPS.

Q: How does the RTX 4060 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The RTX 4060 has an average benchmark score of 17639, which is 0.2% below the AMD Radeon HD 7790 (17666), 0.3% above the AMD Radeon 780M (17588), 0.5% above the AMD Radeon Pro 560 (17551), and 0.7% above the AMD Radeon Pro 460 (17509). All are within 1% of each other.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the primary constraint. The CPU ranks at the 85th percentile among all processors, while the GPU ranks at the 61st percentile. The FPS drops sharply from 1080p to 4K (e.g., 106 to 63 FPS at Low settings), which is characteristic of GPU-bound performance rather than CPU limitations.

Q: What is the combo's overall rank in this game?

A: This CPU-GPU combination ranks 1804 out of 2996 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the 60th percentile of all tested configurations.

Q: How much FPS does Ultra settings cost compared to High?

A: At 1080p, Ultra is 3 FPS slower than High (59 vs 62 FPS). At 1440p, the difference is 2 FPS (48 vs 50 FPS). At 4K, the difference is 2 FPS (35 vs 37 FPS). The small deltas suggest Ultra offers minimal visual benefit relative to its performance cost.

Q: Does the 8 GB VRAM on the RTX 4060 affect performance at 4K?

A: The measured 4K results show significant drops: 63 FPS at Low, 49 FPS at Medium, 37 FPS at High, and 35 FPS at Ultra. While the data doesn't isolate VRAM usage, the steep decline at higher settings aligns with the 8 GB capacity and 128-bit bus being stressed by 4K textures and geometry.

# CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 185H is a 16-core, 22-thread processor based on the Meteor Lake architecture, built on Intel's 7 nm process. It has a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, with a TDP of 45 W. The cache hierarchy includes 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory bandwidth is rated at 89.6 GB/s over a dual-channel DDR5 interface.

In synthetic benchmarks, the Core Ultra 9 185H scores 17984.5 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 1810.5 in single-core. Geekbench results show 11657 multi-core and 1794 single-core. PassMark multithread score is 29376, with single-thread at 3697. These figures place the CPU at the 85th percentile among all processors, with an average benchmark score of 35670. Its nearest rivals are all within 0.7% of its score, indicating that this chip is competitive but not exceptional within its tier.

For Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is significant but secondary to the GPU based on the data. The game is known for heavy single-thread dependencies in its simulation loop, and the Core Ultra 9 185H's single-core score of 1810.5 in Cinebench R23 is respectable for a mobile chip. The boost clock of 5.10 GHz should provide adequate headroom for the game's physics and flight model calculations.

However, the measured FPS patterns suggest that CPU performance is not the primary bottleneck in this setup. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 106 FPS — a solid number that indicates the CPU can feed the GPU adequately at lower resolution. The fact that FPS scales down proportionally with resolution (106 to 86 to 63 at Low) points to GPU limitation rather than CPU stalls. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we'd expect similar FPS regardless of resolution, since CPU workload stays roughly constant as pixel count changes.

The 16 cores and 22 threads provide ample multi-threading capacity for background tasks and the game's auxiliary systems, though Flight Simulator's core simulation loop likely uses only a few threads. The 24 MB of L3 cache is beneficial for loading scenery data, and the 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth supports fast texture streaming. The CPU's 45 W TDP is modest, which is appropriate for a mobile processor in a laptop chassis, and the integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 128EU offers a fallback display output option though it's not relevant to the discrete GPU results.

The CPU's release date of 2023-12-13 and its active production status indicate it's a current-generation part, though the GPU (released 2023-05-17) is already marked as end-of-life. This mismatch in lifecycle status, combined with the CPU's 85th percentile ranking versus the GPU's 61st percentile, reinforces that the RTX 4060 is the limiting factor in this pairing. Users considering upgrades based on this data would likely see greater gains from a GPU upgrade than a CPU swap, since the CPU is already performing near the top of its class.