Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is a demanding flight simulation title that stresses both processor and graphics hardware in unique ways. This analysis examines the measured performance of the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile, using only the provided benchmark data. The combination ranks 815th out of 3714 tested combos, placing it in the top 22% of all systems tested for this game. The data shows a configuration capable of high frame rates at lower settings, but one that requires careful tuning to maintain smooth performance at higher resolutions and detail levels.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 185H is a 16-core, 22-thread mobile processor based on the Meteor Lake architecture, built on a 7 nm process. It has a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, with a 45 W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. For a flight simulator, the CPU is responsible for simulating flight physics, handling AI traffic, and orchestrating the complex world streaming that this genre demands. The processor's multi-threaded capabilities are substantial, as indicated by its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 17984.5 and Geekbench multicore score of 11657. Its single-core performance, critical for the primary simulation thread, is reflected in a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1810.5 and a Geekbench single-core score of 1794.

In the context of this game's results, the CPU's role becomes clearer when analyzing the frame rate scaling. At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves an average of 166 FPS. This high frame rate, compared to the 4K Low result of 98 FPS, suggests that at lower resolutions, the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU enough data to reach very high frame rates. The processor's PassMark single-thread score of 3697 and multithread score of 29376 indicate a balanced capability that avoids becoming a severe bottleneck at lower settings. However, the performance data also shows that the CPU's performance is not the primary limiter in this configuration. The processor's nearest rivals, such as the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350, have an average score of 35719, which is only 0.1% different from this CPU's average benchmark score of 35670. This places the CPU at the 85th percentile when compared to all CPUs, showing it is a strong performer, but the game's frame rates suggest the GPU is more often the constraint.

The CPU's 22 threads are likely well-utilized by Microsoft Flight Simulator's background tasks, such as terrain loading and AI computation. The data shows that as resolution increases, the CPU headroom grows, as frame rates drop more steeply with higher settings, indicating the workload shifts to the GPU. The processor's impact is most visible in the difference between Low and Medium settings at 1080p. The jump from 166 FPS to 129 FPS is a 22% drop, which is significant, but not as steep as the drop from Medium to High, which goes to 97 FPS. This pattern suggests that the CPU can handle the initial increase in simulation complexity, but the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck as visual fidelity rises Mendacity. The Core Ultra 9 185H provides a solid foundation, but its performance is not the defining factor in this specific benchmark set.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile is the graphics powerhouse in this configuration, built on the Ada Lovelace architecture with a 5 nm process. It packs 9728 shading units, 304 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, along with 76 RT cores and 304 tensor cores. The GPU has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering a bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s. Its clock speeds are 1335 MHz base and 1695 MHz boost, with memory running at 2250 MHz or 18 Gbps effective. This hardware is designed to handle the vast draw distances and detailed scenery that Microsoft Flight Simulator presentscars. The GPU's raw compute power is substantial, with an FP32 performance of 32.98 TFLOPS and a texture rate of 515.3 GTexel/s.

The GPU's dominance in this pairing is evident from the frame rate data. At 4K Ultra settings, the system averages 55 FPS, which is a demanding workload. The difference between 4K Low (98 FPS) and 4K Ultra (55 FPS) is a 44% reduction in average frame rate, highlighting how much the GPU is stressed by the game's highest visual fidelity. The GPU's benchmark scores, such as a Passmark G3D score of 27212 and a Geekbench OpenCL score of 180831, place it at the 84th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX A6000, which has an average score of 44075, 0.9% higher than this GPU's average score of 43667. This confirms the RTX 4090 Mobile is a top-tier mobile graphics solution.

The VRAM capacity of 16 GB is a critical factor for this game. Microsoft Flight Simulator is known for loading large textures and scenery data, and the data shows that at 4K with High settings, the system still manages an average of 58 FPS. The step from High to Ultra at 4K only drops the frame rate by 3 FPS (from 58 to 55), which is a small margin compared to the step from Medium to High (77 to 58 FPS). This suggests that at 4K, the GPU is not only fill-rate limited but also potentially memory-bandwidth limited, as the 576.0 GB/s bandwidth is being taxed heavily. The GPU's performance is the primary driver of the experience at higher resolutions, as the frame rate scales inversely with resolution and settings in a manner consistent with a GPU-bound scenario.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of how the system scales from 1080p to 4K. At 1080p, the average frame rates range from 166 FPS at Low to 92 FPS at Ultra. Moving to 1440p, these numbers drop to 133 FPS at Low and 74 FPS at Ultra. At 4K, the range tightens to 98 FPS at Low and 55 FPS at Ultra. The scaling from 1080p to 4K at Low settings is a 41% reduction (166 to 98 FPS), while at Ultra settings, it is a 40% reduction (92 to 55 FPS). This consistency suggests that the limiting component scales predictably with resolution.

The data indicates a GPU-bound scenario at all settings and resolutions. If the CPU were the primary limiter, we would expect to see a smaller difference between 1080p and 4K frame rates, as the CPU workload would remain constant while the GPU workload increased. Instead, the frame rates drop significantly with resolution, which is a classic sign of GPU limitation. For example, at 1080p Medium, the system averages 129 FPS, which drops to 104 FPS at 1440p Medium and 77 FPS at 4K Medium. This is a 20% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 26% drop from 1440p to 4K, showing the GPU is struggling more as pixel count increases.

The analysis reveals that the CPU has more headroom than the GPU in this configuration. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 166 FPS, which is high enough to suggest the CPU is not heavily taxed. However, at 4K Ultra, the 55 FPS average indicates the GPU is fully saturated. This means that for users seeking higher frame rates, reducing resolution will provide immediate benefits, as the GPU is the limiting factor. The scaling also shows that the gap between settings narrows at higher resolutions. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 74 FPS (166 vs 92), but at 4K, the difference narrows to 43 FPS (98 vs 55). This is because at 4K, even Low settings require significant GPU resources, reducing the relative impact of settings changes.

FAQ

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

A: Based on the data, 1440p provides the best balance of visual quality and performance. At 1440p High settings, the system averages 78 FPS, which is smooth for a flight simulator. 4K is playable but dips to 55 FPS at Ultra, while 1080p offers high frame rates but may not fully utilize the GPU's capabilities.

Q: How does the Ultra 9 185H compare to its nearest CPU rivals in terms of general benchmark scores?

A: The CPU has an average benchmark score of 35670, which is 0.1% lower than the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 (35719) and 0.2% lower than the Intel Core 7 250H (35728). It is 0.4% lower than the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 and 0.7% lower than the AMD Ryzen 7 7700Xheb.

Q: Is the RTX 4090 Mobile significantly better than its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score is 43667. It scores 0.8% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 (43301) and 0.9% higher than the GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile (43268). It scores 0.9% lower than the NVIDIA RTX A6000 (44075). The differences are minimal, indicating these GPUs perform similarly in synthetic benchmarks.

Q: What is the most demanding setting for this system?

A: The data shows that Ultra settings at 4K are the most demanding, with an average FPS of 55. This is the lowest average frame rate recorded across all tested configurations. The jump from High to Ultra at 4K results in a 3 FPS drop, while the jump from Medium to High is a much larger 19 FPS drop.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 4K at the same settings?

A: At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 166 at 1080p to 98 at 4K, a 41% reduction. At Ultra settings, it drops from 92 at 1080p to 55 at 4K, a 40% reduction. The consistent percentage drop indicates that the GPU is the primary scaling factor.

Q: Does the system maintain playable frame rates at 4K?

A: Yes, at 4K Medium settings, the system averages 77 FPS with a minimum of 65 FPS, which is playable. At 4K High, it averages 58 FPS, and at Ultra, it averages 55 FPS. These frame rates are acceptable for a flight sim, though not as high as at lower resolutions.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the optimal settings for this system depend on the user's priority for visual fidelity versus frame rate smoothness. For the best balance, the Medium preset is the strongest choice across all resolutions. At 1080p Medium, the system delivers 129 FPS with a minimum of 109 FPS, ensuring a very smooth experience. At 1440p Medium, it delivers 104 FPS with a minimum of 88 FPS, which is excellent for a flight simulator. Even at 4K Medium, the system averages 77 FPS with a minimum of 65 FPS, providing a playable and visually rich experience.

The High preset offers a noticeable visual upgrade but comes with a significant performance cost. At 1080p High, the average FPS drops to 97, which is still smooth, but the jump to 1440p High reduces it to 78 FPS, and at 4K High, it falls to 58 FPS. These frame rates are playable but may feel less fluid in busy scenarios. The Ultra preset is only recommended for users who prioritize maximum visual quality and can tolerate lower frame rates. At 1080p Ultra, the system averages 92 FPS, which is fine, but at 1440p Ultra, it drops to 74 FPS, and at 4K Ultra, it averages only 55 FPS. For most users, Medium settings will provide the best experience, as the performance headroom ensures stability and smoothness, which is crucial in a game where sudden stutters can be disorienting.

The Low preset is not recommended for this high-end hardware, as it underutilizes the system's capabilities. While it achieves 166 FPS at 1080p and 98 FPS at 4K, the visual compromise is too severe for a system of this caliber. The data suggests that Medium at 4K is the sweet spot, as it offers a significant visual improvement over Low while maintaining a frame rate that is 40% higher than Ultra. The minimum FPS of 65 at 4K Medium also indicates that the system can maintain a playable experience even during demanding moments.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rates were recorded at three resolutions and four settings levels. At 1920x1080, the system delivers an average of 166 FPS at Low, 129 FPS at Medium (with a minimum of 109 and maximum of 148), 97 FPS at High, and 92 FPS at Ultra. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 45% reduction in average frame rate, indicating that the GPU is the primary scaling factor at this resolution. The minimum FPS at Medium (109) is higher than the average FPS at High (97), showing that the Medium preset provides a more consistent experience than High.

At 2560x1440, the average frame rates are 133 FPS at Low, 104 FPS at Medium (with a minimum of 88 and maximum of 119), 78 FPS at High, and 74 FPS at Ultra. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 20% at Medium, but the drop from Medium to High at 1440p is 25%, which is more severe than at 1080p. This indicates that the GPU is becoming more stressed as resolution increases. At 3840x2160, the average frame rates are 98 FPS at Low, 77 FPS at Medium (with a minimum of 65 and maximum of 88), 58 FPS at High, and 55 FPS at Ultra. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is 44%, showing that the GPU is the definitive bottleneck at this resolution.

The data shows a consistent pattern where the gap between Low and Medium is smaller than the gap between Medium and High. For example, at 1440p, the difference between Low and Medium is 29 FPS, while the difference between Medium and High is 26 FPS. This suggests that the Medium preset provides a good balance, as the jump to High offers diminishing returns for the performance cost. The minimum FPS data points, available only for Medium settings, show that the system maintains 88% of its average frame rate at 1440p (88 min vs 104 avg) and 84% at 4K (65 min vs 77 avg), indicating good frame pacing.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile ranks 815th out of 3714 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the top 22% of all systems tested, which is a strong result for a mobile platform. The rank reflects the balance between the CPU and GPU. The CPU is at the 85th percentile among all CPUs, and the GPU is at the 84th percentile among all GPUs, indicating that both components are well above average. However, the ranking suggests that there are many other combos with higher overall performance in this specific game.

The ranking implies that while this system is capable, it is not at the very top of the performance hierarchy. The GPU's nearest rivals, such as the NVIDIA RTX A6000, score marginally higher in synthetic benchmarks, which could translate to a few more frames in real-world gaming. The CPU's nearest rivals are all within 0.7% of its average benchmark score, suggesting that the processor is not a differentiator in this rank. Instead, the rank is likely influenced by the GPU's performance under the specific workload of Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is heavily dependent on both raw compute and memory bandwidth.

The 815th rank out of 3714 combos indicates that there are systems with faster CPUs or GPUs that achieve better frame rates. However, for a mobile configuration, this is an impressive position. The data shows that the system can handle 4K Medium at 77 FPS, which is a demanding scenario. The rank is a holistic measure, and the specific frame rates achieved at various settings demonstrate that this combo is well-suited for high-fidelity flight simulation, even if it does not top the charts. The performance is consistent and predictable, with no major bottlenecks, making it a reliable choice for this game.