Microsoft Flight Simulator

# Microsoft Flight Simulator: Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090

This combination ranks 67th out of 2,996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the top 2.2% of all systems evaluated. The pairing of Intel's flagship Arrow Lake Refresh processor with NVIDIA's top-end Ada Lovelace GPU produces frame rates that range from 77 FPS at 4K Ultra to 233 FPS at 1080p Low, demonstrating that this system is capable of handling the simulator's demanding flight dynamics and terrain rendering across all tested configurations.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 67 out of 2,996 tested configurations places it firmly in the upper echelon of systems benchmarked for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This position reflects the balanced strength of both primary components; the CPU sits at the 96th percentile among all processors, while the GPU holds the 88th percentile among all graphics cards. The system's overall performance profile suggests that neither component is a significant bottleneck in this title, though the measured FPS scaling across resolutions reveals where each part's contribution is most pronounced.

When examining the CPU's benchmark standing, the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus achieves an average benchmark score of 84,003. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, scores 83,807, representing a 0.2% advantage for the 290K Plus. The AMD EPYC 4584PX trails by 1.1% with a score of 83,090, while the AMD EPYC 9135 is 1.2% behind at 82,980. Interestingly, the AMD EPYC 7F72 leads this CPU by 1.3% with a score of 85,072, showing that server-class parts can edge out this desktop flagship in synthetic workloads.

On the GPU side, the RTX 4090's average benchmark score of 60,347 places it near the Intel Arc Pro A60 (60,326, a 0% delta) and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 (60,140, a 0.3% delta). The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M actually scores higher at 61,896, a 2.5% advantage, while the AMD Radeon PRO V710 sits 2.9% behind at 58,657. These synthetic benchmarks, however, only partially predict gaming performance; the measured FPS data in Microsoft Flight Simulator shows this GPU delivering playable frame rates even at 4K Ultra settings.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 brings substantial resources to Microsoft Flight Simulator. Its 24 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 384-bit bus provides 1.01 TB/s of bandwidth, which is critical for streaming the high-resolution terrain textures and detailed aircraft models that this simulator loads continuously during flight. The GPU's 16,384 shading units, 512 texture mapping units, and 176 raster output processors handle the geometry and pixel work required by the simulator's rendering pipeline.

Clock speeds are also relevant to the measured results. The base clock of 2235 MHz and boost clock of 2520 MHz, combined with the memory running at 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective), allow the card to sustain high throughput during extended benchmarking sessions. The 128 ray tracing cores and 512 tensor cores are present but less directly relevant to Microsoft Flight Simulator's primary rendering path, which relies more heavily on traditional rasterization and CPU-driven simulation logic.

The GPU's role becomes most apparent when examining the FPS progression from Low to Ultra settings. At 1080p, the system delivers 233 FPS on Low, 181 FPS on Medium, 136 FPS on High, and 130 FPS on Ultra. The relatively small gap between High and Ultra (only 6 FPS) suggests that Ultra settings introduce effects that are partially CPU-limited at this resolution, while the larger drop from Medium to High indicates a more GPU-intensive workload increase. At 4K, the scaling from 138 FPS on Low to 77 FPS on Ultra shows a 44% reduction, consistent with the GPU becoming the limiting factor as pixel count quadruples.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution and refresh rate. At 1080p, the Ultra preset delivers 130 FPS average, which is smooth for most displays and only 6 FPS below the High preset's 136 FPS. Given the small performance penalty, Ultra at 1080p provides the best visual experience without sacrificing meaningful frame rate.

For 2560x1440, the High preset at 110 FPS offers a strong balance between visual fidelity and smoothness, while Ultra at 105 FPS remains playable but begins to approach the threshold where some users might prefer higher frame rates. The Medium preset at 146 FPS provides a substantial margin for those with 144 Hz displays, but the visual downgrade from High is noticeable in a simulator that relies heavily on ground detail and cockpit readability.

At 3840x2160, the High preset at 81 FPS is the recommended target for most users, as it maintains fluid motion while preserving the detail that makes the simulator immersive. The Ultra preset at 77 FPS is only marginally slower, but the 4 FPS difference may not justify the additional rendering work if frame time consistency matters. The Medium preset at 108 FPS is the choice for those prioritizing frame rate over maximum visual quality, particularly if running on a 120 Hz display. The Low preset at 138 FPS is generally too visually compromised for this simulator's purpose, though it serves as a useful benchmark for understanding the system's upper limits.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to run this combo at for maximum visual quality?

A: The 4K Ultra preset delivers 77 FPS average, which is playable and visually stunning given the GPU's 24 GB VRAM and 1.01 TB/s bandwidth. However, the High preset at 4K achieves 81 FPS with only a modest visual reduction, making it a more frame-rate-stable choice for long flight sessions.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its closest rival?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus scores 84,003 in average benchmarks, which is 0.2% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K's 83,807. This margin is negligible in practice, indicating that the two processors are functionally equivalent for gaming workloads like Microsoft Flight Simulator.

Q: Is the RTX 4090 overkill for 1080p gaming with this CPU?

A: The data shows 233 FPS at 1080p Low and 130 FPS at 1080p Ultra, meaning the GPU is rarely the limiting factor at this resolution. The CPU's 24 cores and 24 threads, combined with its 36 MB of shared L3 cache, appear sufficient to keep frame rates high, but the GPU's headroom suggests users could enable higher resolutions without sacrificing performance.

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 1440p with Medium settings?

A: The measured average is 146 FPS, with a minimum of 124 FPS and a maximum of 168 FPS. This provides a comfortable margin above 120 FPS for most of the flight, though the minimum indicates some scenes can stress the system.

Q: How does the combo's rank translate to real-world performance?

A: Being 67th out of 2,996 means this system outperforms approximately 97.8% of tested configurations in Microsoft Flight Simulator. The combination of high CPU percentile (96th) and GPU percentile (88th) confirms that both components are working effectively together in this title.

Q: Does the CPU's TDP of 125 W limit sustained performance?

A: The benchmark scores, including a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51,731 and a single-core score of 7,303, indicate strong sustained performance. The 24 cores running at a base clock of 3.70 GHz and boost clock of 5.80 GHz appear well-supported by the 125 W TDP in these tests.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals distinct scaling patterns across the three tested resolutions. Moving from 1080p to 1440p at Ultra settings, the average FPS drops from 130 to 105, a 19.2% reduction. From 1440p to 4K Ultra, the average falls further from 105 to 77, a 26.7% reduction. This non-linear scaling pattern indicates a transition in the limiting component.

At 1080p, the system appears CPU-bound, particularly at lower settings where the 233 FPS Low result exceeds what most displays can show. The CPU's 24 threads and 36 MB of L3 cache provide ample headroom for the simulation logic, but the frame rates suggest the CPU is still the primary driver of performance at this resolution. The GPU's role at 1080p is less critical, as evidenced by the relatively small FPS gap between High (136) and Ultra (130) settings.

At 1440p, the balance shifts. The GPU begins to exert more influence, but the CPU still contributes meaningfully, as shown by the Medium preset's 146 FPS average. The 4K results, however, clearly demonstrate GPU-bound behavior. The progression from Low (138) to Medium (108) to High (81) to Ultra (77) shows a consistent 20-30 FPS drop per settings tier, which is characteristic of a GPU-limited scenario where each visual enhancement directly impacts pixel throughput.

The minimum FPS data available for Medium settings further illustrates this: 154 FPS at 1080p, 124 FPS at 1440p, and 92 FPS at 4K. These minimums suggest that complex scenes with dense terrain or weather effects can cause frame time spikes, but the overall averages remain stable enough for immersive flight simulation.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture, manufactured on TSMC's 3 nm process. Its base clock of 3.70 GHz and boost clock of 5.80 GHz, combined with a 36 MB shared L3 cache and 192 KB of L1 cache per core, provide substantial computational headroom for Microsoft Flight Simulator's complex flight dynamics, weather simulation, and AI traffic management.

The CPU's benchmark results show strong multi-threaded performance: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51,731 and a Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 21,727. Single-thread performance is equally impressive, with Cinebench R23 single-core at 7,303 and R20 single-core at 3,067. These scores indicate that the CPU can handle both the heavily threaded simulation logic and the less-parallelizable rendering tasks that the simulator requires.

In the context of this game, the CPU's role is most evident at 1080p, where frame rates are highest and the GPU has more headroom. The 233 FPS Low result at 1080p suggests that the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU with enough draw calls and simulation updates to maintain very high frame rates. The PassMark multi-thread score of 60,860 and single-thread score of 4,823 further confirm that this processor excels at both the parallel and serial workloads present in flight simulation.

The CPU's memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, delivered through dual-channel DDR5 support, is adequate for feeding the RTX 4090's 1.01 TB/s bandwidth. The 24 threads are fully utilized by the simulator's multi-threaded architecture, which handles tasks such as terrain streaming, weather computation, and aircraft systems modeling across multiple cores. The CPU's 96th percentile ranking among all processors underscores its capability to sustain high frame rates even in CPU-intensive scenarios like dense urban areas or complex weather fronts.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured FPS dataset for this combo in Microsoft Flight Simulator is as follows:

1920x1080:

• Low: 233 FPS average
• Medium: 181 FPS average (154 minimum, 208 maximum)
• High: 136 FPS average
• Ultra: 130 FPS average

2560x1440:

• Low: 188 FPS average
• Medium: 146 FPS average (124 minimum, 168 maximum)
• High: 110 FPS average
• Ultra: 105 FPS average

3840x2160:

• Low: 138 FPS average
• Medium: 108 FPS average (92 minimum, 124 maximum)
• High: 81 FPS average
• Ultra: 77 FPS average

These numbers show a clear hierarchy: at each resolution, the Low preset provides the highest frame rate, followed by Medium, then High, with Ultra being the most demanding. The gaps between presets are not uniform, however. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Medium is 52 FPS (233 to 181), while the difference between High and Ultra is only 6 FPS (136 to 130). This suggests that the Ultra preset at 1080p introduces effects that are less GPU-intensive than the step from Medium to High.

At 1440p, the spread is more even: 188 to 146 to 110 to 105 FPS across the four presets. The Medium to High drop of 36 FPS is the largest single-setting jump, indicating that High enables significantly more GPU work. At 4K, the progression is 138 to 108 to 81 to 77 FPS, with the Medium to High drop of 27 FPS being the most pronounced. The High to Ultra difference of only 4 FPS at 4K suggests that Ultra settings at this resolution are limited by factors other than pure GPU fill rate, possibly including CPU-driven simulation updates that cannot be hidden by the GPU's 24 GB frame buffer.

The minimum FPS values, available only for Medium settings, provide insight into frame pacing: 154 FPS at 1080p, 124 FPS at 1440p, and 92 FPS at 4K. These minimums are 85%, 85%, and 85% of their respective averages, indicating consistent frame delivery without major spikes or hitches. This consistency is important for flight simulation, where smooth visual feedback is essential for maintaining situational awareness during instrument approaches or low-altitude maneuvering.