Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is a uniquely demanding title, and the data for the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D places this combination among the elite configurations tested. The measured frame rates across all resolutions and settings presets show a system that is heavily influenced by both the CPU's single-thread strength and the GPU's raw throughput, though the bottleneck shifts predictably as resolution increases. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS data, contextualizes the performance against other tested combos, and provides actionable settings guidance based strictly on the empirical results.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear and expected trend: performance degrades as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At the "Low" preset, the system delivers 254 FPS at 1080p, which drops to 205 FPS at 1440p, and further to 151 FPS at 4K. This represents a 40.6% performance reduction when moving from 1080p to 4K at the lowest settings. The pattern is consistent across all presets, but the percentage drop is more pronounced at higher quality settings, suggesting a growing dependency on the GPU as the visual load increases.

For the "High" preset, the transition from 1080p (149 FPS) to 1440p (120 FPS) is a 19.5% drop, while moving to 4K (88 FPS) constitutes a 40.9% total reduction from the 1080p baseline. The "Ultra" preset shows a similar trajectory: 142 FPS at 1080p, 114 FPS at 1440p, and 84 FPS at 4K. The scaling between 1440p and 4K is notably steeper across all presets, with the "Medium" preset showing a 25.8% drop (159 to 118 FPS). This non-linear scaling indicates that while the CPU is sufficient to maintain high frame rates at lower resolutions, the RTX 5090 D becomes the primary limiting factor at 4K, where the sheer pixel count and geometric complexity of Flight Simulator tax the GPU heavily.

The fact that the 1080p to 1440p gap is smaller than the 1440p to 4K gap across all settings suggests that the system is not CPU-bound at 1440p, but rather the GPU's capabilities are being saturated at 4K. Specifically, at "Low" settings, the 1080p result of 254 FPS is exceptionally high, indicating that the CPU can drive frame rates well beyond typical display refresh rates when the GPU is not heavily loaded. However, the 40.6% drop to 151 FPS at 4K Low shows that even a flagship GPU like the RTX 5090 D must work significantly harder to render the same scene at higher resolution. The data strongly points to a GPU-bound scenario at 4K, while 1080p and 1440p results are more balanced between CPU and GPU contributions.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D is the dominant force in this pairing, equipped with 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus, providing a massive 1.79 TB/s of memory bandwidth. This memory configuration is critical for Microsoft Flight Simulator, which streams vast amounts of terrain and scenery data. The 32 GB capacity ensures that even at 4K Ultra settings, the GPU will not run out of memory, preventing stutters or texture pop-in that might occur on lower-capacity cards. The measured FPS at 4K Ultra (84 FPS) and 4K High (88 FPS) shows that the GPU's 176 ROPs and 104.8 TFLOPS of FP32 compute are being utilized effectively, though the relatively small gap between High and Ultra at 4K (88 vs 84 FPS) suggests that the Ultra preset introduces additional computational demands that yield diminishing returns.

The GPU's clock speeds, with a base of 2017 MHz and a boost of 2407 MHz, are relatively modest compared to some rivals, but the architecture's efficiency compensates. The 21,760 shading units are the highest in the data set, and the 170 RT cores and 680 tensor cores provide ample resources for DirectX 12 Ultimate features, though Flight Simulator's traditional rasterization workload is likely the primary driver of the measured performance. The fact that the GPU's benchmark percentile is 92, with an average score of 77,712, places it near the top of all GPUs tested, and its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT, is only 1.6% behind in average score, indicating that the RTX 5090 D is just at the edge of the performance envelope.

In Flight Simulator specifically, the GPU's role is most evident in the 4K results. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 254 FPS, which is a CPU-limited scenario, but at 4K Ultra, the frame rate drops to 84 FPS, a 66.9% reduction from the 1080p Low figure. This dramatic scaling shows that the GPU's computational limits are being reached at higher resolutions and quality settings. The memory bandwidth of 1.79 TB/s is likely a key factor in maintaining playable frame rates at 4K, as the game's streaming engine requires constant data transfer. The GPU's performance in this title is consistent with its overall benchmark standing, but the data suggests that even this flagship card cannot fully overcome the rendering demands of Flight Simulator at 4K Ultra, where the 84 FPS average is still respectable but not in the field of high-refresh-rate gaming.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D ranks 5th out of 3,714 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This top-tier ranking places it in the 99.9th percentile of all configurations, indicating that only four other CPU-GPU pairings deliver higher average frame rates in this specific game. The ranking reflects the balance between the CPU's high single-core performance and the GPU's massive computational and memory resources.

The CPU's overall benchmark percentile is 96, with an average score of 84,003, and its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, is only 0.2% ahead, showing that the 290K Plus is essentially at the top of the CPU performance hierarchy. The GPU's percentile is 92, with an average score of 77,712, and its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT, is 1.1% behind. The combination of a top-4% CPU and a top-8% GPU yields a combo that is in the top 0.13% of all tested pairings in this game.

The rank of 5th out of 3,714 is particularly notable because it suggests that the system is not bottlenecked by either component in a way that would drag its ranking down. In many games, a combination of a high-end CPU and GPU might rank lower if one component is significantly weaker than the other, but in this case, the data indicates that both components are performing near their peak potential. The measured FPS at 1080p High (149 FPS) and 4K High (88 FPS) shows a performance envelope that is consistent with a top-5 finish, as most other combos would likely struggle to maintain these frame rates at the same settings. The fact that the combo ranks 5th, rather than 1st, suggests that there are a handful of other configurations with even more optimized pairings, but for practical purposes, this system is at the very top of the leaderboard for Flight Simulator.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its highest frame rates across all settings. The "Low" preset achieves an average of 254 FPS, which is the highest measured value in the entire data set. The "Medium" preset averages 198 FPS, with a minimum of 168 FPS and a maximum of 227 FPS, showing some frame time variance but still maintaining excellent performance. The "High" preset averages 149 FPS, while the "Ultra" preset averages 142 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra at 1080p is only 4.7%, suggesting that the Ultra preset's additional effects are relatively easy for the GPU to handle at this resolution, or that the CPU is becoming the limiting factor.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates decrease across all presets, but the system remains highly capable. "Low" settings average 205 FPS, which is still well above the refresh rate of most monitors. "Medium" averages 159 FPS, with a minimum of 136 FPS and a maximum of 183 FPS, indicating a slightly wider variance than at 1080p. "High" averages 120 FPS, and "Ultra" averages 114 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is most pronounced at "Low" settings (254 to 205 FPS, a 19.3% reduction), while the "Ultra" preset sees a smaller relative drop (142 to 114 FPS, a 19.7% reduction), showing that the GPU is the primary driver of the performance change.

At 3840x2160, the system's performance is still strong but shows its limits. "Low" settings average 151 FPS, which is a 26.3% drop from the 1440p Low result. "Medium" averages 118 FPS, with a minimum of 100 FPS and a maximum of 135 FPS, showing that even at 4K, the system can maintain frame rates above 100 FPS. "High" averages 88 FPS, and "Ultra" averages 84 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra at 4K is only 4.5%, mirroring the 1080p result, which suggests that the Ultra preset's impact on performance is consistent regardless of resolution. The 4K results show that the system is capable of 4K gaming, but the frame rates are more in line with console-like performance rather than the high-refresh-rate territory seen at 1080p.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the "High" preset at 2560x1440 appears to be the sweet spot for this configuration, delivering 120 FPS average. This is a significant improvement over the "Ultra" preset's 114 FPS at the same resolution, while the "Medium" preset at 1440p offers 159 FPS, but the visual quality difference between Medium and High is typically more noticeable than between High and Ultra. For users prioritizing visual fidelity, the "Ultra" preset at 1440p (114 FPS) is still highly playable, but the 5.3% performance gain from dropping to "High" is a reasonable trade-off for a smoother experience.

At 4K, the "High" preset (88 FPS) is the recommended choice, as it offers a better balance of visual quality and performance compared to "Ultra" (84 FPS), which only provides a marginal improvement in fidelity while costing 4 FPS. The "Medium" preset at 4K (118 FPS) is also viable, providing a 34.1% performance boost over "High" while still maintaining a high level of visual detail. For users with high-refresh-rate 4K displays, the "Low" preset at 4K (151 FPS) is the only way to approach 144 Hz, but the visual compromises may be too severe for a simulation game.

At 1080p, the "Ultra" preset (142 FPS) is fully playable and provides the best visual experience, but the "High" preset (149 FPS) offers nearly identical performance with a negligible 4.7% difference. The "Medium" preset at 1080p (198 FPS) is ideal for users with 165 Hz or 240 Hz monitors, as it provides a significant frame rate boost while still looking good. The "Low" preset at 1080p (254 FPS) is only useful for competitive play or benchmarking, as the visual quality is significantly reduced. For most users, the "High" preset at 1440p delivers the best combination of visual quality and frame rate, with 120 FPS being well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo achieves in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The highest measured average FPS is 254 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with the "Low" settings preset.

Q: How does the combo perform at 4K Ultra settings?

A: At 3840x2160 resolution with the "Ultra" preset, the system delivers an average of 84 FPS, which is the lowest measured value in the data set but still playable.

Q: Is the system CPU-bound or GPU-bound at 4K?

A: The data suggests the system becomes GPU-bound at 4K, as the frame rate drops by 40.6% from 1080p to 4K at "Low" settings, indicating the GPU is the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

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

A: At 2560x1440, the "High" preset averages 120 FPS, while the "Ultra" preset averages 114 FPS, a difference of 5.3% in favor of "High".

Q: How does this combo rank compared to other tested configurations?

A: This combo ranks 5th out of 3,714 tested CPU-GPU combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the top 0.13% of all configurations.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The minimum FPS recorded is 100 FPS, which occurs at 3840x2160 resolution with the "Medium" settings preset.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus plays a crucial role in the system's overall performance, particularly at lower resolutions where the GPU is less stressed. With 24 cores and 24 threads, this CPU is designed for heavy multi-threaded workloads, but its single-thread performance is what matters most in Microsoft Flight Simulator, which relies heavily on a single main thread for simulation logic. The CPU's boost clock of 5.80 GHz is one of the highest available, and this is reflected in its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 7,303, which is a strong indicator of its ability to handle the game's simulation loop.

The CPU's cache hierarchy, with 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and a 36 MB shared L3 cache, ensures that frequently accessed data is stored close to the cores, reducing latency. This is particularly important for Flight Simulator, which streams data continuously. The CPU's memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s via DDR5 memory support is adequate for feeding the GPU, but it is not the main bottleneck in this system. The data shows that at 1080p Low, the system achieves 254 FPS, which is likely near the CPU's maximum frame rate capability, as the GPU is not heavily loaded at this setting.

The CPU's overall benchmark percentile of 96, with an average score of 84,003, places it in the top 4% of all CPUs tested. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, is only 0.2% ahead, showing that the 290K Plus is essentially at the top of the heap. In Flight Simulator, the CPU's single-thread performance is likely the reason why the system can maintain high frame rates at 1080p and 1440p, even when the GPU is not the limiting factor. The measured FPS at 1440p High (120 FPS) and 1080p High (149 FPS) shows that the CPU can feed the GPU with enough data to maintain these frame rates, and the 4K results (88 FPS at High) are more indicative of the GPU's limitations rather than the CPU's. The CPU's 24 cores and 24 threads also ensure that background tasks and the game's multi-threaded systems, such as AI traffic and physics, do not cause frame rate dips, as evidenced by the consistent minimum FPS values at "Medium" settings (100 FPS at 4K, 136 FPS at 1440p, and 168 FPS at 1080p).