Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator (released 2020-08-17) is a flight simulation title, and the measured data for the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 Mobile shows a combination that spans from high-refresh 1080p play to playable 4K. In the measured rows, the best average is 162 FPS at 1920x1080 Low; the most demanding row, 3840x2160 Ultra, still averages 54 FPS. The CPU carries an aggregate benchmark score of 40518, the GPU’s aggregate score is 38349, and the pair ranks 984th out of 3714 tested combos in this game.

Resolution Scaling

Across all three resolutions, every preset follows the same downward path. At Low, the average goes from 162 FPS at 1920x1080, to 131 FPS at 2560x1440, to 96 FPS at 3840x2160. At Medium, the same resolution steps produce 126, 102, and 75 FPS. At High, the values are 95, 76, and 56 FPS. At Ultra, the sequence is 90, 73, and 54 FPS.

The consistency is the important part. The CPU and GPU are fixed in every row, so the only changes are resolution and settings. Because FPS falls steadily as pixel count rises, the scaling pattern points to the GPU as the limiting component at higher resolutions. A CPU-bound result would not degrade this predictably when resolution increases.

An interesting crossover appears when comparing 4K Low to 1080p High. 4K Low averages 96 FPS, while 1080p High averages 95 FPS. That near-equal result shows how much raw pixel count costs relative to the in-game quality slider. The same kind of pressure is visible in the Medium preset’s recorded minimums and maximums: at 1080p the range is 107 to 145, at 1440p it is 86 to 117, and at 4K it is 64 to 86. The 4K Medium minimum of 64 FPS is still above the average FPS of High and Ultra at that resolution.

The resolution steps also tell a practical story. Moving from 1440p to 4K costs a meaningful amount of average FPS in every preset: Low drops from 131 to 96, Medium from 102 to 75, High from 76 to 56, and Ultra from 73 to 54. The High and Ultra presets end up close together at 4K, which suggests that the highest quality options are limited by the same overall GPU workload rather than by the specific CPU.

Settings Recommendations

The measured rows make Medium the most defensible default for higher resolutions. At 3840x2160, Medium is the only preset that averages more than 70 FPS, at 75 FPS, while still leaving a recorded minimum of 64 FPS and a maximum of 86 FPS. High averages 56 FPS, Ultra averages 54 FPS, and Low averages 96 FPS. Low is smoother, but it strips out most of the quality settings; Medium offers the best compromise between frame rate and visual load in the measured data.

At 2560x1440, Medium again has the clearest stability data: 102 average, 86 minimum, and 117 maximum. Ultra averages 73 FPS, which is playable but leaves less headroom. High sits at 76 FPS, close to Ultra, while Low reaches 131 FPS. For a 1440p display, Medium is the best balanced row, with Ultra as an acceptable quality-oriented alternative.

At 1920x1080, the situation changes. Ultra averages 90 FPS, which is high enough for a quality-first setup. Medium averages 126 FPS with a 107 minimum and 145 maximum, giving a substantial safety margin. Low reaches 162 FPS, the highest measured result in the entire set. Users who want maximum headroom can use Medium at 1080p; users who want maximum visual quality can use Ultra and still stay near 90 FPS.

One notable pattern in the data is that only Medium rows include measured minimum and maximum FPS values. That makes Medium the only preset where variance can be directly assessed from this dataset. The Low, High, and Ultra rows provide averages only. In practical terms, Medium is not just the middle preset; it is also the row with the most complete stability information in the measured results.

FAQ

Q: What FPS does this combo produce at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, Low averages 96 FPS, Medium averages 75 FPS with a 64 minimum and 86 maximum, High averages 56 FPS, and Ultra averages 54 FPS.

Q: Is the Core Ultra X7 368H strong enough for this pairing?

A: The CPU scores 28221 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 3984 in single-core. Its aggregate benchmark score is 40518. The nearest CPU rival in aggregate score is the Intel Core 7 253PE at 40557 with deltaPct -0.1.

Q: What memory configuration does the RTX 5080 Mobile use?

A: It has 16 GB of GDDR7 on a 256-bit bus with 896.0 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clock is 1750 MHz, listed as 28 Gbps effective, while the GPU base clock is 975 MHz and boost clock is 1500 MHz.

Q: How does this combo rank in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: It ranks 984th out of 3714 tested combos. The CPU is in the 87th percentile of all CPUs, and the GPU is in the 81st percentile of all GPUs.

Q: What is the best setting at 1440p according to the measured data?

A: Medium gives a 102 FPS average, an 86 FPS minimum, and a 117 FPS maximum. Low averages 131 FPS, High averages 76 FPS, and Ultra averages 73 FPS.

Q: Are these FPS values measured or estimated?

A: The data is marked measured. The measured FPS rows include exact average values and, for Medium settings, exact minimum and maximum values at each resolution.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 984th out of 3714 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. That places it above the middle of the tested field, though not in the top tier. More combos rank behind this pairing than ahead of it, but the gap to the top of the list is not closed by this CPU and GPU combination.

The component-level rankings are stronger than the game-specific rank. The Core Ultra X7 368H sits in the 87th percentile of all CPUs, and the RTX 5080 Mobile sits in the 81st percentile of all GPUs. Those are solid positions, yet the in-game rank of 984 out of 3714 shows that Microsoft Flight Simulator’s measured results do not put this pairing near the top of the leaderboard.

The CPU’s nearest rivals in aggregate score are tightly packed. The Intel Core 7 253PE scores 40557 with deltaPct -0.1, the Intel Core 5 223PE scores 40585 with deltaPct -0.2, the AMD Ryzen 9 7940H scores 40431 with deltaPct 0.2, and the Intel Xeon 6507P scores 40426 with deltaPct 0.2. The Core Ultra X7 368H sits at 40518, within a very small band of its nearest competitors. On the GPU side, the RTX 5080 Mobile scores 38349, with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile at 38135 and deltaPct 0.6. In aggregate terms, small benchmark differences separate these components, but the in-game rank is the result that matters for this title.

GPU Role

The RTX 5080 Mobile is a GeForce 50-series part based on the GB203 chip with Blackwell 2.0 architecture. It uses 7680 shading units, 240 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 60 RT cores, and 240 tensor cores. The frame buffer is 16 GB of GDDR7 on a 256-bit bus, which gives 896.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The base clock is 975 MHz, boost clock is 1500 MHz, and the memory clock is 1750 MHz, listed as 28 Gbps effective. The GPU is rated at 80 W and its slot width is listed as IGP, indicating a mobile-oriented implementation.

These specifications line up with the measured FPS. At 1080p, the GPU delivers 162 FPS on Low, 126 FPS on Medium, 95 FPS on High, and 90 FPS on Ultra. At 1440p, those numbers become 131, 102, 76, and 73. At 4K, the same settings yield 96, 75, 56, and 54. The High and Ultra presets converge at higher resolutions, which suggests the GPU is doing most of the heavy lifting as rendering load scales up.

The 16 GB frame buffer is large in absolute terms, but the measured data does not include VRAM usage, so a capacity limit cannot be confirmed or ruled out from this dataset. What the data does show is that the GPU keeps the combo above 90 FPS at 1080p Ultra and above 54 FPS at 4K Ultra. The boost clock of 1500 MHz is the performance ceiling for this part, and the measured results reflect a realistic mobile RTX 5080 implementation rather than a desktop-class part.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The table below lists the measured FPS values exactly as provided. Only Medium rows include recorded minimum and maximum values.

| Resolution | Settings | Avg FPS | Min FPS | Max FPS |

|---|---|---|---|---|

| 3840x2160 | High | 56 | — | — |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 96 | — | — |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 75 | 64 | 86 |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 54 | — | — |

| 2560x1440 | High | 76 | — | — |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 131 | — | — |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 102 | 86 | 117 |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 73 | — | — |

| 1920x1080 | High | 95 | — | — |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 162 | — | — |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 126 | 107 | 145 |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 90 | — | — |

At every resolution, Low produces the highest average and Ultra produces the lowest. Medium sits between them with the only reported stability windows. The 1080p rows show the pairing’s ceiling at 162 FPS, while the 4K rows show a floor of 54 FPS at Ultra. The Medium rows provide the clearest consistency picture, with a 107 FPS minimum at 1080p, an 86 FPS minimum at 1440p, and a 64 FPS minimum at 4K.