Microsoft Flight Simulator

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 is a mobile combination that delivers strong, consistent frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator, a title known for its heavy demands on both CPU and GPU. The data shows that this combo ranks in the top 20% of all tested configurations, with measured performance scaling predictably across resolutions and settings. This analysis breaks down the measured results, contextualizes the combo’s standing, and provides practical guidance for configuring the game.

FAQ

Q: What is the overall rank of this CPU and GPU combo in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The combo ranks 586th out of 2996 tested combos, placing it in the top 20% of all configurations tested for this game.

Q: Does the CPU outperform its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has an average benchmark score of 40518, which is 0.1% lower than the Intel Core 7 253PE (40557) and 0.2% lower than the Intel Core 5 223PE (40585). It is 0.2% higher than both the AMD Ryzen 9 7940H (40431) and Intel Xeon 6507P (40426). Essentially, it trades blows with these chips, with performance deltas under a third of a percent.

Q: What is the GPU's memory size and bandwidth, and how does that matter for this game?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 has 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus, providing 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth. For a flight simulator with expansive scenery, 32 GB of VRAM is ample for high-resolution textures and complex environments.

Q: What is the CPU's core and thread configuration?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has 16 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. It also features an 18 MB shared L3 cache and 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core.

Q: What is the difference in measured average FPS between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset delivers an average of 139 FPS, while the Ultra preset delivers an average of 78 FPS. This represents a 61 FPS difference between the two extremes.

Q: What is the GPU's percentile ranking compared to all other GPUs?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 is in the 92nd percentile compared to all GPUs, and its average benchmark score is 79842. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB, scores 79605, which is 0.3% lower.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 586 out of 2996 tested combinations places it in the top 19.6% of all systems evaluated in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This is a strong result, indicating that the pairing of the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 is well suited for this simulation. To contextualize this rank, consider that the CPU itself sits in the 87th percentile among all CPUs, and the GPU is in the 92nd percentile among all GPUs. A top-20% game-specific rank is consistent with a system where both major components are high performers individually. The data suggests that this combo is capable of handling the game’s demands without being bottlenecked to a significant degree by either component, though the performance scaling across settings will show where each part’s influence is most pronounced.

The rank is a composite measure, reflecting the combined performance of the CPU and GPU in this specific workload. Compared to the CPU’s nearest rivals—the Intel Core 7 253PE, Intel Core 5 223PE, AMD Ryzen 9 7940H, and Intel Xeon 6507P—the 368H is within 0.2% of each in average benchmark score. This means that swapping in any of those CPUs would likely produce near-identical in-game results, given the same GPU. The GPU’s rivals, including the Tesla P100 variants and AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT, are also within a 1.4% delta in average score, so the RTX 5090’s performance advantage is thin on paper. In practice, the game’s measured FPS will be the deciding factor, and those numbers are strong across the board.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 is the primary driver of raw frame rates in this combo. Its 32 GB of GDDR7 memory is a key asset for Microsoft Flight Simulator, which streams large amounts of terrain and texture data. The 1.79 TB/s of memory bandwidth ensures that this data can be fed to the GPU quickly, reducing the likelihood of stutters when flying over detailed areas. The GPU’s boost clock of 2407 MHz and base clock of 2017 MHz are high for a mobile part, and its 21760 shading units provide substantial compute throughput. With a 92nd percentile ranking against all GPUs and an average benchmark score of 79842, the RTX 5090 is clearly a top-tier part.

The GPU’s performance in synthetic tests, such as a Passmark G3D score of 39650 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 376728, indicates strong DirectX 12 and Vulkan capabilities, which are relevant for this game’s rendering engine. The measured FPS data shows that the GPU scales well with settings changes. For instance, at 3840x2160, moving from Low to High settings drops the average FPS from 103 to 60, a 43 FPS reduction. This is a steep penalty, but the game remains playable. The medium preset at 4K shows an average of 80 FPS with a min of 68 and max of 92, which is a smoother experience than High. The GPU’s role is clear: it is the limiting factor at higher resolutions and quality presets, but its sheer power allows for high frame rates even at 4K, something many other GPUs cannot achieve.

The RTX 5090’s nearest rivals in benchmark scores are the Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB (0.3% lower score) and the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT (1.1% lower score). While these deltas are small, the RTX 5090’s 32 GB VRAM and newer architecture give it an edge in a game that can use large memory pools. The data does not show frame times or 1% lows for most settings, but the medium preset results for each resolution include min and max FPS, which offer a glimpse into consistency. At 1920x1080 medium, the min FPS is 114 and max is 155, indicating a stable frame delivery. At 2560x1440 medium, the min is 92 and max is 125. At 3840x2160 medium, the min is 68 and max is 92. These ranges suggest that the GPU maintains a consistent frame rate without major dips, which is crucial for a smooth flight experience.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of how the combo performs across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the combo delivers high frame rates. The Low preset averages 173 FPS, which is exceptionally smooth. Medium averages 135 FPS with a min of 114 and max of 155. High averages 101 FPS, and Ultra averages 96 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 77 FPS, but even at Ultra, the game is highly playable. The scaling from Low to Medium to High is consistent, with each step reducing the average by roughly 30-35 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the performance remains strong. Low averages 139 FPS, Medium averages 109 FPS (min 92, max 125), High averages 82 FPS, and Ultra averages 78 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra here is 61 FPS. The High and Ultra presets are closer in performance than at 1080p, with only a 4 FPS difference, suggesting that the GPU is becoming more of a bottleneck at this resolution. The Medium preset offers a good balance, with an average above 100 FPS and a minimum that stays above 90.

At 3840x2160 (4K), the performance is lower but still respectable. Low averages 103 FPS, Medium averages 80 FPS (min 68, max 92), High averages 60 FPS, and Ultra averages 57 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 46 FPS. Notably, the difference between High and Ultra is only 3 FPS, indicating that the Ultra preset’s extra demands provide diminishing returns. The 4K Medium preset is the most consistent option, with a min of 68 FPS that keeps the experience fluid. The High and Ultra presets dip to around 60 FPS or below, which may be acceptable for a flight simulator but is not ideal for fast-paced maneuvering.

The data reveals a pattern: as resolution increases, the performance gap between presets narrows, and the GPU becomes the clear limiting factor. At 1080p, the CPU has more headroom to push higher frame rates, but at 4K, the GPU’s workload dominates. The Medium preset at each resolution offers the best combination of average FPS and minimum FPS stability, as evidenced by the min/max data being provided only for Medium settings. This suggests that the game’s engine and the combo’s hardware are well matched at Medium, providing a consistent experience.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is a 16-core, 16-thread processor based on the Panther Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process. Its base clock is 2.00 GHz, which boosts to 5.00 GHz, and it has an 18 MB shared L3 cache. The CPU’s average benchmark score is 40518, placing it in the 87th percentile among all CPUs. In synthetic tests, it scores 28221 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 3984 in single-core, which are strong results for a mobile part. The Passmark multithread score of 32956 and single-thread score of 4005 further confirm its capability.

For Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU’s role is to handle the simulation logic, physics, and AI, as well as to feed the GPU with draw calls. The data shows that the CPU is not a significant bottleneck in most scenarios. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 173 FPS, which is a high frame rate that suggests the CPU can keep up with the GPU’s output. At 1080p Ultra, the average drops to 96 FPS, but this is more likely due to the GPU’s workload than the CPU. The fact that the CPU has 16 cores and 16 threads, with no hyper-threading, is notable; this configuration is unusual for a modern processor, as most have more threads than cores. However, the high boost clock of 5.00 GHz helps with single-threaded performance, which is critical for this game’s main thread.

Comparing to its nearest rivals, the 368H’s average score is 0.1% lower than the Intel Core 7 253PE and 0.2% lower than the Intel Core 5 223PE, but 0.2% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 7940H and Intel Xeon 6507P. These differences are negligible in real-world gaming. The CPU’s L3 cache of 18 MB is shared across all cores, which can help with data locality in a simulation that accesses large datasets. The memory support for LPDDR5X with a dual-channel bus and 153.6 GB/s of bandwidth is adequate for feeding the CPU, though it is not as high as some desktop platforms. The CPU’s TDP of 25 W is low, indicating it is designed for mobile efficiency, but its performance in this game’s measured FPS shows it does not hold back the RTX 5090 in most cases.

The data implies that the CPU’s impact is most noticeable at lower resolutions and settings where the GPU is less stressed. At 1080p Low, the combo hits 173 FPS, which is a CPU-bound scenario likely. At 4K Ultra, the CPU’s influence wanes, and the GPU takes over as the limiting factor. The CPU’s 87th percentile ranking and its benchmark scores suggest it is a capable partner for this high-end GPU, but it is not the star of the show in this pairing.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides a clear basis for recommending settings based on the user’s display resolution and performance priorities. For users with a 1920x1080 display, the Ultra preset is the best choice. It delivers an average of 96 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS target for smooth gameplay, and it offers the highest visual fidelity. If a user prefers maximum frame rates, the Low preset at 173 FPS is available, but the visual sacrifice is significant. Medium at 135 FPS is a strong middle ground, but since Ultra is still above 90 FPS, there is little reason to compromise on visuals at this resolution.

For 2560x1440, the Medium preset is the optimal balance. It provides an average of 109 FPS with a minimum of 92 FPS, ensuring a consistently smooth experience. The High preset at 82 FPS is also playable, but the 27 FPS drop from Medium to High is noticeable, and the visual improvement may not justify it. Ultra at 78 FPS is similar to High, so if a user wants the highest quality, Ultra is acceptable, but Medium offers the best frame rate stability, as evidenced by the min/max data. The Low preset at 139 FPS is for those who prioritize frame rate above all else, but it is not recommended for a game where immersion matters.

For 3840x2160 (4K), the Medium preset is the clear recommendation. It averages 80 FPS with a minimum of 68 FPS, which is the only preset at 4K that maintains an average above 60 FPS with a minimum that does not drop below 60. The High preset at 60 FPS is right at the threshold, and the Ultra preset at 57 FPS dips below it. For a flight simulator, where smooth panning is important, the Medium preset’s 68 FPS minimum is the safest choice. The Low preset at 103 FPS is available for those who want a higher frame rate, but the visual downgrade at 4K is stark. The data indicates that the RTX 5090 is powerful enough to handle 4K, but the game’s Ultra settings are too demanding for a consistent 60+ FPS experience at this resolution.

In summary, the best experience per the measured rows is achieved by matching the preset to the resolution: Ultra at 1080p, Medium at 1440p, and Medium at 4K. This approach balances visual quality with frame rate stability, using the min/max data from the Medium presets to ensure that the experience does not suffer from sudden drops. The combo is strong enough that users can prioritize visuals at lower resolutions, but at 4K, some compromise is necessary to maintain a fluid frame rate.