Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is one of the most demanding titles in the benchmark database, and the data for the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 shows a system that is clearly capable but requires careful settings management to hit smooth frame rates. The measured results across three resolutions and four quality presets reveal a configuration where the GPU is the primary driver of performance at higher resolutions, while the CPU becomes more relevant as resolution drops. The combination ranks in the 69th percentile of all tested combos, indicating a solid, upper-midrange pairing that excels at 1440p and can handle 4K with adjustments.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data points strongly toward Medium as the optimal preset for this specific combo, particularly for users who prioritize a stable experience across all resolutions. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset delivers an average of 118 FPS with a minimum of 100 FPS and a maximum of 135 FPS, which is the only preset at this resolution that provides a triple-digit average while maintaining a minimum above 100 FPS. The High preset at 1080p drops to 88 FPS average, and Ultra falls to 84 FPS, both of which are playable but leave less headroom for the complex scenery and weather systems that can cause sudden frame dips in this simulator.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset again stands out with a 95 FPS average, a 81 FPS minimum, and a 109 FPS maximum. This is a significant step up from High's 71 FPS average and Ultra's 68 FPS average, and it keeps the experience comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold that most flight sim enthusiasts consider the minimum for smooth panning over terrain. The Low preset at 1440p does offer a higher 122 FPS average, but the visual compromise is severe for a game where situational awareness and instrument readability are paramount; Medium provides a much better balance.

For 4K (3840x2160), the Medium preset yields a 70 FPS average with a 59 FPS minimum and 80 FPS maximum, which is the only 4K preset that consistently stays near or above 60 FPS. High and Ultra at 4K drop to 53 FPS and 50 FPS averages respectively, which are borderline for a flight simulator where smooth frame pacing is critical for accurate control input. The Low preset at 4K hits 90 FPS average, but again, the visual quality loss undermines the immersion. Therefore, Medium is the recommended preset for this hardware combination across all three resolutions, as it offers the best combination of playability and visual fidelity without requiring per-setting tweaks.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 is the undisputed performance anchor in this pairing, and its specifications from the FACT PACK explain why. The GPU features 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 716.8 GB/s. This large memory pool is essential for Microsoft Flight Simulator, which loads vast texture sets for terrain, aircraft, and airports; the data shows that even at 4K Ultra, the system manages 50 FPS average, indicating the 16 GB buffer is sufficient to avoid catastrophic stuttering. The GPU's 76 RT cores and 304 tensor cores also support the advanced rendering features that the sim can utilize, though the measured FPS data does not isolate ray-tracing effects specifically.

Clock speeds for the RTX 4080 are a base of 2205 MHz and a boost of 2505 MHz, which are high for this class of GPU. The benchmark results show the card's raw compute capability: it achieves 48.74 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and a texture rate of 761.5 GTexel/s, with a pixel rate of 280.6 GPixel/s. These figures translate directly to the measured frame rates, as the GPU is clearly able to push high pixel counts. The data shows a direct scaling from Low to Ultra settings; at 1080p, the average FPS drops from 151 on Low to 84 on Ultra, a 44% reduction, which is consistent with a GPU that is being fed more work per frame. At 4K, the same settings span from 90 FPS on Low to 50 FPS on Ultra, a similar percentage drop, confirming the GPU is the limiting factor as settings increase.

The RTX 4080's position in the broader GPU landscape is strong, with a percentile rank of 86 among all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the RTX 4080 SUPER, scores a deltaPct of 0.1, meaning the 4080 is virtually identical in average benchmark score. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X is 1.1% behind, and the RX 6750 GRE 12 GB is 2.6% behind. This places the RTX 4080 at the top of its performance tier, and the measured FPS in this game reflects that, as it is able to maintain playable frame rates at 4K High, which is a feat many GPUs cannot achieve.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a classic GPU-bound scenario, but with a notable CPU influence at lower resolutions. At Medium settings, the average FPS drops from 118 at 1080p to 95 at 1440p, a 19.5% decrease, and then to 70 at 4K, a further 26.3% decrease. This scaling pattern is typical for a demanding title where pixel throughput becomes the bottleneck. The transition from 1440p to 4K represents a 2.25x increase in pixel count, but the FPS only drops by 26%, which indicates the GPU has spare compute headroom that is not fully utilized at lower resolutions.

At High settings, the scaling is similar: 88 FPS at 1080p, 71 FPS at 1440p, and 53 FPS at 4K. The percentage drops are 19.3% and 25.4% respectively, showing a consistent pattern. However, the Low settings tell a different story. At Low, the FPS drops from 151 at 1080p to 122 at 1440p (19.2% decrease) and then to 90 at 4K (26.2% decrease). The absolute numbers are higher, but the relative scaling is nearly identical, which suggests that even at Low settings, the GPU is still the primary limiter.

The key insight comes from comparing the 1080p Low result of 151 FPS to the 4K Low result of 90 FPS. If the CPU were a significant bottleneck at 1080p, we would expect the FPS to be capped at a lower value, and the drop to 4K would be more pronounced. The data shows a smooth scaling curve, indicating the RTX 4080 is efficiently utilized across all resolutions. However, the 151 FPS at 1080p Low is not excessively high, and the CPU's single-thread performance of 2200.5 in Cinebench R23 suggests it is keeping up with the GPU's output, but it is not leaving massive headroom for frame rates above 150 FPS. The limiting component is definitively the GPU, as evidenced by the fact that increasing resolution consistently reduces FPS proportionally across all settings.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 combination holds a rank of 917 out of 2996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the 69.4th percentile of all pairings, which is a respectable position for a mobile CPU paired with a high-end desktop GPU. The rank reflects the overall balance of the system; while the RTX 4080 is a top-tier GPU, the Core Ultra X9 388H is a mobile processor with a 25 W TDP, which is lower than desktop counterparts, and this likely prevents the combo from reaching the top echelons of the ranking.

The data shows that this combo is not at the very top, but it is far from the bottom. With 2996 total combos, a rank of 917 means there are 2079 combos that perform worse, which is a strong showing. The CPU's percentile rank of 88 among all CPUs is notably higher than the combo's overall rank, suggesting the GPU is being held back slightly by the processor in this specific game. The GPU's percentile rank of 86 is also high, but the combo rank being lower than both individual component percentiles indicates a slight mismatch, likely due to the CPU's mobile power envelope limiting sustained performance in a demanding simulation title.

Comparing to the CPU's nearest rivals, the Intel Core i9-13950HX scores a deltaPct of 0.3% higher, which is within the margin of error. The AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D is 0.2% lower, and the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 is 0.4% higher. This puts the Core Ultra X9 388H in a tight competitive cluster, and the combo rank reflects this; it is not a runaway leader but is competitive with other high-end pairings. The RTX 4080's nearest rivals show a similar pattern, with the 4080 SUPER being 0.1% ahead, meaning the GPU is essentially at the top of its class. The combo's rank is thus more indicative of the CPU's limitations than the GPU's.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is a 16-core, 16-thread processor based on the Panther Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The cache layout includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. This configuration is designed for mobile efficiency, with a 25 W TDP, but the boost clock of 5.10 GHz is high enough to provide strong single-threaded performance. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2200.5 and multi-core score of 18911 confirm this; the single-core performance is critical for Microsoft Flight Simulator, which relies heavily on a single main thread for flight model and physics calculations.

The data shows that the CPU's role becomes more apparent at lower resolutions. At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 151, which is high, but it is not as high as it could be if the CPU were truly unconstrained. The PassMark single-thread score of 4280 is solid, but the multi-thread score of 36811 indicates that the CPU does not have overwhelming multi-core headroom. In a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator, which can utilize multiple cores for scenery loading and AI traffic, the 16 threads are beneficial, but the lack of hyperthreading (16 cores, 16 threads) means each core must handle its workload without additional thread-level parallelism.

The CPU's benchmark scores relative to rivals show it is competitive. The avgBenchmarkScore of 44466 is nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D's 44573 (0.2% difference) and the Intel Core i9-13950HX's 44342 (0.3% difference). This means the CPU is not a weak link in the system. However, its mobile nature and 25 W TDP likely cause it to throttle under sustained loads, which could explain why the combo rank is not higher than the individual component percentiles would suggest. The data indicates that at 4K, the CPU is less of a factor because the GPU is the bottleneck, but at 1080p, the CPU's performance is adequate to feed the RTX 4080, though it does not push frame rates into the 160+ range that a desktop CPU might achieve.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The full set of measured FPS data provides a granular view of performance across all settings and resolutions. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 151 FPS, which is the highest recorded for this combo. Medium drops to 118 FPS with a minimum of 100 FPS and a maximum of 135 FPS. High yields 88 FPS average, and Ultra produces 84 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 33 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is only 4 FPS, indicating diminishing returns at the highest settings where the GPU is saturated.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 122 FPS, which is a 19% drop from 1080p Low. Medium averages 95 FPS with a minimum of 81 FPS and a maximum of 109 FPS, which is a 19.5% drop from 1080p Medium. High averages 71 FPS, a 19.3% drop, and Ultra averages 68 FPS, a 19% drop. The consistency of these percentage drops across all settings reinforces that the GPU is the limiting factor, as the scaling is uniform regardless of the quality preset.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 90 FPS, a 26.2% drop from 1440p Low. Medium averages 70 FPS with a minimum of 59 FPS and a maximum of 80 FPS, a 26.3% drop from 1440p Medium. High averages 53 FPS, a 25.4% drop, and Ultra averages 50 FPS, a 26.5% drop. The 4K results are the most demanding, and the Medium preset is the only one that maintains an average above 60 FPS with a minimum close to it. The Ultra preset at 4K at 50 FPS is playable but not ideal for a simulator that requires precise control, and the data suggests that users should stick to Medium or High for a smoother experience.

The min and max FPS data is only available for the Medium preset at each resolution, which provides insight into frame pacing. At 1080p, the range is 100 to 135 FPS, a 35 FPS spread. At 1440p, the range is 81 to 109 FPS, a 28 FPS spread. At 4K, the range is 59 to 80 FPS, a 21 FPS spread. This tightening of the frame time variance at higher resolutions is interesting; it suggests that as the GPU becomes more heavily loaded, the frame delivery becomes more consistent, which is counterintuitive but likely due to the CPU no longer being able to cause frame spikes. The 4K Medium result with a 59 FPS minimum is the most critical data point, as it shows that even in demanding scenes, the system does not drop below 60 FPS significantly, making Medium the safest choice for 4K play.