Microsoft Flight Simulator

# FAQ

Q: What is the best settings preset for this combo at 4K?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 5500 + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 combo runs Microsoft Flight Simulator at Ultra settings with an average of 80.9 FPS at 3840x2160, making Ultra the most demanding playable preset at that resolution.

Q: How much faster is 1080p compared to 4K at Ultra settings?

A: At 1920x1080 Ultra, the average FPS is 130.9, while at 3840x2160 Ultra it drops to 80.9 — a difference of 50 FPS, or roughly 62% higher performance at the lower resolution.

Q: Does this CPU bottleneck the RTX 5090 in this game?

A: The CPU's percentile rank is 73 among all tested processors, and its nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen AI 5 430 with a delta of -0.1%, indicating near-identical performance. The data suggests the Ryzen 5 5500 is sufficient to keep frame rates above 80 FPS even at 4K Ultra, though the GPU is clearly the dominant component.

Q: What is the combo's ranking among all tested combinations?

A: This combo ranks 213 out of 3714 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the top 6% of all systems evaluated.

Q: Which GPU rivals perform similarly to the RTX 5090?

A: The nearest rival is the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB with a delta of 0.3%, followed by the Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB at 0.6% and the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT at 1.1%. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X is slightly ahead at -1.4% delta.

Q: Are all presets playable at every resolution?

A: Yes, all four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) exceed the 60 FPS playable threshold at all three tested resolutions, with the lowest recorded average being 80.9 FPS at 4K Ultra.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals a clear pattern: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 is the primary performance driver in Microsoft Flight Simulator, but the CPU's role becomes more apparent as resolution decreases. At 3840x2160, frame rates scale almost linearly with graphical load. The Low preset delivers 136.8 FPS, Medium drops to 106.6 FPS, High reaches 81.6 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 80.9 FPS. The transition from Medium to High represents a 25 FPS loss, while the High-to-Ultra step is only 0.7 FPS — a sign that Ultra's additional settings are nearly free on this GPU at 4K.

Moving to 2560x1440, the pattern shifts. Low runs at 149.9 FPS, which is only 13.1 FPS higher than the 4K Low result, suggesting the CPU is beginning to limit throughput. Medium at 138.2 FPS and High at 112.2 FPS show the GPU still has headroom, but the gap between Low and Medium (11.7 FPS) is smaller than at 4K (30.2 FPS). This compression indicates that at 1440p, the CPU's single-thread performance on the Ryzen 5 5500 — which scores 836 in 3DMark single-thread and 2319 in Cinebench R23 single-core — becomes a more meaningful constraint.

At 1920x1080, the CPU bottleneck is unmistakable. Low preset runs at 160.7 FPS, only 10.8 FPS above the 1440p Low result. Medium reaches 148 FPS, High hits 132 FPS, and Ultra runs at 130.9 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra at 1080p is just 1.1 FPS, while the same comparison at 4K is 0.7 FPS. This near-flat scaling across High and Ultra at all resolutions confirms that once the GPU can handle the geometry and textures, the CPU's 6 cores and 12 threads — with a boost clock of 4.20 GHz — determine the ceiling.

The 3DMark thread scaling scores reinforce this: the CPU scores 1645 with 2 threads, 3151 with 4 threads, and 5411 with max threads. The jump from 4 to 8 threads (4593) and then to max (5411) shows diminishing returns, which is typical for a flight simulator that relies heavily on a few primary threads for physics and scenery loading. In practice, the RTX 5090's 32 GB of GDDR7 memory and 1.79 TB/s bandwidth are never the limiting factor; the data shows frame rates plateauing due to CPU throughput rather than GPU rendering capacity.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, with an average of 80.9 FPS. This is well above the playability threshold, and even the High preset at 81.6 FPS is nearly identical, meaning users can enable Ultra without sacrificing measurable smoothness.

For 2560x1440, Ultra again qualifies as the best playable setting, delivering an average of 104.7 FPS. The margin over the 60 FPS threshold is substantial — 44.7 FPS of headroom — which suggests that even with heavier scenery or multiplayer scenarios, the combo would likely maintain playable frame rates.

At 1920x1080, Ultra runs at 130.9 FPS, the highest average among all Ultra presets across the three resolutions. The Low preset peaks at 160.7 FPS, but since Ultra clears the threshold by more than double, there is no reason to compromise settings at this resolution.

In all cases, the verdict data confirms that all four settings presets — Low, Medium, High, and Ultra — are playable at every resolution tested. The best settings choice is therefore always Ultra, as it provides the maximum visual fidelity without dropping below 80 FPS in any configuration.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU's nearest rivals, based on average benchmark scores, are all within a narrow band of performance. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 430 scores 19617 (delta -0.1%), the Intel Core i5-12500 scores 19668 (delta -0.4%), the Intel Core i7-10700F scores 19499 (delta 0.5%), and the Intel Core i5-11600KF scores 19723 (delta -0.7%). These deltas are all under 1%, meaning any of these processors would produce nearly identical frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator when paired with the RTX 5090. The Ryzen 5 5500's own average benchmark score is 19593, placing it squarely in the middle of this cluster.

For the GPU, the situation is similar but with a different set of competitors. The NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB (79605) and the Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB (79396) are the closest matches, with deltas of 0.3% and 0.6% respectively. The AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT (78940) trails by 1.1%, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X (80959) leads by 1.4%. The RTX 5090's average benchmark score is 79842, so swapping to any of these rivals would shift frame rates by only a few FPS in either direction. Given that the RTX 5090 ranks in the 92nd percentile of all GPUs, these alternatives are all high-end parts that would maintain the same general performance envelope.

In practical terms, a system builder with an Intel Core i5-12500 or an AMD Ryzen AI 5 430 would see essentially the same results. The same applies to the GPU: choosing a Tesla P100 or RX 6850M XT would not meaningfully change the measured FPS in this title.

How This Combo Ranks

This combination of AMD Ryzen 5 5500 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 ranks 213 out of 3714 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. That places it in the top 5.7% of all systems evaluated, which is an exceptional standing given that the CPU is a mid-range 2022 part. The ranking reflects the GPU's dominance — the RTX 5090 sits in the 92nd percentile of all GPUs — and the fact that the Ryzen 5 5500, while not a flagship, still delivers sufficient single-thread performance to avoid crippling the system.

The gap between this combo and the top-ranked systems is likely attributable to CPU-bound scenarios, as the GPU is already near the top of the performance hierarchy. The 3DMark max-threads score of 5411 and Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 16429 indicate that the CPU is capable but not elite; a higher-end processor like the Intel Core i7-10700F or Core i5-11600KF (both within 0.7% delta) would not meaningfully change the ranking. The rank of 213 is therefore evidence of how much headroom the RTX 5090 provides, even when paired with a more modest CPU.

The Verdict

Yes, this PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator at all tested resolutions and presets. The verdict data is unambiguous: at 3840x2160, the playable settings include High, Low, Medium, and Ultra, with Ultra achieving an average of 80.9 FPS. At 2560x1440, the same four presets are playable, with Ultra at 104.7 FPS. At 1920x1080, all presets again clear the 60 FPS threshold, with Ultra at 130.9 FPS.

The minimum recorded average across the entire test matrix is 80.9 FPS (4K Ultra), which is 20.9 FPS above the playable threshold. This means that even in the most demanding configuration, the system maintains a comfortable margin over the 60 FPS target. There is no resolution or preset in the data where this combo falls below playable levels. The only caveat is that the CPU may limit absolute maximum frame rates at lower resolutions — the difference between 1080p Low (160.7 FPS) and 1440p Low (149.9 FPS) is just 10.8 FPS, suggesting that a stronger CPU could push higher — but this does not affect playability.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the measured average FPS values are as follows: Low runs at 136.8 FPS, Medium at 106.6 FPS, High at 81.6 FPS, and Ultra at 80.9 FPS. The step from Low to Medium costs 30.2 FPS, Medium to High costs 25 FPS, and High to Ultra costs just 0.7 FPS. The largest performance hit comes from enabling medium-tier effects, while the jump to Ultra is nearly free.

At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low at 149.9 FPS, Medium at 138.2 FPS, High at 112.2 FPS, and Ultra at 104.7 FPS. The Low-to-Medium drop is 11.7 FPS, Medium-to-High is 26 FPS, and High-to-Ultra is 7.5 FPS. The Medium-to-High transition is the most expensive at this resolution, unlike at 4K where it was the Low-to-Medium step.

At 1920x1080, the averages are: Low at 160.7 FPS, Medium at 148 FPS, High at 132 FPS, and Ultra at 130.9 FPS. The Low-to-Medium drop is 12.7 FPS, Medium-to-High is 16 FPS, and High-to-Ultra is 1.1 FPS. Across all three resolutions, the High-to-Ultra delta is consistently the smallest (0.7, 7.5, and 1.1 FPS respectively), indicating that Ultra settings in this game impose a minimal additional GPU load beyond High. The data also shows that 1080p and 1440p results are closer to each other than 1440p and 4K, confirming that the GPU is fully utilized at 4K while the CPU becomes the limiting factor at lower resolutions.