Microsoft Flight Simulator

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 combination delivers exceptional frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator, with measured data showing every resolution and preset tested clears the 60 FPS playability threshold. Across all twelve benchmark configurations—four settings at three resolutions—the average frame rate never dips below 74.9 FPS, making this combo one of the most capable tested for the flight simulator.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system produces its highest raw throughput. The Low preset averages 216.5 FPS, which is the fastest result recorded for this combo in any configuration. Moving to Medium drops the average to 184.1 FPS, representing an approximate 15% reduction from Low. The High preset averages 137.9 FPS, while Ultra maintains 131.1 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra at 1080p is modest—only about 5%—suggesting that the Ultra preset’s additional visual demands are well within the headroom of this hardware. Even at the most demanding 1080p setting, the average frame rate remains more than double the 60 FPS playability threshold.

At 2560x1440, the pattern holds but with expected scaling penalties. Low averages 185.2 FPS, which is still exceptionally high for a 1440p flight simulator session. Medium delivers 147.8 FPS, while High drops to 109.1 FPS. Ultra at 1440p averages 107 FPS, nearly identical to the High preset’s 109.1 FPS—a difference of just 2.1 FPS. This near-parity between High and Ultra at 1440p indicates that the RTX 4090’s 24 GB memory buffer and 1.01 TB/s bandwidth absorb the extra texture and shading loads without meaningful performance loss. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p at Ultra shows a reduction from 131.1 to 107 FPS, a roughly 18% decline that aligns with the increased pixel count.

At 3840x2160, the RTX 4090’s strengths become most apparent. Low averages 137.6 FPS, which remains above the 1080p High result of 137.9 FPS—essentially identical performance despite rendering four times the pixels. Medium averages 105.5 FPS, while High drops to 80.3 FPS. The most demanding configuration, Ultra at 4K, still averages 74.9 FPS, comfortably above 60 FPS. The transition from 1440p Ultra to 4K Ultra shows a decline from 107 to 74.9 FPS, a 30% drop that reflects the significant pixel-count increase. Notably, the data shows no min or max FPS values for any configuration, so the analysis relies solely on average frame rates; however, the consistent averages across all settings suggest stable performance with no obvious bottleneck.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 4K Ultra settings?

A: Yes. The measured average FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings is 74.9, which exceeds the 60 FPS playability threshold by nearly 15 frames.

Q: What is the fastest preset at 1080p?

A: The Low preset at 1920x1080 produces the highest average frame rate of 216.5 FPS. Medium follows at 184.1 FPS, High at 137.9 FPS, and Ultra at 131.1 FPS.

Q: How does the RTX 4090’s benchmark standing compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GPU’s average benchmark score is 60,347, which places it at the 88th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the Intel Arc Pro A60, scores 60,326 (0% delta), while the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M scores 61,896 (2.5% higher). The AMD Radeon PRO V710 trails at 58,657 (2.9% lower).

Q: What is the CPU’s ranking relative to other processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 7700 sits at the 87th percentile among all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 40,081. Its closest rival, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365, scores 40,048 (0.1% lower), while the Intel Core 5 221E scores 40,144 (0.2% higher).

Q: Does the system maintain 60 FPS at all settings in 1440p?

A: Yes. At 2560x1440, the lowest average frame rate is 107 FPS on the Ultra preset. Low averages 185.2 FPS, Medium 147.8 FPS, and High 109.1 FPS—all well above 60 FPS.

Q: What is the largest performance drop between consecutive presets?

A: At 4K, moving from Low (137.6 FPS) to Medium (105.5 FPS) represents a 32.1 FPS drop, the largest single-step decline in the dataset. The next largest is at 1080p from Low to Medium, which falls 32.4 FPS from 216.5 to 184.1.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals a system where the RTX 4090 dominates performance scaling, while the Ryzen 7 7700 provides sufficient headroom to avoid bottlenecking. At 1080p, the frame rates are extraordinarily high—216.5 FPS on Low—which suggests the CPU is keeping up with the GPU’s output. The Ryzen 7 7700’s 8 cores and 16 threads, based on the Zen 4 architecture, deliver strong multi-threaded performance with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 18,760 and a single-core score of 1,930. These figures indicate the CPU can feed the GPU adequately even at low resolutions where CPU overhead typically becomes a limiting factor.

The GPU’s role becomes more pronounced as resolution increases. At 4K, the RTX 4090’s raw compute—82.58 TFLOPS FP32 with 16,384 shading units—drives the frame rates. The measured 4K Low average of 137.6 FPS is nearly identical to the 1080p High average of 137.9 FPS, showing that the GPU has sufficient headroom to render four times the pixels at equivalent settings without proportional frame loss. This behavior points to a GPU-bound scenario at higher resolutions, where the RTX 4090’s 24 GB GDDR6X memory and 1.01 TB/s bandwidth handle the increased texture and geometry loads efficiently.

At 1440p, the balance shifts slightly. The Ultra preset averages 107 FPS, which is 24.1 FPS lower than the 1080p Ultra result of 131.1 FPS. This 18% reduction aligns closely with the pixel count increase from 1080p to 1440p (about 78% more pixels), indicating that the GPU is scaling as expected. The CPU, with its 32 MB shared L3 cache and 83.2 GB/s DDR5 memory bandwidth, appears to maintain consistent frame delivery without introducing stutter or frame-time spikes, as evidenced by the stable averages across all settings.

Comparing the two components’ benchmark percentiles provides context: the CPU sits at the 87th percentile among all CPUs, while the GPU sits at the 88th percentile among all GPUs. The Ryzen 7 7700’s nearest rivals—the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 (0.1% higher score) and Intel Core 5 221E (0.2% lower)—show that the CPU is near the top of its class. The RTX 4090’s nearest rivals include the Intel Arc Pro A60 (0% delta) and AMD Radeon Pro W6600M (2.5% higher), indicating the GPU also ranks highly. In this game, the GPU carries the heavier load at 4K, while the CPU’s single-thread performance (PassMark single-thread score of 4,063) ensures that flight simulation’s physics and AI calculations do not become a limiting factor at any tested setting.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 103rd out of 3,714 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the top 2.8% of all configurations. This rank reflects the combined strengths of the Ryzen 7 7700 and RTX 4090. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 40,081 places it just 0.1% above the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 and 0.2% below the Intel Core 5 221E, showing that the processor is competitive with the latest mid-range offerings. The GPU’s average score of 60,347 puts it 2.5% below the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M but 2.9% above the AMD Radeon PRO V710, demonstrating that the RTX 4090, despite being end-of-life, remains a top-tier performer.

The rank of 103 out of 3,714 means the vast majority of tested combos (3,611) score lower in this game. The data shows that the combination’s weakest result—74.9 FPS at 4K Ultra—still exceeds the 60 FPS threshold by 24.8%. At 1440p, the weakest result is 107 FPS, which is 78.3% above the threshold. At 1080p, the weakest result is 131.1 FPS, which is 118.5% above the threshold. This consistency across all resolutions and presets is rare; many combinations struggle at 4K Ultra, but this setup handles it with room to spare.

The CPU’s percentile rank of 87 and GPU’s percentile rank of 88 are nearly identical, suggesting a balanced pairing. However, the game’s scaling behavior—where 4K Low (137.6 FPS) nearly matches 1080p High (137.9 FPS)—indicates that the GPU is the primary driver at higher resolutions. The CPU’s 3DMark scores support this: 8,484 in 16-thread tests and 1,049 in single-thread tests show strong multi-threading that benefits flight simulator’s complex flight models, but the GPU’s 82.58 TFLOPS FP32 compute is what enables the high frame rates at 4K.

The Verdict

This PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator at every resolution and preset tested, with all twelve configurations exceeding the 60 FPS playability threshold. At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset averages 74.9 FPS, which is the lowest result in the entire dataset. This means even the most demanding configuration—4K with all settings maxed—maintains a comfortable margin above the playability threshold. The High preset at 4K averages 80.3 FPS, while Medium averages 105.5 FPS and Low averages 137.6 FPS.

At 2560x1440, all presets perform exceptionally. Ultra averages 107 FPS, High averages 109.1 FPS, Medium averages 147.8 FPS, and Low averages 185.2 FPS. The near-identical results for Ultra (107) and High (109.1) at 1440p suggest that the visual upgrade to Ultra costs only 2.1 FPS on average, making it a worthwhile trade for users prioritizing image quality.

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its highest frame rates. Ultra averages 131.1 FPS, High averages 137.9 FPS, Medium averages 184.1 FPS, and Low averages 216.5 FPS. Even the lowest-performing 1080p preset (Ultra) is more than double the 60 FPS threshold. The verdict data confirms that all playable settings include every option at every resolution, with the best settings being Ultra at each resolution. The average FPS at the best settings are 74.9 at 4K, 107 at 1440p, and 131.1 at 1080p. This system does not merely run the game—it runs it at maximum settings with substantial headroom, making it suitable for high-refresh-rate displays at 1080p and 1440p, and for smooth 4K gameplay at 60 FPS or higher.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset is the recommended choice, delivering an average of 74.9 FPS. This is the only resolution where the best settings result falls below 100 FPS, but it still clears the 60 FPS threshold by nearly 15 frames. For users with 4K displays, Ultra is fully viable, though the High preset at 80.3 FPS offers a small performance buffer if frame rate consistency is prioritized over maximum visual fidelity.

At 2560x1440, Ultra is the clear best setting, averaging 107 FPS. This provides 78% more headroom above the 60 FPS threshold than the 4K Ultra result. The 1440p Ultra configuration is the sweet spot for this combo: it delivers high visual quality with frame rates that support 100 Hz or 120 Hz displays without compromise. Medium at 147.8 FPS and Low at 185.2 FPS are available for users seeking even higher refresh rates, but the data shows no need to drop below Ultra for playability.

At 1920x1080, Ultra averages 131.1 FPS, making it the best setting for this resolution. This result is 118% above the 60 FPS threshold, meaning users can enable every visual option and still enjoy frame rates suitable for 120 Hz or 144 Hz monitors. The High preset at 137.9 FPS is only marginally faster, while Medium at 184.1 FPS and Low at 216.5 FPS cater to those with very high refresh rate displays. Across all three resolutions, the pattern is consistent: this combination is so powerful that the most demanding preset at each resolution remains the recommended choice, with no need to sacrifice visual quality for performance. The data’s verdictByResolution field confirms this, listing Ultra as the best setting for all three resolutions with average FPS of 74.9, 107, and 131.1 respectively.