Microsoft Flight Simulator

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 ranks 65th out of 3,714 tested combinations for Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the top 1.8% of all systems evaluated. This is a high-end pairing where the RTX 5090’s raw graphics throughput dominates, while the Ryzen 7 7700 provides sufficient single-thread performance to avoid becoming a bottleneck in most scenarios. The combo’s percentile standing reflects a system that is overkill for 1080p and 1440p play, yet still delivers a definitive 60+ FPS experience at 4K Ultra, which is the most demanding configuration tested.

How This Combo Ranks

At rank 65 of 3,714, this configuration sits firmly in the upper echelon of tested hardware pairings for this flight simulator. The rank is driven almost entirely by the GPU, which holds a 92nd percentile standing among all GPUs, while the CPU sits at the 87th percentile among all processors. The data indicates that the RTX 5090 is the primary performance driver; its average benchmark score of 79,842 is nearly double that of the CPU’s 40,081, and the GPU’s 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 18,355 underscores its capability in modern DirectX 12 workloads.

For context, the RTX 5090’s nearest rivals in aggregate benchmark score include the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB (0.3% slower), Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB (0.6% slower), and AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT (1.1% slower), while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X is 1.4% faster. These deltas are negligible in real-world terms, meaning the RTX 5090 performs within a narrow band of other high-end accelerators. On the CPU side, the Ryzen 7 7700’s nearest rivals—AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 (0.1% faster), Intel Core 5 221E (0.2% faster), and AMD Ryzen 9 270 (0.4% faster)—show that the processor is competitively matched with other mid-to-high-range chips, though none of these rivals approach the GPU’s performance ceiling.

In game-specific terms, the combo’s rank suggests that while the CPU is adequate, it does not boost the system beyond what the GPU alone can achieve. The measured FPS data supports this: at 1080p Low, the system hits 213 FPS, but at 4K Ultra it drops to 79.7 FPS, a 62.6% reduction that aligns with GPU-bound scaling rather than CPU limitations.

FAQ

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

A: Yes. The measured average FPS at 3840x2160 Ultra is 79.7 FPS, which exceeds the 60 FPS playable threshold. The verdictByResolution data lists Ultra as the best settings at 4K, with all four tested presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) being playable.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its closest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Ryzen 7 7700’s average benchmark score is 40,081. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365, scores 40,048 (0.1% higher), while the Intel Core 5 221E scores 40,144 (0.2% higher). The AMD Ryzen 9 270 is 0.4% higher at 40,246, and the Intel Core i9-13905H is 0.6% higher at 40,313. These differences are within measurement noise.

Q: What is the highest FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The highest average FPS is 213, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The lowest average FPS is 79.7 at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings.

Q: Is the RTX 5090’s performance notably different from its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The RTX 5090’s average score is 79,842. The NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB is 0.3% slower (79,605), the Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB is 0.6% slower (79,396), and the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT is 1.1% slower (78,940). The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X is 1.4% faster (80,959). All deltas are under 1.5%, indicating near-identical aggregate performance.

Q: Which resolution provides the largest performance headroom over 60 FPS?

A: At 1920x1080, the lowest average FPS across all presets is 136.3 (Ultra), which is 127% above the 60 FPS threshold. The highest headroom is at 1080p Low, where 213 FPS is 255% above the threshold.

Q: Does the combo maintain playable FPS across all tested settings at every resolution?

A: Yes. The verdictByResolution data shows that all four settings (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) are playable at 3840x2160, 2560x1440, and 1920x1080. The lowest recorded average FPS is 79.7 at 4K Ultra, which still clears 60 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of scaling across three resolutions and four quality presets. At 3840x2160, the system delivers 139.5 FPS on Low, 107.1 FPS on Medium, 84.2 FPS on High, and 79.7 FPS on Ultra. The gap between Low and Ultra is 59.8 FPS, representing a 42.9% drop in performance as settings increase. This resolution is clearly GPU-bound, with the RTX 5090’s 32 GB of GDDR7 memory and 1.79 TB/s bandwidth being sufficient to avoid memory-related stutters.

Moving to 2560x1440, performance improves substantially. Low settings produce 193.4 FPS, Medium 148.2 FPS, High 116 FPS, and Ultra 105.9 FPS. The relative drop from Low to Ultra is 87.5 FPS, or 45.2%, which is a slightly larger percentage decline than at 4K, suggesting that at lower resolutions the CPU begins to play a more significant role, but the GPU still remains the dominant factor.

At 1920x1080, the system reaches its peak: 213 FPS on Low, 187.3 FPS on Medium, 142.6 FPS on High, and 136.3 FPS on Ultra. The scaling from Low to Ultra is 76.7 FPS (36%), which is the smallest percentage drop among all resolutions. This indicates that at 1080p, the CPU’s single-thread performance (3DMark single-thread score of 1,049, Cinebench R23 single-core of 1,930) becomes a limiting factor, as the GPU has ample headroom to render frames faster than the CPU can feed it.

The data shows a consistent pattern: each resolution step from 1080p to 1440p to 4K incurs a performance penalty. Comparing 1080p Ultra (136.3 FPS) to 1440p Ultra (105.9 FPS) is a 22.3% reduction, and from 1440p Ultra to 4K Ultra (79.7 FPS) is a 24.7% reduction. These figures align with the pixel count increase (78% more pixels from 1440p to 4K), confirming that the RTX 5090 scales predictably with resolution.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Based on the nearestRivals data, the CPU and GPU each have close performance equivalents that would yield similar in-game behavior. For the Ryzen 7 7700, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 (0.1% faster), Intel Core 5 221E (0.2% faster), AMD Ryzen 9 270 (0.4% faster), and Intel Core i9-13905H (0.6% faster) all fall within a 0.6% aggregate score band. In practice, swapping the Ryzen 7 7700 for any of these would produce FPS differences well under 1%, meaning the measured FPS at each resolution and setting would remain virtually unchanged.

On the GPU side, the RTX 5090’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB (0.3% slower), Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB (0.6% slower), and AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT (1.1% slower), with the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X being 1.4% faster. These are not consumer gaming cards in most cases—the Tesla P100 is a datacenter accelerator—but the aggregate score similarity suggests that any of these would deliver within 1.5% of the RTX 5090’s FPS. For a gaming-oriented comparison, the RX 6850M XT (a laptop GPU) is the closest consumer equivalent, though it would likely have different thermal and power characteristics.

When considering alternative combos, a system with the Intel Core i9-13905H (0.6% faster CPU) and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X (1.4% faster GPU) would theoretically outperform this setup by roughly 1-2% overall, but this would be imperceptible in real-world gameplay. Conversely, a combo with the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 and RX 6850M XT would be approximately 1% slower, still maintaining the same playable status at all resolutions.

Best Settings per Resolution

For each resolution, the most demanding preset that maintains an average FPS at or above 60 is the Ultra setting. At 3840x2160, Ultra yields 79.7 FPS, which is 19.7 FPS above the threshold. This is the most demanding configuration tested, and the system clears it with a 32.8% margin. At 2560x1440, Ultra produces 105.9 FPS, a 76.5% margin over 60 FPS. At 1920x1080, Ultra delivers 136.3 FPS, a 127.2% margin.

The data suggests that there is no scenario where the system falls below 60 FPS, even at the highest settings and resolution. The lowest recorded average FPS is 79.7, which means all other presets at all resolutions exceed this floor. For users prioritizing visual fidelity, 4K Ultra is the recommended configuration, as it is both the most demanding and fully playable. For those seeking higher frame rates, 1440p Ultra offers a 33% FPS increase over 4K Ultra without sacrificing settings quality.

The Verdict

This PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator at all tested resolutions and presets, with every configuration clearing the 60 FPS playable threshold. The verdictByResolution data confirms that at 3840x2160, the playable settings include High (84.2 FPS), Low (139.5 FPS), Medium (107.1 FPS), and Ultra (79.7 FPS), with Ultra being the best settings at an average of 79.7 FPS. At 2560x1440, all settings are playable, with Ultra achieving 105.9 FPS. At 1920x1080, the system reaches its peak performance, with Ultra at 136.3 FPS.

The 4K Ultra result is the most notable: 79.7 FPS is comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold, providing a 32.8% headroom. This means the system is not merely playable but offers a smooth experience even in the most demanding scenario. The combination of the RTX 5090’s 104.8 TFLOPS FP32 performance and the Ryzen 7 7700’s 3.80 GHz base / 5.30 GHz boost clocks ensures that neither component becomes a critical bottleneck.

For any user, the takeaway is that this system eliminates the need for settings compromises. Whether at 1080p, 1440p, or 4K, the Ultra preset is always viable, and the lowest FPS recorded is 79.7, which is 19.7 FPS above the playable threshold. This is a definitive yes for running the game at maximum quality.

CPU and GPU Roles

The division of labor between the Ryzen 7 7700 and the RTX 5090 shifts significantly across resolutions, as evidenced by the FPS scaling. At 1920x1080, the system achieves 213 FPS on Low and 136.3 FPS on Ultra, a 36% drop. The CPU’s single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1,930, Geekbench single-core of 2,525) becomes the limiting factor at this resolution, as the GPU has excess capacity. The 3DMark 2-thread score of 2,043 and 4-thread score of 3,931 indicate that the game’s primary simulation thread benefits from the CPU’s high boost clock, but the GPU is not fully utilized.

At 2560x1440, the FPS drops to 193.4 on Low and 105.9 on Ultra, a 45.2% reduction. The larger percentage drop compared to 1080p suggests that the GPU is starting to take on more of the workload, but the CPU still plays a significant role, particularly in the simulation and physics calculations that Microsoft Flight Simulator relies on. The CPU’s 8 cores and 16 threads, with a max-thread 3DMark score of 8,479, provide adequate multi-threaded performance for background tasks, but the game’s main thread remains the bottleneck.

At 3840x2160, the FPS drops to 139.5 on Low and 79.7 on Ultra, a 42.9% reduction. This is where the RTX 5090 becomes the dominant factor. The GPU’s 32 GB of GDDR7 memory, 512-bit bus, and 1.79 TB/s bandwidth are fully exercised at 4K, and the 104.8 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is the primary driver of frame rate. The CPU’s role diminishes relative to the GPU, as evidenced by the smaller absolute FPS drop from 1440p to 4K (26.2 FPS at Ultra) compared to the drop from 1080p to 1440p (30.4 FPS at Ultra).

The scaling data indicates that the CPU is the limiting factor at 1080p, the GPU begins to dominate at 1440p, and at 4K the GPU is overwhelmingly the primary performance driver. For users playing at 1080p, upgrading the CPU would yield a larger FPS improvement than upgrading the GPU. At 4K, the opposite is true: the RTX 5090 is the component that determines playability, and the CPU’s contribution is relatively minor. This is consistent with the combo’s rank of 65, which reflects a system that is balanced for high-resolution gaming but leaves some performance on the table at lower resolutions due to CPU limits.