Microsoft Flight Simulator

This PC combination, the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080, delivers a commanding performance in Microsoft Flight Simulator. Benchmark data shows that this system clears the 60 FPS playable threshold at every tested resolution and preset, making it a top-tier choice for flight simulation enthusiasts.

FAQ

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

A: Yes. At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the system achieves an average of 70 FPS, which is comfortably above the 60 FPS playable threshold. The verdict data confirms that Ultra is the best playable setting at this resolution.

Q: How much performance difference is there between 1080p and 4K at Ultra settings?

A: The average frame rate drops from 117 FPS at 1920x1080 to 70 FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings. This represents a 40% reduction in average FPS when moving from 1080p to 4K, indicating strong GPU scaling with resolution.

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo can achieve?

A: The highest recorded average is 184 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. At 4K with Low settings, the average is 125 FPS, showing the system’s ability to push very high frame rates when settings are reduced.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested PC configurations for this game?

A: This combination ranks 291st out of 3,714 tested combos, placing it in the top 8% of all configurations tested for Microsoft Flight Simulator.

Q: Is the Ryzen 9 5950X a strong CPU for this game?

A: The CPU scores in the 91st percentile among all CPUs tested, with strong multi-threaded performance. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 26,017 and Geekbench multi-core score of 15,233 indicate substantial processing headroom for simulation workloads.

Q: Does the RTX 4080 hold up against its closest rivals?

A: The GPU’s average benchmark score of 54,247 is essentially on par with the RTX 4080 SUPER, which scores 54,209 (0.1% delta). It trails the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X by 1.1% and the Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB by 2.6%, but outperforms the Radeon 8060S by 2.7%.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals a clear pattern where the GPU becomes the dominant factor as resolution increases. At 1920x1080, the system achieves 184 FPS on Low settings and 117 FPS on Ultra, a 57% difference between presets. Moving to 2560x1440, Low produces 170 FPS and Ultra drops to 95 FPS, narrowing the preset gap to 44%. At 3840x2160, the spread tightens further: Low yields 125 FPS while Ultra yields 70 FPS, a 44% difference.

This scaling indicates that at 1080p, the CPU has enough headroom to feed the GPU efficiently, allowing the graphics card to run at higher frame rates. The Ryzen 9 5950X’s 16 cores and 32 threads provide substantial computational capacity, as evidenced by its PassMark multi-thread score of 45,424 and 3DMark max-thread score of 11,597. However, the frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K at the same settings—for instance, from 117 to 70 FPS at Ultra—shows that the RTX 4080’s rendering workload becomes the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

The RTX 4080’s specifications support this interpretation. With 9,728 shading units, 76 RT cores, and a boost clock of 2,505 MHz, the GPU delivers 48.74 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. Its 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus provides 716.8 GB/s of bandwidth, which is critical for handling the high-resolution textures and terrain data in Microsoft Flight Simulator. At 4K, the GPU’s pixel rate of 280.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 761.5 GTexel/s become the primary drivers of performance, explaining the more pronounced drop at Ultra settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the system delivers an average of 125 FPS on Low settings. Medium settings produce a 97 FPS average with a minimum of 83 FPS and maximum of 112 FPS. High settings achieve 73 FPS average, while Ultra drops to 70 FPS average. All four presets remain above the 60 FPS threshold at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, Low settings yield 170 FPS average. Medium settings produce 132 FPS average, with minimum 112 FPS and maximum 152 FPS. High settings reach 99 FPS average, and Ultra maintains 95 FPS average. The gap between High and Ultra narrows to just 4 FPS at this resolution, suggesting diminishing returns from the highest preset.

At 1920x1080, the system achieves its peak performance. Low settings deliver 184 FPS average. Medium settings produce 164 FPS average, with minimum 139 FPS and maximum 188 FPS. High settings reach 123 FPS average, while Ultra maintains 117 FPS average. The minimum frame rate at Medium (139 FPS) exceeds the average frame rate at Ultra (117 FPS), indicating that even the most demanding preset maintains high minimums at 1080p.

The data shows a consistent pattern across all resolutions: the step from Medium to High produces the largest FPS drop (28% at 4K, 25% at 1440p, 25% at 1080p), while the step from High to Ultra is more modest (4% at 4K, 4% at 1440p, 5% at 1080p). This suggests that High settings offer the best balance between visual quality and performance, with Ultra providing only marginal gains in fidelity.

The Verdict

This PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator exceptionally well. The verdict data confirms that all four presets—Low, Medium, High, and Ultra—are playable at every tested resolution, with average frame rates well above the 60 FPS threshold.

At 3840x2160, the system achieves 70 FPS on Ultra, which is 16.7% above the playable threshold. The 2560x1440 resolution delivers 95 FPS on Ultra, a 58.3% margin over 60 FPS. At 1920x1080, Ultra produces 117 FPS, nearly double the playable threshold.

The best settings at each resolution are as follows: Ultra at 4K with 70 FPS average, Ultra at 1440p with 95 FPS average, and Ultra at 1080p with 117 FPS average. For users seeking higher frame rates, dropping to High settings at 4K yields 73 FPS, which is only 3 FPS more than Ultra, making Ultra the recommended choice at all resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

This combination ranks 291st out of 3,714 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the top 7.8% of all configurations. This ranking reflects the strong synergy between the Ryzen 9 5950X and RTX 4080 for this specific game.

The CPU’s benchmark performance supports its contribution to this ranking. With an average benchmark score of 51,947, the Ryzen 9 5950X sits in the 91st percentile among all CPUs. Its nearest rivals show minimal performance differences: the Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX scores 52,073 (-0.2% delta), the AMD EPYC 8124P scores 52,121 (-0.3% delta), the Intel Core i9-13900F scores 51,730 (+0.4% delta), and the Intel Core i7-14700 scores 52,301 (-0.7% delta). These tight margins indicate that the CPU is not a bottleneck in this configuration.

The GPU’s ranking is similarly strong. The RTX 4080 sits in the 86th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 54,247. Its nearest rival, the RTX 4080 SUPER, scores 54,209 (0.1% delta), making them effectively tied. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X scores 54,828 (-1.1% delta), the Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB scores 55,698 (-2.6% delta), and the Radeon 8060S scores 55,757 (-2.7% delta). While these rivals post slightly higher scores, the RTX 4080’s performance in actual game benchmarks remains competitive.

The combination’s high ranking is driven by the balance between CPU and GPU capabilities. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 26,017 and PassMark multi-thread score of 45,424 provide ample processing power for the simulation’s complex physics and AI calculations, while the GPU’s 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 6,567 and PassMark G3D score of 34,457 ensure smooth rendering of the game’s detailed environments.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that maintains at least 60 FPS is Ultra, achieving an average of 70 FPS. The margin above the threshold is 10 FPS, providing a comfortable buffer for demanding scenes. High settings also clear the threshold at 73 FPS, though the 3 FPS difference makes Ultra the preferred choice.

At 2560x1440, Ultra is again the best setting, delivering 95 FPS average. This represents a 35 FPS margin over the 60 FPS threshold, offering substantial headroom for complex flight scenarios or heavy weather effects. The High preset produces 99 FPS, but the 4 FPS difference does not justify sacrificing visual quality.

At 1920x1080, Ultra produces 117 FPS average, a 57 FPS margin over the playable threshold. This provides exceptional smoothness even during intensive moments such as landing approaches or flying through dense urban areas. The Medium preset achieves 164 FPS, but the Ultra preset’s visual improvements are well worth the 47 FPS reduction for most users.

For users prioritizing maximum frame rates, the Low presets offer 184 FPS at 1080p, 170 FPS at 1440p, and 125 FPS at 4K. However, given that Ultra clears 60 FPS at all resolutions, there is no practical need to reduce settings for playability. The system’s performance headroom allows users to maximize visual quality without compromising frame rates.