Microsoft Flight Simulator

The data for the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 in Microsoft Flight Simulator presents a clear picture of high-end performance. The measured frame rates across all resolutions and settings indicate that this combination is not merely capable, but consistently exceeds the 60 FPS playable threshold. The following analysis breaks down the benchmark results, exploring the optimal settings, the balance between CPU and GPU load, and how this specific hardware stack compares to other tested configurations.

Best Settings per Resolution

For each resolution, the most demanding preset that maintains an average frame rate at or above 60 FPS is the "Ultra" setting. This is the highest visual quality preset available in the dataset, and this hardware combination powers through it without dropping below the playable threshold.

At 3840x2160 (4K), the Ultra preset achieves an average of 70 FPS. This is a significant achievement, as it allows for the maximum visual fidelity at 4K resolution while still providing a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS target. The data shows that the RTX 4080 has enough headroom to handle the most demanding settings at this resolution.

At 2560x1440 (1440p), the Ultra preset delivers an average of 95 FPS. This represents a substantial performance increase over the 4K result, showcasing how the lower pixel count relieves pressure on the GPU. The 95 FPS average provides a very smooth experience, ideal for the detailed cockpit views and fast-moving terrain in flight simulation.

At 1920x1080 (1080p), the Ultra preset reaches an average of 117 FPS. This high frame rate ensures an exceptionally fluid experience. The performance gain from 1440p to 1080p is noticeable, but the difference is smaller than the jump from 4K to 1440p, suggesting that the CPU begins to play a more significant role at lower resolutions. The ability to run the game at Ultra settings with an average well above 100 FPS at 1080p makes this an excellent pairing for high-refresh-rate monitors.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark results reveal a complex interplay between the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080, with the balance of responsibility shifting depending on the resolution.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is the primary bottleneck. The performance difference between Low and Ultra settings is significant, with a 125 FPS average at Low dropping to 70 FPS at Ultra. This 55 FPS swing demonstrates that the RTX 4080's workload is the limiting factor. The CPU has less impact here because the GPU is fully occupied rendering the massive number of pixels.

Moving to 2560x1440, the balance begins to shift. The frame rates are higher across all settings, but the scaling is less steep. The gap between Low (170 FPS) and Ultra (95 FPS) is 75 FPS. The higher overall frame rates mean the CPU must feed the GPU more quickly, and the scaling pattern suggests the CPU is becoming more relevant, though the GPU still dominates the workload.

At 1920x1080, the CPU's role becomes much more prominent. The frame rates are the highest of all, with Low settings producing an average of 211 FPS and Ultra producing 117 FPS. The fact that the game can hit over 200 FPS at Low settings indicates the GPU is not heavily taxed. The performance scaling from 1440p to 1080p is smaller than from 4K to 1440p, which is a classic sign that the CPU is starting to limit the maximum achievable frame rate. The Ryzen 9 9900X, with its 12 cores and 24 threads, provides enough processing power to keep the RTX 4080 well-fed, but the data implies that at 1080p, the CPU is the more significant factor in determining the final frame rate.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table details the exact average, minimum, and maximum frame rates recorded for each resolution and settings combination.

At 3840x2160:

• Low: The average frame rate is 125 FPS. No minimum or maximum values were recorded.
• Medium: The average frame rate is 97 FPS, with a minimum of 83 FPS and a maximum of 112 FPS. This is the only 4K setting with full min/max data.
• High: The average frame rate is 73 FPS. No minimum or maximum values were recorded.
• Ultra: The average frame rate is 70 FPS. No minimum or maximum values were recorded.

At 2560x1440:

• Low: The average frame rate is 170 FPS. No minimum or maximum values were recorded.
• Medium: The average frame rate is 132 FPS, with a minimum of 112 FPS and a maximum of 152 FPS.
• High: The average frame rate is 99 FPS. No minimum or maximum values were recorded.
• Ultra: The average frame rate is 95 FPS. No minimum or maximum values were recorded.

At 1920x1080:

• Low: The average frame rate is 211 FPS. No minimum or maximum values were recorded.
• Medium: The average frame rate is 164 FPS, with a minimum of 139 FPS and a maximum of 188 FPS.
• High: The average frame rate is 123 FPS. No minimum or maximum values were recorded.
• Ultra: The average frame rate is 117 FPS. No minimum or maximum values were recorded.

The data shows a consistent pattern: the frame rate drops as resolution and settings increase, but even the most demanding configuration (4K Ultra) stays above the 60 FPS playable threshold. The presence of min/max data only for Medium settings suggests that this preset may exhibit more frame-time variance, but the averages remain solid.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The benchmark database provides a set of "nearest rivals" for both the CPU and GPU, offering insight into what other hardware could deliver a similar experience.

For the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X, the closest matching processors are all server-class chips. The AMD EPYC 9015 has an average benchmark score that is 0.1% lower than the 9900X, while the AMD EPYC 7313 is 0.2% higher. The Intel Core i9-14900 is a more mainstream alternative, scoring 1.1% higher. The Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M is also close, with a score 1.4% higher. These results indicate that the Ryzen 9 9900X's performance is comparable to a range of high-end server and desktop processors, meaning users could expect similar frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator if they had any of these CPUs installed, assuming the GPU remains the same.

For the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080, the nearest rival is the RTX 4080 SUPER, which has a benchmark score a mere 0.1% higher. This implies that the two graphics cards would perform nearly identically in this game. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X is 1.1% lower, and the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB and AMD Radeon 8060S are 2.6% and 2.7% lower, respectively. These alternatives would result in slightly lower frame rates, but the differences are small enough that the overall experience, particularly the ability to run the game at Ultra settings above 60 FPS, would likely remain intact.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 4K resolution with the highest settings?

A: Yes. The data shows that at 3840x2160 with the Ultra preset, the combination achieves an average frame rate of 70 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: What is the best settings preset for a 1440p monitor?

A: The Ultra preset is the best option at 2560x1440, as it delivers an average of 95 FPS. This provides the highest visual quality while still maintaining a frame rate well above 60 FPS.

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

A: The average frame rate at 1920x1080 on Ultra is 117 FPS, while at 3840x2160 on Ultra it is 70 FPS. This represents a 47 FPS increase, or roughly 67% higher performance, when moving from 4K to 1080p.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more important for this game at 1080p?

A: The data suggests the CPU becomes a more significant factor at lower resolutions. The frame rate scaling from 1440p to 1080p is less pronounced than from 4K to 1440p, indicating that the CPU is beginning to limit the maximum frame rate at 1080p.

Q: How does the RTX 4080 compare to the RTX 4080 SUPER in this system?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER has a benchmark score that is only 0.1% higher than the RTX 4080. In practical terms, this means the frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator would be virtually identical with either card.

Q: What are the minimum and maximum FPS recorded at Medium settings in 4K?

A: At 3840x2160 with Medium settings, the minimum FPS is 83 and the maximum FPS is 112, with an average of 97 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the benchmark database, this specific combination of the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 is ranked 215 out of 3714 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places the system in the top 5.8% of all configurations tested. This high ranking is consistent with the measured frame rates, which show the system comfortably exceeding the 60 FPS playable threshold at all resolutions and presets. The fact that it achieves this at the maximum Ultra preset across the board indicates that it is a top-tier performer for this specific game.

The Verdict

The data unequivocally answers the question: yes, this PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator exceptionally well. The verdict by resolution confirms that all settings presets at all three tested resolutions are playable.

At 3840x2160, the best playable setting is Ultra, with an average frame rate of 70 FPS. This clears the 60 FPS threshold with a small but sufficient margin.

At 2560x1440, the best playable setting is also Ultra, with a much more comfortable average of 95 FPS. This provides a high-refresh-rate experience at a demanding resolution.

At 1920x1080, the best playable setting is Ultra, delivering an average of 117 FPS. This is ideal for competitive or high-refresh-rate play, with the CPU beginning to play a larger role in frame rate generation.

In summary, the Ryzen 9 9900X and RTX 4080 combination is a powerful pairing that allows gamers to experience Microsoft Flight Simulator with the highest visual fidelity available, without any compromises to frame rate. The benchmark results show it to be a top-tier performer, ranking in the top percentile of all tested systems. This is a definitive high-end setup for the game.