Microsoft Flight Simulator

# How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT lands at rank 2571 out of 3714 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. That places this configuration in the lower third of all tested hardware pairings, which is a meaningful signal for a flight simulator that tends to stress both the CPU and GPU heavily depending on the scenario. The rank suggests that while this combo is functional and capable of running the game, it is not positioned among the high-performing setups in the database.

Looking at the individual components, the CPU sits at the 75th percentile among all processors, while the GPU sits at the 70th percentile among all graphics cards. When both components are combined in this specific title, the overall combo rank of 2571 out of 3714 indicates that Microsoft Flight Simulator is particularly demanding on the pairing. The gap between the component-level percentiles and the combo rank suggests that the game's workloads do not align perfectly with what these two parts do best. In simpler terms, each part is reasonably strong in general benchmarks, but together in this simulator, they produce results that trail a substantial portion of the field.

The measured frame rates confirm this positioning. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves 101 FPS, which is solid. But at 4K with Ultra settings, it drops to 33 FPS. These numbers tell a story of a system that can handle lighter loads comfortably but struggles when pushed to the extremes. The rank of 2571 out of 3714 reflects this duality: it is not a bottom-tier setup, but it is far from the top. For context, this rank means roughly 31% of tested combos perform worse, while about 69% perform better. That is a useful reference point for anyone evaluating whether this pairing meets their expectations.

# CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 is a 6-core, 12-thread processor from the 2000 series, built on the Zen architecture with a 12 nm process node. Its base clock is 3.40 GHz, boosting up to 3.90 GHz. The CPU has a 16 MB shared L3 cache, 512 KB L2 per core, and 96 KB L1 per core. Memory support is dual-channel DDR4 with a bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s. These specifications are moderate by modern standards, and the benchmark data reflects that.

In synthetic tests, the Ryzen 5 2600 scores 1248 in Cinebench R15 multi-core and 157.3 in single-core. Geekbench results show 5648 multi-core and 1154 single-core. PassMark multi-thread score is 13160, with a single-thread score of 2239. The average benchmark score across all tests is 21484. The CPU's percentile rank among all processors is 75, meaning it outperforms three-quarters of CPUs in general workloads. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V (0.2% ahead), Intel Core i9-11900H (0.5% ahead), Intel Xeon D-1746TER (0.7% behind), and AMD EPYC 9454 (1.2% ahead).

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is significant because the game simulates physics, weather, and flight dynamics, which depend heavily on single-thread performance. The Ryzen 5 2600's single-thread score of 157.3 in Cinebench R15 is modest, and this likely contributes to frame rate limitations in scenarios where the CPU is the bottleneck. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo reaches 101 FPS, but at 1080p with Ultra settings, it drops to 56 FPS. The CPU's 6 cores and 12 threads are adequate for the game's multithreading, but the older Zen architecture does not deliver the per-core efficiency of newer designs.

The data suggests that the CPU is a limiting factor at lower resolutions and higher settings. When the resolution increases to 4K, the GPU becomes more stressed, but the CPU still plays a role in maintaining minimum frame rates. The measured FPS at 4K Medium shows a min of 40 FPS and max of 54 FPS, which indicates that the CPU can keep up with the GPU's output to some degree. However, the overall scores from PassMark physics (673) and integer math (44518) indicate that the CPU's computational throughput is not exceptional, which aligns with the mid-pack combo ranking.

# GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT is a RDNA 2.0 architecture GPU with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The chip is Navi 23, built on a 7 nm process from TSMC. It has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 32 ray accelerators. The base clock is 1968 MHz, with a boost clock of 2589 MHz and a game clock of 2359 MHz. Memory runs at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

In synthetic benchmarks, the RX 6600 XT scores 1804 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 88720 in Geekbench Metal, 80503 in Geekbench OpenCL, and 72417 in Geekbench Vulkan. PassMark G3D score is 16461, with a GPU compute score of 7520. The average benchmark score is 24442, and the GPU sits at the 70th percentile among all graphics cards. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 (0.7% ahead), Intel Arc A350M (0.8% behind), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti (0.8% ahead), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER (1.1% ahead).

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU's 8 GB VRAM and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth are relevant for texture streaming and rendering the detailed scenery. The measured FPS at 4K Low is 60 FPS, which is playable, but at 4K Ultra it drops to 33 FPS. The GPU's pixel rate of 165.7 GPixel/s and texture rate of 331.4 GTexel/s are moderate, and the data shows that at higher resolutions, the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck. At 1440p, the average FPS ranges from 81 (Low) to 45 (Ultra), while at 1080p, it ranges from 101 (Low) to 56 (Ultra). These numbers indicate that the GPU can handle 1080p and 1440p reasonably well, but 4K Ultra is beyond its comfortable range.

The GPU's 8 GB VRAM is a key consideration for Microsoft Flight Simulator, which can use large amounts of memory for high-resolution textures. The fact that the 4K Medium setting shows a min FPS of 40 and max of 54 suggests that the GPU is managing memory, but the overall performance at 4K is limited. The data points to the GPU as the main constraint at 4K, while at 1080p, the CPU's single-thread performance becomes more influential.

# FAQ

Q: What is the combo rank of this CPU and GPU pairing in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 with the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT ranks 2571 out of 3714 tested combos in this game.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Ryzen 5 2600 has an average benchmark score of 21484. It is 0.2% behind the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V, 0.5% behind the Intel Core i9-11900H, 0.7% ahead of the Intel Xeon D-1746TER, and 1.2% behind the AMD EPYC 9454.

Q: What is the GPU's percentile ranking among all graphics cards?

A: The Radeon RX 6600 XT is at the 70th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 24442.

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo achieves at 1080p?

A: The highest average FPS at 1080p is 101 FPS, achieved with Low settings.

Q: What is the lowest average FPS this combo achieves at 4K?

A: The lowest average FPS at 4K is 33 FPS, achieved with Ultra settings.

Q: Does the GPU have ray tracing support?

A: Yes, the Radeon RX 6600 XT has 32 ray accelerators and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which includes ray tracing features.

# Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear pattern of performance scaling across resolutions. At 1080p, the combo achieves 101 FPS on Low, 78 FPS on Medium, 59 FPS on High, and 56 FPS on Ultra. Moving to 1440p, those numbers drop to 81 FPS on Low, 63 FPS on Medium, 47 FPS on High, and 45 FPS on Ultra. At 4K, the performance falls further to 60 FPS on Low, 47 FPS on Medium, 35 FPS on High, and 33 FPS on Ultra.

The scaling from 1080p to 4K on Low settings shows a drop from 101 FPS to 60 FPS, which is a 41% reduction. On Ultra settings, the drop is from 56 FPS to 33 FPS, a 41% reduction as well. This consistent percentage drop across settings suggests that the scaling is primarily resolution-driven, with the GPU bearing the brunt of the increased pixel count. However, the absolute numbers tell a more nuanced story.

At 1080p, the gap between Low (101 FPS) and Ultra (56 FPS) is 45 FPS, indicating that settings have a significant impact. At 4K, the gap between Low (60 FPS) and Ultra (33 FPS) is 27 FPS, showing that the GPU is already stretched thin at 4K, leaving less headroom for settings changes. The data suggests that at 1080p, the CPU and GPU are more balanced, with the CPU able to feed the GPU enough frames. At 4K, the GPU becomes the limiting component, as evidenced by the 33 FPS Ultra result.

The 1440p results sit in between, with Medium settings hitting 63 FPS and High at 47 FPS. This resolution appears to be a sweet spot for the combo, offering a balance between visual quality and performance. The 4K Medium result of 47 FPS with a min of 40 and max of 54 indicates that the GPU is working hard but still producing playable frame rates. Overall, the resolution scaling data points to the GPU as the primary constraint at higher resolutions, while the CPU's influence is more apparent at 1080p.

# Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the best experience depends on the target resolution. At 1080p, the Medium preset delivers 78 FPS average with a min of 66 and max of 90, which is smooth and stable. The High preset at 1080p drops to 59 FPS, which is still playable but less comfortable for a flight simulator where smoothness matters. The Ultra preset at 1080p yields 56 FPS, which is borderline. For a consistent experience at 1080p, Medium is the recommended setting, as it maintains a high frame rate with a narrow variance between min and max.

At 1440p, the Medium preset achieves 63 FPS average with a min of 54 and max of 73. This is a solid result that balances visual fidelity with performance. The High preset at 1440p drops to 47 FPS, which may feel less fluid, especially during complex scenes with dense scenery. The Low preset at 1440p hits 81 FPS, but it sacrifices visual quality. For 1440p, Medium is the recommended setting, providing the best trade-off between image quality and frame rate stability.

At 4K, the situation is more challenging. The Low preset reaches 60 FPS, which is exactly at the threshold for smooth playback, but it comes with reduced visual detail. The Medium preset achieves 47 FPS with a min of 40 and max of 54, which is playable but not ideal. The High and Ultra presets drop to 35 FPS and 33 FPS respectively, which are below the smooth threshold. For 4K, the Low preset is the only setting that consistently hits 60 FPS, while Medium offers a compromise at 47 FPS. Given the data, the recommendation for 4K is either Low for smoothness or Medium for better visuals if the user can tolerate the lower frame rate.

Across all resolutions, the Medium preset provides the most balanced experience. At 1080p it yields 78 FPS, at 1440p it yields 63 FPS, and at 4K it yields 47 FPS. The measured min and max values for Medium settings are also the most stable across the board, with the smallest variance between minimum and maximum frame rates. This consistency makes Medium the recommended preset for most users, with adjustments based on resolution and personal preference for smoothness versus visual detail.

# Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers four settings levels (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) across three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, 3840x2160). The results are as follows:

1920x1080:

• Low: 101 FPS average
• Medium: 78 FPS average, 66 FPS min, 90 FPS max
• High: 59 FPS average
• Ultra: 56 FPS average

2560x1440:

• Low: 81 FPS average
• Medium: 63 FPS average, 54 FPS min, 73 FPS max
• High: 47 FPS average
• Ultra: 45 FPS average

3840x2160:

• Low: 60 FPS average
• Medium: 47 FPS average, 40 FPS min, 54 FPS max
• High: 35 FPS average
• Ultra: 33 FPS average

The data shows that the combo performs best at 1080p with Low settings, hitting 101 FPS. The performance degrades progressively as resolution and settings increase. The largest single drop occurs between 1080p Low (101 FPS) and 4K Ultra (33 FPS), a reduction of 68 FPS. The Medium settings consistently provide the most stable frame times, with the min and max values recorded only for Medium presets across all three resolutions. This stability suggests that the combo handles Medium settings with less variance, making it the most predictable configuration.

At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 45 FPS, indicating that settings have a significant impact on performance. At 1440p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 36 FPS. At 4K, the difference between Low and Ultra is 27 FPS. This narrowing gap at higher resolutions confirms that the GPU becomes the limiting factor, as there is less performance headroom to sacrifice for higher settings. The 4K Medium result of 47 FPS with a min of 40 and max of 54 is the most detailed data point, showing that the combo can maintain playable frame rates at 4K with moderate settings, but the margin for error is thin.