Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator places an unusually heavy load on both processor and graphics hardware, and the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT produces a distinct performance profile across resolutions. The measured data shows a system that is capable of smooth flight in less demanding scenarios but becomes increasingly constrained as visual fidelity and pixel count rise, with the CPU emerging as a limiting factor at lower resolutions and the GPU taking over at 4K.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate progression from 1080p to 4K reveals how the workload shifts between components. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves 118 FPS average, which drops to 110 FPS at 1440p and then falls sharply to 82 FPS at 4K. This scaling pattern—a modest 7% decline from 1080p to 1440p followed by a 25% drop from 1440p to 4K—indicates that at lower resolutions the CPU is the primary bottleneck, as the GPU has headroom to render frames quickly but the processor cannot feed it faster.

Moving to Medium settings, the same trend appears but with a steeper initial decline: 108 FPS at 1080p, 87 FPS at 1440p (a 19% reduction), and 64 FPS at 4K (a 26% reduction from 1440p). The larger 1080p-to-1440p gap at Medium compared to Low suggests that the additional graphical workload begins to engage the GPU more fully, though the CPU still limits the top end. The High preset shows a similar pattern with 81 FPS at 1080p, 65 FPS at 1440p (a 20% drop), and 48 FPS at 4K (a 26% drop).

Ultra settings produce the lowest frame rates across the board: 77 FPS at 1080p, 62 FPS at 1440p, and 46 FPS at 4K. Here the scaling is more linear, with a 19% reduction from 1080p to 1440p and a 26% reduction from 1440p to 4K. This consistency suggests that at Ultra, both CPU and GPU are working near their limits, and neither component alone is the sole bottleneck. The data indicates that the 1080p-to-4K total drop ranges from 30% at Low (118 to 82 FPS) to 40% at Ultra (77 to 46 FPS), with the percentage gap widening as settings increase—a sign that the GPU becomes progressively more dominant in limiting performance at higher quality levels.

GPU Role

The Radeon RX 7700 XT brings 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. In Microsoft Flight Simulator, this memory capacity is relevant because the game loads large terrain and scenery datasets, and the 12 GB allocation helps prevent stuttering when flying over dense urban areas or complex photogrammetry regions. The GPU’s boost clock of 2544 MHz and game clock of 2171 MHz, based on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with 3456 shading units, provide the raw compute necessary for the game’s heavy draw calls and procedural generation.

The GPU’s benchmark standing places it in the 67th percentile of all graphics cards, with an average benchmark score of 22549. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile (0.5% faster) and RTX 4060 Mobile (0.8% slower), while the desktop RTX 2080 sits 1.5% ahead. This mid-range positioning means the RX 7700 XT is capable but not top-tier, which aligns with the measured FPS: at 1080p High, the 81 FPS average is playable but not exceptional, and at 4K Ultra, the 46 FPS average falls below the 60 FPS threshold many simmers prefer.

The GPU’s DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) is crucial for Microsoft Flight Simulator, which uses DirectX 12 exclusively. The measured results show that the card handles the API efficiently, as evidenced by the 48 FPS average at 4K High—a respectable figure for a flight sim known for its demanding rendering. The pixel rate of 244.2 GPixel/s and texture rate of 549.5 GTexel/s are sufficient for the game’s ground textures and cloud rendering, though the 35.17 TFLOPS FP32 compute is the limiting factor at Ultra settings where the 46 FPS average dips below the smoother 48 FPS at High.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The data shows 1440p Medium provides the best balance, with 87 FPS average and a minimum of 74 FPS. This keeps frame rates above 60 FPS consistently while offering higher visual fidelity than 1080p.

Q: How does the RX 7700 XT compare to its nearest rivals in general benchmarks?

A: The GPU sits 0.5% behind the RTX 5060 Mobile and 0.8% ahead of the RTX 4060 Mobile, while the RTX 2080 is 1.5% faster. The RX 7700 XT’s average benchmark score is 22549, placing it in the 67th percentile of all GPUs.

Q: Is the CPU holding back performance at 1080p?

A: Yes. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 118 FPS, but the 6-core Ryzen 5 2600 with 12 threads appears to limit further gains. The smaller performance gap between 1080p and 1440p at Low settings (118 to 110 FPS) indicates the CPU cannot feed the GPU fast enough at lower resolutions.

Q: What frame rates can be expected at 4K Ultra?

A: The measured average is 46 FPS, which falls below the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. At 4K High, the average improves to 48 FPS, indicating that the GPU is the limiting factor at this resolution.

Q: How does the Ryzen 5 2600’s benchmark score compare to its rivals?

A: The CPU’s average benchmark score is 21484, placing it in the 75th percentile of all CPUs. It is 0.2% behind the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V and 0.5% behind the Core i9-11900H, while ahead of the Xeon D-1746TER by 0.7% and the EPYC 9454 by 1.2%.

Q: Does the 12 GB VRAM cause any issues at 4K?

A: The data does not show VRAM-related stutters or out-of-memory errors. The 12 GB capacity appears sufficient for the tested 4K settings, as the GPU still delivers 46-82 FPS depending on the preset, suggesting memory bandwidth and compute are the limiting factors rather than capacity.

How This Combo Ranks

Among the 3714 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator, this pairing of the Ryzen 5 2600 and RX 7700 XT ranks 1575th. This places it in the 42nd percentile of all combos, meaning roughly 58% of tested systems perform better. Given that the CPU is from 2018 and the GPU from 2023, this ranking reflects the imbalance between the two components—the newer GPU is held back by the older processor in many scenarios.

The CPU’s 75th percentile standing among all processors (average benchmark score 21484) is stronger than the GPU’s 67th percentile (average score 22549), but in gaming, the GPU typically matters more. The combo ranking of 1575 suggests that while each component is individually mid-pack, their interaction creates a system that is not optimally balanced for this specific game. The measured data supports this: at 1080p Low, the CPU limits performance, while at 4K Ultra, the GPU becomes the constraint. This means the combo’s rank would be higher in GPU-bound scenarios and lower in CPU-bound ones, but the overall average places it in the lower half of tested systems.

Compared to the nearest rival combos, the RX 7700 XT’s performance relative to the RTX 2080 (1.5% slower) suggests that pairing the Ryzen 5 2600 with a faster GPU would not yield proportional gains in this game, as the CPU would bottleneck at lower resolutions. Conversely, upgrading the CPU would likely improve 1080p and 1440p performance more than 4K, where the GPU is already near its limits.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers 118 FPS on Low, 108 FPS on Medium (with a minimum of 92 and maximum of 124), 81 FPS on High, and 77 FPS on Ultra. The spread from Low to Ultra is 41 FPS, indicating that the CPU and GPU have sufficient headroom to handle the increased settings, though the jump from High to Ultra costs only 4 FPS, suggesting diminishing returns at the highest preset.

At 2560x1440, the results are 110 FPS on Low, 87 FPS on Medium (minimum 74, maximum 100), 65 FPS on High, and 62 FPS on Ultra. The Low-to-Ultra spread narrows to 48 FPS, and the High-to-Ultra gap remains small at 3 FPS. The 1440p Medium result of 87 FPS with a 74 FPS minimum is notable as the only sub-4K setting that maintains a minimum above 70 FPS while offering medium visual quality.

At 3840x2160, the data shows 82 FPS on Low, 64 FPS on Medium (minimum 55, maximum 74), 48 FPS on High, and 46 FPS on Ultra. The Low-to-Ultra spread is 36 FPS, and critically, only the Low preset exceeds 60 FPS. The Medium preset’s minimum of 55 FPS is close to the playable threshold, while High and Ultra both fall below it. The 4K results clearly show the GPU as the limiting factor, as the CPU has less influence at this resolution due to the increased pixel workload.

Settings Recommendations

For a consistently smooth experience above 60 FPS, the 1440p Medium preset is the strongest choice. The measured 87 FPS average with a 74 FPS minimum provides a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold, and the Medium settings preserve enough visual detail for a flight sim where readability of instruments and terrain is important. At 1080p, the Medium preset at 108 FPS average (minimum 92 FPS) is also excellent, offering a higher frame rate with the same settings.

For users who prioritize visual quality over frame rate, the 1080p Ultra preset at 77 FPS is viable, as it stays above 60 FPS while delivering the highest fidelity. At 1440p Ultra, the 62 FPS average is borderline—playable but with less headroom for stutters during complex scenery loads. The 4K resolution is only recommended at Low settings (82 FPS); the Medium preset at 64 FPS is marginal, and High (48 FPS) and Ultra (46 FPS) fall below the smoothness threshold.

The data suggests that the sweet spot for this combo is 1440p Medium, as it balances the CPU’s ability to maintain high frame rates with the GPU’s capacity to render acceptable visual detail. Users with 1080p monitors should select Medium or High (81 FPS) depending on their preference for frame rate versus fidelity, while 4K users should stick to Low unless they accept sub-60 FPS performance.

CPU Role

The Ryzen 5 2600, a 6-core, 12-thread processor from the 2000 series based on the Zen architecture, runs at a base clock of 3.40 GHz and boost clock of 3.90 GHz. Its 16 MB shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support with 46.9 GB/s bandwidth are modest by modern standards, yet the CPU still achieves a respectable 75th percentile ranking among all processors. In Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known for heavy single-threaded performance demands, the CPU’s single-core benchmark scores—157.3 in Cinebench R15 and 1154 in Geekbench—are the likely limiting factor at lower resolutions.

The CPU’s nearest rivals in the benchmark database are all newer or higher-end parts: the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V (0.2% faster), Core i9-11900H (0.5% faster), Xeon D-1746TER (0.7% slower), and EPYC 9454 (1.2% faster). The small delta percentages indicate that the Ryzen 5 2600’s overall average score of 21484 is competitive with these parts, but the architecture’s age shows in demanding games. The measured FPS at 1080p Low (118 FPS) versus 1440p Low (110 FPS) demonstrates that the CPU can push the GPU to a certain point, but the 7% drop when increasing resolution suggests the CPU is not the sole bottleneck even at 1080p.

The processor’s 65 W TDP and 12 nm process node are dated compared to the GPU’s 5 nm RDNA 3.0 architecture, but the CPU’s performance in this game is adequate for 60+ FPS at most settings below 4K. The data shows that at 1080p Medium (108 FPS) and High (81 FPS), the CPU keeps pace, and only at Ultra (77 FPS) does it begin to show strain. The 6-core, 12-thread configuration is sufficient for the game’s multithreaded aspects, such as AI traffic and physics, but the single-thread performance limits peak frame rates. For users seeking higher FPS at 1080p, a CPU upgrade would yield better gains than a GPU upgrade, as the RX 7700 XT has demonstrated headroom at that resolution.