Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is an exceptionally demanding title, and the combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER produces a specific performance profile that is heavily dictated by resolution and graphical presets. The measured data reveals a system that can achieve playable frame rates at lower resolutions and settings, but which struggles to maintain smooth performance at 4K with high visual fidelity. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS, component roles, and ranking to provide a precise picture of what this hardware pairing delivers in this simulation.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and consistent trend: performance degrades significantly as resolution increases from 1080p to 4K. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves an average of 78 FPS, which drops to 63 FPS at 1440p and further to 46 FPS at 4K. This represents a substantial 41% reduction in average frame rate from 1080p to 4K at the lowest settings, indicating a strong dependency on resolution.

This scaling pattern is even more pronounced at higher settings. With High settings, the average FPS falls from 45 at 1080p to 37 at 1440p and finally to 27 at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 4K at High settings is a 40% decrease, mirroring the Low setting trend. This consistent scaling across presets suggests that the limiting factor is the GPU's rendering throughput, as the workload increases with pixel count. The GTX 1660 SUPER's 192-bit memory bus and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth appear to be a bottleneck at higher resolutions, as the demand for texture data and frame buffer memory grows.

The transition from 1440p to 4K is particularly punishing. At Medium settings, the average FPS drops from 49 at 1440p to 36 at 4K, a 26.5% decrease. This indicates that the GPU is being pushed to its limits, with the 6 GB of GDDR6 memory likely becoming a constraint at 4K, especially with the game's high-resolution textures. The data suggests that 1080p is the optimal resolution for this pairing, as it allows for the highest frame rates across all settings, while 4K should be reserved for Low or Medium presets if playability is the goal.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER is the primary driver of performance in this configuration. Its benchmark scores show a 53rd percentile ranking among all GPUs, placing it in the mid-range tier. The GPU's base clock of 1530 MHz and boost clock of 1785 MHz are modest by modern standards, but they provide adequate throughput for 1080p gaming. The 6 GB of GDDR6 memory, while sufficient for many titles, is a limiting factor in Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known for its extensive terrain and aircraft data.

The GPU's memory bandwidth of 336.0 GB/s is a critical specification for this game. The measured FPS at 4K (27 FPS at High, 26 FPS at Ultra) suggests that the GPU is struggling to feed the renderer with enough data. The FP32 performance of 5.027 TFLOPS and the pixel rate of 85.68 GPixel/s are indicative of a card that can handle 1080p and 1440p reasonably well, but the 4K results show a clear ceiling. The GPU's nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 580, has an average score that is 0.4% lower, indicating that the GTX 1660 SUPER is performing at a comparable level to its direct competition.

The VRAM capacity is a notable concern. At 4K with Ultra settings, the average FPS drops to 26, and it is likely that the 6 GB frame buffer is being exceeded, causing texture thrashing. The data does not provide minimum FPS for this specific setting, but the trend from Medium (min 31 FPS) to High (no min FPS recorded) suggests instability at higher resolutions. The GPU's role is clear: it is the bottleneck at 4K and at high settings, while at 1080p and Low settings, it provides enough headroom for the CPU to keep up.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations, this specific pairing of the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER ranks 3143 out of 3714 combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the 15th percentile of all tested configurations, indicating that it is a below-average performer for this specific game. The rank of 3143 out of 3714 shows that the vast majority of other CPU-GPU pairings tested achieve higher frame rates in this simulator.

This ranking is a direct consequence of the GPU's mid-range position and the CPU's older architecture. The Ryzen 5 2600, while having a 75th percentile ranking among all CPUs, is paired with a GPU that is only in the 53rd percentile. In a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is notoriously CPU-intensive for physics and AI calculations, the CPU's performance is important, but the GPU's limitations at higher resolutions cap the overall experience. The combo's rank suggests that while the individual components are adequate for many tasks, they are not optimized for this specific title's demands.

The data indicates that this combo is better suited for 1080p gaming, where it can achieve playable frame rates. At 1440p and 4K, the rank would likely be lower, as the frame rates drop below the 60 FPS threshold that is often considered smooth. The rank of 3143 is a holistic measure, and the specific resolution and settings used will heavily influence the actual experience, but the overall trend is clear: this is a pairing for entry-level to mid-range 1080p gaming, not for high-resolution simulation.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a detailed look at how this combo performs across different resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the results are the most promising. With Low settings, the average FPS is 78, providing a smooth experience. Medium settings yield an average of 60 FPS, with a minimum of 51 and a maximum of 69, indicating some variance but generally playable performance. High settings drop the average to 45 FPS, while Ultra settings bring it down to 43 FPS, which is borderline for a flight simulator where smooth panning is important.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance takes a noticeable hit. Low settings still manage an average of 63 FPS, which is acceptable. Medium settings average 49 FPS, with a range of 41 to 56 FPS, showing more significant frame time spikes. High settings drop to 37 FPS, and Ultra settings fall to 35 FPS, making these presets less desirable for a smooth experience. At this resolution, the GTX 1660 SUPER starts to show its limitations, and the frame rates become less consistent.

At 3840x2160, the results are largely below the threshold for smooth gameplay. Low settings average 46 FPS, which is playable but not ideal. Medium settings average 36 FPS, with a minimum of 31 and a maximum of 41, indicating a choppy experience. High settings drop to 27 FPS, and Ultra settings fall to 26 FPS, which is stuttery and detracts from the simulation. The data clearly shows that 4K is not a viable option for this combo beyond Low settings, and even then, the frame rate is not consistently smooth.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 provides the highest average frame rates across all settings, with a maximum of 78 FPS at Low settings. This is the only resolution where the combo can consistently achieve 60 FPS or higher, making it the optimal choice.

Q: Can this combo handle 4K resolution?

A: At 4K, the average FPS ranges from 26 at Ultra to 46 at Low settings. Only the Low preset approaches playability, with Medium (36 FPS) and High (27 FPS) falling below the 30 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest rival?

A: The GTX 1660 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 12986, which is 0.4% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 580's score of 12928. This indicates that the two GPUs offer nearly identical performance levels.

Q: What is the CPU's performance percentile?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 ranks in the 75th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 21484. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V, has a score that is 0.2% higher.

Q: Is the 6 GB of VRAM sufficient for this game?

A: The measured FPS at 4K suggests that 6 GB of GDDR6 memory is a limiting factor. At 4K with High settings, the average FPS is 27, and at Ultra it is 26, indicating that the memory capacity and bandwidth are insufficient for high-resolution textures.

Q: What is the combo's overall rank in the database?

A: This specific CPU-GPU combination ranks 3143 out of 3714 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the bottom 15% of all configurations tested for this game.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience with this hardware, the data suggests prioritizing 1080p resolution. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset offers the most balanced experience, with an average FPS of 60 and a minimum of 51. This provides a smooth frame rate that is suitable for a flight simulator, while still allowing for a reasonable level of visual detail. The Low preset at 1080p, with an average of 78 FPS, is the best choice for maximum smoothness, though it sacrifices visual quality.

If a higher resolution is desired, 1440p with Low settings is the only viable option, achieving an average of 63 FPS. The Medium preset at 1440p, with an average of 49 FPS, may be acceptable for some users, but the minimum FPS of 41 suggests occasional stutters. At 4K, only the Low preset, with an average of 46 FPS, is likely to provide a playable experience, though it will not be consistently smooth.

The Ultra preset is not recommended at any resolution, as the average FPS ranges from 26 at 4K to 43 at 1080p. The performance gains from High to Ultra are minimal compared to the significant frame rate cost. For users who prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate, the High preset at 1080p, with an average of 45 FPS, is a more reasonable choice than Ultra, as it provides a better balance of quality and performance. In summary, 1080p Medium is the sweet spot for this combo.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 plays a supporting role in this configuration, providing the computational foundation for the game's simulation logic. With 6 cores and 12 threads, it offers adequate multi-threading capabilities for a flight simulator, which often uses multiple threads for terrain loading, AI traffic, and physics calculations. The CPU's base clock of 3.40 GHz and boost clock of 3.90 GHz are moderate, and its benchmark scores, such as a Cinebench R15 multicore score of 1248, reflect its position as a solid mid-range processor.

The CPU's 75th percentile ranking among all CPUs indicates that it is not the primary bottleneck in this system. In contrast, the GPU's 53rd percentile ranking suggests that it is the limiting factor, especially at higher resolutions. The Ryzen 5 2600's 16 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support provide sufficient bandwidth for the GPU to receive data, but the GPU's own limitations cap the overall performance.

The CPU's performance relative to its nearest rivals is notable. It is 0.2% faster than the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V and 0.5% faster than the Intel Core i9-11900H in average benchmark scores, while being 0.7% slower than the Intel Xeon D-1746TER and 1.2% slower than the AMD EPYC 9454. This shows that, while the CPU is not top-tier, it holds its own against more modern processors. In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is to ensure that the game's logic runs smoothly, and the measured FPS data suggests that, at 1080p Low settings, the CPU is capable of keeping up with the GPU, as evidenced by the 78 FPS average. However, at higher resolutions, the GPU's workload increases, and the overall frame rate is constrained by the GPU, not the CPU.