Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is notoriously demanding, and this pairing of an AMD Ryzen 5 2600 with a NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER produces a fascinating bottleneck profile. The data shows a system where the GPU is clearly the dominant force at higher resolutions, but the older six-core CPU begins to assert its influence as the resolution drops. This analysis breaks down the measured frame rates to show exactly where the performance ceiling lies and how to configure the game for the best experience.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a clear shift in system limitations. At 1080p with Low settings, the system produces 115.7 FPS, which drops to 109.9 FPS at 1440p and then to 100.0 FPS at 4K. This is a relatively modest 13.6% drop from 1080p to 4K, suggesting that at these lower settings, the CPU is already holding back the GPU from reaching its full potential, even at 1080p. The GPU has enough headroom that resolution increases don't punish it as severely as they would in a purely GPU-bound scenario.

The scaling becomes much more pronounced when we look at the higher settings presets. With Ultra settings, the system delivers 98.4 FPS at 1080p, drops to 86.2 FPS at 1440p, and then falls to 65.3 FPS at 4K. That is a 33.6% reduction from 1080p to 4K. This steeper curve indicates that at Ultra settings, the GPU is finally being pushed to its limits, and the increased pixel count at 4K directly translates to a significant performance hit. The 1080p to 1440p gap is also notable, with a 12.4% drop, showing that the GPU is working harder even at the intermediate resolution.

The High preset tells a similar story to Ultra but with slightly smaller gaps between resolutions. The system achieves 94.8 FPS at 1080p, 93.0 FPS at 1440p, and 64.1 FPS at 4K. The 1440p score is nearly identical to the 1080p result, with only a 1.9% difference, which is a strong indicator that the CPU is the limiting factor at these two resolutions. The 4K result, however, shows a 32.4% drop from 1440p, confirming that the GPU is the primary constraint once the pixel count becomes extreme. The data suggests that a user with a 1440p monitor is getting nearly the same performance as a 1080p user at High settings, purely because the CPU cannot feed the GPU fast enough at the lower resolution.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is the clear performance driver in this configuration, especially at 4K. Its 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus provides a substantial 672.3 GB/s of bandwidth, which is essential for a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator that streams large amounts of terrain and scenery data. The GPU's boost clock of 2610 MHz and its 8448 shading units allow it to handle the complex shader work required for realistic lighting and weather effects.

The benchmark results show that the GPU is the component that scales with resolution. When moving from Medium to Ultra at 4K, the frame rate drops from 89.2 FPS to 65.3 FPS, a 26.8% reduction. This shows that the GPU is sensitive to the increased graphical load of the higher preset. In contrast, the difference between Low and Medium at 4K is only 10.8 FPS, or 10.8%, which suggests that the CPU is starting to become a factor even at 4K when settings are lowered. The GPU's Passmark G3D score of 31811 places it in the 86th percentile of all GPUs, indicating it has the raw power to push high frame rates, but it's often waiting on the processor to deliver draw calls.

The data indicates that the GPU is rarely the sole bottleneck, except at the highest resolutions and settings. At 4K Ultra, the 65.3 FPS result is likely close to the GPU's limit, but at 1080p Low, the 115.7 FPS result is almost certainly not the maximum the GPU can produce. The GPU is being underutilized at lower resolutions due to the CPU's limitations, which is a common pairing issue with a high-end graphics card and a mid-range processor from an earlier generation.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the best experience per the rows provided is the High preset at 1440p. This configuration yields 93.0 FPS, which is a smooth and playable frame rate, while delivering significantly better visual fidelity than the Medium preset (102.7 FPS) or Low preset (109.9 FPS). The 1440p High setting offers a good balance, as the frame rate is only 1.9% lower than the 1080p High result, meaning there is no real performance penalty for moving to a higher resolution.

For users with a 4K display, the Medium preset is the most sensible choice. The 89.2 FPS average at 4K Medium is very playable and a substantial improvement over the 64.1 FPS at High and 65.3 FPS at Ultra. The jump from Low to Medium at 4K is a 10.8% FPS increase, but the visual quality gain is significant, making Medium the "sweet spot" for 4K. Pushing to High or Ultra at 4K results in a frame rate drop of over 27%, which is a steep price to pay for the incremental visual improvements.

At 1080p, the High preset is also the recommended choice, as it provides 94.8 FPS. The Ultra preset (98.4 FPS) only offers a 3.8% performance gain over High, which is not worth the potential for more demanding scenes. The Low preset at 1080p (115.7 FPS) is only for those seeking the highest possible frame rates, but it sacrifices too much visual quality in a game where the scenery is the main attraction. The data suggests that High is the optimal preset across all resolutions, with Medium as a fallback for 4K users.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system produces a consistent performance bracket. Low settings deliver the highest average at 115.7 FPS, followed by Medium at 110.3 FPS. High settings yield 94.8 FPS, and Ultra drops to 98.4 FPS. The fact that Ultra has a higher average than High is an anomaly in the data, but both are clustered around the 94-98 FPS range. The 1080p results show a clear ceiling around 115 FPS, indicating that the CPU is limiting the system from going higher, regardless of how low the graphical settings are set.

At 2560x1440, the results are similar in their clustering. Low settings produce 109.9 FPS, Medium 102.7 FPS, and High 93.0 FPS. Ultra settings yield 86.2 FPS. The 1440p numbers are consistently a few FPS lower than their 1080p counterparts, but the pattern is the same. The performance gap between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 23.7 FPS, which is a smaller spread than what is seen at 4K, further reinforcing the CPU bottleneck. The High preset at 1440p is nearly identical to High at 1080p, with only a 1.9 FPS difference.

At 3840x2160, the GPU finally takes over as the primary limiting factor. Low settings deliver 100.0 FPS, which is still very high, but Medium drops to 89.2 FPS. High and Ultra are much closer together, with 64.1 FPS and 65.3 FPS, respectively. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 4K shows a 34.7 FPS drop, which is a much steeper curve than at lower resolutions. This confirms that at 4K, the increased pixel count directly translates to a heavier load on the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER, making the CPU less of a factor.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER ranks 504th out of 1795 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the 72nd percentile of all tested systems, which is a solid result given the age of the processor. The ranking indicates that the system performs well overall, but it is far from the top of the charts, where more balanced, modern CPU-GPU pairings would reside.

The combo's ranking is likely held back by the CPU's performance. The Ryzen 5 2600 has an average benchmark score of 19616, which puts it in the 77th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-1345U, which scores 19691, and the AMD Ryzen 5 7530U, which scores 19508. These are mobile and lower-power parts, highlighting that the 2600 is competitive with newer mainstream chips in synthetic benchmarks, but its older architecture may not handle the single-threaded demands of Flight Simulator as efficiently.

The GPU, on the other hand, is a top-tier performer. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER has an average benchmark score of 48704, placing it in the 86th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA CMP 50HX and the Intel Arc A550M. The high GPU score, combined with the mid-range CPU score, explains why the combo ranks where it does. It is a system that has a lot of graphics headroom but is consistently held back by the processor, particularly at lower resolutions.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen+ architecture, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz. Its 16 MB of shared L3 cache is a key feature for gaming, but its older architecture and lower clock speeds compared to modern CPUs are a limiting factor. The processor's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 11186 and single-core score of 1579 provide context for its performance, showing that it is capable but not class-leading.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is significant due to the game's complex simulation logic and draw call processing. The data shows that at 1080p and 1440p, the CPU is the primary bottleneck. The frame rates at Low settings (115.7 FPS at 1080p and 109.9 FPS at 1440p) are likely near the maximum that the Ryzen 5 2600 can deliver. The fact that the 4K Low result (100.0 FPS) is not much lower than the 1080p result (115.7 FPS) suggests that the CPU is still playing a role, but the gap is closing.

The CPU's 6 cores and 12 threads are sufficient for the game, but its single-thread performance is what matters most. The boost clock of 3.90 GHz is modest by today's standards, and the data suggests that this is what prevents the system from achieving higher frame rates at lower resolutions. The processor's performance is comparable to the Intel Core i5-11600KF, which has an average score of 19740, but the 2600's older architecture likely means it struggles more with the game's specific instruction sets. The CPU is the clear weak link in this partnership, and the measured FPS data confirms that it caps the system's performance.