Microsoft Flight Simulator

The AMD Ryzen 5 3600 is a 6-core, 12-thread desktop processor from the 3000 series, built on the Zen 2 architecture and the 7 nm process. Its base clock is 3.60 GHz with a boost clock of 4.20 GHz, and it has 32 MB of shared L3 cache. In synthetic benchmarks, the processor demonstrates strong multi-threaded capabilities, scoring 15,045 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 6,318 in Cinebench R20 multicore, with a PassMark multithread score of 17,700. Its single-thread performance is also respectable, scoring 2,124 in Cinebench R23 singlecore and 2,562 in PassMark single thread.

The CPU’s performance in this game is best understood through its percentile ranking; it sits at the 76th percentile among all CPUs. Its nearest rival in average benchmark score is the Intel Core i5-11400, which scores 18,150, a delta of -0.1% relative to the Ryzen’s 18,129 average. The AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS is 0.2% ahead with a score of 18,101, while the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 is -0.2% behind at 18,158. These tight margins indicate that the Ryzen 5 3600 delivers processing power squarely in the mid-range tier, with no significant advantage or deficit compared to its closest competitors. For a flight simulator like Microsoft Flight Simulator, which often relies on single-thread performance for simulation logic, the processor’s 3dmark single-thread score of 696 and its Cinebench R20 singlecore result of 892 suggest it can handle the core flight model calculations without becoming the primary bottleneck at lower resolutions. However, the data indicates that as resolution increases, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, with the CPU’s role diminishing in overall frame rate determination.

CPU Role

The Ryzen 5 3600’s configuration of 6 cores and 12 threads is well-suited for the multi-threaded background tasks in Microsoft Flight Simulator, such as terrain loading and AI traffic. Its 3DMark scores show scaling from 1,361 with 2 threads to 4,605 with 16 threads, indicating efficient use of additional threads. In practical terms, the CPU’s PassMark physics score of 1,152 and data compression score of 219,774 reflect its ability to handle the game’s continuous data streaming. The processor’s average benchmark score of 18,129 places it at the 76th percentile, but its nearest rivals show a spread of only -0.3% to 0.2%, meaning performance is virtually identical to the Intel Core i5-11400, AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS, and AMD Ryzen 5 1600. The delta of -0.1% versus the i5-11400 is negligible. This parity suggests that in CPU-bound scenarios, such as flying over dense cityscapes at 1080p, the Ryzen 5 3600 will perform on par with these alternatives. The 32 MB of shared L3 cache is a notable asset for flight simulation, as it helps retain frequently accessed terrain and aircraft data, reducing the need for slower memory fetches. The processor supports DDR4 memory with dual-channel configuration and 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, which is adequate for the game’s demands. Its 65 W TDP indicates efficient power use, but no power consumption numbers are available for the game itself. The benchmark results show that the CPU can drive frame rates up to 100.2 FPS at 1080p Low settings, proving it is not a limiting factor at that preset. However, at 1080p Ultra, the frame rate drops to 54.1 FPS, which is nearly identical to the 55.8 FPS at 1080p High, suggesting that the GPU is starting to take over the workload as settings increase. The data implies the CPU maintains consistent performance across settings, with the frame rate differences at 1080p being primarily attributable to GPU load.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT is based on the Navi 10 chip with RDNA 1.0 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm process. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU’s base clock is 1605 MHz, with a boost clock of 1905 MHz and a game clock of 1755 MHz. Its compute capabilities include 9.754 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and a pixel rate of 121.9 GPixel/s. The GPU’s benchmark scores are modest; its PassMark G3D score is 16,277, and its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 2,134. It ranks at the 68th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 24,731. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile at -0.1% delta, the Intel Arc A350M at 0.3% delta, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile at 0.6% delta, and the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 at 0.9% delta. This indicates the RX 5700 XT is a mid-range performer, slightly behind the RTX A5000 Mobile but ahead of the Arc A350M.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU’s role becomes increasingly critical as resolution and settings rise. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 31, which is below the 30 FPS threshold often considered playable, while at 4K High it achieves 36.8 FPS. The GPU’s 8 GB VRAM is sufficient for the game’s textures, but the data shows a clear performance cliff at higher settings. The frame rate at 1080p Ultra is 54.1 FPS, which is 46% lower than the 100.2 FPS at 1080p Low. This steep drop is directly attributable to the GPU’s rendering load, as the CPU’s performance remains constant. The RX 5700 XT’s 448.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is a limiting factor at 4K, where the game requires more data throughput. The GPU’s DirectX 12 PassMark score of 64 is low, but the game’s performance suggests it relies more on raw rasterization power. The 64 ROPs and 160 TMUs provide adequate fill rates for the game’s geometry, but the 9.754 TFLOPS is insufficient for the highest settings at 4K without significant frame rate drops.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides clear guidance for optimal settings. At 1080p, the Low preset delivers 100.2 FPS, which is exceptionally smooth, while the Medium preset achieves 76.3 FPS, still highly playable. The High preset drops to 55.8 FPS, and Ultra falls to 54.1 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra at 1080p is minimal (1.7 FPS), but the jump from Medium to High costs 20.5 FPS. For a balance of visual quality and performance at 1080p, the Medium preset is the sweet spot, offering over 76 FPS while maintaining acceptable visual fidelity. The High preset is also viable if the user prefers better graphics, as 55.8 FPS is still fluid for a flight simulator.

At 1440p, the Low preset yields 76.4 FPS, which is excellent, while Medium provides 61.9 FPS and High drops to 46.5 FPS. The Ultra preset is borderline at 43.4 FPS, which may be acceptable for slower-paced flight but is not ideal. The Medium preset at 1440p is recommended for a smooth experience, as it maintains above 60 FPS. The High preset is playable but with noticeable frame rate dips. At 4K, the Low preset is the only option that provides a playable experience at 59.2 FPS. The Medium preset at 45.8 FPS is marginal, and High at 36.8 FPS and Ultra at 31 FPS are not recommended for consistent gameplay. The data indicates that for this combination of CPU and GPU, the Low preset is the best choice for 4K, Medium is ideal for 1440p, and Medium or High works well at 1080p depending on the user’s preference for visual quality over frame rate. The Ultra preset is only suitable at 1080p, where it still manages 54.1 FPS, but the visual gains over High are minimal.

FAQ

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

A: Based on the measured FPS, 1440p with the Medium preset offers a balanced experience at 61.9 FPS. At 1080p, the Medium preset achieves 76.3 FPS, while at 4K, only the Low preset is playable at 59.2 FPS.

Q: How does the Ryzen 5 3600 compare to its closest rival, the Intel Core i5-11400?

A: The Ryzen 5 3600 has an average benchmark score of 18,129, which is -0.1% lower than the Intel Core i5-11400’s score of 18,150. This difference is negligible, indicating nearly identical CPU performance.

Q: Is 8 GB of VRAM on the RX 5700 XT sufficient for this game?

A: The 8 GB GDDR6 memory with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth is adequate, but the frame rate drops significantly at 4K Ultra (31 FPS) suggest that VRAM capacity or bandwidth may contribute to the performance ceiling at higher settings.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1080p, the Low preset delivers 100.2 FPS, while the Ultra preset delivers 54.1 FPS, a difference of 46.1 FPS, or a 46% reduction in performance when switching to the highest settings.

Q: How does the GPU rank against the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile?

A: The RX 5700 XT has an average benchmark score of 24,731, which is -0.1% lower than the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile’s score of 24,763. This places the two GPUs at nearly identical performance levels.

Q: What is the combo’s overall ranking in this game?

A: This specific CPU and GPU combination ranks 1,376 out of 1,795 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the lower-middle portion of the performance spectrum.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases from 1080p to 4K. At the Low preset, frame rates drop from 100.2 FPS at 1080p to 76.4 FPS at 1440p, a 23.8% decrease, and then to 59.2 FPS at 4K, another 22.5% decrease from 1440p. The total drop from 1080p to 4K at Low settings is 41 FPS, or 40.9%. At the Medium preset, the frame rates are 76.3 FPS at 1080p, 61.9 FPS at 1440p, and 45.8 FPS at 4K, representing a 39.9% total reduction. The High preset shows 55.8 FPS at 1080p, 46.5 FPS at 1440p, and 36.8 FPS at 4K, a 34% total drop. The Ultra preset follows a similar trend: 54.1 FPS at 1080p, 43.4 FPS at 1440p, and 31 FPS at 4K, a 42.7% reduction.

These scaling patterns reveal that the GPU is the primary limiting component, as the frame rate drops are directly proportional to the increase in pixel count. The CPU’s performance remains constant across resolutions, but the GPU’s rendering workload increases exponentially with resolution. The RX 5700 XT’s 448.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 9.754 TFLOPS are insufficient to maintain high frame rates at 4K, particularly at higher settings. The fact that the Low preset at 4K still delivers 59.2 FPS, close to the 60 FPS target, indicates that the GPU can handle the game if texture and shading loads are reduced. Conversely, the Ultra preset at 4K drops to 31 FPS, which is a 69% reduction from the 1080p Ultra score of 54.1 FPS. This suggests that the GPU’s compute resources are saturated at 4K with high settings. The data also shows that the gap between 1080p and 1440p is smaller than the gap between 1440p and 4K, with average drops of 22.5% and 25.6% respectively across all settings, implying that the GPU’s performance scales non-linearly with resolution. The limiting component is clearly the GPU, as the CPU’s performance is consistent and would not cause such significant frame rate variations across resolutions.