Microsoft Flight Simulator

The AMD Ryzen 5 4600G paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT presents a solid mid-range foundation for Microsoft Flight Simulator, a title notorious for its demanding simulation overhead. This analysis breaks down the measured performance data, focusing on how the CPU and GPU each influence the frame rates across common resolutions and presets. The combination ranks in the 50th percentile (897 out of 1795 tested combos), indicating a balanced pairing that delivers playable results, though the data reveals distinct bottlenecks depending on the settings and resolution chosen.

FAQ

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

A: At 1920x1080, the combo achieves its highest frame rates, with an average of 126 FPS on Low settings and 73.9 FPS on High. For a balance of visual quality and smoothness, 2560x1440 on Medium settings provides an average of 80.7 FPS, making it a strong choice.

Q: How does the GPU's VRAM capacity affect performance?

A: The GPU features 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. This capacity is sufficient for the high-resolution textures and detailed scenery in Microsoft Flight Simulator, preventing memory-related stutters at 3840x2160, where the GPU still manages 40.4 FPS on High settings.

Q: Is the CPU a bottleneck for this game?

A: The Ryzen 5 4600G has 6 cores and 12 threads, boosting up to 4.20 GHz. The data suggests it can keep up with the GPU at lower resolutions and settings, but at 1080p Ultra, the FPS drops to 67.9, indicating a potential CPU limitation on frame pacing in complex scenes.

Q: What is the difference in performance between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the average FPS jumps from 54.2 on Ultra to 101.3 on Low. This represents a significant performance headroom, allowing users to prioritize frame rate or visual fidelity depending on their preference.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to other tested systems?

A: The combination ranks 897 out of 1795 total combos, placing it near the middle of the database. This indicates it is a balanced mid-range setup, not a top-tier performer but capable of a good experience in this specific title.

Q: Does the CPU's integrated graphics matter for this game?

A: The CPU includes Radeon Vega 7 integrated graphics, but the system utilizes the discrete RX 6750 XT for rendering. The integrated GPU is irrelevant to the measured FPS, as the dedicated card handles all the graphical workload.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT is the primary driver of visual performance in this pairing. Its 12 GB of VRAM is a key asset, given Microsoft Flight Simulator's vast streaming world and high-resolution textures. The memory operates at 18 Gbps effective across a 192-bit bus, providing 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This bandwidth is crucial for feeding the GPU's 2560 shading units and 64 ROPs, especially at higher resolutions.

The GPU's clock speeds contribute to its capability. With a base clock of 2150 MHz and a boost up to 2600 MHz, the card sustains high throughput. The data shows that at 4K, the GPU's performance is the limiting factor. The average frame rate at 3840x2160 on High settings is 40.4 FPS, which is identical to the 40.3 FPS on Ultra. This plateau indicates that the GPU is fully saturated at this resolution, unable to translate the extra visual work in Ultra into a higher frame rate.

At lower resolutions, the GPU's power becomes more evident. At 1920x1080, the average FPS scales from 67.9 on Ultra to 126 on Low. This scaling shows that the RX 6750 XT has significant headroom at 1080p, making the CPU more relevant for achieving peak frame rates. The GPU's performance percentile of 79 places it above the majority of tested graphics cards, and its nearest rivals, including the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080, show it is a capable 1440p performer.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data points to a clear 'sweet spot' for this combination. At 2560x1440, the Medium preset delivers an average of 80.7 FPS, which is a strong result for a flight simulator where smoothness is often prioritized. This setting balances visual clarity and performance, avoiding the significant frame rate drop seen at Ultra (54.2 FPS).

For users with a 1080p monitor, the High preset is the recommended choice. It achieves an average of 73.9 FPS, which is well within the playable range for this genre. While Low settings push the average to 126 FPS, the visual compromise is substantial. The Ultra preset at 1080p (67.9 FPS) is playable but does not offer a significant enough advantage over High to justify the performance cost, suggesting a CPU limitation at this setting.

At 4K, the choices are more constrained. The Ultra and High presets yield nearly identical averages of 40.3 and 40.4 FPS, respectively. The Medium preset provides a more playable 60.2 FPS, making it the best option for 4K displays when using this hardware. The Low preset at 4K, at 74.6 FPS, shows that the GPU still has untapped potential if the visual load is reduced. For the best overall experience, prioritizing 1440p Medium or 1080p High provides the most balanced frame rates.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of the Ryzen 5 4600G and the RX 6750 XT holds a rank of 897 out of 1795 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it almost exactly at the median of all tested systems, indicating that it is a representative mid-range build. The ranking reflects a balance between the CPU's processing power and the GPU's rendering capability.

The CPU itself performs at the 75th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 17489. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-12450H and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE, with which it trades blows within a 1% margin. This shows the 4600G is a competent processor, but not a top-tier one. The GPU, at the 79th percentile, is slightly stronger relative to its peers, with rivals like the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 and AMD Radeon RX 5600M.

The mid-pack rank in-game suggests that while neither component is a weak link, the pairing also doesn't unlock exceptional performance. The system is likely constrained by the CPU's single-thread performance in simulation-heavy scenes, preventing the GPU from reaching its full potential at lower resolutions. This is a typical characteristic of mid-range builds in simulation titles.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 4600G, based on the Zen 2 architecture, provides the computational foundation for the simulation. With 6 cores and 12 threads, it offers sufficient multi-threading for the game's background tasks, but its single-thread performance is critical for the main simulation loop. The CPU's boost clock of 4.20 GHz is a key factor in this regard.

Benchmark data shows the CPU scores 1919 points in Cinebench R23 single-core, which is a modest figure. Its multi-core score of 13593 is more respectable, reflecting the benefit of its 12 threads. This disparity suggests that in Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's single-thread performance may become a limiting factor in scenarios with heavy AI traffic or complex scenery calculations.

The data supports this interpretation. At 1920x1080, the frame rate difference between High (73.9 FPS) and Ultra (67.9 FPS) is only 6 FPS, while the difference between Low (126 FPS) and High is 52.1 FPS. This indicates that as the graphical load increases, the CPU becomes a bottleneck, preventing the GPU from rendering frames as quickly as it could. The CPU's 8 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support are adequate, but they don't provide the bandwidth that higher-end CPUs offer.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a detailed look at the system's performance envelope.

3840x2160 (4K):

• Ultra: 40.3 FPS
• High: 40.4 FPS
• Medium: 60.2 FPS
• Low: 74.6 FPS

At 4K, the GPU is the dominant bottleneck. The Ultra and High settings produce nearly identical averages, showing that the card is maxed out. Medium is the most playable option, offering a 20 FPS improvement over High.

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Ultra: 54.2 FPS
• High: 59.4 FPS
• Medium: 80.7 FPS
• Low: 101.3 FPS

1440p is the resolution where this combo shines. The jump from High to Medium yields a 21.3 FPS increase, making Medium the best balance. The scaling from Low to Ultra shows a 47.1 FPS range, giving users clear control over performance versus fidelity.

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Ultra: 67.9 FPS
• High: 73.9 FPS
• Medium: 95.5 FPS
• Low: 126 FPS

At 1080p, the CPU begins to assert its influence. The Low preset achieves a high 126 FPS, but the gains from Medium to High are smaller, suggesting a CPU limit around the 70-95 FPS range. The difference between High and Ultra is a modest 6 FPS, indicating the CPU is holding back the GPU at this resolution and high settings.