Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is a notoriously demanding title, and the pairing of the AMD Ryzen 5 4600G with the AMD Radeon RX 9060 lands in the lower-middle tier of tested configurations. With a combo rank of 1712 out of 2996 tested combinations, this system sits in the 57th percentile of all tested hardware pairings for this specific simulation. The data indicates a setup that can achieve playable frame rates, but it requires careful attention to graphical presets and resolution to maintain a smooth experience, as the hardware is clearly not positioned for high-refresh-rate or max-settings gameplay.

How This Combo Ranks

The benchmark results place this CPU and GPU pairing at rank 1712 out of 2996 total tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This positioning suggests that while the system is capable of running the game, it is outmatched by a significant portion of the tested hardware field. The rank reflects a balance point where neither component is a top-tier performer, resulting in a configuration that is more suited to medium or high settings at 1080p rather than chasing ultimate visual fidelity.

The CPU, the AMD Ryzen 5 4600G, holds a percentile rank of 71 against all tested CPUs, indicating it is a solid mid-range processor. Its average benchmark score of 17507 places it in close competition with several other chips, such as the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE (scoring 17482, a 0.1% difference) and the Intel Core 7 150U (scoring 17395, a 0.6% difference). It is also slightly behind the AMD Ryzen 3 8300GE and Intel Core i3-14100T, which score 17614 and 17648 respectively, showing a performance delta of -0.6% and -0.8%. This indicates the 4600G is a competent, if not class-leading, processor.

On the graphics side, the AMD Radeon RX 9060 sits at the 59th percentile against all tested GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 16014. Its nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, which scores 16129, a delta of -0.7%, meaning the RX 9060 is slightly behind. It also trades blows with the AMD Radeon R9 370X and AMD Radeon RX 7700, which score 15862 and 15852 respectively, putting the RX 9060 ahead by 1.0% in both cases. This data points to a GPU that offers performance comparable to a previous-generation mid-range card, defining its capability ceiling in a demanding title like Flight Simulator.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 4600G is built on the Zen 2 architecture with the Renoir codename and features 6 cores and 12 threads. Its base clock is 3.70 GHz, which can boost up to 4.20 GHz. For a simulation game like Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known for heavy single-thread and multi-thread usage, this processor provides a reasonable foundation. The data shows a single-thread score of 1919 in Cinebench R23 and a multicore score of 13593, indicating a balanced performance profile.

The CPU's memory support is dual-channel DDR4 with a bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. This is a critical factor for a simulation that constantly streams terrain and aircraft data. The 8 MB of shared L3 cache is modest by modern standards, but the processor's performance in synthetic benchmarks, such as a Passmark multithread score of 15992, suggests it can handle the game's complex flight models and AI traffic without becoming the primary bottleneck at lower resolutions. Its performance in the 3DMark tests, particularly the 16-thread score of 4863, reinforces its capability in multi-threaded workloads.

However, the processor's position relative to its nearest rivals, such as the Intel Core i3-14100T (avg score 17648) and AMD Ryzen 3 8300GE (avg score 17614), shows it is not a top-tier performer. While it is slightly faster than the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE and Intel Core 7 150U, the margins are thin. In practical terms, this means the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU at 1080p, but as resolution increases, the load shifts more to the graphics card, which is where the system's limitations become more apparent.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 is the graphics powerhouse in this combo, built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture with the Navi 44 chip. It comes equipped with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s. The GPU has a base clock of 1700 MHz, a game clock of 2400 MHz, and a boost clock of 2990 MHz. This specification set positions the card as a capable 1080p and 1440p performer, but its 8 GB VRAM buffer could be a limiting factor at higher resolutions with ultra textures.

The GPU's 1792 shading units and 64 ROPs give it a pixel rate of 191.4 GPixel/s, while its FP32 performance is 21.43 TFLOPS. In synthetic benchmarks, it scores 17631 in Passmark G3D and 3322 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. These scores place it in direct competition with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, which has an average score of 16129. The RX 9060 is slightly behind that card by 0.7%, but it is ahead of older cards like the AMD Radeon R9 370X and the Radeon RX 7700 by 1.0%. This performance level explains why the combo achieves playable, but not spectacular, frame rates in Flight Simulator.

The GPU's memory bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s is adequate for the textures used in the game, but the 8 GB capacity can be a constraint. The benchmark data shows that at 4K Ultra settings, the average FPS drops to 37, which suggests the GPU is struggling with the combined load of high resolution and high detail. The 28 RT cores are available for ray tracing, but the performance impact in this title is likely significant, and the data does not suggest that ray tracing is a viable option for this card if smooth frame rates are a priority.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a detailed look at the combo's performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the system shows its strongest results. With Low settings, the average FPS is 111, which is very playable. Medium settings yield an average of 86 FPS, with a minimum of 73 and a maximum of 99. High settings drop the average to 65 FPS, and Ultra settings bring it down further to 62 FPS. These numbers indicate that 1080p is the sweet spot for this hardware, allowing for high refresh rate monitors to be utilized at lower presets.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance takes a noticeable hit. Low settings produce an average of 89 FPS, which is still smooth. Medium settings average 69 FPS, with a minimum of 59 and a maximum of 80. High settings lower the average to 52 FPS, and Ultra settings dip to 50 FPS. The data shows that 1440p is viable for Medium settings, but High and Ultra presets will result in a less consistent experience, especially during busy airport scenes or over dense urban areas.

At 3840x2160, the system is pushed to its limit. Low settings manage an average of 66 FPS, which is playable. Medium settings average 51 FPS, with a minimum of 44 and a maximum of 59. High settings drop to 39 FPS, and Ultra settings are the most demanding, yielding an average of just 37 FPS. These results clearly show that 4K gaming is only feasible with Low or Medium settings, and even then, the frame rate can dip into the 40s, which is not ideal for a flight simulator where smoothness is crucial for a realistic experience.

Resolution Scaling

The performance scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals the limiting component of this system. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 65 at 1080p to 52 at 1440p and finally to 39 at 4K. This represents a 40% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a further 25% drop from 1440p to 4K. This scaling pattern suggests that the GPU is becoming the primary bottleneck as resolution increases.

The same trend is visible at Low settings, where FPS goes from 111 at 1080p to 89 at 1440p and 66 at 4K. The drop from 1440p to 4K is 26%, which is substantial. However, the scaling from 1080p to 1440p is only 20%, which is less severe. This indicates that at lower settings, the CPU is still able to keep up reasonably well at 1440p, but the GPU's workload at 4K overwhelms it.

The data strongly points to the GPU as the limiting factor at higher resolutions. The CPU, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, appears to be sufficient to drive the game at 1080p and even 1440p, but the RX 9060's 8 GB of VRAM and its overall compute power are not enough to maintain high frame rates at 4K. The 288.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is also a potential constraint, as the game requires large amounts of texture data to be streamed quickly. For users with a 4K monitor, this combo is not recommended for high-detail gameplay.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this hardware combination depend heavily on the target resolution. For 1080p users, the data shows that High settings provide an average of 65 FPS, which is a good balance between visual quality and performance. Those with high refresh rate monitors can comfortably use Medium settings for an average of 86 FPS, or even Low settings for 111 FPS, to maximize smoothness. Ultra settings at 1080p reduce the average to 62 FPS, which is still playable but offers diminishing returns over High settings.

At 1440p, the best experience is found at Medium settings, which yield an average of 69 FPS with a minimum of 59 FPS. This preset provides a good balance, ensuring the frame rate stays above 60 FPS in most scenarios. High settings at 1440p drop the average to 52 FPS, which is playable but may feel less smooth during rapid maneuvers or when flying over complex scenery. Low settings are an option for those who prioritize frame rate above all else, with an average of 89 FPS.

For 4K resolution, the data suggests that Medium settings are the highest preset that can be considered, with an average of 51 FPS. This is a borderline playable experience, but the minimum FPS of 44 indicates that stutters are likely. Low settings at 4K provide a more comfortable margin, with an average of 66 FPS. High and Ultra settings at 4K are not recommended, as the average FPS falls to 39 and 37 respectively, which is too low for a satisfying simulation experience. Users with 4K displays should prioritize Low or Medium settings to maintain playability.