Microsoft Flight Simulator

# GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT brings 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth. With a base clock of 2321 MHz, a game clock of 2424 MHz, and a boost clock of 2581 MHz, this RDNA 2.0 part (Navi 22 chip) is positioned to handle demanding flight simulation workloads. The GPU's 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units suggest a design that can push substantial pixel and texture throughput — the pixel rate is 165.2 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 413.0 GTexel/s.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the VRAM allocation matters significantly because the game streams vast amounts of terrain, photogrammetry, and aircraft detail. The 12 GB frame buffer is ample for the tested settings, as evidenced by the measured frame rates staying consistent across the resolution ladder. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 40, while at 4K High it is 42 — a narrow 2 FPS gap that hints the GPU is not running out of memory but rather hitting compute or bandwidth limits. The 384.0 GB/s bandwidth is a key constraint at higher resolutions; the data shows a clear drop from 1080p to 4K across all settings, which aligns with bandwidth becoming a bottleneck when pixel count quadruples.

The GPU's 13.21 TFLOPS FP32 performance is the raw compute ceiling, but flight simulators rely heavily on draw calls, terrain LOD transitions, and physics — factors that stress both the GPU's geometry pipeline and the CPU's ability to feed it. The RX 6700 XT's 40 ray tracing cores are present, but the game's rendering engine does not appear to leverage them heavily based on the measured results; the focus is on traditional rasterization throughput. The 7 nm process from TSMC, with 17,200 million transistors on a 335 mm² die, gives this GPU a solid transistor density of 51.3M per mm², which translates to efficient power delivery for sustained flight sessions.

The GPU's percentile rank against all GPUs is 72, indicating it sits above the median in overall compute capability. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile (0% delta), the RTX 3090 (-0.5%), the RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell (1.1%), and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 (-1.5%) — showing that the RX 6700 XT is statistically a peer of the RTX 4070 Mobile and RTX 3090 in aggregate benchmarks, though flight sim performance will diverge based on driver optimization and memory subsystem behavior.

# Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

The measured data provides clear guidance for optimizing the experience in Microsoft Flight Simulator with this combo. At 1080p, the Low preset delivers 121 FPS average, which is exceptionally smooth for a flight sim — likely because terrain detail and object density are reduced, easing the CPU load. Medium at 1080p yields 94 FPS, still well above the 60 FPS threshold, while High drops to 71 FPS and Ultra to 67 FPS. The jump from Medium to High costs 23 FPS (from 94 to 71), which is a 24.5% reduction, while High to Ultra only costs 4 FPS (71 to 67). This suggests that High is the sweet spot at 1080p — it maintains playable frame rates while providing substantially more visual fidelity than Medium, and Ultra's extra 4 FPS cost may not justify the marginal visual gains for most users.

At 1440p, the pattern shifts. Low gives 97 FPS, Medium 76 FPS, High 57 FPS, and Ultra 54 FPS. The Medium to High drop is 19 FPS (25% reduction), which is steeper than at 1080p. Here, Medium is the recommended preset — it provides 76 FPS, comfortably above 60, and the visual improvement over Low is significant for terrain clarity. High at 57 FPS is playable but borders on the edge of smoothness for a flight sim where panning the camera can feel less fluid below 60.

At 4K, the situation becomes more constrained. Low delivers 72 FPS, Medium 56 FPS, High 42 FPS, and Ultra 40 FPS. The data shows that Low is the only preset that maintains a 60+ FPS average at 4K. Medium at 56 FPS is playable, but the jump to High (42 FPS) and Ultra (40 FPS) is substantial — a 25% drop from Medium to High. For 4K users, the recommendation is Medium if visual quality is a priority, or Low if smoothness is paramount. The Ultra preset at 40 FPS is only 2 FPS below High, suggesting that the GPU is so heavily loaded that the extra settings in Ultra do not add much cost relative to the already-stressed High preset.

Across all resolutions, the Medium preset offers the most balanced experience — it consistently stays within striking distance of 60 FPS or above at 1080p and 1440p, and it provides the only 4K option with a min FPS of 47 (the only preset with min/max data). The measured min FPS values for Medium are 80 at 1080p, 64 at 1440p, and 47 at 4K, which indicate that even the worst-case frames are respectable. The absence of min/max data for other presets in the pack means the Medium preset is the only one where frame pacing can be fully assessed.

# How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific pairing of the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D and the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT achieves a combo rank of 1524 out of 2996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. That places it in the 49th percentile of all tested configurations — essentially dead center in the field. This is a notable result because the individual components rank higher in isolation: the CPU sits at the 85th percentile against all CPUs, and the GPU at the 72nd percentile against all GPUs. The combination underperforms relative to what the individual parts might suggest, implying that flight sim's specific workload demands something this pairing does not fully deliver.

The CPU's nearest rivals in aggregate benchmarks — the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F (0.2% delta), AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 (-0.2%), Intel Core Ultra 5 225 (0.2%), and Intel Core i9-12900T (-0.3%) — all score within 0.3% of the 5500X3D, so CPU choice is unlikely to be the differentiator. The GPU's nearest rivals (RTX 4070 Mobile at 0%, RTX 3090 at -0.5%, RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell at 1.1%, and Radeon Pro Vega 20 at -1.5%) also show that the RX 6700 XT is a mid-pack performer. The combo rank of 1524 suggests that many other pairings — likely those with higher-tier GPUs or CPUs with more cores — achieve better frame rates in this simulator.

The data implies that while this combo is competent, it does not excel in Microsoft Flight Simulator. The 6-core, 12-thread CPU with 96 MB of L3 cache (from the 3D V-Cache technology, though the pack does not specify vCache explicitly) should help with the sim's single-threaded draw call bottleneck, but the overall rank indicates that the GPU's 72nd percentile standing is not enough to push the combo higher. The 2996 total combos span a wide range of hardware; being at 1524 means there are 1472 combos that perform better and 1471 that perform worse — a perfectly balanced result that speaks to the mid-range nature of this pairing.

# Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS values are: Low 121, Medium 94, High 71, and Ultra 67. The Medium preset has min/max values of 80 and 108 FPS, respectively, giving a 28 FPS spread between the lowest and highest frames. This spread is substantial — it suggests that in busy scenes with dense scenery or complex weather, the frame rate can dip to 80, but it also shows headroom to reach 108 in lighter moments. The Low to Medium drop is 27 FPS (22.3% reduction), Medium to High is 23 FPS (24.5%), and High to Ultra is 4 FPS (5.6%). The Ultra preset's 67 FPS is still above 60, but barely.

At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low 97, Medium 76, High 57, and Ultra 54. The Medium preset shows min/max of 64 and 87 FPS, a 23 FPS spread. The Low to Medium drop is 21 FPS (21.6%), Medium to High is 19 FPS (25.0%), and High to Ultra is 3 FPS (5.3%). The High preset at 57 FPS falls below the 60 FPS threshold, which many users consider the minimum for smooth flight simulation where camera movement and instrument scanning are frequent. The Ultra at 54 FPS is only 3 FPS lower, so the High and Ultra presets are nearly indistinguishable in performance at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the averages are: Low 72, Medium 56, High 42, and Ultra 40. The Medium preset has min/max of 47 and 64 FPS, a 17 FPS spread. The Low to Medium drop is 16 FPS (22.2%), Medium to High is 14 FPS (25.0%), and High to Ultra is 2 FPS (4.8%). The pattern is consistent: the Medium to High transition costs about 25% across all resolutions, while the High to Ultra transition costs only 5-6%. This consistency suggests that the High to Ultra difference is a minor set of visual enhancements, while the Medium to High jump involves significant rendering changes that roughly quadruple the GPU load — likely shadows, reflections, or terrain detail settings that scale with resolution.

# Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The resolution scaling reveals important bottleneck information. From 1080p to 1440p (a 1.78x pixel increase), the FPS drops are: Low from 121 to 97 (19.8% decrease), Medium from 94 to 76 (19.1%), High from 71 to 57 (19.7%), and Ultra from 67 to 54 (19.4%). The near-uniform ~20% drop across all settings indicates that the scaling is primarily driven by pixel fill rate and memory bandwidth, not by compute or CPU limitations — the GPU's 165.2 GPixel/s pixel rate and 384.0 GB/s bandwidth are being taxed proportionally.

From 1440p to 4K (a 2.25x pixel increase), the FPS drops are: Low from 97 to 72 (25.8% decrease), Medium from 76 to 56 (26.3%), High from 57 to 42 (26.3%), and Ultra from 54 to 40 (25.9%). Again, the drop is uniform at ~26%, regardless of settings. This uniformity is telling: if the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect the FPS to scale less steeply at higher resolutions because the CPU's workload (draw calls, physics) is resolution-independent. Instead, the consistent ~20-26% drops suggest the GPU is the primary limiter at all settings.

However, the absolute FPS values tell a more nuanced story. At 1080p Low, 121 FPS is achieved, which is a high frame rate that flight sims can rarely sustain due to CPU overhead. The fact that it reaches 121 at 1080p Low suggests the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU at that rate, but as settings increase, the GPU becomes the constraint. The 96 MB L3 cache on the CPU likely helps with the sim's asset streaming, reducing stutter but not increasing peak FPS. The data implies that this combo is GPU-bound at 1440p and above, while at 1080p Low, the CPU still has headroom — the 121 FPS is likely near the CPU's draw call limit, but the GPU could handle more if the CPU could deliver it.

# FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

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

A: At 1080p Medium, the combo achieves 94 FPS average with a min of 80 FPS, which is the best balance of smoothness and visual quality. At 1440p Medium, it drops to 76 FPS with a min of 64 FPS — still playable. At 4K, only Low (72 FPS) exceeds 60 FPS, so 1080p or 1440p Medium is recommended.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in aggregate benchmarks?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D has an average benchmark score of 37018. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450, scores 37093 (0.2% higher), while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 scores 36938 (0.2% lower). The Intel Core i9-12900T is 0.3% higher at 37112, and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F is 0.2% lower at 36945.

Q: What is the GPU's aggregate performance level relative to all GPUs?

A: The RX 6700 XT has a percentile rank of 72 against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 27425. It is statistically tied with the RTX 4070 Mobile (27435, 0% delta) and within 0.5% of the RTX 3090 (27565, -0.5% delta).

Q: How much FPS does Ultra cost compared to High at each resolution?

A: At 1080p, Ultra is 4 FPS lower than High (67 vs 71). At 1440p, it is 3 FPS lower (54 vs 57). At 4K, it is 2 FPS lower (40 vs 42). The cost of Ultra is minimal — under 6% — across all resolutions.

Q: What is the combo's rank among all tested configurations in this game?

A: The combo ranks 1524 out of 2996 tested combos, placing it at the 49th percentile. This means it outperforms slightly less than half of all configurations tested in Microsoft Flight Simulator.

Q: Does the Medium preset have frame pacing data, and what does it show?

A: Yes, Medium is the only preset with min and max FPS data. At 1080p, it ranges from 80 to 108 FPS; at 1440p, from 64 to 87; at 4K, from 47 to 64. The spread narrows at higher resolutions (28 FPS at 1080p down to 17 FPS at 4K), indicating more consistent frame delivery as the GPU becomes fully saturated.

# CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D is a 6-core, 12-thread processor from the 5000 series, built on the Zen 3 architecture (Vermeer codename) using a 7 nm process from TSMC. Its base clock is 3.00 GHz with a boost clock of 4.00 GHz, and it carries a 105 W TDP. The defining feature is the 96 MB shared L3 cache — a massive pool that flight simulators can exploit for terrain and object data. The L1 cache is 64 KB per core and L2 is 512 KB per core. This CPU is not multiplier-unlocked, meaning its clock behavior is fixed by AMD's specifications.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is critical for draw call submission, physics calculations, and AI traffic management. The 6 cores with 12 threads provide enough parallelism for the sim's multi-threaded subsystems, but the single-thread performance — measured at 2941 in PassMark single-thread tests — is what drives the 121 FPS at 1080p Low. The CPU's aggregate benchmark score is 37018 with a percentile rank of 85, indicating it outperforms 85% of all CPUs in general computing tasks. Its nearest rivals all score within 0.3%, showing that this is a tightly competitive segment.

The data suggests that the CPU is not the primary bottleneck in this combo for higher settings. As the GPU load increases with resolution and quality presets, the FPS scales down uniformly, which is the signature of a GPU-bound scenario. However, the 121 FPS ceiling at 1080p Low hints at a CPU limit — the sim's physics and terrain streaming cannot exceed that rate with this processor, regardless of how much GPU headroom exists. The 96 MB L3 cache likely helps maintain consistent frame pacing by reducing memory latency for frequently accessed flight data, but it does not raise the absolute frame rate ceiling.

The CPU's memory support is DDR4 with dual-channel configuration, delivering 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth. ECC memory is supported, which is unusual for a desktop chip and suggests a workstation heritage. The PCIe Gen 4 interface with 20 lanes (CPU only) provides ample bandwidth for the GPU's PCIe 4.0 x16 connection, eliminating any potential PCIe bottleneck. The CPU was released on 2025-06-04 and is still in active production, making it a current-generation option for AM4 socket users. Its PassMark multithread score of 20363 and floating point math score of 34511 indicate strong compute capabilities, but flight sim's reliance on single-threaded performance (score of 2941) is what ultimately constrains the 1080p Low ceiling.