Microsoft Flight Simulator

Resolution Scaling

Microsoft Flight Simulator presents a demanding workload that scales predictably across the three tested resolutions. At 1080p with Low settings, the AMD Ryzen 5 5600 and Radeon RX 7700 XT combination delivers 134.4 FPS average. Moving to 1440p drops that to 110.1 FPS, a 24.3 FPS reduction, while 4K at Low yields 80.5 FPS—a further 29.6 FPS decline. This pattern indicates that even at the lowest quality preset, the rendering load grows substantially with pixel count, though the frame rates remain highly playable across all resolutions.

The High preset tells a more constrained story. At 1080p, the combo produces 81.9 FPS. At 1440p, that falls to 67.2 FPS, and at 4K, it bottoms out at 48 FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 4K here represents a 33.9 FPS drop, a 41.4% reduction from the starting point. This steeper decline compared to Low settings suggests that the additional graphical features in High amplify the GPU workload more aggressively as resolution increases.

Ultra settings compress the range further. The measured results show 74.6 FPS at 1080p, 61 FPS at 1440p, and 45.9 FPS at 4K. The gap between 1080p and 4K is 28.7 FPS. Notably, the 4K Ultra result of 45.9 FPS is the lowest frame rate recorded in the entire dataset, and it sits just barely above the 45 FPS threshold that many flight sim enthusiasts consider acceptable for smooth panning over dense scenery.

The Medium preset offers the most balanced scaling curve. At 1080p it hits 109.3 FPS, at 1440p it drops to 86.4 FPS, and at 4K it manages 59.9 FPS. The 1080p-to-4K delta is 49.4 FPS, which is the largest absolute drop across all presets. This suggests that Medium settings still rely heavily on the GPU's fill rate and bandwidth, and the RX 7700 XT's 192-bit memory interface becomes a limiting factor as pixel throughput demands escalate.

Overall, the data reveals that the limiting component shifts depending on the preset. At Low settings, the CPU likely plays a more significant role in capping frame rates at lower resolutions, evidenced by the relatively modest 53.9 FPS difference between 1080p Low and 4K Low. At High and Ultra, the GPU's rendering capabilities become the dominant constraint, with the frame rate deltas across resolutions narrowing as the graphics pipeline saturates.

GPU Role

The Radeon RX 7700 XT brings 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, yielding 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. In Microsoft Flight Simulator, which streams vast terrain and photogrammetry data, memory capacity and bandwidth are critical. The 12 GB allocation appears sufficient at 1080p and 1440p across all presets, as the frame rates remain consistent with what the GPU's compute capabilities would suggest. At 4K, however, the combination of higher resolution textures and the sim's asset streaming may push closer to the memory ceiling, contributing to the sub-60 FPS results at High and Ultra.

The GPU's clock behavior is noteworthy. The base clock of 1435 MHz, game clock of 2171 MHz, and boost clock of 2544 MHz indicate a wide operational range. The measured FPS results suggest that the card sustains higher clocks during less demanding scenes, such as open water or high-altitude cruise, but may throttle closer to the game clock during dense urban flyovers or heavy weather effects. The 35.17 TFLOPS FP32 throughput provides ample raw compute for the sim's physics and rendering calculations.

Comparing the RX 7700 XT to its nearest rivals in the benchmark database, the data shows a virtual tie with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060, where the deltaPct is 0. The AMD Radeon RX 570 also sits within 0.2% of the RX 7700 XT's average score, though that comparison is misleading given the generational gap. The NVIDIA Tesla M60 trails by 0.4%, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Mobile is 0.6% behind. These tight margins indicate that the RX 7700 XT occupies a well-populated performance tier, and its position in the 73rd percentile of all GPUs reflects solid but not exceptional standing.

The GPU's 96 ROPs and 216 TMUs deliver a pixel rate of 244.2 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 549.5 GTexel/s. In Microsoft Flight Simulator, where ground textures and cloud layers demand heavy texture filtering, the texture rate is particularly relevant. The measured frame rates at Medium and High presets suggest that the card handles these workloads competently, though the 4K Ultra result of 45.9 FPS indicates that the pixel fill rate becomes strained when all quality features are enabled.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600 provides six cores and twelve threads based on the Zen 3 architecture, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. The 32 MB shared L3 cache is advantageous for flight simulators, which often exhibit working sets that benefit from larger caches. The CPU's single-thread performance, as evidenced by the 3DMark single-thread score of 882 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2584, is crucial for the sim's main thread, which handles cockpit systems, AI traffic, and flight dynamics.

The processor's multi-threaded capabilities are less critical for Microsoft Flight Simulator, which primarily scales with single-thread performance. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 18309 shows strong overall throughput, but the game's architecture means that the CPU's six cores are often not fully utilized. The 3DMark 2-thread score of 1737 and 4-thread score of 3313 indicate that the CPU excels in lightly-threaded workloads, which aligns well with the sim's requirements.

When paired with the RX 7700 XT, the Ryzen 5 5600 appears to keep pace adequately at lower resolutions. At 1080p Low, the 134.4 FPS result is high enough to suggest that the CPU is not the primary bottleneck at that setting. However, the gap between 1080p Low and 1440p Low (134.4 vs 110.1 FPS) is 24.3 FPS, which is larger than the gap between 1440p Low and 4K Low (110.1 vs 80.5 FPS, a 29.6 FPS difference). This non-linear scaling hints that the CPU may begin to limit performance at 1080p, where the GPU has more headroom.

The CPU's percentile ranking of 79 among all CPUs places it in the upper quintile, and its average benchmark score of 21765 puts it in close competition with several server-class processors. The nearest rival, Intel Xeon D-1746TER, scores 21635, a 0.6% delta, while the AMD EPYC 9554P and EPYC 9534 both score 21899 and 21900 respectively, trailing by 0.6%. The Intel Core i7-11700F leads slightly with 21957, a 0.9% advantage. These comparisons underscore that the Ryzen 5 5600's compute capabilities are well-matched to its mainstream desktop positioning.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 5600 and AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT ranks 765th out of 1795 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the 42.6th percentile of all combinations in the database, meaning roughly 57% of tested systems perform better in this specific title. Given that the CPU ranks in the 79th percentile and the GPU in the 73rd percentile individually, the combo's lower relative ranking suggests that Microsoft Flight Simulator's unique performance characteristics—particularly its reliance on single-thread CPU performance and large memory bandwidth—may not favor this pairing as strongly as other games.

The data indicates that the combo's ranking is dragged down by the CPU's position relative to other processors in the database. While the Ryzen 5 5600 offers solid single-thread performance, many higher-ranked combos likely feature newer CPUs with higher boost clocks or additional cache. The GPU's 73rd percentile ranking is respectable, but in a sim where frame rates at 4K Ultra dip below 46 FPS, the overall experience may not match what higher-tier GPUs deliver.

Examining the measured frame rates against the combo's rank provides context. The 1080p Ultra result of 74.6 FPS and 1440p Ultra result of 61 FPS are playable, but the 4K Ultra result of 45.9 FPS falls short of the 60 FPS target that many users prefer for a smooth experience. The fact that this combo sits in the lower half of the database rankings for this game suggests that users seeking consistently high frame rates at 4K with maximum settings would need to look at higher-performing components.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal experience depends heavily on the target resolution. At 1080p, the High preset delivers 81.9 FPS, which is smooth and visually rich. The Ultra preset drops to 74.6 FPS, a 7.3 FPS reduction that may not justify the additional graphical fidelity for most users. The Medium preset at 109.3 FPS offers a significant frame rate buffer, making it a strong choice for users who prioritize consistency over maximum visual quality.

For 1440p, the High preset at 67.2 FPS provides a good balance between visual fidelity and performance. The Ultra preset at 61 FPS is also viable, though it leaves less headroom for demanding scenes such as busy airports or complex weather systems. The Medium preset at 86.4 FPS is the safest recommendation for users who want to ensure the frame rate never dips below playable levels during heavy streaming scenarios.

At 4K, the situation becomes more constrained. The High preset at 48 FPS is borderline, while the Ultra preset at 45.9 FPS is likely too low for a satisfying experience. The Medium preset at 59.9 FPS is the clear recommendation for 4K users, as it approaches the 60 FPS threshold while still providing reasonable visual quality. The Low preset at 80.5 FPS is an option for users who prioritize frame rate over everything, but the visual compromise may be significant for a game that relies heavily on atmospheric and terrain detail.

Overall, the data suggests that the Medium preset offers the best combination of frame rate stability and visual quality across all three resolutions. At 1080p and 1440p, users can comfortably step up to High or Ultra if they prefer, but for 4K, Medium is the highest setting that maintains acceptable performance. The 12 GB VRAM and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth of the RX 7700 XT are sufficient for Medium settings at 4K, but the GPU's compute throughput limits higher presets at that resolution.