Microsoft Flight Simulator

# FAQ

Q: What is the best average FPS this combo achieves in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The highest recorded average FPS is 172.9, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The same resolution at Ultra still delivers a strong 132.1 FPS, showing that even maxed-out settings remain highly playable.

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

A: The Ryzen 5 5600 scores an average benchmark of 21,765, which is 0.6% higher than the Intel Xeon D-1746TER (21,635) and 0.6% lower than the AMD EPYC 9554P (21,899). It also trails the AMD EPYC 9534 (21,900) by 0.6% and the Intel Core i7-11700F (21,957) by 0.9%.

Q: What is the GPU's percentile ranking among all tested graphics cards?

A: The RTX 4090 sits in the 91st percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 66,473. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA Tesla T4, scores 66,733, which is 0.4% higher, while the NVIDIA Tesla P40 trails by 0.5%.

Q: How much VRAM does the RTX 4090 have, and what memory type does it use?

A: The card features 24 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 384-bit bus, delivering a bandwidth of 1.01 TB/s. This large memory pool is particularly relevant for a flight simulator that loads extensive terrain and scenery data.

Q: What is the combo's ranking among all tested CPU+GPU combinations for this game?

A: The Ryzen 5 5600 + RTX 4090 combo ranks 80th out of 1,795 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the top 4.5% of all configurations tested.

Q: How does the CPU's single-thread performance compare to its multi-thread performance?

A: In Cinebench R23, the CPU scores 2,584 in single-core and 18,309 in multi-core, a ratio of roughly 7.1x. This indicates strong single-thread performance, which is critical for flight simulators that often rely heavily on a few cores.

# Settings Recommendations

The measured data reveals a clear hierarchy across settings presets. At 1920x1080, the jump from Low (172.9 FPS) to Medium (156.3 FPS) costs only 16.6 FPS, but the step from Medium to High (135.1 FPS) drops another 21.2 FPS. Interestingly, the gap between High and Ultra (132.1 FPS) is just 3.0 FPS, suggesting diminishing returns at the top end.

At 2560x1440, the pattern shifts. Low delivers 162.1 FPS, Medium drops to 146.3 FPS, and High falls to 109.7 FPS. The most significant penalty occurs between Medium and High, a loss of 36.6 FPS. Ultra (101.4 FPS) is only 8.3 FPS behind High, again showing that the Ultra preset's additional demands yield minimal visual benefit per frame.

For 3840x2160, the differences become more pronounced. Low runs at 136.4 FPS, Medium at 106.2 FPS, and High at 76.4 FPS. Ultra (74.6 FPS) is nearly identical to High, with just 1.8 FPS separating them. This suggests that at 4K, the Ultra preset's extra effects are largely GPU-bound and offer little return.

The data indicates that Medium at 1080p (156.3 FPS) or 1440p (146.3 FPS) provides the best balance, as both maintain frame rates above 145 FPS while offering improved visual fidelity over Low. At 4K, High (76.4 FPS) is the sweet spot, since Ultra gains only 1.8 FPS over High while imposing a heavier load. For players prioritizing maximum smoothness, Low at any resolution remains viable, but Medium appears to be the optimal compromise across the board.

# Resolution Scaling

The FPS progression from 1080p to 4K reveals how this combination scales with resolution. At High settings, the frame rate drops from 135.1 FPS at 1920x1080 to 109.7 FPS at 2560x1440, a 25.4 FPS reduction, then further to 76.4 FPS at 3840x2160, another 33.3 FPS loss. This represents a 43.4% total decrease from 1080p to 4K.

The Low preset shows a similar but less steep curve: 172.9 FPS at 1080p, 162.1 FPS at 1440p, and 136.4 FPS at 4K. The 4K-to-1080p ratio here is 0.79, meaning 4K retains 79% of the 1080p performance. In contrast, the High preset's 4K-to-1080p ratio is 0.57, indicating that higher settings amplify the resolution penalty.

Medium settings tell an interesting story: 156.3 FPS at 1080p, 146.3 FPS at 1440p, and 106.2 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1440p to 4K is a steep 40.1 FPS, while the 1080p-to-1440p loss is only 10.0 FPS. This suggests that the GPU begins to bottleneck significantly at 4K with Medium settings, while the CPU maintains adequate headroom.

Ultra settings follow the same trend: 132.1 FPS, 101.4 FPS, and 74.6 FPS across the three resolutions. The 1440p-to-4K drop (26.8 FPS) is larger than the 1080p-to-1440p drop (30.7 FPS). The scaling pattern indicates that while the RTX 4090 is powerful, Microsoft Flight Simulator's rendering complexity at 4K with higher presets pushes the GPU to its limits, and the CPU's role diminishes as resolution increases.

# How This Combo Ranks

With a rank of 80 out of 1,795 tested combinations, this pairing sits comfortably in the top percentile of all configurations evaluated for Microsoft Flight Simulator. The rank reflects the synergy between the Ryzen 5 5600's strong single-thread performance and the RTX 4090's massive rendering capabilities.

The CPU's synthetic scores provide context for this ranking. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,584 and multi-core score of 18,309 suggest that it can feed the GPU effectively at lower resolutions, where the CPU often becomes the limiting factor. The 3DMark results reinforce this: the max-thread score of 5,659 and single-thread score of 882 indicate balanced performance across thread counts.

The GPU's Passmark G3D score of 38,194 places it far above most other cards, and its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 9,223 shows strong DirectX 12 performance. The combination of these strengths explains why the combo ranks so highly despite the CPU being a mid-range part. The data implies that in a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known for heavy CPU usage in simulation logic, the Ryzen 5 5600's 6 cores and 12 threads are sufficient to keep up with the RTX 4090's output at most settings and resolutions.

# GPU Role

The RTX 4090's 24 GB of GDDR6X memory and 1.01 TB/s bandwidth are critical for Microsoft Flight Simulator, which streams vast amounts of terrain and scenery data. The card's boost clock of 2520 MHz and base clock of 2235 MHz enable high sustained throughput, while its 16,384 shading units and 128 RT cores provide ample compute for complex lighting and shadow effects.

The GPU's benchmark scores highlight its dominance. Its Passmark G3D score of 38,194 and Geekbench OpenCL score of 317,684 demonstrate exceptional raw compute. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 9,223 indicates that the card excels in modern API workloads, which is relevant for a game that supports DirectX 12 Ultimate.

In the measured FPS data, the GPU's role becomes evident at 4K. At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the combo achieves 74.6 FPS, while at 1920x1080 with Low settings, it reaches 172.9 FPS. The difference of 98.3 FPS shows how the GPU is the primary driver of performance scaling with resolution. The GPU's 91st percentile ranking among all GPUs, combined with its nearest rival (Tesla T4) being only 0.4% higher in average score, underscores its top-tier status. The VRAM capacity is particularly relevant, as flight simulators often exceed 8 GB at high settings, and 24 GB ensures no memory-related stutters at any tested configuration.

# Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers 172.9 FPS on Low, 156.3 FPS on Medium, 135.1 FPS on High, and 132.1 FPS on Ultra. The spread from Low to Ultra is 40.8 FPS, with the largest single drop occurring between Medium and High (21.2 FPS).

At 2560x1440, the numbers are 162.1 FPS (Low), 146.3 FPS (Medium), 109.7 FPS (High), and 101.4 FPS (Ultra). The gap between Low and Ultra widens to 60.7 FPS, and the Medium-to-High drop becomes the most significant penalty at 36.6 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the results are 136.4 FPS (Low), 106.2 FPS (Medium), 76.4 FPS (High), and 74.6 FPS (Ultra). The Low-to-Ultra spread reaches 61.8 FPS, but the High-to-Ultra difference narrows to just 1.8 FPS, suggesting that the Ultra preset offers minimal gains at 4K.

Across all resolutions, the Low preset consistently provides the highest frame rates, while Ultra provides the lowest. However, the relative performance gaps shrink at higher resolutions: at 1080p, High is 22.4% slower than Low, but at 4K, High is 44.0% slower than Low. This indicates that the GPU becomes increasingly taxed as resolution and settings scale, while the CPU's contribution remains relatively constant.

# CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600 features 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. Its Zen 3 architecture (Vermeer) on a 7 nm process delivers strong single-thread performance, as evidenced by its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,584 and 3DMark single-thread score of 882.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is most apparent at lower resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo achieves 172.9 FPS, which is likely near the CPU's limit for game logic and draw-call processing. The CPU's 32 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support (51.2 GB/s bandwidth) provide adequate data throughput for the simulation's physics and AI calculations.

The CPU's multi-thread capabilities are robust but not exceptional. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 18,309 and Passmark multithread score of 21,541 indicate that it can handle parallel workloads, but the game's single-thread dependency means the boost clock of 4.40 GHz is more important than raw core count. The 3DMark results show scaling from 2 threads (1,737) to max threads (5,659), demonstrating efficient thread utilization up to 12 threads.

The CPU's 79th percentile ranking among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 21,765, places it slightly above the Intel Xeon D-1746TER (0.6% higher) and slightly below the AMD EPYC 9554P (0.6% lower). This mid-range positioning explains why the combo rank (80th) is not higher: the CPU can bottleneck the RTX 4090 at lower resolutions, but at 4K, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, allowing the CPU's moderate performance to suffice.