Microsoft Flight Simulator

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600F and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT pairing in Microsoft Flight Simulator presents a study in balance and limitation. The data shows a configuration that handles the simulator’s demands across resolutions, but with clear performance tiers defined by both the processor’s architecture and the graphics card’s capabilities. This analysis breaks down the measured frames per second and contextualizes them against the hardware’s broader benchmark standing.

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

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 3 architecture, built on TSMC’s 7 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 3.00 GHz and boosts up to 4.00 GHz. For Microsoft Flight Simulator, this configuration matters because the game is known for heavy single-threaded workloads alongside moderate multi-threading. The 5600F’s PassMark single-thread score of 2872 places it in the 85th percentile among all CPUs, indicating strong per-core performance that helps maintain frame pacing when the simulator is processing terrain, weather, and flight physics.

The processor’s 32 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth contribute to its ability to feed the GPU. In the measured FPS data, the CPU’s influence becomes apparent at lower resolutions. At 1920x1080 on Low settings, the combo reaches 121 FPS average, which is significantly higher than the 1440p Low result of 97 FPS and the 4K Low result of 72 FPS. This scaling suggests that at lower graphical loads, the CPU is capable of pushing substantial frame rates, while at higher resolutions, the GPU becomes the limiting factor.

Benchmark results show the 5600F achieving an average benchmark score of 36945, which is nearly identical to the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 (deltaPct: 0) and slightly above the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D (deltaPct: -0.2). This positioning indicates that the 5600F provides competitive processing power for its class, sufficient to keep the RX 6700 XT adequately fed in most scenarios. However, the data also reveals that the CPU does not become a bottleneck until the GPU is under less stress, as evidenced by the 121 FPS ceiling at 1080p Low, which represents the highest measured average across all tested configurations.

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

Q: How does the Ryzen 5 5600F compare to its nearest rival in CPU benchmarks?

A: The 5600F’s average benchmark score is 36945, which is essentially tied with the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 (deltaPct: 0) and slightly ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D (deltaPct: -0.2). It trails the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 by 0.4% and lags the Intel Core i9-12900T by 0.5%, indicating the 5600F sits in a very tight performance cluster.

Q: What is the maximum average FPS achieved by this combo in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The highest measured average FPS is 121, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This represents the peak performance ceiling for this hardware combination in the tested scenarios.

Q: At which resolution does the combo show the most significant FPS drop when moving from Low to Ultra?

A: At 3840x2160, the average FPS drops from 72 on Low to 40 on Ultra, a decrease of 32 FPS. This is a proportional drop of approximately 44%, which is the largest absolute reduction among all tested resolutions.

Q: How does the RX 6700 XT rank among all GPUs based on its average benchmark score?

A: The RX 6700 XT holds an average benchmark score of 27425, placing it in the 72nd percentile among all GPUs. It is nearly identical to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile (deltaPct: 0) and slightly behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 (deltaPct: -0.5).

Q: What is the combo's overall ranking among tested configurations in this game?

A: The combo ranks 1524th out of 2996 total tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the upper half of all configurations evaluated by the database.

Q: Does the combo maintain playable frame rates at 4K Ultra settings?

A: Yes, but barely. At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the average FPS is 40, which is playable for a flight simulator but below the 60 FPS threshold often considered ideal for smooth gameplay. The 4K High setting yields 42 FPS average, suggesting users seeking higher frame rates should consider Medium settings.

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

The measured data across the three resolutions reveals a clear pattern of GPU-bound scaling. At Low settings, the FPS drops from 121 at 1920x1080 to 97 at 2560x1440 (a 19.8% decrease), then to 72 at 3840x2160 (a further 25.8% decrease from 1440p). This progressive decline indicates that as pixel count increases, the RX 6700 XT’s rendering load grows proportionally, and the CPU has ample headroom to keep up.

At Medium settings, the pattern continues: 94 FPS at 1080p, 76 FPS at 1440p (a 19.1% drop), and 56 FPS at 4K (a 26.3% drop from 1440p). The consistency of these percentage drops across Low and Medium settings suggests that the GPU is the primary limiter, as the CPU’s role in frame generation becomes less impactful when the GPU is doing more work.

At High settings, the scaling is steeper: 71 FPS at 1080p, 57 FPS at 1440p (a 19.7% drop), and 42 FPS at 4K (a 26.3% drop from 1440p). This aligns with the expectation that higher graphical fidelity increases the GPU’s workload. The Ultra settings show a similar trend: 67 FPS at 1080p, 54 FPS at 1440p (a 19.4% drop), and 40 FPS at 4K (a 25.9% drop from 1440p). The near-identical percentage drops across all settings levels strongly indicate that the RX 6700 XT is the decisive factor in frame rate scaling, with the Ryzen 5 5600F providing sufficient processing power to avoid becoming a bottleneck at any tested resolution.

The fact that the 1080p Low setting achieves 121 FPS while 4K Low achieves 72 FPS shows that the GPU’s fill rate and memory bandwidth are the limiting resources. The RX 6700 XT has 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus with 384.0 GB/s bandwidth, which proves adequate for 4K but not sufficient to maintain the same frame rates as lower resolutions. This is further confirmed by the GPU’s benchmark scores, which show a PassMark G3D score of 19786 and a percentile rank of 72, placing it in the mid-to-upper tier of graphics cards.

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

The measured FPS data provides clear guidance on which settings preset offers the most balanced experience. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset delivers 94 FPS average with a minimum of 80 FPS and a maximum of 108 FPS. This represents a strong experience for users with 1080p displays, as it maintains high frame rates while offering better visual fidelity than Low. The High preset at 1080p yields 71 FPS average, which is also acceptable, but the jump to Ultra reduces the average to 67 FPS, a marginal gain in visuals for a noticeable drop in performance.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset produces 76 FPS average with a minimum of 64 FPS and a maximum of 87 FPS. This is arguably the sweet spot for 1440p gaming, as it stays above the 60 FPS threshold for smoothness while providing decent graphical detail. The High preset at 1440p drops to 57 FPS average, which falls below the ideal 60 FPS mark, and Ultra is even lower at 54 FPS. For users prioritizing frame rate, Medium is the recommended choice at 1440p.

At 3840x2160, the situation becomes more constrained. The Medium preset offers 56 FPS average with a minimum of 47 FPS and a maximum of 64 FPS. This is the only 4K preset that approaches playable frame rates, though the minimum FPS of 47 indicates potential stutters during complex scenes. The High preset at 4K yields 42 FPS average, and Ultra drops to 40 FPS, both of which are below the 60 FPS ideal. For 4K users, Medium is the recommended preset, as it provides the best compromise between visual quality and performance, with the caveat that the minimum FPS may occasionally dip below 50.

Across all resolutions, the data suggests that Medium settings offer the most consistent experience. The minimum FPS values are only recorded for Medium presets, showing 80 FPS at 1080p, 64 FPS at 1440p, and 47 FPS at 4K. These minimums indicate that Medium maintains a more stable frame rate compared to other presets, which may be important for a simulation game where smoothness is critical for immersion.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combo ranks 1524th out of 2996 tested configurations in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the 49th percentile of all tested combos. This ranking reflects the mid-tier position of both the CPU and GPU in their respective benchmark hierarchies. The Ryzen 5 5600F sits in the 85th percentile among CPUs, while the RX 6700 XT sits in the 72nd percentile among GPUs. The combo’s overall ranking of 1524 is slightly lower than what the individual component percentiles might suggest, likely because Microsoft Flight Simulator is particularly demanding on both processing and rendering resources.

The ranking indicates that this combination is neither a top-tier performer nor a budget option. It sits squarely in the middle of the field, which aligns with the measured FPS data showing playable but not exceptional frame rates across all resolutions. The combo’s rank of 1524 out of 2996 means it outperforms approximately half of all tested combinations, a reasonable result for a 6-core CPU paired with a 12 GB GPU.

Compared to the CPU’s nearest rivals, the 5600F’s performance is essentially tied with the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 and AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D, suggesting that processors in this performance class would yield similar results when paired with the RX 6700 XT. The GPU’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile, achieves a nearly identical average benchmark score (27435 vs 27425), indicating that this combo’s ranking would likely be similar if paired with that mobile GPU.

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

1920x1080:

• Low: 121 FPS average
• Medium: 94 FPS average, 80 FPS minimum, 108 FPS maximum
• High: 71 FPS average
• Ultra: 67 FPS average

2560x1440:

• Low: 97 FPS average
• Medium: 76 FPS average, 64 FPS minimum, 87 FPS maximum
• High: 57 FPS average
• Ultra: 54 FPS average

3840x2160:

• Low: 72 FPS average
• Medium: 56 FPS average, 47 FPS minimum, 64 FPS maximum
• High: 42 FPS average
• Ultra: 40 FPS average

The data shows a consistent pattern: Low settings provide the highest frame rates, followed by Medium, High, and Ultra in descending order. The Medium preset is the only one with recorded minimum and maximum FPS values, indicating that the benchmark captured more detailed data for this setting. The spread between Low and Ultra averages narrows as resolution increases: at 1080p, the difference is 54 FPS (121 vs 67), at 1440p it is 43 FPS (97 vs 54), and at 4K it is 32 FPS (72 vs 40). This narrowing suggests that at higher resolutions, the GPU’s workload becomes so heavy that the difference between Low and Ultra settings has less relative impact on frame rates.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with the Navi 22 chip, manufactured on TSMC’s 7 nm process. It features 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU operates with a base clock of 2321 MHz and a boost clock of 2581 MHz, with a game clock of 2424 MHz. These specifications directly influence the measured FPS results in Microsoft Flight Simulator.

The 12 GB VRAM capacity is notable for a flight simulator, which often loads large textures for terrain, aircraft, and scenery. At 4K resolution, the VRAM usage likely approaches the 12 GB limit, which could explain why the 4K Ultra preset only achieves 40 FPS average. The 384.0 GB/s bandwidth is also a factor; at higher resolutions, the GPU must access memory more frequently to render the increased pixel count, and the bandwidth becomes a bottleneck.

The GPU’s benchmark scores provide context for its gaming performance. The PassMark G3D score is 19786, placing the RX 6700 XT in the 72nd percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile, has an average score of 27435 (deltaPct: 0), while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 scores 27565 (deltaPct: -0.5). This indicates that the RX 6700 XT performs on par with a high-end mobile GPU and within 1% of the RTX 3090, despite the RTX 3090 being a desktop flagship.

The GPU’s 13.21 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 165.2 GPixel/s pixel rate are relevant to Microsoft Flight Simulator’s rendering requirements. The game’s heavy use of pixel shaders and geometry processing aligns with the GPU’s capabilities, but the measured FPS data shows that even with these specifications, the combo cannot maintain 60 FPS at 4K High or Ultra settings. The 40 FPS average at 4K Ultra suggests that the GPU is fully utilized at this setting, and the frame rate is limited by the graphics card’s raw compute and memory throughput.

The GPU’s 230 W TDP and dual-slot design indicate it is a mid-range power draw component, but the measured performance shows it is capable of delivering playable frame rates in this simulation at 1080p and 1440p, with acceptable results at 4K on Medium settings. The data suggests that for users seeking higher 4K performance, a more powerful GPU would be necessary, but the RX 6700 XT provides a viable experience for most flight simulation enthusiasts.