Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator presents one of the most demanding workloads in PC gaming, and the combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 5600G and the AMD Radeon RX 9060 produces a distinct performance profile. The measured data reveals a system that is capable of smooth flight at lower resolutions and settings, but which encounters significant limitations as graphical demands increase. This analysis examines the benchmark results to understand how this specific CPU-GPU pairing behaves, where the bottlenecks lie, and what settings provide the most playable experience.

Resolution Scaling

The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is substantial and reveals a system that becomes progressively more GPU-bound as resolution increases. At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves an average of 111 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops this to 89 FPS, a reduction of 22 FPS or approximately 19.8%. At 4K Low, the average falls to 66 FPS, which is 45 FPS lower than the 1080p result, representing a 40.5% decrease. This scaling pattern indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting factor at higher resolutions, as the workload on the rendering hardware increases dramatically with pixel count.

The trend continues across all settings presets. At Medium settings, the average FPS drops from 86 at 1080p to 69 at 1440p (a 19.8% decrease) and then to 51 at 4K (a 40.7% decrease from 1080p). The High preset shows a similar pattern: 65 FPS at 1080p, 52 at 1440p (20% lower), and 39 at 4K (40% lower). The Ultra preset follows suit with 62 FPS at 1080p, 50 at 1440p, and 37 at 4K, with the 4K result being 40.3% lower than the 1080p figure.

The consistency of these percentage drops across all four settings presets is notable. The fact that the scaling from 1080p to 4K results in a roughly 40% reduction in average FPS regardless of the quality preset suggests that the performance ceiling at 4K is firmly set by the GPU's rendering capabilities. The RX 9060, with its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus providing 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth, is being pushed to its limits at 3840x2160. The data indicates that achieving playable frame rates at 4K requires the Low preset, which is the only 4K configuration to break the 60 FPS barrier. All other 4K presets fall below 60 FPS, with Medium at 51, High at 39, and Ultra at 37.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 is based on the Navi 44 chip using the RDNA 4.0 architecture, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It features 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 raster output units, along with 28 ray tracing cores. The GPU operates with a base clock of 1700 MHz, a game clock of 2400 MHz, and a boost clock of 2990 MHz. These specifications place the RX 9060 in a mid-range position, as indicated by its percentile rank of 59 against all GPUs in the benchmark database.

The GPU's average benchmark score of 16014 places it in close competition with several rivals. The nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, which has an average score of 16129, putting the RX 9060 0.7% behind. The AMD Radeon R9 370X and AMD Radeon RX 7700 are also close, with scores of 15862 and 15852 respectively, representing a 1% advantage for the RX 9060 over both. The AMD Radeon Pro W5500 trails with a score of 15679, giving the RX 9060 a 2.1% lead.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU's performance is clearly the determining factor in the measured frame rates. The simulation's rendering of terrain, aircraft models, and weather effects places a heavy load on the graphics processor. The 8 GB of VRAM is a key consideration, as the higher resolution and quality presets demand more memory for textures and geometry. The data shows that the GPU's capabilities are sufficient for 1080p gaming at all settings, with even the Ultra preset achieving 62 FPS. However, at 4K, the GPU struggles to maintain high frame rates, with the Ultra preset dropping to 37 FPS.

The GPU's DirectX 12 Ultimate support and Vulkan 1.4 compatibility are relevant to this modern title. The game can leverage these APIs to improve efficiency, but the fundamental hardware limitations remain. The pixel rate of 191.4 GPixel/s and texture rate of 334.9 GTexel/s provide theoretical ceilings that are tested heavily by the dense visual information in flight simulation. The FP32 performance of 21.43 TFLOPS is adequate for the game's shader complexity, but the 4K resolution requires more raw throughput than the GPU can consistently deliver.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600G is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 3 architecture (Cezanne codename), built on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It runs with a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The CPU has a 16 MB L3 cache and supports DDR4 memory with dual-channel configuration and 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. This processor achieves a percentile rank of 74 against all CPUs, indicating it performs better relative to its peers than the RX 9060 does in the GPU landscape.

The CPU's average benchmark score of 21088 places it in a very tight cluster of rivals. The Intel Core i3-1220P scores 21066, putting the 5600G just 0.1% ahead. The Intel Core Ultra 7 256V scores 21112, a 0.1% advantage over the 5600G. The AMD Ryzen 5 7530U scores 21133, 0.2% ahead, and the Intel Core Ultra 7 155U scores 21174, 0.4% ahead. This grouping indicates that the 5600G is performance-competitive with these other processors, with differences of less than half a percent separating them.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is primarily in handling game logic, physics calculations, and the complex simulation of flight dynamics. The 6-core, 12-thread configuration provides ample parallel processing capability for these tasks. The single-thread performance, as measured by a 3dmark single-thread score of 872 and a cinebench r23 single-core score of 1409, is important for a game that relies heavily on main-thread performance for simulation updates.

The benchmark data suggests that the CPU is not the primary bottleneck in this system for most configurations. The resolution scaling pattern, where FPS drops consistently by about 40% when moving from 1080p to 4K, indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor at higher resolutions. However, the CPU's performance does set an upper ceiling on frame rates. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 111 FPS, which is likely approaching the CPU's limit for this simulation workload. If the GPU were significantly more powerful, the CPU would likely cap the maximum frame rate at a value near this level.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 5600G and the AMD Radeon RX 9060 ranks 1712 out of 2996 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places the combo in the lower half of all tested systems, at approximately the 57th percentile of combinations. This ranking reflects the system's overall capability in this specific game, which is demanding on both processor and graphics hardware.

The ranking position is consistent with the individual component rankings. The CPU ranks in the 74th percentile of all CPUs, which is a relatively strong position. The GPU ranks in the 59th percentile of all GPUs, which is a more modest position. The combo's overall ranking of 1712 out of 2996 suggests that the GPU's lower relative performance pulls the system down from where the CPU alone might place it.

The data shows that this combo is better suited to 1080p gaming than to higher resolutions. At 1080p, the system can achieve very good frame rates across all settings, with the Low preset hitting 111 FPS and the Ultra preset still managing 62 FPS. This level of performance is likely to provide a smooth experience for most users at this resolution. The 1440p results are still playable, with all presets exceeding 50 FPS. However, the 4K results are more limited, with only the Low preset exceeding 60 FPS.

The ranking also reflects the balance between the two components. In a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known for its high demands on both CPU and GPU, the system's overall capability is determined by the weaker component. In this case, the GPU's mid-range performance at higher resolutions limits the system's overall ranking, despite the CPU's stronger relative position.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rates provide a comprehensive picture of the system's performance across different resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the system delivers strong performance across all presets. The Low setting achieves an average of 111 FPS, Medium reaches 86 FPS with a minimum of 73 and maximum of 99, High hits 65 FPS, and Ultra manages 62 FPS. This shows that at 1080p, the system is capable of smooth gameplay even at the highest quality settings, with the Ultra preset's 62 FPS being comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold for most displays.

At 2560x1440, performance drops predictably. The Low setting averages 89 FPS, Medium averages 69 FPS with a range of 59 to 80, High averages 52 FPS, and Ultra averages 50 FPS. The Medium preset at 1440p provides a good balance, with the minimum of 59 FPS indicating that the system can maintain near-60 FPS performance even in demanding scenes. The High and Ultra presets at 1440p fall below 60 FPS, which may result in less smooth gameplay depending on the user's tolerance for frame rate variations.

At 3840x2160, the system's limitations become apparent. The Low setting is the only preset to exceed 60 FPS, averaging 66 FPS. Medium averages 51 FPS with a range of 44 to 59, which means that even the maximum frame rate does not reach 60 FPS. High averages 39 FPS, and Ultra averages 37 FPS. These results indicate that 4K gaming with this combo requires significant compromises in visual quality to achieve playable frame rates. The Low preset is the only viable option for 4K, and even then, the frame rate is not particularly high.

The data also shows the relationship between settings and performance at each resolution. At 1080p, moving from Low to Medium costs 25 FPS (from 111 to 86), Medium to High costs 21 FPS (from 86 to 65), and High to Ultra costs 3 FPS (from 65 to 62). This pattern shows diminishing returns as settings increase, with the Ultra preset offering only a small penalty over High but potentially significant visual improvements. At 1440p, the differences are 20 FPS (Low to Medium), 17 FPS (Medium to High), and 2 FPS (High to Ultra). At 4K, the differences are 15 FPS (Low to Medium), 12 FPS (Medium to High), and 2 FPS (High to Ultra). The consistently small difference between High and Ultra across all resolutions suggests that the Ultra preset may offer better visual quality with minimal performance cost.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution. For 1080p gaming, the Ultra preset is the recommended choice. The system achieves 62 FPS at this setting, which is above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. The performance cost of moving from High to Ultra is only 3 FPS (from 65 to 62), making the visual quality improvement essentially free. Even the minimum frame rate is not listed for Ultra, but the average of 62 FPS suggests a playable experience.

For 1440p, the Medium preset provides the best balance of performance and visual quality. The average of 69 FPS with a minimum of 59 FPS means that the system can maintain near-60 FPS performance throughout most gameplay. While the High preset averages 52 FPS and Ultra averages 50 FPS, these fall below the 60 FPS threshold and may result in less consistent frame delivery. The Medium preset's minimum of 59 FPS indicates that even in demanding scenes, the system rarely drops below playable frame rates.

For 4K, the Low preset is the only viable option. At 66 FPS, it is the only 4K configuration that exceeds 60 FPS. The Medium preset at 51 FPS is playable but with noticeable compromises, and the High and Ultra presets at 39 and 37 FPS respectively are likely to feel sluggish during flight. Users who prioritize visual quality at 4K may need to accept lower frame rates, but the data shows that the Low preset provides the best experience for smooth gameplay.

The data also suggests that the High preset offers a reasonable middle ground for users who want improved visuals without the full Ultra quality. At 1080p, High provides 65 FPS, which is only 3 FPS less than Ultra. At 1440p, High provides 52 FPS, which is 2 FPS more than Ultra but 17 FPS less than Medium. The choice between High and Ultra at any resolution is largely a matter of preference, as the performance difference is minimal.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows 1920x1080 as the best resolution, with all settings presets achieving at least 62 FPS. At 1080p, the system can run the Ultra preset at 62 FPS, providing a high-quality experience. The 1440p resolution is also playable, but only the Medium preset reliably maintains near-60 FPS performance.

Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: Yes, but with significant limitations. The only 4K preset that exceeds 60 FPS is Low, which averages 66 FPS. The Medium preset averages 51 FPS, while High and Ultra average 39 and 37 FPS respectively. Users who want 4K will need to use Low settings for smooth performance.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon RX 9060 compare to its nearest rivals in this game?

A: The RX 9060's average benchmark score of 16014 places it 0.7% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti (16129) and 1% ahead of both the AMD Radeon R9 370X (15862) and AMD Radeon RX 7700 (15852). The AMD Radeon Pro W5500 (15679) trails by 2.1%.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the main bottleneck for this system?

A: The GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions. The consistent 40% FPS drop from 1080p to 4K across all settings indicates that the RX 9060's rendering capabilities limit performance at 4K. The CPU's performance is sufficient to support the frame rates achieved, though it may cap maximum FPS at lower resolutions.

Q: What is the performance difference between the High and Ultra presets?

A: The difference is minimal across all resolutions. At 1080p, High averages 65 FPS and Ultra averages 62 FPS, a 3 FPS difference. At 1440p, High averages 52 FPS and Ultra averages 50 FPS, a 2 FPS difference. At 4K, High averages 39 FPS and Ultra averages 37 FPS, also a 2 FPS difference.

Q: How does the AMD Ryzen 5 5600G compare to its nearest CPU rivals?

A: The 5600G has an average benchmark score of 21088, placing it 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i3-1220P (21066) and 0.1% behind the Intel Core Ultra 7 256V (21112). The AMD Ryzen 5 7530U (21133) and Intel Core Ultra 7 155U (21174) are 0.2% and 0.4% ahead respectively.