Microsoft Flight Simulator

# Microsoft Flight Simulator — AMD Ryzen 5 5600GT + AMD Radeon RX 7600

This combination of an AMD Ryzen 5 5600GT and an AMD Radeon RX 7600 delivers a playable but demanding experience in Microsoft Flight Simulator, with frame rates that scale predictably across resolutions and presets. The measured data shows the pairing sits at rank 1207 out of 1795 tested combos, placing it in the lower-middle portion of the database, though its performance profile varies significantly depending on whether the workload leans on the CPU's six Zen 3 cores or the GPU's RDNA 3.0 architecture.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to run this game with this combo?

A: The data shows 1920x1080 is the only resolution where all presets exceed 57 FPS, with Low reaching 99.1 FPS, Medium at 79.4 FPS, High at 60.3 FPS, and Ultra at 57.1 FPS. At 2560x1440, only Low (80.7 FPS) and Medium (64.2 FPS) remain above the 60 FPS threshold.

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

A: The Ryzen 5 5600GT's average benchmark score of 20740 is essentially identical to the Intel Core i7-10700 (20746, 0% delta), slightly ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X (20680, 0.3% ahead), and marginally behind the Intel Core i5-12490F (20794, 0.3% behind) and AMD EPYC 7J13 (20845, 0.5% behind). This indicates the CPU is a consistent mid-range performer.

Q: Is the GPU's 8 GB VRAM sufficient for this game at higher settings?

A: The measured frame rates show a clear drop when moving from Medium to High at all resolutions—for instance, at 3840x2160, Medium runs at 47.6 FPS while High falls to 34.4 FPS. The 8 GB GDDR6 memory with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth appears to become a limiting factor at higher presets, though the data does not isolate VRAM usage directly.

Q: What is the CPU's single-threaded performance like?

A: The Ryzen 5 5600GT scores 913 in 3dMark single-thread, 2438 in Cinebench R23 single-core, and 2035 in Geekbench single-core, with a PassMark single-thread score of 3348. These results place the CPU at the 78th percentile among all CPUs, indicating solid per-core capability for a flight simulator that relies on single-threaded simulation logic.

Q: How does the GPU rank against other graphics cards?

A: The Radeon RX 7600 achieves a PassMark G3D score of 16634 and sits at the 63rd percentile of all GPUs. Its average benchmark score of 20258 is 0.6% behind the RX 7600 XT (20146), 0.8% behind the RX 460 (20088), and 1.3% ahead of the RTX 3070 Mobile (20534), showing it is competitive within a narrow performance band.

Q: Can this combo handle 4K gaming?

A: At 3840x2160, the best preset is Low at 59.5 FPS, with Medium at 47.6 FPS, High at 34.4 FPS, and Ultra at 32.7 FPS. While 4K Low approaches playability, the data suggests 1440p or 1080p are more appropriate targets for smoother frame rates.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data reveals a clear trade-off between visual fidelity and playability across the three resolutions tested. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset delivers 57.1 FPS, which is just below the standard 60 FPS target but still within a playable range for a flight simulator where precise timing is less critical than in fast-paced genres. High at 1080p yields 60.3 FPS, offering a marginal improvement while reducing the visual load on the GPU. For users prioritizing smoothness, Medium at 1080p provides 79.4 FPS, a substantial 39% improvement over Ultra while maintaining reasonable detail levels.

At 2560x1440, the situation becomes more constrained. Medium produces 64.2 FPS, which is the only preset at this resolution that comfortably exceeds 60 FPS. High drops to 48.7 FPS, and Ultra falls to 46.3 FPS, both of which introduce noticeable stutter during dense scenery or weather effects. Low at 1440p reaches 80.7 FPS, but the visual compromise is severe. Given the data, the best experience at 1440p is Medium, as it balances the 64.2 FPS frame rate with acceptable graphical quality.

The 3840x2160 results indicate that 4K is only viable at Low settings, which achieves 59.5 FPS. Medium at 47.6 FPS, High at 34.4 FPS, and Ultra at 32.7 FPS all fall below the threshold for smooth gameplay. The recommendation is to avoid 4K unless the user accepts Low presets or is willing to tolerate sub-50 FPS frame rates. Across all resolutions, the data points to Medium as the optimal settings preset, as it delivers the highest frame rate that retains meaningful visual detail, particularly at 1440p where the jump to 64.2 FPS from High's 48.7 FPS is substantial.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600GT is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 3 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm TSMC process with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. Its 16 MB L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth provide the memory subsystem necessary for feeding the GPU in a simulation-heavy title like Microsoft Flight Simulator. The CPU's benchmark scores show a balanced profile: Cinebench R23 multicore at 17272 and single-core at 2438, indicating that the six cores are well-suited for the game's multi-threaded rendering tasks while maintaining strong single-thread performance for physics and flight model calculations.

In relation to this game, the CPU's role is significant because Microsoft Flight Simulator relies heavily on single-threaded performance for its core simulation loop, while delegating terrain streaming and object rendering to additional threads. The Ryzen 5 5600GT's passmark_single_thread score of 3348 and 3dmark_single_thread score of 913 suggest it can handle the simulation logic without bottlenecking the GPU at lower resolutions. However, the data shows that at 1080p Ultra, the frame rate of 57.1 FPS is only 1.5 FPS lower than High at 60.3 FPS, indicating the CPU maintains consistent performance across presets, leaving the GPU as the primary variable.

Compared to its nearest rivals, the CPU's average benchmark score of 20740 places it within 0.5% of the Intel Core i7-10700, Intel Core i5-12490F, AMD Ryzen 5 5600X, and AMD EPYC 7J13. This tight clustering means that swapping to any of these alternatives would yield negligible differences in frame rates for this game. The CPU's 65 W TDP and 7 nm process node contribute to thermal headroom, but the measured data does not indicate any thermal throttling behavior. The 3dmark_16_threads score of 5523 versus the max_threads score of 5554 shows that the processor scales well with additional threads, which is beneficial for the game's background tasks like photogrammetry loading.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination holds a rank of 1207 out of 1795 tested combos in this game, placing it in the 33rd percentile of all systems evaluated. This ranking reflects the balance between the CPU's 78th percentile standing among all processors and the GPU's 63rd percentile among all graphics cards. The lower combined rank suggests that the GPU is the limiting factor in this pairing, as the CPU has more headroom relative to its peers than the GPU does.

In practical terms, this ranking means the combo outperforms roughly two-thirds of tested systems but trails the top performers by a significant margin. The measured FPS data corroborates this: at 1080p Ultra, the system achieves 57.1 FPS, which is playable but far from the high refresh rates seen in top-tier combos. At 1440p Ultra, the 46.3 FPS result places the system in a territory where users must compromise on settings or resolution to maintain smoothness. The rank of 1207 suggests that while the combo is not entry-level, it is not optimized for the highest fidelity settings in this simulation title.

The deltaPct values for the CPU's nearest rivals show that the processor itself is not the source of the ranking's mediocrity—its performance is statistically indistinguishable from several higher-tier CPUs. Instead, the GPU's 63rd percentile ranking, combined with 8 GB of VRAM, likely explains why the combo falls behind more balanced pairings. The data indicates that upgrading the GPU would yield a more substantial improvement in this game than upgrading the CPU, as the processor's performance headroom is already sufficient to support higher frame rates than what the RX 7600 delivers at higher presets.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7600 is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with a 6 nm process, featuring 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. Its boost clock of 2655 MHz and game clock of 2250 MHz drive a peak FP32 throughput of 21.75 TFLOPS, while the 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus provides 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. These specifications position the GPU at the 63rd percentile of all graphics cards, with a PassMark G3D score of 16634 and an average benchmark score of 20258.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU's role is dominant at higher resolutions and presets, as evidenced by the frame rate scaling. At 1080p, the GPU delivers 99.1 FPS at Low, 79.4 FPS at Medium, 60.3 FPS at High, and 57.1 FPS at Ultra. The drop from Medium to Ultra is 28%, indicating that the GPU's rendering resources are increasingly taxed by the game's complex scenery and lighting effects. At 1440p, the same pattern persists with a 43% drop from Low (80.7 FPS) to Ultra (46.3 FPS), while at 4K, the drop is 45% from Low (59.5 FPS) to Ultra (32.7 FPS).

The 8 GB VRAM capacity is a notable constraint. The 128-bit memory bus and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth are adequate for 1080p and 1440p Medium presets, but the data shows that High and Ultra presets at 1440p and above likely exceed the VRAM buffer, causing the frame rate to fall below 50 FPS. The GPU's nearest rivals—the RX 7600 XT, RX 460, RTX 3070 Mobile, and Intel Arc B570—all have average scores within 1.5% of the RX 7600, meaning the GPU is not a standout performer in its class. The measured FPS results indicate that the GPU is the primary bottleneck for this combo, as the CPU's benchmark scores suggest it could drive higher frame rates if paired with a more powerful graphics card. For users seeking better performance, reducing resolution to 1080p or lowering presets to Medium are the most effective adjustments based on the data.