Microsoft Flight Simulator

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

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600GT is a 6-core, 12-thread Zen 3 processor built on TSMC's 7 nm process. Its base clock of 3.60 GHz and boost clock of 4.60 GHz place it as a mid-range desktop part, but the data shows it is not the bottleneck in Microsoft Flight Simulator when paired with the RTX 5080. The CPU's 16 MB of L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support (with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth) provide adequate feeding of the GPU, as evidenced by the FPS scaling across resolutions.

In synthetic CPU benchmarks, the 5600GT scores a Cinebench R23 multi-core result of 17272 and a single-core score of 2438. Its average benchmark score of 20740 places it in the 78th percentile among all CPUs. The nearest rivals are remarkably close: the Intel Core i7-10700 scores 20746 (0% delta), the Intel Core i5-12490F scores 20794 (-0.3%), and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X scores 20680 (+0.3%). This clustering shows the 5600GT sits at parity with a previous-generation i7 and within a fraction of a percent of its own sibling, the 5600X.

For Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known for heavy simulation logic and draw-call overhead, the 5600GT's single-thread performance is the more relevant figure. The Geekbench single-core score of 2035 and the 3DMark single-thread score of 913 indicate competent per-core throughput. However, the FPS data reveals that at 1080p Low, the combo hits 174.8 FPS, which is the highest average in the entire measured set. This suggests that even at low settings, the CPU can drive the simulation engine fast enough to exceed 170 FPS, and the GPU is not yet fully saturated at that resolution.

The CPU's 65 W TDP and 7 nm process make it an efficient choice, but the benchmark results show that its role here is to keep the frame pipeline fed without becoming a hard ceiling. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS drops to 73.9, a 58% reduction from 1080p Ultra's 121.3 FPS. That drop is far larger than any CPU frequency scaling would produce, indicating the GPU is the limiting factor at higher resolutions, not the processor.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 is a Blackwell 2.0 architecture GPU built on TSMC's 5 nm process, with 45,600 million transistors. It carries 16 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus, yielding 960.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock is 1875 MHz (30 Gbps effective), while the base clock is 2295 MHz and the boost clock is 2617 MHz. With 10752 shading units, 336 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, the RTX 5080 is a high-end part that sits at the 89th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 59188.

The GPU's nearest rivals in the database are all Intel or AMD professional/consumer parts: the Intel Arc A570M scores 58239 (+1.6% delta), the Intel Arc Pro A60 scores 60326 (-1.9%), the Intel Arc A580 scores 57756 (+2.5%), and the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X scores 57661 (+2.6%). These small deltas show the RTX 5080 is within a few percentage points of its closest competitors in raw compute benchmarks, though its real-world gaming performance is what the measured FPS captures.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the RTX 5080's 16 GB VRAM is ample for the game's high-resolution textures and dense scenery, even at 4K Ultra. The measured data shows that at 4K Ultra, the combo averages 73.9 FPS, which is playable but not silky smooth for a flight sim. At 4K High, the average rises to 78.4 FPS, a modest 6% improvement. The step from High to Ultra at 4K costs about 4.5 FPS, indicating that the Ultra preset's additional settings (likely shadows, volumetric clouds, and terrain detail) have a measurable GPU cost but are not catastrophic.

The GPU's raw compute throughput — 56.28 TFLOPS FP32 and a pixel rate of 293.1 GPixel/s — explains why it can push high frame rates at 1440p and 1080p. At 1440p Ultra, the combo hits exactly 100.0 FPS, a very round number that suggests the GPU is just keeping pace with the CPU's simulation thread at that setting. At 1080p Ultra, the average climbs to 121.3 FPS, showing headroom as resolution drops.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS measured for this CPU+GPU combo in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The highest average is 174.8 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only measured row above 170 FPS across all resolutions and settings.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rival in raw benchmark scores?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 5600GT's average benchmark score is 20740, which is exactly 0% different from the Intel Core i7-10700 (20746) and only 0.3% higher than the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X (20680). The Intel Core i5-12490F is 0.3% faster at 20794.

Q: What is the GPU's percentile ranking and how close are its rivals?

A: The RTX 5080 sits in the 89th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the Intel Arc A570M, is 1.6% faster in average score (58239 vs 59188), while the Intel Arc Pro A60 is 1.9% slower (60326).

Q: At what resolution and settings does the combo first drop below 100 FPS?

A: At 2560x1440 with Ultra settings, the average FPS is exactly 100.0. It drops below that at 3840x2160 with Medium settings, where it averages 99.3 FPS. At 4K High, it averages 78.4 FPS, and at 4K Ultra, 73.9 FPS.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, Low averages 174.8 FPS, Medium 161.0 FPS, High 132.0 FPS, and Ultra 121.3 FPS. The gap from Low to Ultra is 53.5 FPS, a 30.6% reduction.

Q: How does the combo rank among all tested combinations for this game?

A: The combo ranks 89th out of 1795 tested combinations, placing it in the top 5% of all configurations in the database for Microsoft Flight Simulator.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS rows provide a clear picture of the optimal settings experience. For a 60 FPS target, the combo can run 4K Ultra at 73.9 FPS, which exceeds that threshold comfortably. The data shows that 4K Medium delivers 99.3 FPS, while 4K High yields 78.4 FPS. The step from Medium to High at 4K costs 20.9 FPS (21%), and from High to Ultra costs another 4.5 FPS (5.7%). This suggests that the High preset is the sweet spot at 4K: it offers a 78.4 FPS average with most of the visual fidelity, and the Ultra preset's additional 4.5 FPS cost is not worth the marginal visual gain for most users.

At 1440p, the story changes. The Ultra preset hits exactly 100.0 FPS, which is a strong target for high-refresh monitors. The Medium preset at 136.4 FPS and High at 104 FPS both exceed 100 FPS, but Ultra is the only one that offers the full visual package at that frame rate. For 1080p, even Ultra runs at 121.3 FPS, so users with 1080p displays can max out the game without concern.

The best experience per the measured rows is 2560x1440 with Ultra settings: 100.0 FPS average, which balances visual quality with smoothness. If a user prioritizes 4K, the High preset at 78.4 FPS is preferable to Ultra at 73.9 FPS, as the 4.5 FPS gain from High to Ultra is less than 6% while the settings jump is substantial. For 1080p users, the Ultra preset at 121.3 FPS leaves no reason to compromise.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo of AMD Ryzen 5 5600GT and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 ranks 89th out of 1795 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the top 4.96% of all configurations in the database. The rank reflects the balance between the CPU's mid-range compute (78th percentile among all CPUs) and the GPU's high-end performance (89th percentile among all GPUs).

The ranking indicates that this pairing is not limited by the CPU in most scenarios. In fact, the FPS data shows that the GPU is the dominant factor at higher resolutions: from 1080p Low (174.8 FPS) to 4K Low (130.5 FPS), the drop is 25.3%, which is a GPU-bound scaling pattern. The CPU's 12 threads and 16 MB L3 cache are sufficient to keep the simulation engine running at frame rates above 170 FPS at 1080p Low, so the CPU is not the constraint.

Relative to other combos, the 89th rank out of 1795 puts this configuration in the upper tier, but not the absolute top. The data suggests that pairing a higher-end CPU (e.g., a Ryzen 7 or Core i7) with the RTX 5080 would likely improve the rank further, especially at 1080p where CPU overhead is more visible. However, the measured FPS at 1440p and 4K are already strong enough that the rank is competitive for high-resolution gaming.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers the following averages: Low 174.8 FPS, Medium 161.0 FPS, High 132.0 FPS, Ultra 121.3 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 53.5 FPS, with the largest single drop occurring between Medium and High (29.0 FPS, an 18% reduction). The step from Low to Medium costs 13.8 FPS, and from High to Ultra costs 10.7 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low 164.6 FPS, Medium 136.4 FPS, High 104.0 FPS, Ultra 100.0 FPS. Here, the drop from Low to Medium is 28.2 FPS (17%), from Medium to High is 32.4 FPS (24%), and from High to Ultra is just 4.0 FPS (3.8%). The High-to-Ultra transition is nearly free at this resolution, making Ultra the obvious choice.

At 3840x2160, the averages are: Low 130.5 FPS, Medium 99.3 FPS, High 78.4 FPS, Ultra 73.9 FPS. The Low-to-Medium drop is 31.2 FPS (24%), Medium-to-High is 20.9 FPS (21%), and High-to-Ultra is 4.5 FPS (5.7%). At 4K, the Medium preset is the first to drop below 100 FPS, and Ultra falls below 75 FPS.

The data reveals a consistent pattern: the Ultra preset's cost over High is small at every resolution (10.7 FPS at 1080p, 4.0 FPS at 1440p, 4.5 FPS at 4K), whereas the jump from Medium to High is the largest incremental cost at 1080p and 1440p. This means Ultra is almost always worth selecting over High, while the Medium-to-High step requires more careful consideration.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K reveals the limiting component. At Low settings, the averages are 174.8 FPS (1080p), 164.6 FPS (1440p), and 130.5 FPS (4K). The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 10.2 FPS (5.8%), and from 1440p to 4K is 34.1 FPS (20.7%). From 1080p to 4K, the total drop is 44.3 FPS (25.3%). This relatively shallow scaling at Low settings suggests that the CPU is still providing enough simulation throughput to keep the GPU busy, but the GPU's load increases with resolution.

At Ultra settings, the averages are 121.3 FPS (1080p), 100.0 FPS (1440p), and 73.9 FPS (4K). The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 21.3 FPS (17.6%), and from 1440p to 4K is 26.1 FPS (26.1%). The total drop from 1080p to 4K is 47.4 FPS (39.1%). This is a much steeper scaling curve, indicating that the GPU becomes the bottleneck at higher resolutions when the Ultra preset's additional effects (shadows, textures, clouds) are enabled.

The comparison between Low and Ultra scaling is instructive. At Low, the 4K-to-1080p ratio is 130.5/174.8 = 0.746, meaning 4K delivers 74.6% of 1080p performance. At Ultra, the ratio is 73.9/121.3 = 0.609, meaning 4K delivers only 60.9% of 1080p performance. This 13.7 percentage-point difference confirms that the RTX 5080's VRAM and compute are taxed more heavily as settings increase, while the CPU's simulation load remains relatively constant regardless of resolution.

The data points to the GPU as the limiting component at 1440p and 4K, especially on Ultra presets. At 1080p Low, the CPU is closer to the limit, but the 5600GT still manages to drive 174.8 FPS. The RTX 5080's 16 GB VRAM and 960.0 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for the game's demands, but the sheer pixel count at 4K, combined with Ultra settings, pushes the GPU to its limits, resulting in a 73.9 FPS average that is still playable but not high-refresh territory.