Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is one of the most demanding titles in the benchmark suite, and the pairing of the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F with the AMD Radeon RX 580 produces a strictly entry-level experience. The data shows a configuration that is heavily constrained by the graphics card at every resolution, with the CPU’s strong Zen 4 architecture unable to compensate for the GPU’s aging Polaris 20 silicon. The measured frames per second indicate that this combo is positioned for playability only at the lowest settings and resolutions, with any attempt to increase visual fidelity resulting in a slideshow. The following analysis breaks down the measured data, the role of each component, and what users can realistically expect from this pairing in Microsoft Flight Simulator.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear and consistent pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases, confirming that the AMD Radeon RX 580 is the primary bottleneck in this configuration. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo achieves an average of 54 FPS, which drops to 43 FPS at 2560x1440 and further to 32 FPS at 3840x2160. This represents a 20% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 41% drop from 1080p to 4K at Low settings, demonstrating that the GPU’s pixel throughput is the limiting factor. The scaling is slightly more pronounced at Medium settings, where the average falls from 42 FPS at 1080p to 34 FPS at 1440p (a 19% reduction) and then to 25 FPS at 4K (a 40% reduction from 1080p). This non-linear drop-off is typical of a GPU that is running out of raw fillrate and memory bandwidth as the pixel count increases.

At High settings, the resolution scaling becomes even more severe, with averages of 31 FPS at 1080p, 25 FPS at 1440p, and 19 FPS at 4K. The 4K result is particularly telling, as it represents a 39% reduction from 1080p, and the absolute figure of 19 FPS is well below the threshold for smooth gameplay. The Ultra preset shows the worst performance across the board, with 30 FPS at 1080p, 24 FPS at 1440p, and 18 FPS at 4K. The gap between 1440p and 4K at Ultra is only 6 FPS, suggesting that the GPU is so overwhelmed that additional resolution scaling yields diminishing returns—the card is already at its computational limit. The data indicates that the Ryzen 5 7400F, with its 6 cores and 12 threads based on Zen 4 architecture, is not the constraint here; if it were, the FPS would remain relatively flat across resolutions, which is not the case.

The benchmark results clearly show that this combo is only viable at 1080p, and even then, only at Low settings does it approach a playable frame rate. The 54 FPS at 1080p Low is the only measured configuration that exceeds 50 FPS, and the 42 FPS at Medium is borderline. At any resolution above 1080p, the average FPS drops below 43, and at 4K, the best case is 32 FPS at Low, which is still choppy for a flight simulator that requires smooth visuals for instrument reading and terrain scanning. The scaling pattern suggests that the RX 580’s 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth, is insufficient for the high-resolution textures and draw distances in Microsoft Flight Simulator, leading to the steep performance cliff as resolution increases.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings for this combo depend heavily on the user’s resolution and tolerance for frame rate dips. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers the only fully smooth experience, with an average of 54 FPS. The Medium preset at 1080p yields 42 FPS on average, with a minimum of 36 FPS and a maximum of 48 FPS, which is acceptable for a flight simulator where the camera often moves slowly, but it will feel less fluid during fast maneuvers or when flying over dense scenery. The High preset at 1080p drops to 31 FPS, which is marginal, and Ultra at 30 FPS is not recommended for anything other than static screenshots. The data suggests that Medium at 1080p is the best compromise, offering a 22% improvement in average FPS over High while maintaining visual fidelity that is significantly better than Low.

At 2560x1440, the situation is more constrained. The Low preset provides 43 FPS, which is playable but not ideal, while Medium drops to 34 FPS and High falls to 25 FPS. The Ultra preset at 24 FPS is essentially unplayable for dynamic flight. For 1440p users, Low is the only sensible choice, as it maintains a frame rate above 40 FPS, though the visual downgrade from Medium is noticeable in terrain detail and shadow quality. The gap between Low and Medium at 1440p is 9 FPS, which is substantial, but the Medium preset’s minimum of 29 FPS means that users will experience stuttering during complex scenes, such as landing approaches or flying through cloud layers.

For 4K resolution, the data is unequivocal: none of the presets are recommended for active gameplay. The Low preset at 32 FPS is the best case, but even this is below the 40 FPS threshold that many consider the minimum for a playable simulator. The Medium preset at 25 FPS and High at 19 FPS are slideshows, and Ultra at 18 FPS is only useful for benchmarking. The measured minimums for Medium at 4K are 21 FPS, which indicates significant frame time spikes that would make precision flying difficult. Given that the combo ranks 2733 out of 2996 tested combos in this game, the recommendation is to stick to 1080p Medium or 1080p Low, depending on whether the user prioritizes visual quality or frame rate stability.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 580 plays the dominant role in this combo’s performance, and the measured FPS data reflects its age and limitations. The GPU features a Polaris 20 chip built on a 14 nm process, with 2304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. Its clocks are modest, with a base of 1257 MHz and a boost of 1340 MHz, and the 8 GB of GDDR5 memory runs at 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective), providing 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. These specifications place the RX 580 at the 53rd percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 12928, putting it in the lower-middle tier of the database. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (scoring 12940, a 0.1% difference) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER (scoring 12986, a 0.4% difference), which shows that the RX 580 is competitive with those parts in synthetic tests, but Microsoft Flight Simulator’s specific demands expose its weaknesses.

The benchmark results indicate that the RX 580’s VRAM and bandwidth are critical factors. At 4K Ultra, the combo scores only 18 FPS, and at 4K High it is 19 FPS, suggesting that the 8 GB frame buffer is being saturated by the game’s high-resolution textures, causing the GPU to spill over into system memory. The memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s is also insufficient for the data streaming required by the flight simulator, which loads terrain and airport data continuously. The GPU’s pixel rate of 42.88 GPixel/s and texture rate of 193.0 GTexel/s are simply not enough to maintain playable frame rates at higher resolutions, as evidenced by the steep scaling curve. The card’s FP32 performance of 6.175 TFLOPS is adequate for older titles but is outclassed by the demands of a 2020-era simulator.

The RX 580’s end-of-life status and its 185 W TDP, requiring a 450 W suggested PSU, make it a legacy part, and its 53rd percentile ranking reflects that it is a mid-range card from 2017. In this game, the GPU is the clear limiting factor, as the Ryzen 5 7400F’s benchmarks are far stronger relative to its peers. The CPU scores 21765 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 3072 in single-core, placing it at the 83rd percentile of all CPUs, but these strengths do not translate to higher FPS because the GPU cannot keep up. The data shows that the RX 580 is the component that users would need to upgrade first to improve performance in Microsoft Flight Simulator, as the CPU has ample headroom to drive a more powerful graphics card.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo of the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F and AMD Radeon RX 580 ranks 2733 out of 2996 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the bottom 9% of all configurations. This ranking is a direct consequence of the GPU’s limitations, as the CPU is a modern, capable part. The Ryzen 5 7400F, with its 6 cores and 12 threads on the Zen 4 Raphael architecture, has a percentile rank of 83 against all CPUs, and its average benchmark score of 32750 is nearly identical to its nearest rival, the Intel Core i5-14600T, which scores 32707 (a 0.1% difference). This indicates that the CPU is not a weak link in the chain. In contrast, the RX 580’s percentile rank of 53 and average score of 12928 are much lower, and its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile, scores 12940 (a -0.1% difference), confirming that the GPU is a budget-tier component.

The combination of a top-tier CPU with a bottom-tier GPU creates a severe imbalance, and the game’s benchmark results reflect this. The combo’s rank of 2733 out of 2996 means that 263 other tested configurations performed worse, but these are likely older or even more mismatched systems. The data indicates that this combo is not suitable for Microsoft Flight Simulator at any setting above Low at 1080p, and its ranking suggests that users would be better served by pairing the Ryzen 5 7400F with a more modern GPU. The CPU’s strong single-threaded performance, evidenced by its 3072 score in Cinebench R23 single-core, is wasted in this pairing, as the game’s frame rate is dictated by the GPU’s ability to render frames, not the CPU’s ability to feed it.

The ranking also highlights the disparity between the two components’ positions in their respective markets. The Ryzen 5 7400F is a recent release, launched in January 2025, while the RX 580 was released in April 2017 and is marked as end-of-life. This generational gap is stark, and the benchmark results show that the older GPU cannot leverage the newer CPU’s capabilities. The combo’s performance is so low that even the 4K Low preset at 32 FPS is not a viable gaming experience, and the 1080p Medium preset at 42 FPS is the maximum playable configuration. For users considering this pairing, the data suggests that they should prioritize upgrading the GPU, as the CPU has significant headroom for future graphics card upgrades without becoming a bottleneck.

FAQ

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

A: The measured data shows that 1920x1080 is the only resolution where this combo achieves playable frame rates. At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 54, and at Medium it is 42. At 2560x1440, the best case is 43 FPS at Low, and at 3840x2160, the best case is 32 FPS at Low, both of which are below the threshold for smooth gameplay.

Q: Can this combo run Microsoft Flight Simulator at Ultra settings?

A: No, the data shows that Ultra settings are not viable at any resolution. At 1080p Ultra, the average FPS is 30, at 1440p Ultra it is 24, and at 4K Ultra it is 18. These frame rates are too low for a playable experience, and the minimum FPS at 4K Medium (21 FPS) suggests similar instability at Ultra.

Q: Is the CPU or the GPU the bottleneck in this configuration?

A: The benchmark results indicate that the GPU is the clear bottleneck. The AMD Radeon RX 580 has a percentile rank of 53 and an average score of 12928, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F has a percentile rank of 83 and an average score of 32750. The FPS drops significantly as resolution increases, which is a GPU-bound behavior, not a CPU-bound one.

Q: How does this combo compare to other tested configurations?

A: This combo ranks 2733 out of 2996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the bottom 9% of all configurations. This low ranking is due to the GPU’s age and performance, as the CPU is competitive with rivals like the Intel Core i5-14600T, which scores 32707 (a 0.1% difference from the Ryzen 5 7400F).

Q: What settings should I use at 1080p?

A: The data recommends Medium settings at 1080p, which delivers an average of 42 FPS with a minimum of 36 FPS and a maximum of 48 FPS. Low settings provide a higher average of 54 FPS but with significantly reduced visual quality. High and Ultra are not recommended, as they drop to 31 FPS and 30 FPS, respectively.

Q: Is this combo suitable for 4K gaming?

A: No, the measured data shows that 4K is not playable with this combo. The best case is 32 FPS at Low settings, which is still below the 40 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. Medium, High, and Ultra at 4K produce 25 FPS, 19 FPS, and 18 FPS, respectively, which are all unplayable.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following data represents the exact measured average FPS for each resolution and settings preset combination. For Medium settings, the minimum and maximum FPS are also provided where available.

At 1920x1080, the Low preset yields an average of 54 FPS. The Medium preset produces an average of 42 FPS, with a minimum of 36 FPS and a maximum of 48 FPS. The High preset results in an average of 31 FPS, and the Ultra preset delivers an average of 30 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset achieves an average of 43 FPS. The Medium preset averages 34 FPS, with a minimum of 29 FPS and a maximum of 39 FPS. The High preset averages 25 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 24 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset provides an average of 32 FPS. The Medium preset yields an average of 25 FPS, with a minimum of 21 FPS and a maximum of 29 FPS. The High preset averages 19 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 18 FPS.

The data shows a consistent pattern: every step from Low to Ultra at any resolution costs approximately 10-15 FPS, and every step from 1080p to 1440p to 4K costs approximately 10-15 FPS as well. The only exception is the transition from 1440p to 4K at Ultra, which only costs 6 FPS, indicating that the GPU is already at its limit. The minimum FPS values for Medium settings at all resolutions show that frame pacing is a concern, with the 4K Medium minimum of 21 FPS being particularly low. This breakdown confirms that the combo is best suited for 1080p Low to Medium gaming, with any higher resolution or preset resulting in a sub-optimal experience.