Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is a demanding title, and the pairing of the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F with the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT produces a predictable set of performance trade-offs across resolutions and presets. The benchmark data shows a system that can handle the sim at 1080p with high frame rates on lower settings, but which requires careful preset management to maintain smoothness at higher resolutions. The measured results indicate that this combo is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, where it can deliver playable performance, while 4K remains a challenge that forces significant compromises. This analysis details the measured FPS across all tested configurations and interprets how the CPU and GPU characteristics shape the experience in this specific flight simulator.

FAQ

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

A: Based on the measured data, 1920x1080 is the best resolution for this combo. At Low settings, it achieves 101 FPS average, and even at Ultra it maintains 56 FPS average. The 2560x1440 resolution is also viable, with an 81 FPS average at Low and 45 FPS at Ultra. The 3840x2160 resolution is the weakest, with only a 60 FPS average at Low and 33 FPS at Ultra.

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

A: This combo ranks 2058 out of 2996 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the lower third of all tested system pairings, indicating that while it is functional, many other combinations deliver better overall performance in this specific simulation.

Q: Which graphics settings provide the best balance of quality and performance at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the Medium preset is the best balance. It delivers an average of 78 FPS with a minimum of 66 FPS and a maximum of 90 FPS. This is a significant improvement over the High preset’s 59 FPS average and is only 23 FPS behind the Low preset’s 101 FPS average, while offering considerably better visual fidelity.

Q: Is the CPU or the GPU more of a limiting factor in this game?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the primary limiting factor, especially at higher resolutions. The CPU has a strong multi-core score of 21765 in Cinebench R23 and a Passmark multithread score of 25645, while the GPU’s Passmark G3D score is 16461. The FPS drops significantly as resolution increases (e.g., 101 FPS at 1080p Low to 60 FPS at 4K Low), which is a classic sign of GPU-bound performance.

Q: What is the launch MSRP for the CPU and GPU in this combo?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F has a launch MSRP of $229. The AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT has a launch MSRP of 379 USD.

Q: Does this combo provide a smooth experience at 4K Ultra settings?

A: No. At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the average FPS is only 33. This is below the threshold for a consistently smooth experience in a flight simulator, which typically benefits from higher frame rates for fluid camera panning.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides a clear hierarchy for settings optimization. For users prioritizing a smooth, high-refresh experience at 1920x1080, the Low preset is the clear winner, with an average of 101 FPS. However, this comes at a major visual cost. The Medium preset at 1080p is the pragmatic sweet spot for most users, delivering a 78 FPS average with a minimum of 66 FPS. This ensures the frame rate rarely dips into uncomfortable territory while still rendering the world with more detail. The High preset at 1080p drops to 59 FPS average, and Ultra yields 56 FPS, both of which are playable but represent a noticeable step down in smoothness.

At 2560x1440, the situation changes. The Low preset still provides a very playable 81 FPS average, making it the best choice for fluid performance at this resolution. The Medium preset, with a 63 FPS average and a minimum of 54 FPS, is also a strong option for those who want a better-looking image and can tolerate occasional dips. The High preset at 47 FPS and Ultra at 45 FPS are less ideal, as the frame rates are getting closer to the 40s, which can feel less responsive for quick camera movements. For a consistent experience at 1440p, sticking with Medium or Low is recommended.

For 3840x2160, the options are severely constrained. The Low preset achieves a 60 FPS average, which is the only preset at this resolution to hit the 60 FPS mark. The Medium preset provides 47 FPS with a minimum of 40 FPS, which is on the edge of playability. The High preset (35 FPS) and Ultra preset (33 FPS) are not recommended for a smooth experience. Given the data, the best experience for this combo is to run 1080p Medium for a balance of fidelity and smoothness, or 1440p Low/Medium if a higher resolution is desired. The 4K resolution should only be used with the Low preset if a 60 FPS target is a hard requirement, and even then, the visual quality will be poor.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo of the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F and AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT holds a rank of 2058 out of 2996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the 68th percentile of tested systems, meaning that roughly 68% of the combinations tested for this game deliver higher performance. This ranking is a holistic measure of the system’s capability in this specific title and reflects the fact that while the CPU is competent, the GPU is a mid-range part that struggles with the highest resolutions and settings. The combo is not a top-tier performer, but it is not at the bottom either. It sits in a position where it can handle the game at mainstream resolutions with adjusted settings.

The ranking is influenced by the GPU’s performance relative to other parts. The RX 6600 XT has a percentile of 70 among all GPUs and an average benchmark score of 24442. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630, which has a deltaPct of 0.7, and the Intel Arc A350M, with a deltaPct of -0.8. This indicates that the GPU is roughly in line with these competitors in general compute benchmarks, but its performance in flight simulator is what determines the combo’s rank. The CPU’s performance is more solid, with a percentile of 83 among all CPUs and a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21765, placing it well ahead of many alternatives. However, the game’s heavy reliance on GPU rendering means the graphics card’s capabilities are the primary factor in this ranking.

The deltaPct values for the CPU’s nearest rivals are very small, with the Intel Core i5-14600T being 0.1% faster and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H being 0.2% slower. This shows that the 7400F is positioned in a very tight performance band. The bottleneck in this system is clearly the GPU, as evidenced by the massive frame rate drops when moving from 1080p to 4K. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the frame rates would be more consistent across resolutions. Therefore, the combo’s rank is a direct reflection of the RX 6600 XT’s capabilities in this simulation.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data for this combo reveals a clear performance hierarchy that scales with resolution and settings. At 1920x1080, the system performs best. The Low preset produces an average of 101 FPS, which is excellent for a flight simulator and ensures very smooth camera work. The Medium preset reduces the average to 78 FPS, with a minimum of 66 FPS and a maximum of 90 FPS, which is still very playable. The High preset averages 59 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 56 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra at this resolution is small, suggesting that the Ultra preset’s extra effects do not have a large performance impact. The data shows that 1080p is the resolution where this combo can fully stretch its legs, with even the most demanding preset remaining above the 50 FPS mark.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance drops noticeably. The Low preset still delivers a strong 81 FPS average, making it a viable option for high-refresh 1440p monitors. The Medium preset averages 63 FPS, with a minimum of 54 FPS and a maximum of 73 FPS. This is acceptable for most users, but the minimum frame rate suggests there will be occasional stutters in dense areas. The High preset drops to 47 FPS, and the Ultra preset to 45 FPS. These numbers are on the lower end of what is considered smooth, and users may notice a less fluid experience. The step from Low to Medium at 1440p costs 18 FPS on average, while the step from Medium to High costs 16 FPS, indicating that the GPU is struggling with the increased pixel count.

At 3840x2160, the system is heavily strained. The Low preset achieves a 60 FPS average, which is the only playable option at this resolution. The Medium preset averages 47 FPS, with a minimum of 40 FPS and a maximum of 54 FPS. This is borderline, and users will likely experience noticeable frame drops. The High preset averages 35 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 33 FPS. These are not suitable for a smooth simulation experience. The data shows a clear pattern: each increase in resolution cuts the average FPS significantly, and each increase in settings at a given resolution has a similar impact. The performance headroom of this combo is firmly in the 1080p and 1440p territory, with 4K only being viable on the lowest settings.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT is the primary driver of the frame rates in this benchmark. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. This memory configuration is a key factor in its performance, as Microsoft Flight Simulator is known for loading large textures and terrain data. The 8 GB capacity is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p at most settings, but it may become a limiting factor at 4K Ultra where texture demands are highest. The GPU’s core clocks are a base of 1968 MHz, a game clock of 2359 MHz, and a boost clock of 2589 MHz. These high clock speeds are essential for maintaining the frame rates seen in the 1080p Low and Medium presets.

The GPU is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with the Navi 23 chip, which includes 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. It also has 32 ray accelerators. The FP32 performance is 10.60 TFLOPS, which is moderate by modern standards. This compute power is what allows the GPU to handle the complex lighting and shadow calculations in the simulator. The GPU’s Passmark G3D score is 16461, and its percentile among all GPUs is 70. This places it in the mid-range tier. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630, has a deltaPct of 0.7, meaning the RX 6600 XT is roughly 0.7% slower than that card in the aggregate benchmark. This is a very tight margin, but in the real-world flight simulator test, the RX 6600 XT’s performance is defined by the measured FPS, which shows it can handle 1080p well but falls short at 4K.

The data suggests that the GPU’s 8 GB memory and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth are adequate for the lower and medium presets, but the higher presets at 4K likely push it beyond its limits. The pixel rate of 165.7 GPixel/s and texture rate of 331.4 GTexel/s are the theoretical limits, but the actual game performance is lower due to the complex scene geometry and draw calls. The GPU’s support for DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) is important, as it enables the latest rendering features, but these features also add to the performance load. In summary, the RX 6600 XT is a capable 1080p and 1440p card for this game, but it lacks the raw power and memory bandwidth needed for high-fidelity 4K.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 4 architecture on the 5 nm process. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. With 32 MB of shared L3 cache, it is well-suited for gaming workloads. The CPU’s performance in synthetic benchmarks is strong. It scores 21765 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 3072 in single-core, along with a Passmark multithread score of 25645 and a single-thread score of 3689. These scores indicate a very capable processor that should not bottleneck most graphics cards in gaming scenarios. However, in Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU’s role is to process the simulation logic, physics, and AI traffic, which are often single-threaded or lightly threaded.

The CPU’s percentile of 83 among all CPUs shows it is a high-performing part, but its nearest rivals, such as the Intel Core i5-14600T and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H, are within 0.2% of its average score. This means the 7400F is not a standout performer but is solidly in the upper mid-range. In the context of this combo, the CPU’s high single-thread performance (3072 in R23 single-core) is crucial for maintaining frame pacing in the simulator, especially when flying over complex scenery. The 12 threads also help with background tasks and multi-threaded aspects of the simulation, such as loading new terrain tiles.

The measured FPS data shows that the CPU is not the primary bottleneck. For example, at 1080p Low, the 101 FPS average is high, and the CPU can feed the GPU enough data to achieve that. However, at 4K Low, the average drops to 60 FPS, which is a significant decrease. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rates would be similar across resolutions. The fact that they drop so much when going from 1080p to 4K clearly points to the GPU being the limiting factor. The CPU’s 65 W TDP and 83.2 GB/s memory bandwidth are more than adequate for this game. The Ryzen 5 7400F provides a stable foundation, and its performance is more than sufficient to avoid holding back the RX 6600 XT in this title. The bottleneck is firmly on the graphics side.