Microsoft Flight Simulator

AMD Ryzen 5 7400F and AMD Radeon RX 9070 in Microsoft Flight Simulator: the data shows a pairing that scales predictably across resolutions and presets, with the GPU carrying the bulk of the load at 4K and the CPU keeping frame rates fluid at lower settings. This analysis examines the measured FPS rows, the component specifications, and how this combination ranks among 2,996 tested combos.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear progression as resolution climbs from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo averages 155 FPS, which drops to 125 FPS at 1440p and then to 92 FPS at 4K. That represents a 40.6% reduction from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 26.4% reduction from 1440p to 4K. The scaling suggests that at 1080p, the system has ample headroom, likely limited by the CPU’s ability to feed frames, while by 4K the GPU becomes the dominant constraint. For High settings, the drop is steeper: 91 FPS at 1080p falls to 73 FPS at 1440p (19.8% loss) and then to 54 FPS at 4K (26.0% loss from 1440p). The 4K High result of 54 FPS borders on the edge of smooth playability, indicating that the GPU is working hard but not overwhelmed.

Looking at Medium settings, which include min/max FPS data, the pattern holds. At 1080p Medium, the average is 121 FPS with a minimum of 103 and maximum of 139. Moving to 1440p Medium, the average drops to 97 FPS (a 19.8% decrease), with min/max at 83 and 112. At 4K Medium, the average falls to 72 FPS (a 25.8% decrease from 1440p), with min/max at 61 and 83. The minimum FPS values at 4K Medium (61) suggest that even with some variance, the experience remains fluid. Ultra settings show the most dramatic scaling: 86 FPS at 1080p, 70 FPS at 1440p (18.6% loss), and 51 FPS at 4K (27.1% loss from 1440p). The 4K Ultra result of 51 FPS is the lowest measured value across all rows, reinforcing that this resolution and preset combination pushes the GPU to its limits.

The data implies that the limiting component shifts with resolution. At 1080p, the gap between Low (155 FPS) and Ultra (86 FPS) is 69 FPS, a 44.5% spread. At 4K, the same gap narrows to 41 FPS (from 92 to 51), a 44.6% spread. This consistency in relative scaling suggests that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions, while at 1080p, the CPU’s ability to process flight simulation logic (physics, weather, terrain streaming) may cap performance. The Ryzen 5 7400F has 6 cores and 12 threads, which is modest for a simulation-heavy title, but its Zen 4 architecture and boost clock of 4.70 GHz likely help maintain reasonable frame pacing. Still, the fact that 1080p Low reaches 155 FPS while 1080p Ultra remains at 86 FPS indicates that graphical settings, not resolution alone, drive the workload.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9070 is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture with a Navi 48 chip, manufactured on a 4 nm process. It features 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 644.6 GB/s. The memory clock runs at 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective), while the base clock is 1330 MHz, the game clock is 2070 MHz, and the boost clock reaches 2520 MHz. These specifications suggest a GPU designed for high-throughput rendering, which aligns with the measured FPS data. The 16 GB VRAM is particularly relevant for Microsoft Flight Simulator, a game known for large textures and extensive scenery data. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS of 51 suggests the GPU is managing the memory load, but the frame rate indicates compute limits rather than memory exhaustion.

The GPU’s benchmark scores provide context. Its Passmark G3D score is 25,381, placing it in the 69th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER (average score 24,170, delta -1.2%) and the AMD Radeon RX 6800S (average score 24,063, delta -0.8%). This means the RX 9070 outperforms those cards by a small margin in synthetic benchmarks, yet in Microsoft Flight Simulator, the measured FPS at 4K High (54) and Ultra (51) are relatively modest. The GPU’s FP32 performance is 36.13 TFLOPS, and its pixel rate is 322.6 GPixel/s, with a texture rate of 564.5 GTexel/s. These figures indicate strong raw compute, but flight simulation relies heavily on draw calls and scenery complexity, which can dilute raw throughput.

The data shows that at 4K, the GPU is the limiting factor. Moving from Medium to Ultra at 4K reduces FPS from 72 to 51, a 29.2% drop, while moving from Low to High at 4K reduces FPS from 92 to 54, a 41.3% drop. This sensitivity to settings implies that the GPU’s shading units (3,584) and ray tracing cores (56) are being heavily taxed, particularly at Ultra where effects like volumetric clouds and dynamic lighting are likely enabled. The 16 GB VRAM is sufficient, as no memory-related stalls are evident in the min FPS data (61 at 4K Medium), but the GPU’s 220 W TDP suggests it runs warm under load. The boost clock of 2520 MHz is respectable, yet the game clock of 2070 MHz indicates that sustained loads may not maintain peak clocks, potentially explaining the frame rates.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured rows, the best experience depends on the target resolution and desired fluidity. At 1080p, Medium settings deliver 121 FPS average with a minimum of 103, which is smooth for most users. High settings at 1080p offer 91 FPS, still playable, but the jump from Medium to High costs 30 FPS (24.8% loss). Ultra at 1080p drops to 86 FPS, which is only 5 FPS less than High, making High a better choice for visual fidelity without a major FPS penalty. At 1440p, Medium provides 97 FPS average (min 83), which is the sweet spot for balance. High at 1440p yields 73 FPS, which is acceptable but starts to feel less fluid. Ultra at 1440p falls to 70 FPS, only 3 FPS less than High, so High is the better option there as well. At 4K, Medium is the only preset that maintains an average above 60 FPS, at 72 FPS (min 61). High at 4K drops to 54 FPS, and Ultra to 51 FPS, both below the 60 FPS threshold that many players prefer.

The data suggests that for 1080p and 1440p, Medium offers the best experience per the measured rows, as it provides high averages and respectable minimums. At 4K, Medium is the only viable preset for a smooth experience, but even then, the minimum of 61 FPS is close to the edge. Low settings at 4K (92 FPS) are an option for those prioritizing frame rate over visuals, but the visual degradation may not be worth the 20 FPS gain over Medium. For Ultra enthusiasts, the data shows that 1080p Ultra (86 FPS) is the only resolution where Ultra remains above 60 FPS. At 1440p and 4K, Ultra falls below 70 FPS and 60 FPS, respectively, suggesting that Ultra is best reserved for 1080p or for users who tolerate lower frame rates for maximum visual quality.

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F and AMD Radeon RX 9070 combination ranks 833rd out of 2,996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the top 27.8% of all combos, which is a respectable position given the game’s demanding nature. The rank reflects the combined performance of both components, and the data indicates that the GPU is the stronger contributor. The CPU’s percentile versus all CPUs is 83, meaning it outperforms 83% of tested processors in synthetic benchmarks. The GPU’s percentile versus all GPUs is 69, which is lower, suggesting that the GPU is less exceptional relative to its peers. However, in this game, the GPU’s role is more critical, as evidenced by the resolution scaling.

The combo’s rank of 833 out of 2,996 means there are 832 combos that perform better, likely featuring higher-end CPUs (more cores) and GPUs (higher tier RDNA or RTX cards). The nearest CPU rivals in synthetic benchmarks include the Intel Core i5-14600T (avg score 32,707, delta 0.1%) and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H (avg score 32,812, delta -0.2%), indicating that the 7400F is closely matched with those parts. For the GPU, the nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER (delta -1.2%) and the AMD Radeon RX 6800S (delta -0.8%), meaning the RX 9070 edges them out slightly. In Microsoft Flight Simulator, this combo’s rank suggests that while it is not a top-tier performer, it handles the game adequately, especially at 1080p and 1440p with Medium settings.

The rank also implies that the combo is balanced but not overkill. The CPU’s 6 cores and 12 threads are sufficient for the game’s simulation logic, but the GPU’s 16 GB VRAM and 3,584 shading units are well-matched for 1440p gaming. The fact that 4K Ultra drops to 51 FPS indicates that the combo is not designed for maximum settings at 4K, but it excels at lower resolutions. Compared to the 2,996 combos tested, this pairing sits in the upper third, which is a solid result for a mid-range CPU and upper-mid-range GPU.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Raphael. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, with a TDP of 65 W. The CPU’s cache hierarchy includes 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. This configuration is typical for a mid-range desktop processor, and in Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU handles physics, AI traffic, and scenery loading. The measured FPS data at 1080p Low (155 FPS) versus 4K Low (92 FPS) indicates that at lower resolutions, the CPU is more likely to be the bottleneck, as the GPU has less work to do. The boost clock of 4.70 GHz is helpful for single-threaded tasks, which flight simulation often relies on for core simulation loops.

The CPU’s benchmark scores show strong single-thread performance: Cinebench R23 single-core scores 3,072, and Passmark single-thread scores 3,689. Multi-thread scores are also solid, with Cinebench R23 multi-core at 21,765 and Passmark multi-thread at 25,645. These numbers suggest that the 7400F can handle the game’s demands, but the 6-core limit may cause slight frame pacing issues in densely populated areas. The CPU’s memory bandwidth is 83.2 GB/s with dual-channel DDR5 support, which is sufficient for the game’s streaming needs. The L3 cache of 32 MB is shared across all cores, which helps with data sharing but is smaller than some competing CPUs.

The data implies that the CPU is not the primary limiter at 4K, where the GPU dominates. At 1080p Low, the 155 FPS average suggests that the CPU can feed the GPU efficiently, but the drop to 86 FPS at 1080p Ultra indicates that higher settings increase CPU workload (e.g., more draw calls, more complex physics). The CPU’s nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks include the Intel Core i5-14600T (delta 0.1%) and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 (delta 0.3%), meaning the 7400F is competitive with those parts. However, the 14600T has more cores (likely 14), which could offer better multi-threaded performance in simulation scenarios. The data does not include direct CPU-only FPS measurements, but the resolution scaling patterns point to the CPU being adequate for 1080p and 1440p, while the GPU takes over at 4K.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160 (4K), the measured average FPS across settings is as follows: Low at 92 FPS, Medium at 72 FPS (min 61, max 83), High at 54 FPS, and Ultra at 51 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 20 FPS (21.7% decrease), while the gap between Medium and High is 18 FPS (25.0% decrease), and between High and Ultra is only 3 FPS (5.6% decrease). This suggests that High and Ultra are close in performance, but Medium offers a significant jump in frame rate over High. The min FPS of 61 at Medium indicates that even in demanding scenes, the frame rate does not drop below 60 FPS, which is a positive sign for playability.

At 2560x1440 (1440p), the averages are: Low at 125 FPS, Medium at 97 FPS (min 83, max 112), High at 73 FPS, and Ultra at 70 FPS. The decrease from Low to Medium is 28 FPS (22.4%), from Medium to High is 24 FPS (24.7%), and from High to Ultra is 3 FPS (4.1%). The pattern is similar to 4K, with Medium being the inflection point where performance becomes more demanding. The min FPS of 83 at Medium is well above 60, suggesting smooth gameplay even during complex flights.

At 1920x1080 (1080p), the averages are: Low at 155 FPS, Medium at 121 FPS (min 103, max 139), High at 91 FPS, and Ultra at 86 FPS. The decrease from Low to Medium is 34 FPS (21.9%), from Medium to High is 30 FPS (24.8%), and from High to Ultra is 5 FPS (5.5%). The min FPS of 103 at Medium is excellent, ensuring no stutters. Across all resolutions, Medium settings provide the best trade-off between visual quality and frame rate, with the min FPS data confirming that the GPU maintains stable performance. The max FPS values (83 at 4K Medium, 112 at 1440p Medium, 139 at 1080p Medium) show that the system can burst to higher frame rates in less demanding scenes, but the averages are more representative of sustained performance.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 1080p with Ultra settings?

A: The average FPS is 86, with no min or max values provided in the data.

Q: Does the combo maintain 60 FPS at 4K with Medium settings?

A: Yes, the average FPS is 72, with a minimum of 61, so it stays above 60 FPS even in demanding scenes.

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

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F has an average benchmark score of 32,750, which is 0.1% higher than the Intel Core i5-14600T (32,707) and 0.2% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H (32,697).

Q: What is the GPU’s memory configuration?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9070 has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 644.6 GB/s and a memory clock of 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective).

Q: At which resolution does the combo rank best in terms of FPS?

A: The highest average FPS is 155 at 1080p Low settings, while the lowest is 51 at 4K Ultra. The most balanced performance is at 1440p Medium, with 97 FPS average.

Q: What is the combo’s overall rank among tested combinations?

A: The combo ranks 833rd out of 2,996 tested combos, placing it in the upper 27.8% of all tested systems.