Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is one of the most demanding titles in PC gaming, and the data for the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER paints a clear picture of a system that is firmly GPU-limited at higher resolutions. The benchmark results show a configuration that can deliver playable frame rates at 1080p and 1440p with adjusted settings, but it struggles to maintain smooth performance at 4K. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS across resolutions and settings to explain exactly where this combo excels and where it falls short.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a predictable but steep performance curve as resolution increases. At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves an average of 78 FPS, which drops to 63 FPS at 1440p and further to 46 FPS at 4K. This scaling pattern indicates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck; as pixel count increases, the rendering load on the GTX 1660 SUPER grows substantially, causing frame rates to fall by roughly 19% from 1080p to 1440p and another 27% from 1440p to 4K at Low settings.

The trend continues across all settings presets. At Medium settings, the average FPS drops from 60 at 1080p to 49 at 1440p and 36 at 4K. High settings show a similar pattern: 45 FPS at 1080p, 37 at 1440p, and 27 at 4K. Ultra settings are the most demanding, with averages of 43 FPS at 1080p, 35 at 1440p, and just 26 at 4K. The consistent reduction in performance as resolution climbs confirms that the GTX 1660 SUPER’s 6 GB of VRAM and its compute capabilities are the limiting factors, not the Ryzen 5 7400F.

What’s more telling is the relative performance drop between settings at the same resolution. At 1080p, moving from Low to Ultra costs 35 FPS (from 78 to 43), while at 4K, the same settings change only costs 20 FPS (from 46 to 26). This suggests that at lower resolutions, the CPU and GPU have more headroom to work with, and the GPU’s fill rate becomes the deciding factor. At 4K, the GPU is already saturated, so the additional shading and texture work from higher settings has a smaller absolute impact on frame rates.

For practical purposes, the data shows that 4K gaming is only viable with Low settings, where the system manages 46 FPS. Even then, that’s borderline for a flight simulator, which often benefits from higher, more stable frame rates. The 1440p results are more promising, with Medium settings hitting 49 FPS and Low hitting 63 FPS, both of which are acceptable for a slower-paced sim. At 1080p, the system has plenty of options, with Medium and High both exceeding 45 FPS.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER is built on the Turing architecture and features 1,408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs. Its base clock is 1530 MHz with a boost clock of 1785 MHz, and it comes with 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU’s pixel rate is 85.68 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 157.1 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance rated at 5.027 TFLOPS. These specs place it in the mid-range tier, and its benchmark scores reflect that positioning.

In the Passmark G3D benchmark, the GPU scores 12,699, which puts it in the 53rd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (scoring 12,940, a 0.4% delta) and the AMD Radeon RX 580 (scoring 12,928, also a 0.4% delta). This means the GTX 1660 SUPER is essentially on par with those cards in synthetic tests, but in Microsoft Flight Simulator, the actual performance is heavily influenced by VRAM capacity and memory bandwidth.

The 6 GB VRAM is a critical factor. At 4K resolution with High or Ultra settings, the game’s texture and geometry data likely exceeds this capacity, leading to the sub-30 FPS averages measured (27 FPS at High and 26 FPS at Ultra). The GPU’s 336.0 GB/s bandwidth is also modest by modern standards, which becomes a constraint when rendering dense scenery at high resolutions. The data shows that even at 1440p, Ultra settings only reach 35 FPS, indicating that the GPU is struggling to keep up with the shading and memory demands.

Comparing to its synthetic benchmark rivals, the GTX 1660 SUPER’s performance in this game is consistent with its overall positioning. It’s not a high-end card, but it can handle 1080p and 1440p gaming if settings are managed appropriately. The measured FPS at 1080p Medium (60 FPS) and Low (78 FPS) shows that the card has enough headroom for playable frame rates, but pushing to 4K requires dropping to Low settings to stay above 45 FPS. The GPU’s DirectX 12 benchmark score of 50 in Passmark is low, but that doesn’t directly translate to this game, which uses a custom rendering engine.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 4K?

A: Yes, but only with Low settings, where it averages 46 FPS. At Medium, High, or Ultra settings, the average FPS drops to 36, 27, and 26 respectively, which is below the typically desired 30 FPS threshold for a smooth experience. For consistent playability at 4K, Low settings are the only viable option.

Q: What is the best resolution for this CPU and GPU combo?

A: The sweet spot is 1080p, where the system achieves 60 FPS at Medium settings and 45 FPS at High. At 1440p, Medium settings still deliver 49 FPS, which is acceptable. 4K is only recommended for Low settings, and even then, frame rates hover around 46 FPS.

Q: How does the GTX 1660 SUPER compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The GPU scores 12,699 in Passmark G3D. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile scores 12,940 (0.4% higher), and the AMD Radeon RX 580 scores 12,928 (0.4% higher). This indicates the GTX 1660 SUPER is statistically tied with those cards in general GPU performance.

Q: Is the Ryzen 5 7400F holding back the GTX 1660 SUPER in this game?

A: The data suggests no. The CPU scores 21,765 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 3,072 in single-core, placing it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals, like the Intel Core i5-14600T, score similarly (32,707 vs 32,750 average). Given the FPS drops at higher resolutions, the GPU is the limiting factor.

Q: What settings should I use for a balance of visuals and performance at 1440p?

A: Medium settings at 1440p provide an average of 49 FPS, with a minimum of 41 FPS and a maximum of 56 FPS. This is a solid balance. If you prefer smoother frame rates, Low settings push the average to 63 FPS, but visual fidelity suffers.

Q: Does the 6 GB VRAM cause issues in this game?

A: Yes, particularly at 4K. The measured FPS at 4K High (27 FPS) and Ultra (26 FPS) suggests that VRAM capacity is likely exceeded, causing significant performance degradation. At 1080p and 1440p, the 6 GB is sufficient for Medium settings, but Ultra at 1440p still only hits 35 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the system performs best. Low settings deliver an average of 78 FPS. Medium settings average 60 FPS, with a minimum of 51 FPS and a maximum of 69 FPS. High settings average 45 FPS. Ultra settings average 43 FPS. This shows that 1080p is highly playable across the board, with even Ultra staying above 40 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the performance drops noticeably. Low settings average 63 FPS. Medium settings average 49 FPS, with a minimum of 41 FPS and a maximum of 56 FPS. High settings average 37 FPS. Ultra settings average 35 FPS. The minimum frame rate at Medium (41 FPS) is still acceptable, but High and Ultra begin to feel sluggish for a flight sim that benefits from stable frame pacing.

At 3840x2160, the system is clearly struggling. Low settings average 46 FPS. Medium settings average 36 FPS, with a minimum of 31 FPS and a maximum of 41 FPS. High settings average 27 FPS. Ultra settings average 26 FPS. Only Low settings provide a consistently playable experience, and even then, the average is below 60 FPS. The minimum FPS at Medium (31 FPS) is right at the edge of what most players would consider acceptable.

The data reveals a few key patterns. First, the delta between Low and Medium settings is consistent across resolutions: roughly 18-19 FPS at 1080p (78 to 60), 14 FPS at 1440p (63 to 49), and 10 FPS at 4K (46 to 36). This suggests that Medium adds significant visual fidelity without proportionally huge performance costs. Second, the gap between High and Ultra is minimal at all resolutions, with only a 2 FPS difference at 1440p and 1 FPS at 4K. This indicates that Ultra is barely more demanding than High, making High a better choice if you want slightly better performance without sacrificing much visual quality.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Raphael. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The CPU supports DDR5 memory with dual-channel configuration and offers 83.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth. Its cache includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3. The processor is built on TSMC’s 5 nm process and features 6,570 million transistors on a 71 mm² die.

In synthetic benchmarks, the Ryzen 5 7400F performs admirably. It scores 21,765 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 3,072 in single-core. In Passmark tests, it achieves a multi-thread score of 25,645 and a single-thread score of 3,689. Its average benchmark score is 32,750, placing it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-14600T (average score 32,707, a 0.1% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H (average score 32,812, a -0.2% delta). These scores show that the 7400F is a highly capable mid-range processor.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU’s role is to handle game logic, physics, and draw calls, while the GPU handles rendering. Given the measured FPS, the Ryzen 5 7400F is not the bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the system hits 78 FPS, which is a good indicator that the CPU can feed the GPU fast enough. The fact that performance drops so significantly at higher resolutions points to GPU limitations, not CPU ones. The CPU’s strong single-thread performance (3,072 in Cinebench R23) is particularly important for flight simulators, which often rely on a single main thread for simulation logic.

The CPU’s memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s is more than sufficient for this game, and the 32 MB of L3 cache helps with data locality. The 7400F’s 6 cores and 12 threads are adequate for a sim that doesn’t scale perfectly across many cores. The data shows that even at 1080p Ultra (43 FPS), the CPU is not holding back the GPU, as the frame rate is still above what the GPU can typically deliver at that setting.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on your resolution and performance priorities. At 1080p, the system is flexible. For the best visual experience without sacrificing playability, High settings at 45 FPS are a good choice. If you prefer smoother frame rates, Medium settings at 60 FPS provide a significant boost in fluidity with a modest visual downgrade. Ultra settings at 43 FPS are not worth the extra performance hit over High, as the visual difference is minimal according to the data.

At 1440p, Medium settings are the clear recommendation. The average of 49 FPS, with a minimum of 41 FPS, provides a playable experience for most users. Low settings at 63 FPS are also viable if you prioritize frame rate over visuals, but Medium offers a better balance of image quality and performance. High settings at 37 FPS and Ultra at 35 FPS are too low for comfortable gameplay, especially in a sim where smooth camera pans and instrument readability matter.

At 4K, the system is severely constrained. Low settings at 46 FPS are the only option for a remotely playable experience. Medium settings at 36 FPS may be acceptable for some players, but the minimum of 31 FPS indicates potential stuttering in dense areas. High and Ultra are not recommended at 4K, as they both average in the mid-20s, which is below the threshold for smooth gameplay.

For a general recommendation, the data suggests using Medium settings at 1440p as the default for this hardware combo. It provides a good compromise between visual fidelity and performance, with an average FPS in the high 40s. If you have a 1080p monitor, High settings are a better choice, offering 45 FPS with better detail. Players with 4K displays should stick to Low settings and accept the performance limitations of the GTX 1660 SUPER. The benchmark data confirms that this system is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, with 4K reserved for Low settings only.