Microsoft Flight Simulator

The AMD Ryzen 5 7500F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 produces a dataset that is heavily influenced by the CPU's limits at lower resolutions, while the GPU dominates at 4K. The measured rows show a clear hierarchy of settings that balances visual fidelity against frame rate headroom, with the CPU becoming the primary constraint as resolution drops.

Settings Recommendations

The data shows that the "High" preset provides the most balanced experience across the tested resolutions. At 3840x2160, High yields an average of 81.7 FPS, which is only 2.5 FPS behind the Ultra preset's 79.2 FPS, but the gap widens significantly at lower resolutions. At 2560x1440, High produces 115.1 FPS compared to Ultra's 107.8 FPS, a 7.3 FPS advantage. At 1920x1080, the difference grows to 3.0 FPS (138.9 vs 135.9), showing that High consistently outperforms Ultra while likely offering better visual quality than Medium.

The "Medium" preset offers a substantial frame rate boost but with diminishing returns. At 4K, Medium achieves 109.5 FPS, which is 27.8 FPS higher than High. At 1440p, Medium reaches 149.2 FPS, a 34.1 FPS improvement over High. At 1080p, Medium hits 186.4 FPS, which is 47.5 FPS above High. However, the jump from Medium to Low provides even larger gains: at 4K, Low reaches 137.9 FPS (28.4 FPS over Medium), at 1440p Low hits 188.3 FPS (39.1 FPS over Medium), and at 1080p Low achieves 204.7 FPS (18.3 FPS over Medium).

For users prioritizing visual quality, the High preset is the sweet spot. It maintains a playable frame rate at 4K (81.7 FPS) while offering a meaningful advantage over Ultra at every resolution. The Ultra preset is only 2.5 FPS slower at 4K, but the gap expands to 7.3 FPS at 1440p and 3.0 FPS at 1080p, making it the least efficient choice. Low is strictly for competitive or high-refresh-rate scenarios, as it sacrifices visual detail for the highest possible frame rates.

GPU Role

The RTX 5090's memory configuration is a defining factor in this game's results. With 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus, the card delivers 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock runs at 1750 MHz, which translates to 28 Gbps effective. These specifications explain why the GPU does not bottleneck at 4K, where the data shows frame rates of 79.2 to 137.9 FPS depending on settings.

The GPU's boost clock of 2407 MHz, combined with its 21760 shading units and 170 RT cores, provides the raw compute needed for flight simulation's dense geometry and lighting. The 104.8 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is evident in the 4K results, where the gap between Low (137.9 FPS) and Ultra (79.2 FPS) shows a 58.7 FPS range—a 74.1% difference. This scaling indicates the GPU is fully utilized at this resolution, with each settings tier producing a distinct performance level.

At lower resolutions, the GPU's role diminishes. The data shows that at 1080p, the difference between Low (204.7 FPS) and Ultra (135.9 FPS) is 68.8 FPS, but the CPU begins to limit performance. The RTX 5090's 94th percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 84306, confirms its top-tier status, yet the measured results reveal that it is not the limiting component at 1080p.

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 5 7500F + RTX 5090 combination ranks 16th out of 1795 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places the combo in the top 0.9% of all configurations, which is notable given the CPU's mid-range positioning. The CPU itself has an 82nd percentile ranking among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 24993, while the GPU sits in the 94th percentile.

The CPU's nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks provide context. The Intel Core i7-11850H scores 24974 (0.1% lower), the AMD Ryzen 7 2700X scores 25057 (0.3% higher), and the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F scores 25064 (0.3% higher). These deltas are negligible, meaning the 7500F performs essentially on par with these alternatives. The GPU's nearest rival, the RTX 5090 D, scores 84241 (0.1% lower), showing that the 5090 is not meaningfully different from its closest competitor.

The combo's 16th place ranking suggests that while the individual components are strong, the pairing is not optimal for this specific game. The CPU's 6 cores and 12 threads, with a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, provide solid single-thread performance, but the data indicates that flight simulation benefits from more cores. The 3dmark results show a single-thread score of 974, while the max-thread score is 6379, indicating a 6.5x scaling factor that is typical for a 6-core part.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the data shows the following averages: Low produces 204.7 FPS, Medium produces 186.4 FPS, High produces 138.9 FPS, and Ultra produces 135.9 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 68.8 FPS, or 50.6%. The step from Low to Medium is 18.3 FPS, from Medium to High is 47.5 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 3.0 FPS. This pattern reveals that the High-to-Ultra transition has minimal cost, while the Medium-to-High jump is the most expensive.

At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low at 188.3 FPS, Medium at 149.2 FPS, High at 115.1 FPS, and Ultra at 107.8 FPS. The Low-to-Ultra gap is 80.5 FPS, or 74.7%. The step from Low to Medium is 39.1 FPS, from Medium to High is 34.1 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 7.3 FPS. Compared to 1080p, all settings show lower frame rates, but the relative scaling is similar.

At 3840x2160, the averages are: Low at 137.9 FPS, Medium at 109.5 FPS, High at 81.7 FPS, and Ultra at 79.2 FPS. The Low-to-Ultra gap is 58.7 FPS, or 74.1%. The step from Low to Medium is 28.4 FPS, from Medium to High is 27.8 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 2.5 FPS. The High-to-Ultra delta shrinks to nearly negligible levels at 4K, suggesting that Ultra is not worth the visual cost at this resolution.

Resolution Scaling

The data shows a clear pattern of frame rate degradation as resolution increases, but the magnitude varies by settings. At Low settings, the drop from 1080p to 4K is from 204.7 FPS to 137.9 FPS, a reduction of 66.8 FPS or 32.6%. At Medium settings, the drop is from 186.4 FPS to 109.5 FPS, a reduction of 76.9 FPS or 41.3%. At High settings, the drop is from 138.9 FPS to 81.7 FPS, a reduction of 57.2 FPS or 41.2%. At Ultra settings, the drop is from 135.9 FPS to 79.2 FPS, a reduction of 56.7 FPS or 41.7%.

The consistency of the percentage drops (41.2% to 41.7%) for Medium, High, and Ultra suggests that the GPU is the limiting factor at these settings. The Low settings drop of 32.6% is smaller, indicating that the CPU is becoming the bottleneck at 1080p Low. This interpretation is supported by the 1440p-to-1080p scaling: at Low, the difference is 16.4 FPS (188.3 to 204.7), while at Ultra the difference is 28.1 FPS (107.8 to 135.9). The larger absolute gain at Ultra suggests the GPU has more headroom when the CPU is less stressed.

The 4K-to-1440p scaling further clarifies this. At Low, the drop is 50.4 FPS (188.3 to 137.9), at Medium it is 39.7 FPS (149.2 to 109.5), at High it is 33.4 FPS (115.1 to 81.7), and at Ultra it is 28.6 FPS (107.8 to 79.2). The decreasing absolute drops as settings increase indicate that the GPU is the primary constraint at 4K, while the CPU limits performance at lower resolutions and settings.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 7500F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on Zen 4 architecture, with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. It has 32 MB of shared L3 cache and supports DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. The CPU's synthetic benchmarks show a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 22799 and a single-core score of 3218, indicating strong per-core performance.

The data shows that the CPU becomes the limiting factor at 1080p and Low settings. The 1080p Low result of 204.7 FPS is the highest in the dataset, but the 1440p Low result of 188.3 FPS is only 16.4 FPS lower, while the 4K Low result drops to 137.9 FPS. This non-linear scaling suggests that at 1080p Low, the CPU is maxed out, and the GPU is not fully utilized. The 3dmark single-thread score of 974 and the 2-thread score of 1902 indicate that the CPU's single-thread performance is adequate but not exceptional.

The CPU's 82nd percentile ranking and its nearest rival deltas (all within 0.4%) show that it performs as expected for its class. However, the 16th combo ranking out of 1795 suggests that pairing a mid-range CPU with a top-tier GPU creates a bottleneck in this game. The CPU's 6 cores may be insufficient for flight simulation's complex physics and AI calculations, as evidenced by the diminishing returns at higher resolutions where the GPU's workload becomes more dominant. The 12 threads provide some multi-threading capability, but the data indicates that a higher-core-count CPU would likely improve the 1080p and 1440p results.