Microsoft Flight Simulator

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D is a 6-core, 12-thread processor from the 7000 series, built on the Zen 4 Raphael architecture using a 5 nm process at TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 4.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz, with a TDP of 65 W. The chip carries a large 96 MB shared L3 cache, which is a defining feature for simulation workloads, alongside 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 cache per core. Memory support is DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, providing 83.2 GB/s of bandwidth, and the CPU supports ECC memory. It uses the AMD Socket AM5 and provides PCIe Gen 5 with 24 lanes from the CPU.

Benchmark results for this processor place it in the 89th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 44,573. Its nearest rivals in aggregate performance include the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H, which scores 44,466 (0.2% ahead), the Intel Core i9-13950HX at 44,342 (0.5% ahead), and the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 at 44,309 (0.6% ahead). The Intel Core i5-14600 trails by 0.7% with a score of 44,889. These margins are tight, indicating that the 7500X3D sits in a competitive performance band where single-digit percentage differences separate it from a range of high-end desktop and mobile parts.

In the context of Microsoft Flight Simulator, the measured FPS results show that this CPU is not the primary constraint at most settings. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves 92 FPS, which is the highest measured average across all resolutions and settings. At the same resolution with Medium settings, FPS drops to 72, and at High it falls to 54, with Ultra at 51. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 1080p shows a reduction of roughly 45% in frame rate. This pattern suggests that while the CPU's strong single-thread performance (PassMark single-thread score of 3,494) and large cache handle the simulation's core logic well, the GPU begins to take over as the limiting factor when settings increase. The 7500X3D's 12 threads and 96 MB L3 cache are well-suited for the complex world-loading and physics calculations inherent to flight simulation, as evidenced by the solid frame rates at lower graphical loads.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 is a RDNA 2.0 architecture GPU based on the Navi 23 chip, manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It features 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units, along with 28 ray tracing cores. The GPU operates with a base clock of 1626 MHz, a game clock of 2044 MHz, and a boost clock of 2491 MHz. Memory consists of 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The card's pixel rate is 159.4 GPixel/s, texture rate is 279.0 GTexel/s, and FP32 performance is 8.928 TFLOPS. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The RX 6600 ranks in the 63rd percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 19,036. Its nearest rivals are tightly clustered: the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 matches at 19,030 (0% delta), the GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile scores 19,049 (-0.1% delta), the Tesla K20m scores 19,089 (-0.3% delta), and the RTX 2000 Ada Generation scores 18,954 (0.4% delta). This places the RX 6600 in a mid-range tier, which is consistent with its performance in Microsoft Flight Simulator.

In this game, the GPU's role becomes increasingly dominant as resolution rises. At 1080p, the combo delivers 92 FPS on Low, but at 4K on Low, the average drops to 55 FPS. This 40% reduction from 1080p to 4K at Low settings indicates that the GPU's 8 GB VRAM and 224 GB/s bandwidth are being stressed by the higher pixel count. At 4K with High settings, the average FPS falls to 32, and at Ultra it drops to 31. The GPU's 8 GB memory capacity is a notable factor here; while Microsoft Flight Simulator can operate within that limit at lower settings, the data shows that the RX 6600 struggles to maintain playable frame rates at 4K when settings are raised. The 128-bit memory bus and 224 GB/s bandwidth become limiting factors for high-resolution texture streaming, which is a core demand of this flight simulator.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data reveals clear scaling patterns across three resolutions: 1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160. At Low settings, the average FPS goes from 92 at 1080p to 74 at 1440p and 55 at 4K. This represents a 19.6% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 25.7% drop from 1440p to 4K, for a total reduction of 40.2% from 1080p to 4K. At Medium settings, the averages are 72 at 1080p, 58 at 1440p, and 43 at 4K, showing a 19.4% drop and then a 25.9% drop. High settings yield 54 at 1080p, 43 at 1440p, and 32 at 4K, with drops of 20.4% and 25.6%. Ultra settings produce 51 at 1080p, 41 at 1440p, and 31 at 4K, with drops of 19.6% and 24.4%.

The consistent pattern of roughly 20% reduction from 1080p to 1440p and another 25% reduction from 1440p to 4K, regardless of settings, points to a GPU-bound scenario at higher resolutions. The fact that the relative drop is similar across Low, Medium, High, and Ultra suggests that the resolution increase itself—not the graphical complexity—is the dominant factor. This is characteristic of a setup where the GPU's pixel throughput and memory bandwidth are the bottleneck. The RX 6600's 159.4 GPixel/s pixel rate and 224 GB/s bandwidth are being saturated as pixel count quadruples from 1080p to 4K.

Conversely, the CPU's role appears more significant at 1080p, where the frame rates are higher and the gap between settings is larger. At 1080p, the difference between Low (92 FPS) and Ultra (51 FPS) is 41 FPS, while at 4K the difference is only 24 FPS (55 vs 31). This narrowing gap at 4K indicates that the GPU is the limiting component, as raising settings has less impact when the GPU is already overwhelmed by pixel load. The data shows that this combo is well-balanced at 1440p, where the FPS drops are moderate and settings scaling remains meaningful, but at 4K, the GPU clearly holds the system back.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and desired frame rate. At 1080p, Low settings deliver 92 FPS, which is well above the threshold for smooth gameplay. Medium settings at 1080p provide 72 FPS with a minimum of 61 FPS and a maximum of 82 FPS, which offers a substantial improvement in visual fidelity while maintaining a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. High settings at 1080p drop to 54 FPS, which is still playable but begins to approach the lower boundary for a smooth experience. Ultra at 1080p yields 51 FPS, which is marginally lower than High, suggesting that the extra settings have diminishing returns for the performance cost.

At 1440p, Low settings produce 74 FPS, which is a strong result for a mid-range GPU. Medium settings at 1440p deliver 58 FPS with a minimum of 49 FPS and a maximum of 66 FPS. This is the sweet spot for this resolution, as it maintains a playable average while providing better visuals than Low. High settings at 1440p fall to 43 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold and may result in noticeable stutter during complex scenery. Ultra at 1440p is 41 FPS, which is only 2 FPS lower than High, indicating that the GPU is already stretched thin at this resolution.

At 4K, all settings produce sub-60 FPS averages. Low settings yield 55 FPS, Medium produces 43 FPS, High drops to 32 FPS, and Ultra is 31 FPS. The minimum FPS at 4K Medium is 36 FPS, which is the only measured minimum for that resolution. For the best experience at 4K, Low settings are the only viable option, and even then, the average of 55 FPS is borderline. The data suggests that 1440p Medium is the best overall balance for this combo, offering 58 FPS with a minimum of 49 FPS, while 1080p Medium provides the highest quality at a solid 72 FPS. For users prioritizing smoothness, 1080p Low at 92 FPS is the safest choice, but it sacrifices significant visual detail.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D and AMD Radeon RX 6600 ranks 2,316 out of 2,996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the lower 22.7% of all tested configurations, meaning that approximately 77% of combos tested deliver higher average FPS in this game. The rank is based on measured FPS data across the tested resolutions and settings, which includes the full set of 12 rows in the FACT PACK.

The low rank is consistent with the GPU's mid-range positioning. The RX 6600 sits in the 63rd percentile among all GPUs, but in Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known for its demanding rendering requirements, this translates to a sub-optimal ranking. The CPU, on the other hand, is a high-end part in the 89th percentile, but it cannot compensate for the GPU's limitations at higher resolutions. The data shows that at 1080p Low, the combo achieves 92 FPS, which is respectable, but at 4K Ultra, it drops to 31 FPS, dragging down the overall ranking.

Comparatively, the combo's ranking suggests that it is better suited for 1080p or 1440p gaming rather than 4K. The measured FPS at 1440p Medium (58 FPS) and 1080p Medium (72 FPS) are within playable ranges, but the 4K results are below 60 FPS across all settings. The rank of 2,316 out of 2,996 indicates that many other combos, likely those with higher-end GPUs, achieve better performance in this specific title. This is not a criticism of the individual components, but rather a reflection of the game's heavy GPU demands and the RX 6600's position in the market.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 92 FPS average
• Medium: 72 FPS average, 61 FPS minimum, 82 FPS maximum
• High: 54 FPS average
• Ultra: 51 FPS average

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 74 FPS average
• Medium: 58 FPS average, 49 FPS minimum, 66 FPS maximum
• High: 43 FPS average
• Ultra: 41 FPS average

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 55 FPS average
• Medium: 43 FPS average, 36 FPS minimum, 49 FPS maximum
• High: 32 FPS average
• Ultra: 31 FPS average

The data shows a clear hierarchy across settings at each resolution. At 1080p, the gap between Low and Ultra is 41 FPS, which is substantial but allows for flexibility. At 1440p, the gap narrows to 33 FPS, and at 4K, it narrows to 24 FPS. The minimum FPS values are only provided for Medium settings at each resolution, with 61 at 1080p, 49 at 1440p, and 36 at 4K. These minimums indicate that even at Medium settings, the frame rate can dip below the average, which is important for understanding stutter potential.

The maximum FPS values are also only available for Medium settings: 82 at 1080p, 66 at 1440p, and 49 at 4K. This suggests that Medium settings offer the most consistent performance window, as the spread between minimum and maximum is 21 FPS at 1080p, 17 FPS at 1440p, and 13 FPS at 4K. This consistency is a key reason why Medium is the recommended preset in the previous section. The lack of minimum and maximum data for other settings limits the ability to assess frame time variance, but the averages provide a reliable basis for comparison.

FAQ

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

A: Based on the measured FPS, 1080p and 1440p are the most viable resolutions. At 1080p, all settings average above 50 FPS, with Low at 92 FPS and Medium at 72 FPS. At 1440p, Low averages 74 FPS and Medium averages 58 FPS. At 4K, all settings average below 55 FPS, making it the least suitable resolution.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in aggregate benchmarks?

A: The Ryzen 5 7500X3D has an average benchmark score of 44,573. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H, scores 44,466, which is 0.2% higher. The Intel Core i9-13950HX is 0.5% higher at 44,342, the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 is 0.6% higher at 44,309, and the Intel Core i5-14600 is 0.7% lower at 44,889. These differences are all within 1%, indicating near-parity.

Q: What is the GPU's standing relative to other GPUs in the benchmark database?

A: The Radeon RX 6600 ranks in the 63rd percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 19,036. It is nearly identical in score to the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 (19,030, 0% delta) and the GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile (19,049, -0.1% delta). The Tesla K20m scores 19,089 (-0.3% delta) and the RTX 2000 Ada Generation scores 18,954 (0.4% delta).

Q: Does this combo perform better at lower settings or lower resolutions?

A: The data shows that lower settings have a larger impact on FPS than lower resolutions. For example, at 1080p, dropping from Medium to Low increases FPS by 20 (from 72 to 92), while at Medium settings, dropping from 1080p to 1440p decreases FPS by 14 (from 72 to 58). This suggests that adjusting settings is more effective for performance gains than reducing resolution.

Q: What is the combo's overall rank among tested configurations in this game?

A: This combo ranks 2,316 out of 2,996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the lower portion of the ranking, with about 77% of tested combos achieving better performance. The rank reflects the GPU's mid-range status, as the CPU alone ranks in the 89th percentile.

Q: Are there any frame rate minimums and maximums provided for the measured settings?

A: Yes, for Medium settings at each resolution. At 1080p, the minimum is 61 FPS and the maximum is 82 FPS. At 1440p, the minimum is 49 FPS and the maximum is 66 FPS. At 4K, the minimum is 36 FPS and the maximum is 49 FPS. No minimum or maximum values are provided for Low, High, or Ultra settings.