Microsoft Flight Simulator

# Microsoft Flight Simulator with AMD Ryzen 5 7600 + AMD Radeon RX 580

This pairing combines a modern 6-core Zen 4 processor with an older Polaris-based graphics card, and the benchmark data shows a system that is overwhelmingly GPU-limited in Microsoft Flight Simulator. The AMD Ryzen 5 7600, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, boosts up to 5.10 GHz and sits in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs, while the AMD Radeon RX 580, an end-of-life GCN 4.0 part from 2017, lands in only the 53rd percentile of all GPUs. The measured frame rates across all resolutions and settings reveal that the RX 580 is the bottleneck, with the CPU's strong single-thread performance (999 in 3dmark single-thread, 3246 in Cinebench R23 single-core) never coming close to being the limiting factor. This analysis will break down the CPU and GPU contributions, provide settings guidance based on the measured rows, and explain how this combo ranks against other tested configurations.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 7600 provides a substantial foundation for this system, with 6 cores and 12 threads running at a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The CPU's Zen 4 architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 5 nm process, delivers strong single-threaded performance that is critical for flight simulators, which often rely on a single main thread for simulation logic. In the 3dmark single-thread test, the 7600 scores 999, while its Cinebench R23 single-core score reaches 3246, indicating excellent per-core capability. The 32 MB of shared L3 cache helps with the large streaming textures and scenery data that Microsoft Flight Simulator loads, though the 83.2 GB/s memory bandwidth of the DDR5 dual-channel interface is more than adequate for this workload.

The CPU's benchmark profile shows balanced scaling: 3dmark scores rise from 1938 with 2 threads to 5508 with 8 threads, and then plateau at 6503 with max threads. This suggests that the 7600 handles multi-threaded tasks efficiently, but the game's measured FPS patterns indicate that CPU headroom is never exhausted. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 55.2 FPS, and this drops to 45.2 FPS at 1440p Low and 30.2 FPS at 4K Low — a pattern that points squarely at GPU rather than CPU limitations. Compared to its nearest rivals, the 7600's average benchmark score of 26617 is essentially tied with the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D (26574, deltaPct 0.2), Intel Core i9-12900HK (26672, deltaPct -0.2), and Intel Core i9-11900K (26546, deltaPct 0.3). This means the CPU is not the weak link; in fact, it has enough processing power to feed a much stronger GPU than the RX 580.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 580 is the clear performance limiter in this configuration. This GCN 4.0 architecture GPU, built on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process, has 2304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. Its 8 GB of GDDR5 memory runs at 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective) across a 256-bit bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU's base clock is 1257 MHz with a boost clock of 1340 MHz, producing 6.175 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. The pixel rate of 42.88 GPixel/s and texture rate of 193.0 GTexel/s are modest by modern standards, and this shows in the measured frame rates.

The RX 580's benchmark positioning reinforces its role as the bottleneck. Its average benchmark score of 13559 places it in the 53rd percentile of all GPUs, with nearest rivals including the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570 (13564, deltaPct 0), GTX 950 (13549, deltaPct 0.1), and AMD Radeon Pro 455 (13416, deltaPct 1.1). The GPU's Passmark G3D score of 8813 and 3dmark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1005 are modest, and its DirectX 12 performance (43 in Passmark) is notably weaker than its DirectX 11 score (60). Microsoft Flight Simulator leans heavily on GPU fill rate and memory bandwidth for terrain rendering, and the RX 580's 256.0 GB/s bandwidth becomes strained at higher resolutions. The data confirms this: at 1080p High, the system manages 29.9 FPS, but at 1440p High it falls to 25.5 FPS, and at 4K High it drops to 16.9 FPS — a steep degradation that mirrors the GPU's bandwidth and compute constraints.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the Low preset is the only viable option for smooth gameplay, and even then only at 1080p. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the system achieves 55.2 FPS, which is the only measured configuration that crosses the 50 FPS threshold. The Medium preset at 1080p yields 42.3 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for a flight simulator where smooth camera panning matters. High at 1080p drops to 29.9 FPS, and Ultra at 1080p is essentially identical at 29.4 FPS, indicating that the GPU saturates before settings differences matter much beyond Medium.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset delivers 45.2 FPS, which is acceptable for less demanding scenarios but still short of a locked 60. The Medium preset at 1440p falls to 33.2 FPS, and High (25.5 FPS) and Ultra (23.4 FPS) become increasingly choppy. At 3840x2160, even Low settings only produce 30.2 FPS, and the High preset (16.9 FPS) and Ultra preset (18.7 FPS) are effectively unplayable. For the best experience per the measured rows, 1080p Low is the clear recommendation, with 1440p Low as a secondary option if the user accepts a lower frame rate. The data suggests that the RX 580 lacks the raw throughput for higher presets — the jump from Low to Medium at 1080p costs 12.9 FPS, and from Medium to High costs another 12.4 FPS, showing diminishing returns that make Low the most efficient choice.

How This Combo Ranks

This combination of AMD Ryzen 5 7600 and AMD Radeon RX 580 ranks 1662 out of 1795 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the bottom 8% of all configurations. This low ranking is entirely attributable to the GPU, as the CPU alone performs well above average (83rd percentile). The rank disparity between the CPU and GPU components highlights a significant pairing imbalance: the 7600 is capable of driving frame rates far higher than the RX 580 can deliver. The measured FPS data supports this — even at 1080p Low, the system only reaches 55.2 FPS, which is typical of a mid-range GPU from multiple generations ago, while the CPU sits idle waiting on graphics work.

For context, the GPU's nearest rivals (GTX 570, GTX 950, Radeon Pro 455) all have similar average benchmark scores, and none of these would be expected to handle Microsoft Flight Simulator's heavy terrain streaming and photogrammetry data at high settings. The combo's rank of 1662 out of 1795 suggests that most other tested systems pair their CPUs with more capable GPUs, which is the norm for a game of this graphical intensity. The data implies that users with this CPU would see massive gains from a GPU upgrade, as the 7600's headroom is sufficient for several tiers higher of graphics hardware.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K reveals the GPU-bound nature of this system. At Low settings, the frame rate falls from 55.2 FPS at 1080p to 45.2 FPS at 1440p (an 18% drop) and then to 30.2 FPS at 4K (a 45% drop from 1080p). This scaling is much steeper than what a CPU-bound system would show, where resolution changes have minimal impact. The pattern repeats across all settings presets: at Medium, FPS falls from 42.3 at 1080p to 33.2 at 1440p to 26.2 at 4K; at High, it drops from 29.9 to 25.5 to 16.9; at Ultra, it goes from 29.4 to 23.4 to 18.7.

The resolution scaling data indicates that the RX 580's memory bandwidth (256.0 GB/s) and fill rate are the limiting factors. As resolution increases, the GPU must process more pixels, and its 32 ROPs and 42.88 GPixel/s pixel rate become increasingly inadequate. The fact that Ultra and High presets show very similar FPS at each resolution (e.g., 29.4 vs 29.9 at 1080p, 18.7 vs 16.9 at 4K) suggests that the GPU is saturated regardless of the additional shading work that Ultra settings demand — it simply cannot render more than approximately 30 FPS at 1080p even with reduced load. This is classic GPU bottleneck behavior, with the CPU's strong single-thread performance (3246 Cinebench R23 single-core) never becoming a constraint.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system produces its best results: Low settings yield 55.2 FPS, Medium delivers 42.3 FPS, High drops to 29.9 FPS, and Ultra manages 29.4 FPS. The small gap between High and Ultra (0.5 FPS) indicates that the GPU reaches its rendering ceiling around 30 FPS at this resolution, regardless of extra graphical features. At 2560x1440, the frame rates fall to 45.2 FPS (Low), 33.2 FPS (Medium), 25.5 FPS (High), and 23.4 FPS (Ultra). The drop from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings is 10 FPS, while at Ultra it is 6 FPS, showing that lower presets are more sensitive to resolution changes because they have more headroom to lose.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles across the board: Low produces 30.2 FPS, Medium reaches 26.2 FPS, High falls to 16.9 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 18.7 FPS. Notably, High and Ultra at 4K are nearly identical (16.9 vs 18.7 FPS), which suggests that the GPU is so heavily pixel-bound that additional settings have minimal impact. The largest absolute difference between presets occurs at 1080p, where Low beats Medium by 12.9 FPS and Medium beats High by 12.4 FPS. At 4K, the difference between Low and Medium is only 4 FPS, and between Medium and High is only 9.3 FPS, further confirming that resolution is the dominant factor in this system's performance.

FAQ

Q: Is this system playable at 1080p for Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: Yes, but only at Low settings, which produce 55.2 FPS at 1920x1080. Medium settings drop to 42.3 FPS, and High/Ultra fall to approximately 29-30 FPS, which is marginal for a flight simulator.

Q: Why does the CPU score well but the system rank so low?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7600 is in the 83rd percentile of CPUs with an average benchmark score of 26617, but the AMD Radeon RX 580 is in the 53rd percentile with an average score of 13559. The combo ranks 1662 out of 1795 because the GPU cannot keep up with the CPU's capabilities.

Q: What happens if I increase resolution from 1080p to 4K?

A: At Low settings, FPS drops from 55.2 to 30.2, a 45% reduction. At High settings, it drops from 29.9 to 16.9. This steep scaling confirms the GPU is the limiting component, as resolution changes heavily impact frame rates.

Q: Is there a meaningful difference between High and Ultra settings?

A: No. At 1080p, High delivers 29.9 FPS and Ultra delivers 29.4 FPS (0.5 FPS difference). At 1440p, the gap is 2.1 FPS (25.5 vs 23.4), and at 4K it is 1.8 FPS (16.9 vs 18.7). The GPU is saturated before Ultra settings add meaningful load.

Q: How does the RX 580 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The RX 580's average benchmark score of 13559 is within 0.2% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570 (13564) and GTX 950 (13549), and 1.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 455 (13416). All are in the same performance tier.

Q: Can this system handle 1440p gaming?

A: At Low settings, 1440p yields 45.2 FPS, which is usable. Medium settings drop to 33.2 FPS, and High/Ultra fall below 26 FPS. For a smoother experience, 1080p Low is the recommended resolution/settings combination from the measured data.