Microsoft Flight Simulator

# Microsoft Flight Simulator — AMD Ryzen 5 8400F + AMD Radeon RX 9060

Microsoft Flight Simulator is a demanding flight simulation title that stresses both CPU and GPU heavily, depending on resolution and settings. This analysis examines the measured performance of the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 9060 across three resolutions and four quality presets. The data shows a system that delivers playable frame rates at 1080p and 1440p with adjusted settings, while 4K requires significant compromises. The combination ranks 1712th out of 2996 tested combos for this game, placing it in the lower-middle tier of tested systems.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases, indicating that the GPU becomes the primary limiting factor at higher pixel counts. At Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 111 FPS at 1920x1080 to 89 FPS at 2560x1440, a reduction of approximately 20%. Moving from 1440p to 3840x2160 at Low settings, the average falls further to 66 FPS, representing another 26% decrease. This scaling curve is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario where pixel throughput becomes the bottleneck.

At Medium settings, the same progression appears: 86 FPS at 1080p, 69 FPS at 1440p, and 51 FPS at 4K. The percentage drops between successive resolutions are roughly 20% and 26%, respectively, mirroring the Low preset behavior. High settings show a similar slope, with 65 FPS at 1080p, 52 FPS at 1440p, and 39 FPS at 4K. Ultra settings follow the pattern with 62 FPS, 50 FPS, and 37 FPS across the three resolutions.

The consistency of these scaling ratios across all four settings presets strongly suggests that resolution-dependent factors, such as fill rate and memory bandwidth, dominate performance. The Radeon RX 9060's 8 GB GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth appears sufficient for 1080p and 1440p workloads but becomes strained at 4K. The transition from 1440p to 4K consistently causes a larger relative drop than the 1080p-to-1440p transition, which aligns with the approximately 2.25x pixel count increase between those resolutions.

Notably, the gap between Low and Ultra settings narrows at higher resolutions. At 1080p, Ultra delivers 62 FPS versus Low's 111 FPS, a 44% penalty for maximum quality. At 4K, that gap shrinks to 37 FPS versus 66 FPS, a 44% penalty as well, indicating that the GPU is equally taxed by both resolution and settings. This suggests that at 4K, neither lowering settings nor raising them dramatically changes the fundamental pixel throughput limitation.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on Zen 4 architecture (Phoenix codename), built on TSMC's 4 nm process. Its base clock of 4.20 GHz and boost clock of 4.70 GHz provide solid single-thread performance, which matters for flight simulators that often rely heavily on a few primary threads. The CPU's single-thread benchmark scores include 951 in 3DMark single-thread, 296 in Cinebench R15 single-core, 1236 in Cinebench R20 single-core, and 2943 in Cinebench R23 single-core. The PassMark single-thread score of 3685 further confirms competent single-core capability.

Multi-threaded performance is respectable for a 6-core part: Cinebench R23 multicore reaches 20851, while 3DMark max-threads scores 6165. The CPU's 16 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory support with 83.2 GB/s bandwidth contribute to its overall responsiveness. For Microsoft Flight Simulator, which loads terrain data and scenery dynamically, memory bandwidth and cache performance can influence frame pacing and loading behavior, though the measured FPS data shows the GPU dominating at higher resolutions.

The Ryzen 5 8400F's percentile rank versus all CPUs is 77, meaning it outperforms 77% of tested processors. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F (avg score 24964, deltaPct 0.2%), Intel Core i7-11850H (24935, 0.3%), and Intel Core i7-13620H (24911, 0.4%). The AMD EPYC 9474F sits slightly above with 25103 (-0.4% delta). These small deltas indicate the 8400F is well within the mainstream performance envelope. For this game, the CPU's 6 cores and 12 threads appear sufficient to feed the GPU at 1080p Low, where 111 FPS is achieved, suggesting no severe CPU bottleneck at that configuration.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific CPU-GPU combination ranks 1712th out of 2996 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the 57th percentile of all tested configurations. This ranking reflects the GPU's mid-tier positioning more than the CPU, as the RX 9060's percentile versus all GPUs is 59. The combo's overall position suggests that while the system is capable of running the game, many other hardware pairings deliver higher frame rates.

The GPU's nearest rivals provide context for its performance tier. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti scores 16129 on average (deltaPct -0.7% relative to the RX 9060's avg benchmark score of 16014), meaning the RX 9060 is roughly 0.7% slower. The AMD Radeon R9 370X (15862, 1%) and AMD Radeon RX 7700 (15852, 1%) are slightly behind, while the AMD Radeon Pro W5500 (15679, 2.1%) trails further. These comparisons indicate the RX 9060 sits in a competitive band with several previous-generation options, but none of these rivals are top-tier performers.

Given the combo's rank, users can expect moderate performance in Microsoft Flight Simulator. The system is not optimized for maximum settings at high resolutions, but it can handle the game at reduced presets. The rank of 1712 out of 2996 means roughly 57% of tested combos perform better, which is consistent with a mid-range GPU paired with a capable but not flagship CPU.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to run Microsoft Flight Simulator smoothly?

A: Based on measured data, 1920x1080 at Low settings yields 111 FPS average, while 2560x1440 at Low delivers 89 FPS. For a smoother experience, 1080p is preferable, though 1440p remains playable at lower presets.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon RX 9060 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The RX 9060 has an average benchmark score of 16014, placing it 0.7% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti (16129) and 1% ahead of both the AMD Radeon R9 370X (15862) and AMD Radeon RX 7700 (15852).

Q: Is the Ryzen 5 8400F a bottleneck for this GPU in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The data shows the CPU achieves high frame rates at 1080p Low (111 FPS), suggesting it is not the primary bottleneck. At higher resolutions, frame rates drop consistently, indicating GPU limitation rather than CPU constraint.

Q: What frame rates can be expected at 4K with this hardware?

A: Measured averages at 3840x2160 range from 66 FPS at Low to 37 FPS at Ultra, with Medium at 51 FPS and High at 39 FPS. Playable frame rates are only achievable at Low or Medium settings.

Q: How does the combo rank relative to other tested systems?

A: This CPU-GPU combination ranks 1712th out of 2996 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the lower-middle portion of the distribution.

Q: Does the RX 9060's 8 GB VRAM affect performance at higher resolutions?

A: The 8 GB GDDR6 memory with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth likely contributes to the significant frame rate drops at 4K, where the pixel throughput demands increase substantially compared to 1080p and 1440p.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture with the Navi 44 chip (codename Strix Point), fabricated on TSMC's 4 nm process. It features 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs, along with 28 ray tracing cores. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1700 MHz, a game clock of 2400 MHz, and a boost clock of 2990 MHz. Memory runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) across a 128-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s bandwidth from 8 GB of GDDR6 VRAM.

The GPU's compute capabilities include 21.43 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 (1:1 ratio), with a pixel rate of 191.4 GPixel/s and texture rate of 334.9 GTexel/s. These specifications place the RX 9060 in the mid-range segment, and its benchmark scores reflect this positioning. The PassMark G3D score is 17631, with a GPU compute score of 9919. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score reaches 3322, while Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan scores are 88183 and 39476, respectively.

For Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU's role is evident in the resolution scaling data. The 128-bit memory bus and 8 GB VRAM capacity likely constrain performance at 4K, where the game's detailed terrain textures and complex scenery require substantial memory bandwidth. The RX 9060's percentile versus all GPUs is 59, meaning it outperforms 59% of tested graphics cards. Its TDP of 132 W and suggested PSU of 300 W indicate a power-efficient design that pairs well with the Ryzen 5 8400F's 65 W TDP.

The GPU's performance in this game shows that it can deliver 111 FPS at 1080p Low, which is a strong result, but falls to 37 FPS at 4K Ultra. This range demonstrates the GPU's capability at lower resolutions while highlighting its limits at higher pixel counts. The measured minimum and maximum FPS at Medium settings (e.g., 73-99 FPS at 1080p, 59-80 FPS at 1440p, 44-59 FPS at 4K) indicate some frame time variance, but the GPU maintains reasonable consistency within each resolution.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and desired frame rate. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers 111 FPS average, which is well above the threshold for smooth gameplay. Medium at 1080p yields 86 FPS with a range of 73-99 FPS, providing a solid balance of visual quality and performance. High settings at 1080p drop to 65 FPS, while Ultra falls to 62 FPS, both of which remain playable but may show occasional stutter in dense scenes.

For 2560x1440, the Low preset achieves 89 FPS, making it the best choice for high refresh rate monitors. Medium at 1440p produces 69 FPS (59-80 FPS range), which is acceptable for most users. High and Ultra at 1440p deliver 52 FPS and 50 FPS, respectively, which are borderline but may be tolerable depending on user preference. The data suggests that Medium is the sweet spot at 1440p, offering a 33% improvement over High while maintaining similar visual quality.

At 3840x2160, all presets struggle to maintain high frame rates. Low settings yield 66 FPS, which is the only preset that clearly exceeds 60 FPS. Medium at 4K produces 51 FPS (44-59 FPS range), which is playable but may feel sluggish in fast-moving scenarios. High and Ultra at 4K drop to 39 FPS and 37 FPS, respectively, making them unsuitable for smooth gameplay. For 4K users, Low or Medium settings are the only viable options.

The overall recommendation is to prioritize Medium settings at 1080p or 1440p for the best balance of visual fidelity and performance. Users seeking maximum frame rates should select Low at 1440p, while those prioritizing visual quality at 4K must accept the low frame rates of Medium or Low presets.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured FPS data for this combo is as follows:

At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves an average of 111 FPS. Medium settings produce an average of 86 FPS, with a minimum of 73 FPS and maximum of 99 FPS. High settings average 65 FPS, while Ultra averages 62 FPS. This represents a range of 49 FPS between the lowest and highest quality presets at 1080p.

At 2560x1440, Low settings average 89 FPS. Medium averages 69 FPS, with measured minimum and maximum of 59 FPS and 80 FPS, respectively. High settings average 52 FPS, and Ultra averages 50 FPS. The total spread at 1440p is 39 FPS between Low and Ultra.

At 3840x2160, Low settings average 66 FPS. Medium averages 51 FPS, with a minimum of 44 FPS and maximum of 59 FPS. High settings average 39 FPS, while Ultra averages 37 FPS. The spread at 4K narrows to 29 FPS, reflecting the GPU's diminishing ability to differentiate between quality presets at high pixel counts.

The Medium preset is the only configuration with recorded minimum and maximum FPS values across all resolutions, providing insight into frame consistency. At 1080p Medium, the 73-99 FPS range shows a 26 FPS variance. At 1440p Medium, the 59-80 FPS range represents a 21 FPS variance. At 4K Medium, the 44-59 FPS range shows a 15 FPS variance. This narrowing variance at higher resolutions suggests that the GPU becomes more consistently bottlenecked, reducing the impact of scene complexity on frame rate fluctuations.