Microsoft Flight Simulator

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

The AMD Ryzen 5 9600X is a 6-core, 12-thread processor built on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge) using TSMC's 4 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, and its 65 W TDP positions it as a mainstream desktop part on the AMD Socket AM5 platform. The chip carries 32 MB of shared L3 cache, with 1 MB L2 per core and 80 KB L1 per core, and supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth rating of 89.6 GB/s.

In synthetic CPU benchmarks, the 9600X demonstrates strong single-threaded capability, scoring 3,603 in Cinebench R23 single-core and 1,253 in 3DMark single-thread. Multi-threaded results are also competitive: 25,525 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, 10,720 in Cinebench R20 multi-core, and 7,590 in 3DMark max threads. The Geekbench multicore score is 15,182, while the single-core score is 3,363. These numbers place the CPU in the 85th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 28,246.

For a flight simulator like Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's single-thread performance is particularly relevant because the simulation engine handles physics, flight dynamics, and scenery loading across multiple threads. The data shows the 9600X's single-core score (3,603 in R23) is the stronger asset relative to its multi-core score, which matters for maintaining frame pacing when the GPU is not the primary bottleneck. The nearest rivals in aggregate CPU scores include the Intel Core i5-13490F (avg score 28,173, delta 0.3%), AMD Ryzen 5 230 (28,164, delta 0.3%), AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS (28,369, delta -0.4%), and Intel Core i5-14500T (28,377, delta -0.5%). The 9600X sits within a tight 0.5% band of these alternatives, meaning its CPU headroom in this game will be comparable to those parts.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture (AD104 chip) using TSMC's 5 nm process. It has 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 504.2 GB/s. The GPU's base clock is 1920 MHz, with a boost clock of 2475 MHz, and memory runs at 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective). The card includes 5,888 shading units, 184 texture mapping units, 64 ROPs, 46 RT cores, and 184 tensor cores. Its FP32 throughput is 29.15 TFLOPS, with a pixel rate of 158.4 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 455.4 GTexel/s.

In GPU benchmarks, the RTX 4070 scores 26,927 in Passmark G3D and 14,720 in Passmark GPU compute. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 3,854, while Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan scores are 168,006 and 157,352 respectively. The GPU holds the 81st percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 37,283. Its nearest rivals in aggregate scores are the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 (37,507, delta -0.6%), NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A (38,008, delta -1.9%), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile (38,135, delta -2.2%), and AMD Radeon RX 5300M (36,371, delta 2.5%).

For Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU's 12 GB VRAM is relevant at higher resolutions where texture detail and scenery complexity demand memory. The measured frames per second indicate that the RTX 4070 handles the game across all tested resolutions and settings, but the VRAM buffer becomes more significant at 3840x2160 Ultra where the average FPS drops to 50.5. The boost clock of 2475 MHz and memory bandwidth of 504.2 GB/s are the key factors in sustaining frame rates when the simulator renders dense urban areas or complex terrain.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 9600X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 ranks 451st out of 1,795 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places the pairing in roughly the 75th percentile of all tested configurations in this game. The rank reflects a balanced system where neither the CPU nor GPU is drastically underpowered relative to the other. Given that the CPU sits in the 85th percentile of all CPUs and the GPU in the 81st percentile of all GPUs, the combo rank of 451 is slightly lower than each component's individual percentile, suggesting that the game's performance is not purely additive — the simulator's engine has its own scaling characteristics that cap the benefit of having two above-average parts.

The rank of 451 out of 1,795 means that a substantial number of combos outperform this pairing, likely those with higher-tier GPUs (e.g., RTX 4080-class or above) or CPUs with more cores. However, the deltaPct values for the nearest CPU and GPU rivals are all within ±2.5%, indicating that the 9600X + RTX 4070 is part of a tightly clustered performance band. The data supports that this combo is competitive with systems built around the Intel Core i5-13490F or AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS paired with slightly different GPUs, but it does not break into the top tier of configurations.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions — 1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160 — each with four settings presets: Low, Medium, High, and Ultra. All values are average FPS; no minimum or maximum frame times were recorded.

At 1920x1080, the lowest preset yields 164.4 FPS, Medium produces 129.1 FPS, High drops to 93.7 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 91.4 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 73 FPS, a 79.9% reduction in frame rate when moving to the highest quality setting. Notably, the difference between High and Ultra is only 2.3 FPS, indicating that the Ultra preset adds graphical features that do not heavily tax the GPU at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the pattern shifts. Low delivers 130.6 FPS, Medium 105.1 FPS, High 77.2 FPS, and Ultra 76 FPS. The step from High to Ultra is again small (1.2 FPS), but the drop from Medium to High is 27.9 FPS, a 26.5% decrease. This suggests that the High preset at 1440p introduces a significant rendering load, likely from increased shadow quality or terrain detail, that the RTX 4070 cannot absorb as easily as at 1080p.

At 3840x2160, the results show the GPU being pushed harder. Low runs at 98.1 FPS, Medium at 74.3 FPS, High at 53.9 FPS, and Ultra at 50.5 FPS. The gap between Medium and High is 20.4 FPS, while High to Ultra is only 3.4 FPS. The 4K Ultra result of 50.5 FPS is just above the 50 FPS threshold that many users consider playable for a flight simulator, where precision matters more than twitch response. The data shows that at 4K, the RTX 4070 is still capable of delivering a smooth experience at Medium, but High and Ultra require compromises in frame rate.

Across all resolutions, the Low preset consistently delivers over 98 FPS, making it the only setting that maintains high refresh rates at 4K. The Medium preset at 1440p (105.1 FPS) and 1080p (129.1 FPS) offers a balanced experience for users with 144 Hz monitors.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for the RTX 4070 in this game?

A: The data shows that 2560x1440 at Medium produces 105.1 FPS, which is the highest frame rate above 100 FPS at a resolution above 1080p. At 3840x2160, even Low only reaches 98.1 FPS, so 1440p is the practical ceiling for maintaining high frame rates.

Q: How much performance is lost going from Low to Ultra at each resolution?

A: At 1920x1080, the drop is from 164.4 FPS to 91.4 FPS (a 44.4% reduction). At 2560x1440, it goes from 130.6 FPS to 76 FPS (a 41.8% reduction). At 3840x2160, the drop is from 98.1 FPS to 50.5 FPS (a 48.5% reduction). The 4K Ultra setting loses the largest proportion of performance relative to Low.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this combo?

A: The CPU's single-core Cinebench R23 score of 3,603 and the GPU's Passmark G3D score of 26,927 suggest both are capable. The combo ranks 451 out of 1,795, which is lower than either component's individual percentile (85th for CPU, 81st for GPU), indicating that the game's engine does not fully utilize both parts' strengths in tandem.

Q: What is the difference between High and Ultra settings?

A: The measured data shows minimal FPS differences between High and Ultra. At 1080p, High is 93.7 FPS and Ultra is 91.4 FPS (2.3 FPS difference). At 1440p, High is 77.2 FPS and Ultra is 76 FPS (1.2 FPS difference). At 4K, High is 53.9 FPS and Ultra is 50.5 FPS (3.4 FPS difference). The Ultra preset does not cost much frame rate relative to High.

Q: Can this combo handle 4K gaming?

A: Yes, but with caveats. At 3840x2160 Medium, the average FPS is 74.3, which is playable. At High it is 53.9 FPS, and at Ultra it is 50.5 FPS. For a flight simulator where smoothness is more important than competitive frame rates, the Medium preset at 4K is the highest recommended setting, as it stays above 70 FPS.

Q: How does this combo compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The CPU's nearest rival, the Intel Core i5-13490F, has an avg score of 28,173, which is 0.3% lower than the 9600X's 28,246. The GPU's nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56, has an avg score of 37,507, which is 0.6% higher than the RTX 4070's 37,283. These deltas are within measurement noise, so the combo's performance is representative of what those rival pairings would deliver.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and frame rate preference. For users with 1080p displays, the High preset at 93.7 FPS provides a strong balance between visual quality and smoothness; the Ultra preset at 91.4 FPS adds negligible visual improvements for only a 2.3 FPS loss, so High is the recommended choice unless the user specifically wants the highest fidelity. The Medium preset at 129.1 FPS is ideal for 120 Hz or 144 Hz monitors, while Low at 164.4 FPS is only necessary for extreme refresh rates above 160 Hz.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset at 105.1 FPS is the standout option, as it delivers triple-digit frame rates while retaining moderate visual quality. The High preset at 77.2 FPS is acceptable for 60 Hz displays, but the step from Medium to High costs 27.9 FPS, which is a substantial reduction. The Ultra preset at 76 FPS offers no meaningful improvement over High, so High is only recommended if the user prioritizes visual detail over frame rate headroom.

At 3840x2160, the Medium preset at 74.3 FPS is the highest recommended setting, as it provides a smooth experience above 70 FPS. The High preset at 53.9 FPS is playable but may feel less fluid during rapid camera movements or when flying over dense scenery. The Ultra preset at 50.5 FPS is marginal; it works for slow, methodical flight but risks frame drops in complex scenes. The Low preset at 98.1 FPS is the only option for users who want to maintain high refresh rates at 4K, though it sacrifices significant visual detail.

The data indicates that the High to Ultra transition is consistently small across all resolutions (less than 3.4 FPS difference), so users should never choose Ultra over High unless they want the absolute maximum quality settings. The meaningful performance decisions are between Low, Medium, and High, with Medium offering the best trade-off at 1440p and 4K, and High being the sweet spot at 1080p.