Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is a demanding title that stresses both the CPU and GPU heavily, and the measured data for the AMD Ryzen 5 9600X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER combination illustrates a clear balancing act between resolution, graphical presets, and frame rate. The benchmark results, drawn from 4K, 1440p, and 1080p runs at Low, Medium, High, and Ultra settings, show a system that is capable of smooth flight in most scenarios but requires careful settings selection to hit higher refresh rates. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS to identify where the bottleneck lies and what the data suggests about the hardware's role in this specific simulator.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a predictable and steep decline as resolution increases, but the rate of that decline reveals important information about where the performance limit sits. At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves an average of 185.7 FPS, which is the highest recorded figure in the entire dataset. Moving to 1440p at the same Low preset drops the average to 143.7 FPS, a reduction of 42 FPS, or roughly 23%. Stepping up to 4K at Low settings further reduces the average to 106.4 FPS, another 37.3 FPS drop from the 1440p figure. This scaling pattern suggests that at lower resolutions, the CPU is a significant contributor to performance, as the frame rate does not scale linearly with the pixel count increase.

However, the story changes dramatically when examining the higher graphical presets. At Ultra settings, the 1080p average is 103.4 FPS, which is only slightly higher than the 4K Low average of 106.4 FPS. This is a key indicator. At 1080p Ultra, the system is likely becoming more GPU-bound, as the increased graphical workload (shaders, textures, lighting) begins to saturate the graphics card even at a lower resolution. The 1440p Ultra result is 83.8 FPS, and 4K Ultra drops to 56.3 FPS. The gap between 1080p and 4K at Ultra is 47.1 FPS, a significant margin that highlights the GPU's struggle to maintain high frame rates at higher pixel densities with maxed-out visuals.

The data suggests that the RTX 4070 SUPER is the limiting factor at 4K, particularly with higher presets. The 4K High average of 64.7 FPS and 4K Ultra average of 56.3 FPS are playable but far from high-refresh-rate territory. Conversely, at 1080p, the CPU's influence is more apparent. The jump from 143.7 FPS at Low to 107.5 FPS at High shows that the graphical settings have a significant impact, but the system is still capable of producing very high frame rates. The resolution scaling analysis indicates that for this game and hardware, 1440p represents a balanced sweet spot where the CPU and GPU workloads are more evenly matched, allowing for high FPS at High settings (87.4 FPS) without the severe drops seen at 4K.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 9600X is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 5 architecture, with a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. In the context of Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known for its heavy single-threaded simulation logic, the processor's strong single-core performance is critical. The benchmark data shows a 3dmark_single_thread score of 1253 and a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3603, indicating robust per-core capability. This is likely why the system can achieve such high frame rates at lower resolutions where the CPU is not waiting on the GPU.

The processor's multi-threaded scores are also respectable, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 25525 and a Geekbench multi-core score of 15182. However, the game's engine does not always scale perfectly with additional cores, and the data suggests that the 6-core/12-thread configuration is sufficient to feed the GPU at 1080p and 1440p. The percentile ranking of 85 for the CPU against all other processors places it in the upper tier, and its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-13490F and AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS, with performance deltas of only 0.3% and -0.4%, respectively. This indicates that the 9600X is well-positioned among its peers for this type of workload.

At 1080p Low, the system hits 185.7 FPS, which is a strong indicator that the CPU is not a bottleneck in that scenario. The fact that the 1080p Medium and High settings yield 143.7 FPS and 107.5 FPS, respectively, shows that the CPU can handle the simulation overhead while the GPU's workload increases. The CPU's 32 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory support, with a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, also contribute to its ability to manage the large amounts of data required for flight simulation, such as terrain and aircraft models. The data implies that the Ryzen 5 9600X provides a solid foundation, allowing the RTX 4070 SUPER to be the primary variable in determining final frame rates at higher resolutions.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER is the primary driver of visual fidelity and high-resolution performance in this configuration. With 12 GB of GDDR6X memory and a 192-bit memory bus delivering 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth, it has ample resources for the game's high-resolution textures. The GPU's boost clock of 2475 MHz and its 7168 shading units provide substantial compute power, reflected in its Passmark G3D score of 29995. The GPU's percentile ranking of 84 against all other graphics cards shows it is a high-end part, with its nearest rivals including the NVIDIA RTX A6000 and AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE, with performance deltas of -0.2% and -0.3%, respectively.

The measured FPS data clearly shows the GPU's influence at 4K. The transition from Low to Medium at 4K yields a 24.6 FPS drop (from 106.4 to 81.8 FPS), and the High preset further reduces the average to 64.7 FPS. The Ultra preset at 4K brings the system to 56.3 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold often desired for a smooth experience. This pattern indicates that the RTX 4070 SUPER is the limiting component at 4K, as the pixel fill rate and shader complexity overwhelm the GPU's capabilities.

At 1440p, the GPU performs more comfortably. The High preset yields 87.4 FPS, and even the Ultra preset manages 83.8 FPS, suggesting the GPU can handle higher settings at this resolution without a major performance penalty. The 1080p results show that the GPU is rarely the limiting factor at that resolution, as the system can achieve over 100 FPS even on Ultra settings (103.4 FPS). The 12 GB VRAM capacity is also a relevant factor; while the game can use a significant amount of VRAM at 4K with Ultra textures, the measured data does not show any anomalies that would indicate VRAM exhaustion, such as sudden frame rate dips. The GPU's role is clear: it is the primary determinant of performance at 4K and high settings, while at lower resolutions, it is often able to keep up with the CPU's output.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded for this hardware combination?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 185.7 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: How does the system perform at 4K Ultra settings?

A: At 3840x2160 resolution with Ultra settings, the system achieves an average of 56.3 FPS, which is the lowest recorded frame rate in the dataset.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more likely to be the bottleneck at 1080p?

A: At 1080p, the data suggests the CPU is more influential at lower settings. The 185.7 FPS at Low compared to 103.4 FPS at Ultra indicates that the CPU can produce high frame rates, but the GPU's workload increases with settings, impacting the final output.

Q: What is the performance difference between 1440p High and 4K High?

A: The average FPS at 1440p High is 87.4 FPS, while at 4K High it is 64.7 FPS. This represents a difference of 22.7 FPS, showing a significant drop when moving to 4K.

Q: How does the Ryzen 5 9600X compare to its nearest rival, the Intel Core i5-13490F?

A: The benchmark data shows the Ryzen 5 9600X has an average benchmark score of 28246, which is 0.3% higher than the Intel Core i5-13490F's score of 28173.

Q: What is the system's overall ranking for this game?

A: This specific CPU and GPU combination ranks 282 out of 1795 total combos tested for Microsoft Flight Simulator.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table details the exact average FPS measurements for each resolution and settings preset combination.

| Resolution | Settings | Avg FPS |

| :--------- | :------- | ------: |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 185.7 |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 143.7 |

| 1920x1080 | High | 107.5 |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 103.4 |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 143.7 |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 114.0 |

| 2560x1440 | High | 87.4 |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 83.8 |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 106.4 |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 81.8 |

| 3840x2160 | High | 64.7 |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 56.3 |

The data shows a consistent trend: for any given resolution, the FPS decreases as settings increase from Low to Ultra. The largest single drop occurs at 1440p, where moving from Medium (114.0 FPS) to High (87.4 FPS) results in a 26.6 FPS reduction. At 4K, the drop from Low to Medium is 24.6 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 8.4 FPS, indicating that the Ultra preset has a less severe impact on performance than the jump from Low to Medium at this resolution. The 1080p results show the smallest relative difference between High and Ultra, with only a 4.1 FPS difference, suggesting the system is becoming more CPU-limited at that resolution.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution and refresh rate. For players with a 1080p 144Hz monitor, the High preset at 107.5 FPS is a good choice, as it provides a significant visual upgrade over Medium (143.7 FPS) while still maintaining a frame rate above 100 FPS. The Ultra preset at 103.4 FPS offers a marginal improvement over High but at a slightly lower frame rate, making High the more balanced choice for a high-refresh experience.

At 1440p, the High preset at 87.4 FPS is the recommended balance for a smooth experience on a 60-100Hz display. The Ultra preset at 83.8 FPS is also viable, but the performance gain from High to Ultra is minimal compared to the potential stability benefits of the higher frame rate. For users with a 1440p 144Hz monitor, the Medium preset at 114.0 FPS is the best option to get closer to the refresh rate ceiling, though it involves a visual quality trade-off.

For 4K gaming, the data suggests that the Low preset at 106.4 FPS is the only option that guarantees a comfortable frame rate above 100 FPS. The Medium preset at 81.8 FPS is a solid choice for a 60Hz display, offering a significant visual improvement over Low while maintaining a playable frame rate. The High preset at 64.7 FPS is also playable but starts to approach the lower limits of smoothness. The Ultra preset at 56.3 FPS is generally not recommended for a consistent experience, as it falls below the 60 FPS threshold. Ultimately, the data indicates that the High preset at 1440p provides the best overall balance of visual quality and performance, while 4K users should stick to Medium or Low presets to maintain a smooth frame rate.