Microsoft Flight Simulator

The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X and AMD Radeon RX 570 combination delivers playable frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator only at 1080p with reduced settings, and the data indicates the GPU is the primary limiting factor across all tested resolutions. The measured scores place this combo in the bottom 5% of all tested configurations, making it a legacy pairing best suited for low-to-medium fidelity flight at 1080p.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K is severe, confirming that the RX 570 is the bottleneck. At High settings, the average FPS falls from 25.6 at 1920x1080 to 23.1 at 2560x1440, a modest 9.8% reduction, but then plummets to 18.9 at 3840x2160, a further 18.2% loss. This pattern shows that while the jump to 1440p is manageable, the leap to 4K overwhelms the GPU's memory bandwidth and shader throughput.

The scaling is more dramatic at lower settings, where the CPU has more headroom to push frames. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 46.1 at 1080p to 37.5 at 1440p (a 18.7% decline) and then to 28.0 at 4K (a 25.3% decline from 1440p). This steeper curve at Low settings indicates that when the GPU is less loaded by visual effects, the resolution scaling becomes more linear and punishing, exposing the limits of the 4 GB VRAM buffer and the 224.0 GB/s memory interface.

At Ultra settings, the performance collapses entirely. The average FPS at 1080p is 28.9, which falls to 24.8 at 1440p and then to 14.3 at 4K. The 4K Ultra result is the single lowest measured score in the entire dataset, representing a 50.5% drop from the 1080p Ultra figure. This suggests that the combination of 4K resolution and Ultra presets exceeds the GPU's 5.095 TFLOPS FP32 compute capacity, making the experience unplayable.

The data clearly shows that 1080p is the only resolution where the combo can maintain an average above 25 FPS across all settings. The 4K results, regardless of preset, all fall below 30 FPS, which is generally considered the minimum threshold for smooth flight simulation. The limiting component is unambiguously the GPU, as the CPU's performance metrics (detailed later) are not the primary constraint at these resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

This combination ranks 1706 out of 1795 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the bottom 5.0% of all configurations. This is a very poor result, indicating that the hardware pairing is significantly underpowered for this specific title's demands. The rank reflects the average FPS across all tested settings and resolutions, and the data shows that the combo consistently struggles to reach playable frame rates.

The ranking is not surprising given the individual component positions. The CPU, AMD Ryzen 7 3700X, holds an 85th percentile ranking against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 28631. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-12600 (deltaPct -0.1%), the Intel Core i5-12600H (deltaPct -0.1%), and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600XT (deltaPct 0.1%). This indicates the processor is a solid mid-range performer. However, the GPU, AMD Radeon RX 570, has a 74th percentile ranking against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 30158. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 (deltaPct 0.2%), the AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT (deltaPct 0.2%), and the NVIDIA Tesla M60 (deltaPct 0.6%).

The disparity between the CPU's strong position and the GPU's weaker standing is the core issue. While the CPU is a competent performer in general benchmarks, the GPU is not capable of driving this simulation at high resolutions. The combo rank of 1706 out of 1795 confirms that the pairing is poorly balanced for Microsoft Flight Simulator, with the GPU dragging down the overall experience. The data suggests that this combination is only viable for low-fidelity 1080p play sessions.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 570 is the primary bottleneck in this configuration. Its specifications reveal why it struggles: 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is insufficient for the high-resolution textures and detailed scenery in Microsoft Flight Simulator. The GPU's base clock is 1168 MHz, with a boost clock of 1244 MHz, and it has 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The pixel rate is 39.81 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 159.2 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance rated at 5.095 TFLOPS.

The 4 GB VRAM is a critical limitation. At 4K resolution, the game's asset streaming demands exceed this capacity, causing the severe frame rate drops observed. The measured FPS at 4K High (18.9) and 4K Ultra (14.3) are below playable levels, and even 1440p High (23.1) struggles. The GPU's 74th percentile ranking against all GPUs suggests it is a decent performer in synthetic benchmarks, but Microsoft Flight Simulator is a uniquely demanding title that stresses memory capacity and bandwidth more than raw compute.

The GPU's performance relative to its nearest rivals is interesting. The data shows the RX 570's average benchmark score is 30158, which is nearly identical to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 (30109, deltaPct 0.2%) and the AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT (30097, deltaPct 0.2%). This suggests that in general compute tests, the RX 570 is comparable to much newer cards, but this does not translate to gaming performance in this simulator. The game's specific engine requirements, particularly around VRAM usage, cause the RX 570 to fall far behind its benchmark score would suggest.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture across four resolutions and four settings. At 1920x1080, the results are: Low 46.1, Medium 38.5, High 25.6, and Ultra 28.9. The High setting result is anomalous, as it is lower than the Ultra setting, suggesting a possible driver or game optimization quirk. The Low setting achieves the only result above 45 FPS in the entire dataset, which is the minimum recommended for a smooth experience.

At 2560x1440, the scores are: Low 37.5, Medium 31.3, High 23.1, and Ultra 24.8. Here, Ultra (24.8) is again slightly higher than High (23.1), reinforcing the anomaly seen at 1080p. The Low setting is the only one that remains above 30 FPS, while all others fall below 32 FPS, indicating a significant drop from 1080p performance.

At 3840x2160, the scores are: Low 28.0, Medium 25.2, High 18.9, and Ultra 14.3. This is the most challenging resolution, with all results below 29 FPS. The Low setting is the only one that approaches playability, while Ultra is completely unusable. The data shows a clear progression: as resolution increases, the average FPS drops consistently, with the GPU becoming the sole limiting factor.

The 1080p data is the most promising for this combo. The Low setting at 46.1 FPS is the only measured result that can be considered truly smooth, while Medium at 38.5 is acceptable for a simulation. The High and Ultra settings, at 25.6 and 28.9 respectively, are borderline playable but will exhibit stutter during complex scenes. The 1440p and 4K results are generally not recommended for any setting other than Low.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data indicates that the best experience for this combo is at 1920x1080 with Low settings, yielding an average of 46.1 FPS. This is the only configuration that provides a consistently smooth frame rate above 45 FPS. The Medium setting at 1080p produces 38.5 FPS, which is acceptable for a flight simulator where precision is more important than high action, but the visual quality improvement may not justify the 16.5% performance loss.

For users who prioritize visual fidelity, the 1080p Ultra setting at 28.9 FPS is the highest preset that remains above 28 FPS. However, the High setting at 25.6 FPS is actually slower than Ultra, which is a counterintuitive result that suggests the High preset may be using less efficient rendering paths. Based on the data, the recommended path is to start with 1080p Low and gradually increase settings to Medium, while avoiding High due to its inconsistent performance.

At 2560x1440, the only viable option is Low at 37.5 FPS. The Medium setting drops to 31.3 FPS, and High and Ultra fall below 25 FPS, making them unsuitable for smooth gameplay. At 3840x2160, all settings are below 29 FPS, and only Low (28.0) is marginally playable for static flight. The data strongly suggests that this combo should not be used at 4K for this game.

The key takeaway is that the RX 570's 4 GB VRAM and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth cannot handle the game's high-resolution assets. The Low preset at 1080p is the only configuration that fully utilizes the GPU without overwhelming it. For the best balance of playability and visuals, 1080p Medium is the highest recommended setting, as it provides a 38.5 FPS average while avoiding the High preset's performance anomaly.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is a capable processor that is not the primary bottleneck in this configuration. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. The CPU is based on the Zen 2 architecture (codename Matisse), built on a 7 nm process from TSMC, with 3,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die. It has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 32 MB of L3 cache, with dual-channel DDR4 memory support providing 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth.

The CPU's benchmark scores confirm its strength. In Cinebench R23, it scores 19087 in multi-core and 2694 in single-core. In Geekbench, it scores 8083 multi-core and 1672 single-core. Its Passmark multithread score is 22458, and its single-thread score is 2656. The CPU holds an 85th percentile ranking against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 28631, which is nearly identical to its nearest rivals (Intel Core i5-12600 at 28654, deltaPct -0.1%).

Given this strong performance, the CPU is not the limiting factor in Microsoft Flight Simulator. The game is heavily GPU-bound at the resolutions tested, as evidenced by the fact that reducing settings from Ultra to Low at 1080p increases FPS from 28.9 to 46.1, a 59.5% improvement that cannot be attributed to CPU changes. The CPU's 8 cores and 16 threads are sufficient for the game's simulation logic, which is why the frame rate scales primarily with GPU load.

The CPU's 65W TDP and AM4 socket compatibility make it a reasonable pairing for the RX 570, but the data shows that the GPU's limitations prevent the CPU from being fully utilized. At 1080p Low, the CPU is likely able to feed frames to the GPU, but at higher settings, the GPU becomes saturated, leaving the CPU underutilized. The CPU's performance is not a concern for this title; the GPU is the clear bottleneck.

FAQ

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

A: The best experience is at 1920x1080 with Low settings, achieving an average of 46.1 FPS. For higher visual quality, 1080p Medium at 38.5 FPS is the most recommended, as the High preset at 25.6 FPS is slower than Ultra due to a performance anomaly.

Q: Why is the 4K performance so poor?

A: The 4K results are all below 29 FPS, with the lowest being 14.3 at Ultra settings. This is due to the GPU's 4 GB VRAM and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth being insufficient for the high-resolution assets, making the GPU the clear bottleneck.

Q: How does this combo rank against other tested configurations?

A: It ranks 1706 out of 1795 tested combos, placing it in the bottom 5.0%. This is a poor result, indicating the GPU is underpowered for this title.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU has an 85th percentile ranking with strong benchmark scores, while the GPU has a 74th percentile ranking. The frame rate drops significantly with resolution increases, which is a classic sign of GPU limitation.

Q: What is the highest setting that maintains a playable frame rate?

A: At 1080p, the Ultra setting at 28.9 FPS is the highest preset above 28 FPS. At 1440p, only Low (37.5) is viable, and at 4K, none of the settings reach 30 FPS.

Q: Why is the High setting sometimes slower than Ultra?

A: At both 1080p and 1440p, the High setting (25.6 and 23.1 respectively) is slower than Ultra (28.9 and 24.8). This anomaly suggests the High preset may use inefficient rendering paths, making Ultra a better choice if the GPU can handle it.