Microsoft Flight Simulator

The data for Microsoft Flight Simulator with the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 reveals a system that is heavily constrained by the graphics card at higher resolutions, while the processor's eight cores provide a solid foundation for the simulation's complex physics and AI. The measured frames per second (FPS) show a clear narrative of scaling that shifts the bottleneck depending on the resolution and preset.

Resolution Scaling

The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and consistent across all settings, indicating that the RTX 2060 is the primary limiting factor as pixel count rises. At Low settings, the average FPS falls from 91.8 at 1920x1080 to 50.5 at 3840x2160, a reduction of roughly 45%. This dramatic decline shows that even at the lowest graphical load, the GPU's 6 GB of VRAM and 192-bit memory bus are overwhelmed by the sheer number of pixels required for 4K rendering.

Moving to Medium settings, the scaling is less severe in percentage terms but still significant: 73.5 FPS at 1080p drops to 42.7 FPS at 4K, a 42% decrease. The High preset follows a similar pattern, going from 54.4 FPS at 1080p to 33.4 FPS at 4K, which is a 39% reduction. The Ultra preset shows the smallest relative drop, from 54.2 FPS at 1080p to 30.6 FPS at 4K, a 44% decline, but it starts from a lower baseline due to the extreme demands of Ultra settings.

The gap between 1080p and 1440p is also telling. At Low settings, 1440p yields 73.8 FPS versus 91.8 FPS at 1080p, a 20% penalty. For High settings, the drop is from 54.4 to 41.3 FPS, a 24% penalty. This consistent 20-25% hit when moving to 1440p suggests the GPU is struggling to maintain fill rates, while the CPU still has headroom. The fact that the 1440p Ultra result (41.7 FPS) is nearly identical to the 1440p High result (41.3 FPS) is particularly telling—it implies that beyond a certain point, the GPU is saturated and additional graphical fidelity costs almost nothing in performance because the render pipeline is already maxed out.

FAQ

Q: What is the best preset for 1080p gaming with this combo?

A: The data shows that Medium settings at 1920x1080 produce 73.5 FPS average, while Low produces 91.8 FPS and High produces 54.4 FPS. Medium offers a 35% improvement over High while still providing a playable frame rate, making it the most balanced choice for 1080p.

Q: Can this system handle 4K resolution?

A: The measured results indicate that 4K is only playable at Low settings, where the average FPS is 50.5. Medium drops to 42.7 FPS, High to 33.4 FPS, and Ultra to 30.6 FPS, all of which are below the 60 FPS threshold typically desired for smooth gameplay.

Q: Is the Ryzen 7 3700X holding back the RTX 2060 in this game?

A: The benchmark data suggests the CPU is not a bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 91.8 FPS, which is a high frame rate. The primary constraint appears to be the GPU, as performance scales almost linearly with resolution changes, a classic sign of a graphics-limited workload.

Q: How does the CPU's multi-core performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Ryzen 7 3700X scores 19087 in Cinebench R23 multi-core. Its closest rival, the Intel Core i5-12600, scores 28654, which is 0.1% lower, making the two statistically equivalent. The AMD Ryzen 5 5600XT is 0.1% higher, also showing parity.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Low settings produce 73.8 FPS, while Ultra produces 41.7 FPS. This represents a 43% reduction in performance when moving from the lowest to the highest preset, showing the heavy cost of Ultra features at this resolution.

Q: What is the combo's overall ranking among tested systems?

A: This specific CPU-GPU combination ranks 1458 out of 1795 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the lower half of all systems tested, indicating that while it is functional, it is not a high-performance pairing for this particular simulator.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is a Zen 2 architecture processor with 8 cores and 16 threads, running at a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. This configuration is well-suited for Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known for its heavy use of CPU resources for weather simulation, air traffic control, and physics calculations. The processor's 32 MB of L3 cache helps keep frequently accessed data close to the cores, reducing latency in these complex simulations.

Benchmark results show the 3700X scores 19087 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2694 in single-core. Its multi-threaded performance is strong, placing it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs. However, the single-core score is less impressive, which could matter for a game that still relies on some single-threaded tasks. The nearest rivals, the Intel Core i5-12600 and AMD Ryzen 5 5600XT, have average benchmark scores within 0.1% of the 3700X, suggesting that in synthetic tests, these CPUs are nearly interchangeable.

In the context of the measured FPS, the CPU's role is most evident at 1080p Low, where the system achieves 91.8 FPS. This high frame rate demonstrates that the processor can feed the GPU adequately at lower resolutions. However, the fact that performance drops so significantly at 4K (50.5 FPS on Low) suggests that the CPU is not the bottleneck; if it were, the FPS would remain relatively constant regardless of resolution. The data points to the RTX 2060 as the limiting factor in most scenarios.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo of the Ryzen 7 3700X and RTX 2060 is ranked 1458 out of 1795 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the bottom 20% of all systems tested, a surprisingly low position given the individual component benchmarks. The CPU ranks in the 85th percentile among all CPUs, and the GPU ranks in the 58th percentile among all GPUs, yet their combined performance in this specific game is lackluster.

This discrepancy suggests that Microsoft Flight Simulator is particularly demanding in ways that this pairing struggles with. The game's reliance on both high single-thread performance and massive GPU bandwidth for rendering terrain and weather likely exposes weaknesses in both components. The RTX 2060's 6 GB of VRAM may be insufficient for the high-resolution textures used in the simulator, and the 3700X's moderate single-core speed may not be enough for the game's simulation loops.

Compared to the GPU's nearest rivals, the RTX 2060 sits within 1.8% of the AMD Radeon Pro W5500 and 0.5% of the AMD Radeon RX 7600S in average benchmark score. This places it in a competitive mid-range tier, but the combo ranking shows that in this game, it underperforms relative to its synthetic benchmark standing.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its best results. Low settings produce an average of 91.8 FPS, which is smooth and responsive. Medium settings yield 73.5 FPS, still well above the 60 FPS target. High settings drop to 54.4 FPS, and Ultra settings produce 54.2 FPS, both of which are playable but not fluid.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance becomes more variable. Low settings maintain a respectable 73.8 FPS, but Medium falls to 55.6 FPS. High settings produce 41.3 FPS, and Ultra settings produce 41.7 FPS. The similarity between High and Ultra at this resolution is notable, suggesting a GPU bottleneck that limits the impact of additional graphical features.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles. Low settings produce 50.5 FPS, which is borderline playable. Medium settings drop to 42.7 FPS, High to 33.4 FPS, and Ultra to 30.6 FPS. None of these 4K results reach the 60 FPS threshold, and even the Low setting is below ideal smoothness. The data clearly shows that 4K is not a viable resolution for this combination without significant compromises.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience, the data suggests that 1080p Medium is the optimal balance of visual quality and performance. The 73.5 FPS average at Medium is 35% higher than the 54.4 FPS at High, while still providing a substantial improvement over the 91.8 FPS Low setting in terms of visual fidelity. The jump from Medium to High costs 19.1 FPS, a 26% reduction, which is a significant trade-off for incremental visual gains.

At 1440p, the recommendation shifts to Low settings, which produce 73.8 FPS. Medium at this resolution drops to 55.6 FPS, which is still playable but less smooth. The data shows that High and Ultra at 1440p (41.3 and 41.7 FPS respectively) are nearly identical in performance, so if a user insists on higher settings, they might as well choose Ultra since it costs almost nothing extra.

For 4K, the only playable option is Low settings at 50.5 FPS. Any other preset results in frame rates below 43 FPS, which would likely be a frustrating experience for a flight simulator that requires precise control. The substantial performance gap between Low and Medium at 4K (50.5 vs 42.7 FPS) reinforces that the GPU is the limiting factor at this resolution.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 is a Turing architecture GPU with 1920 shading units, 30 RT cores, and 240 tensor cores. It operates at a base clock of 1365 MHz and a boost clock of 1680 MHz, with 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus providing 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU's 160 W TDP and dual-slot design are typical for its generation.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU's role is primarily in rendering terrain, clouds, and lighting effects. The measured FPS data shows that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at resolutions above 1080p. The 6 GB VRAM capacity is likely a limiting factor at 4K, where high-resolution textures can easily exceed this amount. The 48 ROPs and 120 TMUs are also relatively modest for handling the massive draw distances in flight simulation.

The GPU's benchmark performance places it in the 58th percentile of all GPUs, with an average score of 16074. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 7600S, scores 15996, a 0.5% difference, while the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M scores 16351, 1.7% higher. This places the RTX 2060 in a competitive mid-range position, but the game's specific demands for high fill rates and large texture pools clearly stress its 6 GB memory buffer. The FP32 performance of 6.451 TFLOPS is adequate for the game's shader work, but the memory bandwidth of 336 GB/s appears insufficient for the highest settings at high resolutions.