Microsoft Flight Simulator

# FAQ

Q: Is this CPU-GPU combination better suited for 1080p or 4K gaming in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The data clearly favors 1080p. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo achieves 53.1 FPS average, while at 3840x2160 with the same settings, it drops to 28.4 FPS. The gap widens further at higher presets, with 4K Ultra producing just 16.2 FPS compared to 32.9 FPS at 1080p Ultra.

Q: How does the Ryzen 7 5700 compare to its closest competitors in general CPU performance?

A: The Ryzen 7 5700 scores 27,220 on average benchmark scores, placing it in the 84th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core i9-9900K, scores 27,043, meaning the AMD chip is 0.7% faster. The Intel Core i7-12700H also trails slightly at 27,006, a 0.8% difference.

Q: What is the GPU's general performance percentile, and who are its closest rivals?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 580 sits in the 53rd percentile of all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 13,559. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570 nearly matches it exactly at 13,564 (0% delta), while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 is just 0.1% behind at 13,549. The AMD Radeon Pro 455 trails by 1.1% at 13,416.

Q: Does the CPU's thread count matter for this flight simulator?

A: The Ryzen 7 5700 provides 8 cores and 16 threads, which appears substantial for the workload. Its 3DMark scores show strong scaling from 1,762 (2 threads) to 6,617 (max threads), indicating the CPU can leverage multiple threads effectively. The 16 MB L3 cache and 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth support this capability.

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

A: This particular CPU-GPU pairing ranks 1,671st out of 1,795 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the lower portion of the field, suggesting that while the components function, they are not competitive with higher-end configurations for this demanding title.

Q: How does the GPU's memory bandwidth affect performance?

A: The RX 580 offers 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clock runs at 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective). This bandwidth appears adequate for 1080p but becomes a limiting factor at higher resolutions where frame rates drop dramatically.

# GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 580 brings 8 GB of GDDR5 memory operating at 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, which proves to be a critical resource for Microsoft Flight Simulator. The GPU's Polaris 20 chip, built on a 14 nm process with 5,700 million transistors, contains 2,304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. Its base clock of 1257 MHz can boost to 1340 MHz, while the memory runs at 2000 MHz.

In benchmark terms, this GPU sits at the 53rd percentile of all graphics cards, with an average score of 13,559. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570, achieves an almost identical score of 13,564 — a 0% difference that places them statistically even. The GTX 950 follows closely at 13,549 (0.1% behind), while the AMD Radeon Pro 455 trails at 13,416 (1.1% behind). The NVIDIA P106-090 actually surpasses it slightly at 13,716 (-1.1% delta from the RX 580's perspective).

The GPU's 6.175 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 193.0 GTexel/s texture rate provide the raw processing power needed for the simulator's terrain rendering. However, the measured frame rates suggest this power is insufficient for demanding settings. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 53.1 FPS, but this falls to 33.9 FPS at High and 32.9 FPS at Ultra. The pixel rate of 42.88 GPixel/s and 32 ROPs become increasingly stressed as resolution climbs, with 4K Ultra dropping to 16.2 FPS.

The RX 580's DirectX 12 (12_0) support and Vulkan 1.3 compatibility align with modern API requirements, but the aging GCN 4.0 architecture shows its limitations. The 8 GB VRAM capacity is adequate for 1080p textures, yet the 256-bit bus and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth become bottlenecks when the simulator demands larger texture loads at higher resolutions.

# Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a steep performance cliff as resolution increases. At Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 53.1 FPS at 1080p to 43.7 FPS at 1440p (a 17.7% reduction), then further to 28.4 FPS at 4K (a 46.5% reduction from 1080p). This pattern indicates the GPU becomes the primary limiting component at higher resolutions.

The scaling is even more pronounced at Ultra settings. Starting from 32.9 FPS at 1080p, the frame rate falls to 23.7 FPS at 1440p and 16.2 FPS at 4K. The 4K figure represents less than half the 1080p performance, demonstrating that the RX 580's memory bandwidth and compute capacity cannot sustain the pixel throughput required at 3840x2160.

Interestingly, the Low preset shows the smallest relative drop between 1440p and 4K (from 43.7 to 28.4 FPS, a 35% reduction), whereas Medium settings drop from 32.6 to 23.4 FPS (a 28.2% reduction). This non-linear scaling suggests that at low settings, the CPU's 8-core, 16-thread configuration can partially compensate for GPU limitations, while at higher settings the GPU is fully saturated regardless of resolution.

The 1080p to 1440p transition at High settings (33.9 to 26.4 FPS) represents a 22.1% drop, while the 1440p to 4K transition (26.4 to 17 FPS) shows a 35.6% drop. This accelerating degradation indicates that the RX 580's 256-bit memory interface and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth are progressively overwhelmed as pixel counts rise.

# How This Combo Ranks

This configuration places 1,671st out of 1,795 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator, putting it in the bottom 7% of all tested pairings. This ranking reflects the combination of a mid-tier CPU and an aging GPU struggling with one of the most demanding simulation titles available.

The CPU's 84th percentile performance (27,220 average benchmark score) suggests it is not the primary bottleneck. In contrast, the GPU's 53rd percentile standing (13,559 average score) aligns more closely with the combo's low ranking. The RX 580's nearest rivals — the GTX 570 and GTX 950 — are similarly older cards that would likely face comparable challenges.

The rank of 1,671 out of 1,795 indicates that 124 tested combos perform worse, but the vast majority of configurations deliver better results. This positions the combo firmly in the lower tier for this specific game, despite the CPU's respectable general performance. The data implies that Microsoft Flight Simulator's heavy GPU workload dominates the overall experience, dragging the combo down despite the CPU's capabilities.

# CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700 provides 8 cores and 16 threads based on the Zen 3 architecture (Cezanne codename), manufactured on a 7 nm process by TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and boosts up to 4.60 GHz, with 64 KB L1 cache per core, 512 KB L2 cache per core, and a shared 16 MB L3 cache. The 65W TDP and dual-channel DDR4 memory support (51.2 GB/s bandwidth) round out the package.

Benchmark results show this CPU excels in multi-threaded workloads. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score reaches 20,655, while single-core performance hits 2,916. The PassMark multithread score of 24,303 and single-thread score of 3,296 further confirm its balanced capabilities. In 3DMark tests, the CPU scales well from 1,762 (2 threads) to 6,617 (max threads), demonstrating efficient thread utilization.

The CPU's 84th percentile ranking (avg score 27,220) places it slightly above the Intel Core i9-9900K (27,043, 0.7% faster), the Intel Core i7-12700H (27,006, 0.8% faster), and the Intel Core i7-1370P (26,991, 0.8% faster). The AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 trails at 26,909 (1.2% behind). This strong showing suggests the CPU handles the simulator's physics and flight model calculations effectively.

However, the measured frame rates reveal that CPU strength cannot overcome GPU limitations. At 1080p Low, the 53.1 FPS figure likely approaches what this CPU can feed the GPU, but the RX 580's constraints cap performance at higher settings. The CPU's 2,082 Cinebench R15 multicore score and 293 single-core score indicate adequate processing power for the game's demands.

# Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its best performance. Low settings produce 53.1 FPS average, which is playable for most users. Medium settings drop to 41 FPS, High settings reach 33.9 FPS, and Ultra settings hit 32.9 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra is minimal (1 FPS), suggesting the GPU is already saturated at these presets.

Moving to 2560x1440, all settings see notable reductions. Low settings yield 43.7 FPS, Medium drops to 32.6 FPS, High falls to 26.4 FPS, and Ultra reaches just 23.7 FPS. The 1440p Low figure remains borderline playable, but the higher settings approach unplayable territory.

At 3840x2160, the performance becomes marginal. Low settings achieve 28.4 FPS, Medium drops to 23.4 FPS, High falls to 17 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 16.2 FPS. The 4K results are consistently below 30 FPS, making any setting at this resolution unsuitable for smooth gameplay.

The data shows a consistent pattern: Low settings offer roughly 60% better performance than High settings at every resolution. At 1080p, the difference is 53.1 versus 33.9 FPS (a 56.6% improvement). At 1440p, it's 43.7 versus 26.4 FPS (a 65.5% improvement). At 4K, it's 28.4 versus 17 FPS (a 67.1% improvement). This suggests that the Low preset reduces GPU workload significantly, allowing the RX 580 to operate within its comfort zone.

# Settings Recommendations

For playable frame rates, the Low preset is the only viable option at 1440p or 4K. At 1440p Low, the 43.7 FPS average is acceptable, while 4K Low's 28.4 FPS is borderline. At 1080p, Low provides the best experience at 53.1 FPS, comfortably above the 30 FPS threshold.

The Medium preset offers a compromise at 1080p with 41 FPS average, which represents a 23% reduction from Low but likely provides improved visual fidelity. At 1440p Medium (32.6 FPS) and 4K Medium (23.4 FPS), the frame rates become less acceptable.

High and Ultra settings are only recommendable at 1080p, where they deliver 33.9 FPS and 32.9 FPS respectively. The performance difference between these two presets is negligible (1 FPS), so users should choose Ultra if they want maximum visual quality at 1080p without meaningful performance loss.

Given the data, the optimal experience appears to be 1080p with Medium settings, balancing the 41 FPS average against improved visuals over Low. For users prioritizing smoothness above all, 1080p Low at 53.1 FPS is the clear choice. Higher resolutions require sacrificing visual quality to the Low preset to maintain playable frame rates, and even then, 4K remains below 30 FPS.