Microsoft Flight Simulator

# Microsoft Flight Simulator: AMD Ryzen 7 5700 + AMD Radeon RX 7700 Analysis

Microsoft Flight Simulator presents a demanding workload that scales heavily with both CPU and GPU resources. This combination of AMD's Ryzen 7 5700 and Radeon RX 7700 produces playable results across most settings, though the data reveals clear performance tiers. The measured FPS across three resolutions and four quality presets shows a system that handles 1080p comfortably but begins to strain at 4K Ultra. This analysis breaks down the measured results, component roles, and ranking within the broader test pool.

Settings Recommendations

The data shows that the highest playable experience depends heavily on the target resolution. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset delivers 98 FPS average with a minimum of 84 FPS and maximum of 113 FPS, which represents a strong balance between visual quality and smoothness. The High preset at 1080p drops to 74 FPS average, while Ultra falls to 70 FPS. Given that the difference between High and Ultra is only 4 FPS, but Medium offers a 24 FPS improvement over High, the Medium preset at 1080p provides the best measured experience for fluid simulation gameplay.

For 2560x1440, the Medium preset again stands out, delivering 79 FPS average with a minimum of 67 FPS and maximum of 91 FPS. This keeps the experience above the 60 FPS threshold with some headroom. The High preset at 1440p hits exactly 60 FPS average, which is technically playable but leaves no margin for demanding scenes. The Ultra preset at 1440p drops to 57 FPS average, which may introduce noticeable stutter during complex flight scenarios. Low at 1440p reaches 102 FPS, but the visual compromise is substantial.

At 3840x2160, the situation becomes more constrained. The Medium preset achieves 59 FPS average with a minimum of 50 FPS and maximum of 67 FPS, making it the only 4K preset that stays near the playable threshold. High at 4K drops to 44 FPS, and Ultra falls to 42 FPS. Low at 4K reaches 75 FPS, but this preset significantly reduces the visual fidelity that makes flight simulation immersive.

The optimal recommendation is Medium settings for all resolutions. At 1080p, Medium provides 98 FPS with a comfortable margin. At 1440p, Medium gives 79 FPS with a minimum above 60. At 4K, Medium offers 59 FPS average, which is borderline but workable. For users prioritizing frame rate over visuals, Low at 1080p reaches 126 FPS, and Low at 1440p hits 102 FPS.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700 brings eight cores and sixteen threads to this pairing, based on the Zen 3 architecture manufactured on a 7 nm process. The CPU's base clock of 3.70 GHz can boost to 4.60 GHz, and the 16 MB of L3 cache helps feed the GPU during complex flight scenes. The processor's benchmark results show a single-thread score of 901 in 3dmark and a multi-thread score of 6617 at max threads, indicating solid per-core performance that matters for simulation workloads.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU handles the complex physics, weather simulation, and scenery loading. The Ryzen 7 5700's 8-core/16-thread configuration provides sufficient parallelism for the game's multi-threaded rendering pipeline. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 20655 and single-core score of 2916 demonstrate balanced capabilities that keep the GPU fed across all tested settings.

The CPU's performance ranking places it in the 78th percentile among all tested CPUs. Its nearest rivals show very tight clustering: the Intel Xeon D-2752TER scores 25530 average with a 0.1% difference, the AMD Ryzen 5 6600H scores 25550 with a 0.1% difference, and the AMD Ryzen 5 7640U scores 25485 with a 0.1% difference. This indicates that the Ryzen 7 5700 performs nearly identically to these alternatives in synthetic benchmarks, with the deltaPct values all within 0.3%.

The CPU's 65 W TDP suggests efficient power delivery, and the PassMark multi-thread score of 24303 confirms strong multi-core throughput. In this game, the CPU's 16 threads help maintain frame pacing during complex scenarios, particularly at lower resolutions where the GPU is less of a bottleneck. The measured FPS at 1080p Low reaching 126 FPS suggests the CPU can sustain high frame rates when the GPU workload is light.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7700 features the Navi 32 chip on RDNA 3.0 architecture, manufactured on a 5 nm process. The GPU's 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 624.1 GB/s bandwidth, which is ample for high-resolution textures in flight simulation. The GPU's clock speeds show a base of 1900 MHz, a game clock of 2041 MHz, and a boost clock of 2459 MHz, with memory running at 2438 MHz effective 19.5 Gbps.

The GPU's shading units, TMUs, and ROPs are configured to deliver 25.18 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. The pixel rate of 236.1 GPixel/s and texture rate of 393.4 GTexel/s indicate strong fill rates that benefit the dense scenery rendering in this game. The 40 ray tracing cores provide additional capability, though flight sim's traditional rasterization workload is the primary driver here.

In the GPU benchmark suite, the RX 7700 achieves a PassMark G3D score of 20974 and a Geekbench OpenCL score of 106028. The GPU sits in the 58th percentile among all tested GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R9 370X with a 0.1% difference, the AMD Radeon RX 9060 at 1% lower, the AMD Radeon Pro W5500 at 1.1% higher, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti at 1.7% lower. This clustering shows the RX 7700 performs in a competitive mid-range tier.

The GPU's role in this game becomes clear when examining the FPS scaling across resolutions. At 1080p, the GPU delivers 126 FPS on Low and 98 FPS on Medium, showing headroom. At 4K, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, with Ultra dropping to 42 FPS. The 16 GB VRAM capacity prevents memory-related stutters even at 4K Ultra, as the data does not indicate any VRAM-related frame drops.

How This Combo Ranks

This CPU and GPU combination ranks 1324 out of 2996 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the 56th percentile of all combos tested. This mid-pack ranking reflects the balanced but not exceptional performance of this pairing. The Ryzen 7 5700's 78th percentile CPU ranking is stronger than the RX 7700's 58th percentile GPU ranking, suggesting the GPU is the more limiting factor in this combination.

The combination's ranking indicates that roughly 44% of tested combos perform better in this game, while 56% perform worse. This positions the setup as a viable mid-range option that handles 1080p and 1440p well but struggles at 4K Ultra. The gap between the CPU's strong percentile ranking and the GPU's more modest ranking explains why lower resolutions show better scaling: the CPU has headroom that the GPU cannot fully utilize at higher settings.

The data shows that this combo delivers its best relative performance at 1080p Medium where it achieves 98 FPS, and its worst relative performance at 4K Ultra where it drops to 42 FPS. The 4K results particularly highlight the GPU's limitations, as the 42 FPS at Ultra represents a 67% drop from the 126 FPS at 1080p Low. This scaling pattern is typical for a mid-range GPU paired with a capable CPU in a simulation title.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows 1920x1080 provides the best experience, with Medium settings achieving 98 FPS average. At 2560x1440 Medium delivers 79 FPS, while 3840x2160 Medium drops to 59 FPS.

Q: How does the Ryzen 7 5700 compare to its nearest CPU rivals?

A: The Ryzen 7 5700 scores 25517 average, which is within 0.3% of the AMD Ryzen 7 5825U (25446) and within 0.1% of both the Intel Xeon D-2752TER (25530) and AMD Ryzen 5 6600H (25550).

Q: Is the RX 7700's 16 GB VRAM sufficient for this game?

A: The measured data shows no VRAM-related performance issues at any resolution tested, including 4K Ultra which achieves 42 FPS. The 624.1 GB/s memory bandwidth supports high-resolution textures without stuttering.

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 1440p with High settings?

A: The measured average FPS at 2560x1440 High is 60 FPS exactly, which is playable but leaves no margin for demanding scenes. Medium at this resolution provides 79 FPS average with a minimum of 67 FPS.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested combinations?

A: This combo ranks 1324 out of 2996 total tested combinations, placing it in the middle of the pack. The CPU ranks in the 78th percentile while the GPU ranks in the 58th percentile.

Q: Should I use Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: The data shows Ultra at 1080p delivers 70 FPS average, while Medium achieves 98 FPS. The 28 FPS difference makes Medium the better choice for smoother gameplay, as the visual improvement from Ultra is not quantified in the data.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its highest frame rates. Low settings produce 126 FPS average, representing the maximum performance ceiling. Medium settings yield 98 FPS average with a minimum of 84 FPS and maximum of 113 FPS, providing the best balance of smoothness and visual quality. High settings drop to 74 FPS average, while Ultra settings produce 70 FPS average. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 56 FPS total drop, with the largest single-step decrease occurring between Medium and High at 24 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the performance scales down as expected. Low settings achieve 102 FPS average, which remains highly playable. Medium settings deliver 79 FPS average with a minimum of 67 FPS and maximum of 91 FPS, maintaining a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. High settings produce exactly 60 FPS average, which is borderline for flight simulation where smooth panning matters. Ultra settings drop to 57 FPS average, falling below the 60 FPS threshold. The resolution increase from 1080p to 1440p costs approximately 19-24% performance across presets.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the dominant constraint. Low settings achieve 75 FPS average, which remains playable. Medium settings deliver 59 FPS average with a minimum of 50 FPS and maximum of 67 FPS, providing the only 4K preset that approaches playability. High settings drop to 44 FPS average, while Ultra settings fall to 42 FPS average. The 4K results show a 32 FPS difference between Low and Medium, then a 15 FPS drop to High, and only a 2 FPS further drop to Ultra. This pattern indicates that Medium is the practical ceiling for 4K gameplay with this combo.

The full data set shows consistent scaling: 1080p Medium at 98 FPS, 1440p Medium at 79 FPS, and 4K Medium at 59 FPS. This represents a 19 FPS cost for each resolution step up at Medium settings. At Low settings, the drops are 126 to 102 to 75 FPS, showing a 24 FPS cost from 1080p to 1440p and a 27 FPS cost from 1440p to 4K. At High settings, the progression is 74 to 60 to 44 FPS, with a 14 FPS cost from 1080p to 1440p and a 16 FPS cost from 1440p to 4K. Ultra settings show 70 to 57 to 42 FPS, with a 13 FPS cost from 1080p to 1440p and a 15 FPS cost from 1440p to 4K.