Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator presents one of the most demanding real-time rendering workloads in the PC gaming space, and the pairing of the AMD Ryzen 7 5700 with the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT produces a dataset that reveals distinct performance boundaries. The measured frames per second across resolutions and settings indicate a system where the GPU is the dominant force at higher fidelity presets, while the CPU’s 8-core/16-thread configuration becomes more relevant at lower resolutions. The data shows a combo that ranks in the 82nd percentile of all tested configurations, suggesting a well-balanced but not top-tier setup for this specific simulator.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average frame rate recorded for this combo in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The highest average frame rate is 174 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with the Low settings preset.

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

A: At 3840x2160 resolution with the Ultra preset, the average frame rate drops to 59 FPS, which is just below the 60 FPS threshold often considered ideal for smooth gameplay.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the average frame rate falls from 143 FPS on Low settings to 80 FPS on Ultra settings, a decrease of 63 FPS or approximately 44%.

Q: Does the combo’s performance ranking place it in the top half of all tested systems?

A: Yes, the combo ranks 683rd out of 3714 tested combinations, placing it in the top 18.4% of all configurations for Microsoft Flight Simulator.

Q: Are there any measured frame rate values for the Medium preset at 1080p?

A: Yes, at 1920x1080 with Medium settings, the average FPS is 138, with a minimum of 117 FPS and a maximum of 159 FPS recorded.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for the GPU in this combo?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT has an average benchmark score of 13745, which places it in the 55th percentile of all GPUs.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT is the clear performance driver in this pairing, particularly as resolution and graphical fidelity increase. Its 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 320-bit bus provides 800.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is a critical resource for a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator that streams vast amounts of terrain and scenery data. The GPU’s boost clock of 2394 MHz and game clock of 2025 MHz allow it to process the complex geometry and lighting calculations demanded by the simulator’s rendering engine.

Benchmark results show the GPU’s compute capabilities are substantial, with a Passmark G3D score of 29009 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 71068. The 5376 shading units and 192 ROPs are tasked with filling the screen at high resolutions, and the data reflects this. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS of 59 indicates the GPU is working near its limit, while at 4K Low, the average FPS jumps to 106, showing that the GPU has significant headroom when the visual workload is reduced. The 51.48 TFLOPS of FP32 compute power is clearly being utilized more effectively at higher settings, as the frame rate scales with the preset level.

Interestingly, the GPU’s percentile rank of 55th against all GPUs is modest, but its nearest rivals in that ranking include the AMD Radeon 660M and NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile, which are very different classes of hardware. This suggests the benchmark scoring is heavily weighted by multi-GPU or compute workloads rather than pure gaming rasterization. In the context of this game, the RX 7900 XT’s performance is far more competitive, as evidenced by the 4K High result of 62 FPS, which is a playable frame rate for a flight simulator where the camera often moves slowly.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700, with its 8 cores and 16 threads based on the Zen 3 architecture, provides a solid foundation for the simulator’s simulation and physics threads. Its base clock of 3.70 GHz and boost clock of 4.60 GHz are competitive for a 65 W TDP part, and the 16 MB of L3 cache helps with data locality in the complex world-streaming scenarios. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 20655 and single-core score of 2916 indicate strong all-around processing power.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU is responsible for calculating aircraft physics, weather systems, and AI traffic, which can be heavily single-threaded. The Ryzen 7 5700’s single-thread performance is adequate, but the data suggests it may become a limiting factor at lower resolutions. At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 174, which is a high frame rate but not as high as some other high-end CPUs might achieve in the same scenario. The CPU’s Passmark single-thread score of 3296 places it in a competitive range, but the 3DMark single-thread score of 901 shows that in synthetic tests, it trails the very fastest processors.

The CPU’s nearest rivals, including the AMD Ryzen 5 7640U and AMD Ryzen 5 6600H, have similar average benchmark scores, with deltas of only 0.1% and -0.1% respectively. This indicates that the Ryzen 7 5700 is positioned in a mid-tier performance bracket. For this game, the CPU’s 8-core count is beneficial for background tasks and multi-threaded physics, but the simulator’s primary rendering thread will likely rely on the high boost clock to maintain frame pacing. The data shows that at 4K Ultra, the CPU is not the bottleneck, as the GPU is clearly saturated, but at 1080p Low, the CPU’s limits are closer to being reached.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its highest frame rates across all settings. With Low settings, the average FPS is 174, which is a very fluid experience. Moving to Medium, the average drops to 138 FPS, with the minimum recorded at 117 FPS and maximum at 159 FPS, showing a stable frame window. High settings produce an average of 104 FPS, and Ultra settings bring the average down to 99 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 1080p represents a 43% reduction in average FPS, from 174 to 99.

At 2560x1440, the performance curve shifts downward. Low settings yield an average of 143 FPS, which is still very high. Medium settings average 111 FPS, with a minimum of 95 and maximum of 128 FPS, indicating some variance in complex scenes. High settings average 84 FPS, and Ultra settings average 80 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p at the same settings is significant; for example, High settings fall from 104 to 84 FPS, a 19% decrease.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the primary constraint. Low settings average 106 FPS, which is impressive for 4K. Medium settings average 82 FPS, with a minimum of 70 and maximum of 94 FPS, showing a wider range of performance. High settings average 62 FPS, which is borderline for smooth gameplay. Ultra settings average 59 FPS, just below the 60 FPS target. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is 47 FPS, or 44%, which is a more pronounced drop than at lower resolutions, confirming that the GPU’s pixel throughput is the limiting factor here.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 683 out of 3714 tested combinations places it in the 82nd percentile of all systems tested for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This is a strong showing, indicating that the Ryzen 7 5700 and RX 7900 XT together are capable of delivering a good experience in this game. However, the rank also implies that there are many other combinations that perform better, likely with more powerful CPUs or GPUs. The fact that this rank is not higher suggests that the combination is not perfectly optimized for this specific title, which is known to favor high single-thread CPU performance and large GPU memory bandwidth.

The GPU’s percentile rank of 55th against all GPUs is lower than the combo’s in-game rank, which suggests that the RX 7900 XT is performing above its general benchmark expectations in this game. Conversely, the CPU’s percentile rank of 78th against all CPUs is higher than the combo’s in-game rank, which indicates that the CPU is not the limiting factor in the majority of the measured scenarios. This is a classic sign of a GPU-bound system at high resolutions, but at 1080p, the CPU’s performance becomes more relevant, and the combo’s rank could be slightly held back by the CPU’s single-thread capabilities.

The nearest rival for the GPU is the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT, which has a delta of 1.5% in average benchmark score, but this does not directly translate to in-game performance. The data suggests that the combo is well-matched for 1440p and 4K gaming, where the GPU’s 20 GB of VRAM and high bandwidth are fully utilized, but at 1080p, a faster CPU could push the frame rates higher.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience, the Medium preset at 1440p appears to be the sweet spot. The average FPS of 111 is well above the 60 FPS threshold, and the minimum of 95 FPS ensures that frame drops are unlikely to be noticeable. The variance between 95 and 128 FPS is moderate, but the overall experience should be smooth. At 4K, the Medium preset is also a strong choice, with an average of 82 FPS and a minimum of 70 FPS, which provides a good balance between visual quality and performance.

For players who prioritize visual fidelity, the High preset at 1440p is a viable option, with an average of 84 FPS. At 4K, the High preset drops to 62 FPS, which is just above the 60 FPS target but may suffer in dense areas or during rapid camera movements. The Ultra preset is only recommended for those who can tolerate frame rates below 60 FPS, as it averages 80 FPS at 1440p but only 59 FPS at 4K. The Low preset is not recommended for normal play, as it significantly reduces the visual quality of the simulator, but it can be used to diagnose CPU bottlenecks, as the frame rates at 1080p Low of 174 FPS show the CPU’s maximum output.

Resolution Scaling

The data shows a clear trend of frame rate reduction as resolution increases, but the scaling is not uniform across settings. From 1080p to 1440p at Low settings, the average FPS drops from 174 to 143, a decrease of 31 FPS or 17.8%. From 1440p to 4K at Low settings, the drop is from 143 to 106 FPS, a decrease of 37 FPS or 25.9%. This indicates that the GPU is being tasked more heavily at 4K, and the scaling is less efficient.

At High settings, the drop from 1080p to 1440p is from 104 to 84 FPS, a 19.2% decrease, and from 1440p to 4K is from 84 to 62 FPS, a 26.2% decrease. The percentage drops are larger at higher resolutions, which is expected as the pixel count increases quadratically. The limiting component is clearly the GPU, as the CPU’s performance does not scale with resolution. The fact that the frame rate at 1080p Ultra is 99 FPS, which is only slightly higher than 1080p High at 104 FPS, suggests that the CPU is not the primary bottleneck at these settings, and the GPU is still able to maintain high output.

The scaling behavior also reveals that the system is well-balanced for 1440p gaming, as the frame rates are high across all settings. At 4K, the system is heavily GPU-bound, as evidenced by the 59 FPS Ultra result. The 20 GB of VRAM is a major advantage at 4K, as it prevents texture streaming issues that could cause stuttering. The overall trend indicates that users should target 1440p for the best balance of visual quality and performance, or 4K with Medium settings for a smoother experience.