Microsoft Flight Simulator

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700 + NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 combination ranks 1737 out of 1795 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the bottom 3% of all tested configurations, indicating a severely constrained experience for a demanding flight simulator. The data shows this is a pairing where the GPU is the dominant bottleneck, dragging down what is otherwise a capable 8-core processor. The rank is not a reflection of a broken system, but rather a mismatch between the game's heavy rendering load and the GTX 1650's limited 4 GB VRAM and modest compute resources. For context, the CPU alone sits in the 84th percentile among all processors, while the GPU languishes in the 43rd percentile, a clear sign that the graphics card is the limiting factor in this equation. The measured frames per second confirm this, with no resolution or settings combination achieving a 60 FPS average. The overall experience will be playable only at the lowest settings and resolutions, and even then, the margins are thin. This is not a combo for high-fidelity flight; it is a baseline entry point.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the primary constraint in this pairing. Its 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus yields 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth, which is simply insufficient for the high-resolution textures and complex scenery of Microsoft Flight Simulator. The GPU's 896 shading units and 32 ROPs, running at a base clock of 1485 MHz and a boost clock of 1665 MHz, provide a peak FP32 throughput of 2.984 TFLOPS. These specifications translate directly to the measured results: the GPU is overwhelmed at higher settings. The data shows a stark drop from Low to Ultra settings, with the 4K Ultra average at 14.5 FPS versus 27.7 FPS at 4K Low. This indicates that the card's memory bandwidth and fill rate are saturated quickly. The lack of tensor or RT cores means no DLSS or ray tracing assistance, forcing the card to render everything natively. In this game, the GTX 1650's role is to provide a low-fidelity, low-resolution baseline experience; it is not equipped for the simulator's full visual scope.

Settings Recommendations

Benchmark results indicate that the Low preset is the only viable option for a playable frame rate across all tested resolutions. At 1920x1080, Low yields an average of 46 FPS, which is the closest this combo gets to smooth gameplay. Medium at 1080p drops to 34.5 FPS, and High falls to 28.7 FPS. The step from Low to Medium is a 25% performance loss, which is substantial. At 2560x1440, Low produces 39.7 FPS, while Medium falls to 30.7 FPS. For a consistent experience, the Low preset is the recommended starting point. If the user prioritizes visual fidelity over frame rate, Medium at 1080p is the highest acceptable setting, but the data shows it will be a stutter-prone experience. The Ultra preset is not recommended at any resolution, as it produces 27.6 FPS at 1080p and drops to 14.5 FPS at 4K, which is unplayable. The data suggests that users should accept the Low preset to maintain a playable frame rate, or consider lowering resolution to 1080p to enable Medium settings.

FAQ

Q: What is the best average frame rate this combo can achieve in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 46, achieved at 1920x1080 with the Low settings preset.

Q: Is the GTX 1650's 4 GB VRAM sufficient for this game at 4K?

A: No. At 3840x2160, the average frame rate ranges from 27.7 FPS on Low to 14.5 FPS on Ultra, indicating the 4 GB memory and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth are overwhelmed at that resolution.

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

A: The Ryzen 7 5700 has an average benchmark score of 27220, which is 0.7% ahead of the Intel Core i9-9900K and 0.8% ahead of the Intel Core i7-12700H. It also leads the Intel Core i7-1370P by 0.8% and the AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 by 1.2%.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between 1080p and 4K on Low settings?

A: At 1920x1080 Low, the average is 46 FPS. At 3840x2160 Low, the average is 27.7 FPS, representing a 39.8% drop in performance when scaling up the resolution.

Q: Does this combo support ray tracing or DLSS?

A: No. The GTX 1650 has no RT cores and no Tensor cores, and its API support is DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. There is no hardware acceleration for these features.

Q: What is the CPU's multithreaded score in Cinebench R23?

A: The Ryzen 7 5700 scores 20655 in Cinebench R23 multicore, with a single-core score of 2916.

Resolution Scaling

Resolution scaling has a dramatic impact on performance, confirming the GPU as the primary bottleneck. Dropping from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 on Low settings reduces the average frame rate from 46 FPS to 39.7 FPS, a 13.7% decrease. The step from 1440p to 4K Low is even more punishing, falling from 39.7 FPS to 27.7 FPS, a 30.2% decrease. This pattern is consistent across all settings. For example, at High settings, the frame rate drops from 28.7 FPS at 1080p to 21.8 FPS at 1440p, and then to 18.5 FPS at 4K. The data shows that the GTX 1650's memory bandwidth and pixel fill rate are the limiting factors, as the frame rate scales almost linearly with the number of pixels rendered. The CPU, with its 8 cores and 16 threads, is not the constraint here; if it were, we would see a plateau in frame rates at lower resolutions. Instead, the consistent drop at every resolution step indicates that the GPU is saturated. Users seeking higher frame rates must prioritize resolution reduction over settings reduction, as the 1080p Low preset is the only configuration that approaches a smooth experience.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700 provides a strong foundation that is largely untapped in this configuration. With 8 cores and 16 threads based on the Zen 3 architecture, it offers a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. Its 16 MB of L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth are more than adequate for flight simulation's physics and AI calculations. The CPU's benchmark scores are solid, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 20655 and a single-core score of 2916. In PassMark, it achieves a multithread score of 24303 and a single-thread score of 3296. However, the measured FPS in this game shows that the CPU's capabilities are not the limiting factor. The performance ceiling is set by the GPU. For instance, at 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 14.5, which is far below what the CPU could feed. The data suggests that the CPU is idle for significant periods, waiting for the GPU to catch up. This is a classic case of a balanced processor paired with an underpowered graphics card, resulting in a system that cannot utilize its full processing potential in a GPU-bound title like Microsoft Flight Simulator.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rates are as follows across all tested resolutions and settings.

At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers the highest average at 46 FPS. Medium follows at 34.5 FPS, High at 28.7 FPS, and Ultra at 27.6 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 11.5 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is a marginal 1.1 FPS, suggesting diminishing returns at the top end.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset again leads with 39.7 FPS. Medium produces 30.7 FPS, High drops to 21.8 FPS, and Ultra yields 22.9 FPS. Notably, the High preset at 1440p (21.8 FPS) is slower than the Ultra preset (22.9 FPS), indicating a potential anomaly in the data or that the High preset's specific settings are more taxing on the GPU's resources. The drop from 1080p Low to 1440p Low is 6.3 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 27.7 FPS. Medium falls to 23.6 FPS, High to 18.5 FPS, and Ultra to 14.5 FPS. This resolution is the most punishing, with the Ultra preset being only 52.5% as fast as the Low preset. The data shows a clear trend: the GTX 1650 simply cannot handle 4K with this game, and even 1440p requires Low settings for a playable experience. The only configuration that approaches 60 FPS is 1080p Low, and even that falls short by 14 FPS.