Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator places unusual demands on a system, and the measured data for the AMD Ryzen 7 5700 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER combination reveals a clear performance profile across resolutions and settings. This analysis walks through the measured frames per second (FPS) to identify where the bottleneck lies, how the combo ranks, and what settings deliver the most playable experience.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a substantial drop in performance as resolution increases, a pattern that points directly at the GPU as the primary limiter. At 1920x1080 with High settings, the combo averages 45 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 at High, the average falls to 37 FPS, a reduction of approximately 18%. At 3840x2160 High, the average drops further to 27 FPS, which is 40% lower than the 1080p High result. This scaling behavior is classic evidence of a GPU-bound scenario, where the rendering workload increases with pixel count faster than the GTX 1660 SUPER can compensate.

The Low settings results reinforce this interpretation. At 1080p Low, the system produces 78 FPS. At 1440p Low, the average is 63 FPS, and at 4K Low, it drops to 46 FPS. The relative decline from 1080p to 4K at Low is about 41%, very similar to the drop seen at High settings. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect the FPS gap between resolutions to narrow significantly at lower settings, since the GPU would have less work to do. Instead, the consistent ~40% penalty from 1080p to 4K indicates that the GTX 1660 SUPER is saturated even at Low settings, and the CPU has enough headroom to keep feeding it.

A closer look at the Medium settings, which include minimum and maximum FPS values, shows how frame pacing behaves under load. At 1080p Medium, the average is 60 FPS with a minimum of 51 and a maximum of 69. At 1440p Medium, the average is 49 FPS with a range of 41 to 56. At 4K Medium, the average falls to 36 FPS, with a minimum of 31 and a maximum of 41. The spread between minimum and maximum FPS is roughly 18 FPS at each resolution, suggesting that the frame time variability is relatively stable and driven by the GPU's consistent workload, not by CPU hitches.

The data indicates that the system is heavily GPU-limited in Microsoft Flight Simulator. The transition from 1080p to 1440p costs roughly 18% of the average FPS, and the transition from 1440p to 4K costs an additional 27% on average across settings. This nonlinear scaling is typical of a GPU that runs out of shading units and memory bandwidth as resolution climbs, rather than a CPU that cannot keep up with the simulation's complex physics and scenery calculations.

How This Combo Ranks

In the global ranking of tested CPU and GPU combinations for Microsoft Flight Simulator, this specific build places 3143rd out of 3714 combos. That places it in the lower 15% of all tested configurations, which is a poor showing for a modern gaming setup. The percentile data for the individual components helps explain this: the Ryzen 7 5700 sits at the 78th percentile among all CPUs, while the GTX 1660 SUPER sits at the 53rd percentile among all GPUs. The combination of a strong CPU with a mid-range GPU pushes the overall combo ranking down, because the game's performance is dictated primarily by the weaker component.

The rank of 3143 out of 3714 is a stark indicator that this combo is not well-suited for Microsoft Flight Simulator at higher resolutions. The game is known for its heavy reliance on both CPU and GPU, but the measured FPS data shows that the GTX 1660 SUPER is the limiting factor. At 1080p, the combo achieves playable frame rates, but the ranking suggests that most other tested combos deliver better average performance. The deltaPct values from the nearestRivals list for the GPU show how close the GTX 1660 SUPER is to its direct competitors: it is just 0.4% behind the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile, 0.4% behind the RX 580, and 0.9% ahead of the Radeon 740M. These are marginal differences, meaning the GPU sits in a crowded performance band where small advantages or disadvantages define its position.

The CPU's nearestRivals show a similar clustering. The Ryzen 7 5700 is just 0.1% behind the Intel Xeon D-2752TER and 0.1% behind the AMD Ryzen 5 6600H, while it is 0.1% ahead of the Ryzen 5 7640U and 0.3% ahead of the Ryzen 7 5825U. This tight grouping indicates that the CPU's raw compute performance is competitive with several other mid-range processors, but the GPU pairing holds the combo back. The data suggests that this build would rank significantly higher if paired with a more powerful GPU, but as configured, it lands near the bottom quartile of tested combos.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700 brings 8 cores and 16 threads to the table, with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. It is built on the Zen 3 architecture, codenamed Cezanne, using a 7 nm process from TSMC. The processor has 16 MB of L3 cache, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 64 KB of L1 cache per core. This is a capable multi-threaded processor, as shown by its benchmark scores: it achieves a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 20655 and a single-core score of 2916. The PassMark multithread score is 24303, and the single-thread score is 3296.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU is responsible for simulating flight physics, weather, and scenery data, which can be highly multi-threaded. The Ryzen 7 5700's 8-core configuration is well-suited for this task, and the benchmark results indicate it has ample headroom. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 6628 and the max-thread score of 6617 show that the processor scales well with additional threads, which is beneficial for a game that can leverage multiple cores. The single-thread score of 901 in 3DMark is also respectable, indicating that the CPU does not bottleneck on lightly-threaded tasks.

However, the measured FPS data shows that the CPU is not the limiting factor in this combo. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 78 FPS, which is a solid result that suggests the CPU can push well beyond that if the GPU allowed. The fact that increasing resolution from 1080p to 4K at Low settings drops the FPS from 78 to 46, a 41% reduction, confirms that the GPU is the constraint. The CPU's performance is more than adequate for this game, and the data implies that upgrading the GPU would yield significant FPS gains without needing to change the processor.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 1080p with Medium settings?

A: The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 with Medium settings is 60, with a minimum of 51 and a maximum of 69.

Q: How does the combo rank among all tested configurations in this game?

A: The combo ranks 3143rd out of 3714 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the lower portion of the field.

Q: What is the FPS difference between 1080p Low and 4K Low?

A: At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 78, while at 4K Low, the average FPS is 46, representing a drop of 32 FPS or approximately 41%.

Q: Which component is the primary bottleneck in this setup?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the limiting factor, as FPS scales down significantly with increasing resolution even at Low settings, while the CPU benchmarks show strong multi-threaded performance.

Q: What are the minimum and maximum FPS at 1440p Medium?

A: At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the average FPS is 49, with a minimum of 41 and a maximum of 56.

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

A: The Ryzen 7 5700 is 0.1% behind the Intel Xeon D-2752TER and AMD Ryzen 5 6600H, and 0.1% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 7640U and 0.3% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 5825U in average benchmark score.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER is built on the Turing architecture with a TU116 chip, using a 12 nm process. It has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing 336.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The GPU features 1408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 48 raster output units. Its base clock is 1530 MHz with a boost clock of 1785 MHz, and the memory runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The GPU delivers 5.027 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and has a pixel rate of 85.68 GPixel/s with a texture rate of 157.1 GTexel/s.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU handles the rendering of the vast scenery, including terrain, buildings, and weather effects. The measured FPS data shows that the GTX 1660 SUPER is the dominant bottleneck across all resolutions. At 1080p, the GPU can manage 78 FPS at Low settings, but this falls to 45 FPS at High and 43 FPS at Ultra. At 1440p, the GPU struggles to maintain 60 FPS even at Low settings, with an average of 63 FPS. At 4K, the GPU is clearly overmatched, with the average FPS falling below 50 at every setting, including Low.

The GPU's 6 GB of VRAM is a potential concern for this game, which is known for loading large textures. The measured data does not directly show VRAM usage, but the steep FPS drop at 4K suggests that memory bandwidth and capacity may be working against the system. The 336.0 GB/s bandwidth is shared across a 192-bit bus, which is modest by modern standards. The GPU's benchmark scores place it at the 53rd percentile among all GPUs, with an average score of 12986, indicating it is a mid-range part. Its nearest rivals are the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (0.4% ahead), the RX 580 (0.4% ahead), and the Radeon 740M (0.9% behind), showing that it sits in a competitive band.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides clear guidance on which settings to use for a playable experience. At 1080p, the Medium preset delivers an average of 60 FPS with a minimum of 51, which is smooth for a flight simulator that prioritizes fluid camera movement over fast-paced action. The High preset at 1080p drops to 45 FPS, which is still playable but noticeably less smooth. The Ultra preset at 1080p averages 43 FPS, which is close to High but does not offer a meaningful visual improvement for the additional performance cost. For the best balance of visual fidelity and performance at 1080p, Medium is the recommended setting.

At 1440p, the situation becomes more challenging. The Medium preset averages 49 FPS, which is borderline for a smooth experience, but the minimum of 41 FPS may cause noticeable stutters in dense scenery. The Low preset at 1440p averages 63 FPS, which is the only setting that provides a consistently smooth frame rate at this resolution. The High and Ultra presets at 1440p fall to 37 FPS and 35 FPS respectively, which are below the threshold for comfortable play. For 1440p, Low settings are the only viable option for maintaining playable performance.

At 4K, the data shows that the system is not capable of a smooth experience at any setting. The Low preset averages 46 FPS, which is playable but with occasional drops, while the Medium preset averages 36 FPS and the High/Ultra presets hover around 27 FPS and 26 FPS. These numbers are below the 60 FPS target and even below the 30 FPS minimum for many players. For 4K, the recommendation would be to use Low settings if playability is the priority, but the data clearly shows that this combo is not suited for 4K gaming in Microsoft Flight Simulator.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured FPS data for this combo is as follows. At 1920x1080, the Low preset averages 78 FPS, Medium averages 60 FPS (with a min of 51 and max of 69), High averages 45 FPS, and Ultra averages 43 FPS. At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 63 FPS, Medium averages 49 FPS (with a min of 41 and max of 56), High averages 37 FPS, and Ultra averages 35 FPS. At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 46 FPS, Medium averages 36 FPS (with a min of 31 and max of 41), High averages 27 FPS, and Ultra averages 26 FPS.

These numbers tell a consistent story. The system can achieve a stable 60 FPS experience only at 1080p with Medium settings. At 1440p, dropping to Low settings yields 63 FPS, which is just above the 60 FPS mark. At 4K, no setting achieves an average above 46 FPS, and the Ultra preset falls to 26 FPS, which is barely playable. The minimum FPS values at Medium settings show that frame dips are present but not severe, ranging from 51 FPS at 1080p to 31 FPS at 4K. The maximum FPS values indicate that the GPU can occasionally push higher, but the average is the more reliable indicator of sustained performance. Overall, the measured data confirms that this combo is best used at 1080p with Medium settings, and that higher resolutions require significant compromises in visual quality to maintain playable frame rates.