Microsoft Flight Simulator

FAQ

Q: How does this CPU+GPU combo rank for Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 5700 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 ranks 1481 out of 1795 tested combos for this game, placing it in the lower portion of the database. The CPU sits at the 84th percentile against all CPUs, while the GPU is at the 58th percentile against all GPUs, suggesting the graphics card is the more limiting factor in this pairing.

Q: What is the best 4K performance this combo can achieve?

A: At 3840x2160, the highest average FPS recorded is 51.9 on Low settings. The Heavy preset drops to 31.4 FPS, and Ultra yields only 29.1 FPS. None of the 4K presets reach a smooth 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Is the RTX 2060 competitive with other GPUs in its class?

A: The RTX 2060’s average benchmark score is 16074, which is only 0.5% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 7600S (15996) and 1.8% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro W5500 (15786). It trails the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 by 1.7% (16351), indicating a very tight cluster of performance.

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

A: The Ryzen 7 5700 has an average benchmark score of 27220, which is 0.7% ahead of the Intel Core i9-9900K (27043) and 0.8% ahead of the Intel Core i7-12700H (27006). The margin is within 1.2% of the AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 (26909), showing these processors are effectively matched.

Q: What is the most balanced preset at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Medium preset delivers 56.8 FPS, which is the closest to the 60 FPS target among all presets at that resolution. High runs at 41 FPS, Low at 74.1 FPS, and Ultra at 43.6 FPS.

Q: Does lowering resolution from 1440p to 1080p provide a significant boost at Ultra settings?

A: Yes. At Ultra settings, the average FPS rises from 43.6 at 2560x1440 to 52.8 at 1920x1080, a gain of 9.2 FPS. This indicates that even at 1080p Ultra, the combo remains below a 60 FPS average.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 is built on the Turing architecture with a TU106 chip manufactured on a 12 nm process. It carries 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, yielding a memory bandwidth of 336.0 GB/s. The GPU’s base clock is 1365 MHz with a boost clock of 1680 MHz, and memory runs at a 1750 MHz base with 14 Gbps effective speed. These specifications place the GPU at the 58th percentile against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 16074.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU’s role is heavily tied to its memory capacity and bandwidth. The 6 GB frame buffer is a critical constraint at higher resolutions, as the game’s terrain and aircraft detail demand substantial video memory. The benchmark data reflects this: at 3840x2160, the difference between Low and Ultra settings is 22.8 FPS (51.9 vs 29.1), which is a 44% drop in performance. This scaling suggests that the GPU’s compute and memory resources are saturated as graphical fidelity increases.

The RTX 2060’s nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Radeon RX 7600S (0.5% higher score), AMD Radeon Pro 5700 (1.7% higher), and AMD Radeon Pro W5500 (1.8% lower). These deltas are small, indicating that the RTX 2060 sits in a tightly contested performance band. For this game, the GPU’s 30 RT cores and 240 tensor cores are present in the architecture, but the measured FPS suggests that raw rasterization throughput, not ray tracing, is the primary driver.

The combo rank of 1481 out of 1795 underscores that this GPU, while capable at lower presets, struggles to maintain high frame rates when paired with the Ryzen 7 5700 in this simulation. The data shows a clear pattern: the RTX 2060’s 6 GB memory and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth become bottlenecks as resolution and settings increase, limiting the overall experience.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a consistent degradation as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 90.8 at 1080p to 74.1 at 1440p, then to 51.9 at 4K. This represents a 43% reduction from 1080p to 4K. At High settings, the drop is from 54.1 at 1080p to 41 at 1440p, and finally to 31.4 at 4K — a 42% decrease. The proportional loss is similar across presets, which indicates a balanced scaling pattern.

However, the absolute numbers tell a more nuanced story. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 90.8 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold, suggesting the CPU is not the primary limiter at this setting. At 1440p Low, the frame rate is 74.1 FPS, still playable. But at 4K Low, the frame rate falls to 51.9 FPS, crossing below the 60 FPS line. This transition implies that the GPU’s fill rate and memory bandwidth are becoming the limiting components as pixel count rises.

The scaling from 1440p to 4K is particularly telling. At Medium settings, the drop is from 56.8 FPS to 39.9 FPS, a 30% reduction. At Ultra, the drop is from 43.6 FPS to 29.1 FPS, a 33% reduction. These percentages are similar, but the absolute values are low enough that even a 30% improvement would not bring Ultra to a playable level at 4K. The data suggests that the RTX 2060 is the bottleneck at higher resolutions, as the CPU’s 16 threads (based on its 8-core, 16-thread configuration) are likely not fully utilized when the GPU is struggling.

The resolution scaling also highlights the impact of the 6 GB memory buffer. At 4K, the game is likely exceeding the memory capacity at higher presets, causing the GPU to rely on slower memory operations. This is evidenced by the fact that the FPS gap between Low and Ultra widens as resolution increases: 22.8 FPS at 4K versus 38 FPS at 1080p (90.8 minus 52.8). The GPU’s 192-bit bus and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for the demands of 4K Ultra in this simulation.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal experience depends on the target resolution. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset delivers 71.9 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold and provides a balance between visual quality and smoothness. The High preset at 1080p yields 54.1 FPS, which is below 60 but still playable for a flight simulator. Ultra at 1080p drops to 52.8 FPS, offering marginal visual gains over High for a 1.3 FPS loss, making High the better choice for frame rate stability.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset is the only setting that approaches 60 FPS, achieving 56.8 FPS. Low runs at 74.1 FPS but sacrifices visual fidelity. High at 41 FPS and Ultra at 43.6 FPS are both below the 60 FPS target, with Ultra only 2.6 FPS ahead of High. For 1440p users, Medium is the recommended preset, as it provides a playable frame rate while retaining more detail than Low. The data shows that High and Ultra at 1440p offer diminishing returns relative to the FPS cost.

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves 60 FPS. The Low preset is the most playable at 51.9 FPS, but it sacrifices significant visual quality. Medium at 39.9 FPS and High at 31.4 FPS are increasingly stutter-prone, while Ultra at 29.1 FPS is the least playable. For 4K, the recommendation is to use Low settings if frame rate is the priority, or to accept that the combo is not suited for higher presets at this resolution. The 29.1 FPS at Ultra is nearly half the 51.9 FPS at Low, highlighting the steep cost of visual fidelity.

The data indicates that the sweet spot for this combo is 1080p Medium, which offers 71.9 FPS, or 1440p Medium at 56.8 FPS if the user prefers higher resolution. The Ultra preset is consistently the worst performer across all resolutions, with the largest FPS deficit at 4K (29.1 FPS). Users seeking a stable experience should prioritize Medium settings, as the gap between Medium and High is often larger than the gap between High and Ultra, suggesting that High offers limited benefits over Medium.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS values are as follows: Low delivers 90.8 FPS, Medium delivers 71.9 FPS, High delivers 54.1 FPS, and Ultra delivers 52.8 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 38 FPS, with the largest single drop occurring between Medium and High (17.8 FPS). The difference between High and Ultra is only 1.3 FPS, indicating that the Ultra preset provides negligible performance gains over High at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the average FPS values are: Low at 74.1 FPS, Medium at 56.8 FPS, High at 41 FPS, and Ultra at 43.6 FPS. Interestingly, Ultra is 2.6 FPS faster than High at this resolution, which is an anomaly in the data. The drop from Low to Medium is 17.3 FPS, and from Medium to High is 15.8 FPS. The overall spread from Low to Ultra is 30.5 FPS, which is smaller than at 1080p, suggesting that the GPU is becoming more constrained.

At 3840x2160, the average FPS values are: Low at 51.9 FPS, Medium at 39.9 FPS, High at 31.4 FPS, and Ultra at 29.1 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 12 FPS, from Medium to High is 8.5 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 2.3 FPS. The total spread from Low to Ultra is 22.8 FPS, which is the smallest of all resolutions. This compression indicates that the GPU is hitting a hard performance ceiling at 4K, where even reducing settings from High to Low only recovers 20.5 FPS.

The data shows a clear trend: as resolution increases, the absolute FPS values decrease, but the relative differences between presets also shrink. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 42% of the Low value. At 4K, this difference is 44% of the Low value. This consistency suggests that the GPU’s performance scaling is uniform across resolutions, but the lower absolute values at 4K make the combo less viable for demanding settings. The best measured performance is 90.8 FPS at 1080p Low, while the worst is 29.1 FPS at 4K Ultra, a 61.7 FPS difference across the entire matrix.