Microsoft Flight Simulator

# How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700G paired with the AMD Radeon RX 9060 lands at rank 1712 out of 2996 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator. That places this pairing in the 57th percentile of all tested combos, meaning it outperforms a slight majority of systems but sits firmly in the middle of the pack. This is not a top-tier configuration, but it is also far from a weak one. The ranking indicates a balanced mid-range setup that can handle the game at playable frame rates, though it will struggle at the highest visual demands.

Benchmark results show this combo is clearly GPU-bound at higher resolutions, while the CPU has enough headroom to keep up at 1080p. The overall rank of 1712 reflects a system that delivers acceptable performance at 1080p and 1440p with moderate settings, but falls below the 60 FPS threshold at 4K on anything above Low settings. The data suggests that users seeking a smooth 4K experience would need to look at higher-tier GPU combinations, as this pairing's strengths lie in lower-resolution gameplay.

# CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700G is an 8-core, 16-thread processor built on the Zen 3 architecture with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. It belongs to the 5000 series and uses the AMD Socket AM4 platform. The CPU has a 16 MB L3 cache, with 512 KB L2 and 64 KB L1 per core. Its 7 nm process node and 65 W TDP make it an efficient part that does not require exotic cooling.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is significant because the game is known for heavy single-threaded simulation logic. The 5700G's single-thread performance, as measured by benchmarks, is respectable. It scores 899 in 3dmark single-thread, 1494 in Cinebench R23 single-core, and 1894 in Geekbench single-core. These numbers indicate the processor can handle the flight model and physics calculations without becoming the primary bottleneck at most settings.

However, the comparison data shows this CPU sits right at the edge of its peer group. The nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-9900K with an average score of 27097 (0.2% higher), the AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 at 26936 (0.4% lower), the Intel Core i5-14400T at 27166 (0.4% higher), and the Intel Core i7-1370P at 26900 (0.6% lower). The 5700G's average benchmark score of 27051 places it within 1% of all these alternatives, meaning no meaningful CPU performance gap exists between this chip and its closest competitors.

The multi-threaded performance is also solid, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12830.5 and a Passmark multi-thread score of 24419. In Microsoft Flight Simulator, these multi-threaded results matter for background tasks like terrain loading and AI traffic simulation. The 16 threads allow the game to spread ancillary workloads across cores while the simulation thread runs on a single core. The CPU's percentile ranking of 79 across all CPUs confirms it is a capable processor for this title.

# FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 60 FPS?

A: Yes, but only at 1080p. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the measured average FPS is 111, and at Medium settings it drops to 86. High settings yield 65 FPS. At 1440p, only Low settings exceed 60 FPS with an average of 89, while Medium drops to 69 and High falls to 52. At 4K, no preset reaches 60 FPS, with Low topping out at 66 FPS.

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

A: The Ryzen 7 5700G's average benchmark score is 27051. The Intel Core i9-9900K scores 27097 (0.2% higher), the AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 scores 26936 (0.4% lower), the Intel Core i5-14400T scores 27166 (0.4% higher), and the Intel Core i7-1370P scores 26900 (0.6% lower). Performance differences are negligible.

Q: Which resolution gives the best balance of quality and performance?

A: At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the combo delivers 69 FPS average with a minimum of 59 FPS and a maximum of 80 FPS. This provides a smooth experience with improved visual fidelity over 1080p. The 1080p Medium setting offers 86 FPS with a minimum of 73 FPS, which is also strong, but 1440p Medium provides a better visual upgrade per frame rate cost.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU the limiting factor?

A: The data shows the GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher resolutions. At 1080p, the FPS drops from 111 on Low to 62 on Ultra, a 44% reduction. At 4K, the range is 66 FPS on Low to 37 FPS on Ultra, a 44% reduction as well. The CPU's benchmark scores place it in the 79th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU sits in the 59th percentile, indicating the GPU is the weaker component.

Q: What is the lowest frame rate this combo will produce?

A: The lowest measured average is 37 FPS at 4K with Ultra settings. The lowest minimum FPS recorded is 44 FPS at 4K Medium settings. No minimum FPS values were recorded for High, Low, or Ultra presets at any resolution, so these represent the known floor for this configuration.

# Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture across three resolutions and four quality presets. At 1920x1080, Low settings produce an average of 111 FPS. Medium settings reduce this to 86 FPS with a minimum of 73 FPS and a maximum of 99 FPS. High settings lower the average to 65 FPS, and Ultra settings bring it down to 62 FPS. The 1080p results show that the combo is capable of very smooth gameplay at Low and Medium, with High and Ultra still playable above 60 FPS.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance drops noticeably. Low settings average 89 FPS, which drops to 69 FPS at Medium with a minimum of 59 FPS and a maximum of 80 FPS. High settings average 52 FPS, and Ultra settings average 50 FPS. The 1440p results indicate that Medium is the highest preset that maintains a consistent 60 FPS average, while High and Ultra fall below the threshold.

At 3840x2160, the combo struggles to maintain high frame rates. Low settings average 66 FPS, Medium averages 51 FPS with a minimum of 44 FPS and a maximum of 59 FPS, High averages 39 FPS, and Ultra averages 37 FPS. The 4K results show that only Low settings approach 60 FPS, and all other presets fall well below it. The minimum FPS of 44 at 4K Medium indicates potential stuttering in dense scenes, making 4K gameplay a marginal experience on this hardware.

# Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals how the system responds to increasing pixel counts. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 111 at 1080p to 89 at 1440p and 66 at 4K. This represents a 20% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 41% drop from 1080p to 4K. At Medium settings, the averages are 86, 69, and 51 FPS respectively, showing a 20% drop to 1440p and a 41% drop to 4K. High settings follow a similar pattern with 65, 52, and 39 FPS, translating to 20% and 40% reductions. Ultra settings produce 62, 50, and 37 FPS, with 19% and 40% reductions.

The consistency of these percentage drops across all presets, hovering around 20% from 1080p to 1440p and 40% from 1080p to 4K, indicates that the scaling is predictable and resolution-driven. This pattern suggests the GPU is the limiting component, as CPU-bound scenarios would show flatter frame rates across resolutions. The RX 9060's memory configuration, featuring 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, appears to be the constraining factor at higher resolutions where texture and geometry demands increase.

The GPU's benchmark profile supports this conclusion. Its Passmark G3D score of 17631 and 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 3322 place it in the 59th percentile of all GPUs, with nearest rivals including the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti (0.7% higher score), the AMD Radeon R9 370X (1% higher), and the AMD Radeon RX 7700 (1% higher). These close comparisons indicate the RX 9060 is a mid-range part that cannot sustain high frame rates at 4K in a demanding title like Microsoft Flight Simulator.

# Settings Recommendations

The measured data supports a clear recommendation hierarchy based on resolution and desired frame rate. At 1080p, Medium settings at 86 FPS with a minimum of 73 FPS offers the best experience, as it provides a substantial visual upgrade over Low while maintaining a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. High settings at 65 FPS are acceptable, but the jump from Medium to High costs 21 FPS on average, making it a less efficient trade. Ultra at 62 FPS is only marginally lower than High, so users wanting maximum quality at 1080p can justify Ultra without a significant penalty.

At 1440p, Medium settings at 69 FPS with a minimum of 59 FPS is the recommended choice. The minimum dips to 59 FPS, which is nearly 60 but may be noticeable in demanding scenes. Low settings at 89 FPS are the only preset that provides a comfortable buffer above 60 FPS, but the visual compromise is substantial. High and Ultra at 52 and 50 FPS respectively are playable but will feel less smooth, and the data suggests they are not worth the visual gain over Medium.

At 4K, Low settings at 66 FPS is the only preset that achieves a playable average. Medium at 51 FPS with a minimum of 44 FPS may be tolerable for less demanding users, but the frame drops below 45 FPS indicate potential stuttering. High and Ultra at 39 and 37 FPS are generally not recommended for this title, as the simulation genre benefits from consistent frame pacing. The 4K Low preset offers the best balance, providing 66 FPS average with the visual fidelity of Low settings, which in Microsoft Flight Simulator still includes the core scenery and aircraft models at reduced detail.

For users prioritizing smoothness over visuals, the 1080p Medium preset at 86 FPS is the standout choice. For those seeking a balance of quality and performance at higher resolutions, 1440p Medium at 69 FPS is the best compromise. The data does not support 4K gameplay beyond Low settings with this hardware combination.