Microsoft Flight Simulator

# Microsoft Flight Simulator — AMD Ryzen 7 5700X + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER

This combination of AMD's 8-core Zen 3 processor and NVIDIA's Ada Lovelace flagship-tier GPU produces a remarkably consistent frame rate profile across Microsoft Flight Simulator's four presets, but the scaling pattern between resolutions reveals a system that behaves differently depending on where the bottleneck sits. The measured data shows a setup that can push past 180 FPS at 1080p Low yet drops to just over 68 FPS at 4K Ultra, a range that spans nearly threefold and tells a clear story about which component governs performance at each setting tier.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K is steep but not uniform across presets. At Low settings, the average FPS falls from 180.6 at 1920x1080 to 163.8 at 2560x1440 and then to 121.4 at 3840x2160 — a total decline of 59.2 FPS, or roughly 33% from the 1080p baseline. This pattern suggests that at Low, the CPU remains a significant contributor even at higher resolutions, since the GPU has ample headroom to render simpler scenes quickly.

Moving to Medium, the drop becomes more pronounced: 162.5 FPS at 1080p, 132.1 at 1440p, and 94.8 at 4K. The 4K figure represents a 41.7% reduction from 1080p, indicating the GPU begins to take on more responsibility as scene complexity increases. High settings show a similar trajectory — 119.8 → 100.2 → 68.8 — with the 4K result being 42.6% lower than 1080p.

Ultra settings compress the range considerably: 115.8 at 1080p, 93.4 at 1440p, and 68.1 at 4K. Here, the 4K-to-1080p gap is 47.7 FPS, a 41.2% drop. Notably, the difference between High and Ultra at 4K is just 0.7 FPS (68.8 vs 68.1), while at 1080p that same preset jump costs 4.0 FPS. This convergence at 4K strongly implies the RTX 4080 SUPER becomes the limiting factor at higher resolutions, with the CPU's influence fading as pixel count rises.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700X brings 8 cores and 16 threads from the Zen 3 architecture, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and boost up to 4.60 GHz. Its 32 MB of shared L3 cache and 65 W TDP position it as a mainstream desktop part, and its benchmark scores reflect solid multi-threaded capability — a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 22620 and a PassMark multi-thread score of 26612 place it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs tested.

In this game, the CPU's influence is most visible at 1080p Low, where the 180.6 FPS average suggests the processor can feed frames faster than the GPU can render at higher settings. The single-thread performance — Geekbench single-core of 2148 and Cinebench R23 single-core of 3193 — is modest by current standards, yet it appears sufficient for Flight Simulator's demands at lower resolutions. The data shows that between Low and Medium at 1080p, FPS drops by 18.1 FPS (180.6 to 162.5), and between Medium and High by another 42.7 FPS (162.5 to 119.8), indicating that each preset step adds enough CPU workload to measurably impact throughput.

At 4K, however, the CPU's role diminishes. The gap between Low (121.4) and Medium (94.8) is 26.6 FPS, and between Medium and High another 26.0 FPS, but the absolute values are far lower than at 1080p. This suggests the 5700X is not the primary constraint at 4K — the GPU's rendering load dominates. The fact that Ultra at 4K (68.1) is nearly identical to High at 4K (68.8) reinforces that the CPU has headroom left, as the extra settings complexity does not translate into a meaningful frame rate penalty.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER is a formidable piece of silicon: 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus delivering 736.3 GB/s of bandwidth, with a boost clock of 2550 MHz. Its 10240 shading units and 80 RT cores give it substantial compute throughput, reflected in a PassMark G3D score of 34245 and an 88th percentile ranking among all GPUs.

The GPU's dominance becomes clear when examining the resolution scaling at each preset. At Low settings, the 4K-to-1080p ratio is 0.672 (121.4/180.6), meaning 4K retains about two-thirds of the 1080p performance. At Medium, that ratio drops to 0.583 (94.8/162.5), and at High it falls further to 0.574 (68.8/119.8). This declining ratio indicates the GPU is increasingly strained as both resolution and visual complexity rise — the memory bandwidth and shading throughput are being pushed harder, and the frame rate suffers proportionally more.

The VRAM capacity of 16 GB appears sufficient for this game, as even at 4K Ultra the system maintains playable frame rates without evidence of memory-related stutters in the average FPS data. The GPU's nearest rivals in benchmark scores — the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT (0.2% behind) and Radeon Pro W6600M (0.4% ahead) — suggest the 4080 SUPER sits in a competitive tier, but its real-world performance here shows it capable of handling Flight Simulator's heaviest loads at acceptable averages.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the database of 1795 tested combinations, this pairing of Ryzen 7 5700X and RTX 4080 SUPER ranks 130th for Microsoft Flight Simulator. That places it in the top 7.2% of all combos tested, a strong showing given that the CPU is a mid-range part from 2022 while the GPU is a high-end offering from 2024.

The CPU's percentile rank of 83 (vs all CPUs) and the GPU's percentile of 88 (vs all GPUs) are broadly consistent with the combo ranking, though the 130th position out of 1795 suggests the game may reward the GPU's strengths more than the CPU's. The measured FPS data supports this: at 4K Ultra, the 68.1 FPS average is respectable but not class-leading, and the gap between this combo and higher-ranked systems likely stems from CPUs with stronger single-thread performance, given how much the frame rates vary across presets at 1080p.

The nearest CPU rivals — including the Intel Core i9-11900KF (0.1% ahead) and AMD Ryzen 5 7600X (0.2% behind) — show that the 5700X is competitive with other mid-range options, but none of these would dramatically alter the game's outcome. Similarly, the GPU's nearest rivals are within 2.9% in average benchmark score, meaning the combo's rank is primarily driven by the GPU's capabilities rather than any CPU bottleneck at higher resolutions.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides a clear hierarchy for players seeking the best experience. At 1080p, even Ultra runs at 115.8 FPS average, which is well above smooth-playability thresholds, so there is little reason to drop below High (119.8) or Ultra (115.8) — the difference is only 4.0 FPS, and the visual quality gain from Ultra likely justifies that small cost.

At 1440p, High (100.2) versus Ultra (93.4) shows an 6.8 FPS gap, but both remain comfortably playable. Medium (132.1) offers a substantial headroom boost if frame rate is prioritized over fidelity, but for most users High represents the sweet spot — nearly matching the 100 FPS mark while retaining good visual detail.

At 4K, the recommendation shifts decisively. High (68.8) and Ultra (68.1) are nearly identical in performance, meaning players can enable Ultra without sacrificing measurable frame rate — a rare situation where the highest preset is effectively free. Medium (94.8) provides a 26 FPS improvement over High, which may be preferable for those seeking smoother motion, but the 68 FPS from High/Ultra is already within a playable range for a flight simulator where precise input timing is less critical than in fast-action genres. Low (121.4) is only advisable for competitive online flying, where every frame counts and visual fidelity is secondary.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the averages across presets are: Low 180.6, Medium 162.5, High 119.8, Ultra 115.8. The step from Low to Medium costs 18.1 FPS, from Medium to High 42.7 FPS, and from High to Ultra just 4.0 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the numbers are: Low 163.8, Medium 132.1, High 100.2, Ultra 93.4. The preset-to-preset drops are 31.7, 31.9, and 6.8 FPS respectively, showing a more consistent penalty per tier until Ultra.

At 3840x2160, the averages are: Low 121.4, Medium 94.8, High 68.8, Ultra 68.1. The drops are 26.6, 26.0, and 0.7 FPS, with the High-to-Ultra step being nearly imperceptible. Across all resolutions, the highest measured average is 180.6 FPS at 1080p Low, and the lowest is 68.1 FPS at 4K Ultra, a range of 112.5 FPS.

FAQ

Q: What is the best preset for 4K gaming with this combo?

A: High and Ultra produce nearly identical averages at 3840x2160 — 68.8 and 68.1 FPS respectively — so Ultra is effectively free at this resolution and should be preferred for maximum visual quality.

Q: How much performance is lost when going from 1080p to 4K at Ultra settings?

A: The average FPS drops from 115.8 at 1920x1080 to 93.4 at 2560x1440 and then to 68.1 at 3840x2160, a total reduction of 47.7 FPS or about 41% from the 1080p baseline.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor at 1080p Low?

A: At 1080p Low, the 180.6 FPS average is the highest measured in this dataset, suggesting the CPU is capable of feeding frames faster than the GPU can render at higher settings — the CPU's influence is most apparent here.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested systems for this game?

A: It ranks 130th out of 1795 combinations tested, placing it in the top 7.2% of all systems in the database for Microsoft Flight Simulator.

Q: What is the performance difference between Medium and High at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Medium averages 132.1 FPS while High averages 100.2 FPS, a difference of 31.9 FPS in favor of Medium — a significant trade-off for visual fidelity.

Q: Does the RTX 4080 SUPER's 16 GB VRAM cause any frame rate issues at 4K?

A: The data shows no evidence of VRAM-related limitations, as the 4K Ultra average of 68.1 FPS remains consistent with 4K High at 68.8 FPS, indicating the memory capacity is sufficient for this game's demands.