Microsoft Flight Simulator

# Microsoft Flight Simulator: AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D + AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT

This combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D and AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT delivers a measured performance profile in Microsoft Flight Simulator that places it at rank 1156 out of 3714 tested combos, putting it in the 69th percentile of all system configurations. The pairing leverages an 8-core, 16-thread processor with 96 MB of shared L3 cache alongside a 16 GB GPU with 4608 shading units, and the benchmark data reveals a system that excels at lower resolutions but begins to show its limits as the pixel count climbs. The measured frame rates across three resolutions and four settings presets provide a clear picture of where this combo stands, with the data showing consistent behavior that points to the GPU becoming the primary constraint at 4K while the CPU's large cache helps maintain strong performance at 1080p.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 1156 out of 3714 tested combinations places it in the top third of all systems tested for this flight simulator. This percentile position indicates that while this is not an elite-tier configuration, it sits well above the median performer, and the data supports this as a capable setup for the game's demanding rendering workload. The CPU component alone holds an 80th percentile ranking against all processors, and the GPU sits at an 85th percentile against all graphics cards, so both parts contribute positively to the overall position.

Looking at the individual component rankings, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D's average benchmark score of 27896 places it in close competition with several notable rivals. The Intel Core i9-10900K trails by just 0.1% with a score of 27872, while the AMD Ryzen 7 6800U matches at 27887 with a 0% delta. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 leads by 0.1% at 27932, and the Intel Core i5-12600KF leads by 0.3% at 27799. These razor-thin margins show the 5800X3D is positioned in a highly competitive cluster, though its 3D V-Cache architecture gives it a unique advantage in cache-sensitive workloads like flight simulation.

On the GPU side, the RX 6800 XT's average benchmark score of 48477 shows a similar clustering pattern. The NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile trails by 1.5% with a score of 47743, while the Intel Arc A550M leads by 2.5% at 49737. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti leads by 3% at 49957, and the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 also leads by 3% at 50001. The RX 6800 XT's position in this group suggests it provides solid but not class-leading graphics performance, which aligns with its 85th percentile ranking.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D brings 8 cores and 16 threads based on the Zen 3 architecture, manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC with 8,850 million transistors on a 74 mm² die. The processor's base clock runs at 3.40 GHz with a boost clock of 4.50 GHz, and it draws a 105 W TDP. The defining feature is the cache hierarchy: 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a massive 96 MB of shared L3 cache. This large L3 pool is particularly relevant for Microsoft Flight Simulator, which streams extensive terrain and scenery data, and the benchmark results reflect this advantage.

In synthetic testing, the 5800X3D scores 14317 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 1452 in single-core, with a Geekbench multi-core score of 11765 and single-core score of 2017. The 3DMark results show scaling from 884 single-thread to 7299 at 16 threads, with 8-thread performance at 5906. The PassMark multi-thread score of 28309 with a single-thread score of 3234 further characterizes the processor's capability. The data suggests this CPU is well-balanced for flight simulation, where both single-threaded physics calculations and multi-threaded asset loading play roles.

The CPU's 96 MB L3 cache appears to be the key differentiator in this game. Flight simulators often suffer from cache misses when loading new scenery tiles, and the large shared pool helps mitigate this. The benchmark results show that at 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves 153 FPS, which is the highest measured score across all configurations. This indicates the CPU is not the limiting factor at lower resolutions, and the large cache likely helps maintain consistent frame delivery.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT features the Navi 21 chip with RDNA 2.0 architecture, built on a 7 nm process with 26,800 million transistors on a 520 mm² die. The GPU operates with a base clock of 1825 MHz, a game clock of 2015 MHz, and a boost clock of 2250 MHz. Memory consists of 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth with an effective 16 Gbps data rate. The 4608 shading units, 288 texture mapping units, and 128 render output units provide the raw compute throughput, with 72 ray tracing cores supporting the DirectX 12 Ultimate feature set.

The GPU's 16 GB VRAM capacity is substantial and proves relevant for flight simulation's large texture sets. At 4K Ultra settings, the combo manages 51 FPS average, while at 4K High it reaches 53 FPS. These numbers suggest the GPU is being pushed hard at this resolution, and the relatively small gap between High and Ultra settings (only 2 FPS) indicates the rendering workload is already stressing the card. The GPU's PassMark G3D score of 24980 and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3689 position it as a strong performer, though the 85th percentile ranking shows room above it.

At 1080p, the GPU's capabilities shine more clearly. The 153 FPS at Low settings and 119 FPS at Medium show the card can deliver high frame rates when the resolution workload is lighter. The jump from 1080p Medium to 4K Medium (119 to 71 FPS) demonstrates a significant drop, but the GPU maintains playable frame rates throughout. The 16 GB memory capacity prevents any VRAM-related stuttering at 4K, as evidenced by the measured minimum frame rates of 60 FPS at 4K Medium and 101 FPS at 1080p Medium.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its strongest results. Low settings produce 153 FPS average, Medium settings achieve 119 FPS with a minimum of 101 and maximum of 137, High settings reach 90 FPS, and Ultra settings still maintain 85 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 44% performance drop, but even the worst case at 1080p Ultra remains well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates scale down predictably. Low settings yield 123 FPS, Medium produces 96 FPS with a range of 82 to 110, High delivers 72 FPS, and Ultra drops to 69 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra narrows to just 3 FPS at this resolution, suggesting the GPU is beginning to hit a performance ceiling that settings tweaks can no longer overcome.

At 3840x2160, the system shows its most constrained performance. Low settings achieve 91 FPS, Medium reaches 71 FPS with a minimum of 60 and maximum of 81, High drops to 53 FPS, and Ultra falls to 51 FPS. The 4K Ultra result of 51 FPS is the only measured configuration that dips below the 60 FPS threshold, though it remains close. The minimum FPS of 60 at 4K Medium indicates that even at the heaviest tested resolution, the system avoids severe frame drops when using Medium settings.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: Based on the measured data, 1440p provides the best balance. At 1440p Medium, the combo achieves 96 FPS with a minimum of 82 FPS, while 1440p High holds 72 FPS. This resolution keeps frame rates above 60 FPS even at Ultra settings (69 FPS), unlike 4K where Ultra drops to 51 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU's cache affect performance in this game?

A: The Ryzen 7 5800X3D's 96 MB shared L3 cache likely contributes to the strong 1080p results. At 1080p Low, the combo hits 153 FPS, and at 1080p Ultra it still manages 85 FPS. The large cache helps reduce memory latency when the flight simulator streams terrain data, though the GPU becomes the bottleneck at higher resolutions.

Q: Is 4K gaming viable with this combination?

A: Yes, but with caveats. At 4K Medium, the combo achieves 71 FPS with a minimum of 60 FPS, which is playable. At 4K High and Ultra, frame rates drop to 53 and 51 FPS respectively. The data shows that 4K Medium is the sweet spot for maintaining smooth performance.

Q: How does this GPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RX 6800 XT's average benchmark score of 48477 is 1.5% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile, but 2.5% behind the Intel Arc A550M, 3% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti, and 3% behind the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64. This places it in a tightly packed competitive group.

Q: What settings preset gives the highest frame rate improvement?

A: Dropping from Medium to Low settings provides the largest gains. At 1080p, Low delivers 153 FPS versus 119 FPS at Medium, a 34 FPS improvement. At 1440p, the jump is 123 to 96 FPS, and at 4K it goes from 91 to 71 FPS. The step from High to Ultra, however, yields minimal gains of only 2-3 FPS across all resolutions.

Q: Does the system maintain consistent frame times?

A: The only measured minimum and maximum FPS values come from Medium settings. At 1080p, the range spans 101 to 137 FPS. At 1440p, it spans 82 to 110 FPS. At 4K, the range is 60 to 81 FPS. These ranges suggest good consistency, with the 4K minimum staying at exactly 60 FPS.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides a clear hierarchy of settings presets, and the best choice depends on the target resolution and acceptable frame rate floor. For players prioritizing smoothness at 4K, Medium settings are the clear recommendation. The 4K Medium result of 71 FPS average with a 60 FPS minimum provides a consistent experience, and stepping up to High yields only 53 FPS—a significant drop that pushes the game below the 60 FPS threshold.

At 1440p, High settings deliver 72 FPS average, which is playable, but Ultra settings at 69 FPS are nearly identical in performance. The 3 FPS difference between High and Ultra at this resolution suggests that players can enable Ultra without meaningful performance cost. The data indicates that at 1440p, the GPU still has enough headroom to handle the higher preset without substantial penalty.

For 1080p, the choice is more flexible. Ultra settings at 85 FPS remain well above the 60 FPS threshold, and the jump from High (90 FPS) to Ultra (85 FPS) costs only 5 FPS. The 1080p Medium result of 119 FPS with a 101 FPS minimum shows that players seeking higher frame rates can drop to Medium for a substantial boost without sacrificing smoothness. The Low setting at 153 FPS is available for competitive play or maximum fluidity, but the visual quality trade-off is significant.

The overall pattern suggests that Medium is the most balanced preset for this combo across all resolutions. At 4K, it keeps frame rates above 60 FPS. At 1440p, it delivers 96 FPS with a comfortable minimum. At 1080p, it provides 119 FPS. The High and Ultra presets offer diminishing returns, with differences of only 2-5 FPS between them, while Medium to High transitions cost 18-19 FPS at every resolution.

Resolution Scaling

The measured frame rates reveal how the system scales from 1080p to 4K across each settings preset. At Low settings, the progression is 153 FPS at 1080p, 123 FPS at 1440p, and 91 FPS at 4K—a total drop of 40.5% from the lowest to highest resolution. At Medium, the numbers are 119, 96, and 71 FPS, representing a 40.3% decline. High settings show 90, 72, and 53 FPS, a 41.1% drop. Ultra settings demonstrate 85, 69, and 51 FPS, a 40% decrease.

This consistent 40% reduction across all settings presets is a notable finding. The uniform scaling indicates that the performance bottleneck shifts smoothly from resolution to resolution without any sudden cliff effects. The fact that the percentage drop is nearly identical regardless of settings suggests that the GPU is the limiting component at higher resolutions, while the CPU's cache advantage maintains its influence at lower resolutions.

The gap between 1080p and 1440p is larger than the gap between 1440p and 4K in absolute FPS terms. For example, at High settings, the drop from 1080p to 1440p is 18 FPS, while the drop from 1440p to 4K is 19 FPS. This near-linear scaling indicates that the GPU is being utilized progressively harder as pixel count increases, with no single resolution step causing a disproportionate penalty.

The data also shows that the CPU's role diminishes as resolution increases. At 1080p, the large L3 cache helps the CPU feed the GPU efficiently, resulting in high frame rates. By 4K, the GPU's rendering workload dominates, and the CPU's cache advantage becomes less relevant. This is evidenced by the fact that the frame rate at 4K Ultra (51 FPS) is only 6 FPS lower than 4K High (53 FPS), while at 1080p the same settings difference costs 5 FPS—the CPU can still extract performance at lower resolutions, but the GPU's limits at 4K flatten the settings curve.