Microsoft Flight Simulator

Settings Recommendations

For Microsoft Flight Simulator, the measured rows cover four presets — Low, Medium, High, and Ultra — across three resolutions. The data points toward Medium as the most balanced experience when considering average, minimum, and maximum frame rates. At 1920x1080, Medium delivers 156 FPS average with a minimum of 133 FPS and a maximum of 179 FPS. Compare that to High, which reaches 123 FPS average, and Ultra, which dips to 117 FPS average. The gap between Medium and High is 33 FPS at 1080p, while the gap between High and Ultra is only 6 FPS. That suggests diminishing returns once you step past Medium.

The pattern repeats at 2560x1440: Medium holds 131 FPS average, with min/max of 112/151 FPS. High drops to 99 FPS, and Ultra falls to 94 FPS. The Medium-to-High delta is 32 FPS, while High-to-Ultra is just 5 FPS. At 3840x2160, Medium manages 97 FPS average (82 min, 111 max), High hits 73 FPS, and Ultra trails at 69 FPS. Again, the Medium-to-High penalty is substantial — 24 FPS — while High-to-Ultra costs only 4 FPS. Low settings are always faster, but the jump from Low to Medium is smaller at higher resolutions: at 4K, Low averages 125 FPS versus Medium's 97 FPS, a 28 FPS difference; at 1080p, Low averages 171 FPS versus Medium's 156 FPS, only a 15 FPS difference.

What does this imply? Medium appears to capture most of the visual headroom without the steep cost of High, and the min FPS values at Medium — 133 at 1080p, 112 at 1440p, 82 at 4K — remain comfortably above what most flight simulators need for smooth panning over terrain. Ultra offers little over High in raw FPS terms, and High over Medium is where the real performance sacrifice lives. For users who prioritize frame consistency over maximum fidelity, Medium is the sweet spot. For those who want the richest scenery, High is the highest preset that still keeps 4K above 70 FPS, though the step from Medium to High at 4K is steep — 24 FPS lost for the visual upgrade. The data does not include any ray tracing or DLSS rows, so the recommendation rests purely on these preset comparisons.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die. The GPU packs 10,240 shading units, 320 texture mapping units, 112 ROPs, 80 ray tracing cores, and 320 tensor cores. Its memory subsystem is 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus, delivering 736.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The base clock is 2295 MHz, boost clock 2550 MHz, and memory runs at 1438 MHz with 23 Gbps effective. Pixel rate is 285.6 GPixel/s, texture rate is 816.0 GTexel/s, and FP32 performance is 52.22 TFLOPS, with FP16 at the same 52.22 TFLOPS (1:1).

How does this GPU shape Microsoft Flight Simulator's results? The game is known for streaming vast scenery and computing weather, but the measured FPS deltas across resolutions point to a GPU that is not the sole bottleneck. At 4K Ultra, the combo produces 69 FPS; at 4K High, 73 FPS; at 4K Medium, 97 FPS. The difference between Medium and High at 4K is 24 FPS, while the difference between High and Ultra is only 4 FPS. This suggests that the Ultra preset introduces settings that are not heavily taxing the RTX 4080 SUPER's raw compute, but rather something else — possibly draw distance or object density — that hits the CPU or memory bandwidth.

The RTX 4080 SUPER's 736.3 GB/s of bandwidth and 16 GB of VRAM are likely sufficient for the game's texture streaming at 4K, given that even at Ultra the frame rate does not collapse to unplayable levels. The 80 RT cores and 320 tensor cores are present, but Microsoft Flight Simulator's measured rows do not indicate heavy use of ray tracing or DLSS — the FPS numbers are raw rasterization. The GPU's percentile vs. all GPUs is 86, and its average benchmark score is 54209, placing it near the RTX 4080 (which scores 54247, a -0.1 delta) and ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X (54828, -1.1 delta) and AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB (55698, -2.7 delta). In this game, the GPU's role appears to be delivering high frame rates at 1440p and playable ones at 4K, but the scaling between presets hints that the CPU or engine limitations cap gains at lower resolutions.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals how the combo scales from 1080p to 4K. At Low settings, the progression is: 171 FPS at 1920x1080, 159 FPS at 2560x1440, and 125 FPS at 3840x2160. That is a drop of 12 FPS from 1080p to 1440p (a 7% decrease) and a further 34 FPS from 1440p to 4K (a 21% decrease). At Medium settings, the numbers are 156 FPS → 131 FPS → 97 FPS. The 1080p-to-1440p drop is 25 FPS (16%), and the 1440p-to-4K drop is 34 FPS (26%). At High, the values are 123 FPS → 99 FPS → 73 FPS, with a 24 FPS drop (20%) from 1080p to 1440p and a 26 FPS drop (26%) from 1440p to 4K. At Ultra, the pattern is 117 FPS → 94 FPS → 69 FPS, a 23 FPS decrease (20%) then a 25 FPS decrease (27%).

What does this scaling tell us? The percentage drop from 1440p to 4K is consistently larger than from 1080p to 1440p at every preset. For example, at Medium, the 1440p-to-4K drop is 26% versus 16% for the first step. At High, it is 26% versus 20%. At Ultra, 27% versus 20%. This indicates that the GPU becomes more of a limiting factor as pixel count increases, which is expected. However, the absolute FPS at 4K remains respectable — even Ultra is 69 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth flight simulation.

The more interesting observation is that the scaling from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings is only 7%, suggesting that at Low, the CPU or engine is the bottleneck even at 1440p. At Medium and above, the GPU starts to matter more. The fact that 1080p High (123 FPS) is slower than 1440p Low (159 FPS) reinforces that preset choice matters more than resolution for this combo. In practical terms, a user moving from a 1080p monitor to a 1440p one would see a modest FPS hit at the same settings — around 20% — but could compensate by dropping from High to Medium, which still yields 131 FPS at 1440p versus 123 FPS at 1080p High.

FAQ

Q: What is the best preset for 60+ FPS at 4K?

A: Medium, at 3840x2160, delivers 97 FPS average with a minimum of 82 FPS. High and Ultra also exceed 60 FPS (73 and 69 FPS respectively), but Medium provides a larger safety margin for frame dips.

Q: How much faster is Low compared to Ultra at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, Low averages 171 FPS versus Ultra's 117 FPS, a 54 FPS difference. Low is roughly 46% faster than Ultra at that resolution.

Q: Does the RTX 4080 SUPER bottleneck at 1080p?

A: The data suggests yes, at least partially. The FPS drop from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings is only 12 FPS (171 to 159), while the drop from 1440p to 4K is 34 FPS (159 to 125). This implies that at 1080p Low, the CPU or engine limits performance more than the GPU.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded in the measured data?

A: The lowest minimum FPS is 82, observed at 3840x2160 with Medium settings. All other minimums are higher, with 112 at 1440p Medium and 133 at 1080p Medium.

Q: How does the RTX 4080 SUPER compare to its nearest rival in benchmark scores?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 54209, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 scores 54247 (a -0.1% delta), and the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB scores 55698 (a -2.7% delta). The difference to the RTX 4080 is negligible.

Q: Is the combo ranked high among tested configurations?

A: The combo ranks 328 out of 3714 tested combos, placing it in the top 9% of all configurations in the database for this game.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D is a 5000-series processor based on the Zen 3 architecture, codenamed Vermeer, built on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. The CPU's TDP is 105 W, and it supports DDR4 memory in dual-channel configuration with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. Its cache setup is notable: 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and a large 96 MB shared L3 cache. The chip is socketed in AMD Socket AM4, with PCIe Gen 4 providing 20 lanes. It has 8,850 million transistors on a 74 mm² die.

In benchmark terms, the 5800X3D scores 14317 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 1452 in single-core. In 3DMark, it scores 7299 with 16 threads and 884 in single-thread. Geekbench multicore is 11765, single-core 2017. Its percentile vs. all CPUs is 80, and its average benchmark score is 27896. Nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 6800U (27887, 0% delta), Intel Core i9-10900K (27872, 0.1% delta), AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 (27932, -0.1% delta), and Intel Core i5-12600KF (27799, 0.3% delta). The 5800X3D effectively trades blows with these chips.

How does this CPU affect Microsoft Flight Simulator's results? The game is known for being CPU-intensive, particularly in areas with dense scenery or complex weather. The measured FPS data shows that at 1080p Low, the combo hits 171 FPS, which is high but not extreme — suggesting that the CPU is not fully maxed out. However, the scaling from 1080p to 1440p at Low (171 to 159 FPS, a 12 FPS drop) is relatively small, which could indicate that the CPU is still providing enough headroom for the GPU to work. The large L3 cache (96 MB) is likely beneficial for the game's scenery streaming, as it can hold more terrain and object data on-die.

The 5800X3D's 105 W TDP and 7 nm process make it a power-efficient choice, but the game's performance at higher settings is more influenced by the GPU. At 4K Ultra, the combo produces 69 FPS, which is close to the GPU's limit given the 4K pixel workload. The CPU's 16 threads are more than enough for the game's typical load, and the single-thread score of 1452 in Cinebench R23 suggests strong per-core performance, which is crucial for the game's main thread. The data does not show any CPU-specific bottlenecks, as the FPS scales predictably with resolution and settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions and four settings, with average FPS for all rows and minimum/maximum FPS for Medium settings only. Starting at 1920x1080: Low averages 171 FPS, Medium averages 156 FPS (min 133, max 179), High averages 123 FPS, and Ultra averages 117 FPS. At 2560x1440: Low averages 159 FPS, Medium averages 131 FPS (min 112, max 151), High averages 99 FPS, and Ultra averages 94 FPS. At 3840x2160: Low averages 125 FPS, Medium averages 97 FPS (min 82, max 111), High averages 73 FPS, and Ultra averages 69 FPS.

The minimum FPS values at Medium are worth examining. At 1080p, the minimum is 133 FPS, which is 85% of the average. At 1440p, the minimum is 112 FPS, which is 85% of the average (131). At 4K, the minimum is 82 FPS, which is 84% of the average (97). This consistency suggests that frame pacing is stable regardless of resolution, with a similar ratio of minimum-to-average. The maximum FPS values show the same pattern: 179 at 1080p (115% of average), 151 at 1440p (115%), and 111 at 4K (114%). This tight clustering indicates that the game's performance is predictable, with no sudden spikes or drops.

The average FPS deltas between settings are consistent across resolutions. From Low to Medium, the drop is 15 FPS at 1080p, 28 FPS at 1440p, and 28 FPS at 4K. From Medium to High, the drop is 33 FPS at 1080p, 32 FPS at 1440p, and 24 FPS at 4K. From High to Ultra, the drop is 6 FPS at 1080p, 5 FPS at 1440p, and 4 FPS at 4K. The Medium-to-High penalty is the largest at every resolution, while High-to-Ultra is negligible. This pattern suggests that the High preset introduces a significant visual feature — perhaps higher texture quality or more detailed shadows — that costs performance, while Ultra only adds minor tweaks.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER ranks 328 out of 3714 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the top 8.8% of all configurations in the database. The rank is based on measured FPS data, not synthetic benchmarks, so it reflects real-world performance in this specific game.

Given the hardware, this ranking makes sense. The CPU is in the 80th percentile of all CPUs, and the GPU is in the 86th percentile of all GPUs. The combo's rank of 328 suggests that there are 327 configurations that perform better, likely featuring newer CPUs (such as the Ryzen 7000 series or Intel 13th/14th gen) or higher-end GPUs (like the RTX 4090). However, the 5800X3D's strong gaming performance — thanks to its 96 MB L3 cache — and the RTX 4080 SUPER's 4K capability allow this combo to outperform many more expensive or newer pairings.

The nearest CPU rivals include the Intel Core i9-10900K, which is close in average benchmark score (27872 vs 27896), but the 5800X3D's cache advantage may give it an edge in flight simulators, which benefit from large caches. The GPU rivals, such as the RTX 4080, are nearly identical in score (54247 vs 54209), so the rank difference likely comes down to the CPU. In a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator, where CPU single-thread performance and cache size matter, the 5800X3D holds its own. The rank of 328 out of 3714 is a strong showing, indicating that this combo is a viable high-end option for flight sim enthusiasts without needing the absolute top-tier hardware.