Microsoft Flight Simulator

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6600 lands at rank 1451 out of 1795 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places the combination in the 19th percentile of all tested systems, meaning roughly four out of five configurations deliver higher frame rates in this specific title. The ranking reflects a pairing where the CPU is substantially stronger than the GPU, a dynamic that becomes apparent when examining how the system scales across resolutions.

The Ryzen 7 5800XT itself sits in the 86th percentile among all CPUs tested, with an average benchmark score of 29774. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 57555GE (0.1% slower), the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS (0.3% faster), the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 (0.3% slower), and the AMD Ryzen 7 7840H (0.3% faster). These are all essentially statistical ties, showing the 5800XT is competitive with modern mobile and low-power desktop parts. The GPU, however, tells a different story: the RX 6600 sits in the 69th percentile among all GPUs, with an average score of 25235. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon 890M (0% delta), the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP (0.2% slower), the AMD Radeon RX 6700M (0.2% faster), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti (0.5% faster). This places the RX 6600 in a tight cluster of mid-range graphics solutions.

The combination's rank suggests that for Microsoft Flight Simulator, this system is positioned as an entry-level to mid-range performer. The game is known for being demanding on both CPU and GPU, but the data indicates the RX 6600 is the limiting factor here. When the CPU ranks in the top 14% of all processors while the GPU ranks in the 31% worst, the imbalance is stark. The measured frame rates confirm this interpretation, as the system struggles to maintain high refresh rates even at 1080p with higher settings.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 brings 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock runs at 1626 MHz, with a game clock of 2044 MHz and a boost clock of 2491 MHz. This is a GPU built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The 28 ray accelerators support hardware ray tracing, though the performance data suggests Microsoft Flight Simulator's workload does not heavily leverage this feature at the tested settings.

The GPU's 8 GB VRAM capacity is adequate for this game at 1080p and 1440p, but the data shows the frame rates drop significantly at 4K. At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the system manages only 29.4 FPS, which is below playable thresholds for most users. The GPU's raw compute capability of 8.928 TFLOPS FP32 and texture rate of 279.0 GTexel/s are modest by current standards, and the pixel rate of 159.4 GPixel/s limits how quickly it can fill high-resolution frames.

The RX 6600's performance relative to its nearest rivals is instructive. It essentially matches the AMD Radeon 890M integrated graphics (0% delta), which is remarkable for a discrete card. It trails the RX 580 2048SP by 0.2% and the RX 6700M by 0.2%, while leading the RTX 3060 Ti by 0.5%. These are all within a 0.7% band, suggesting that the RX 6600 is positioned at a performance plateau shared by several mid-range options. For Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU's 8 GB memory and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth appear sufficient for the geometry and texture workloads, but the compute throughput becomes the bottleneck at higher resolutions and settings.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear and predictable scaling pattern as resolution increases from 1080p to 4K. At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves 92.1 FPS, which drops to 71.8 FPS at 1440p and further to 56.3 FPS at 4K. This represents a 22% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 39% drop from 1080p to 4K when using Low settings. The pattern holds across all settings presets, though the absolute drops are smaller at higher quality levels.

With High settings, the system goes from 54.7 FPS at 1080p to 45.3 FPS at 1440p to 31.1 FPS at 4K. This is a 17% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 43% drop from 1080p to 4K. The Medium preset shows 73.8 FPS at 1080p, 56.4 FPS at 1440p, and 42 FPS at 4K — drops of 24% and 43% respectively. Ultra settings start at 49 FPS at 1080p, fall to 43 FPS at 1440p (12% drop), and crash to 29.4 FPS at 4K (40% drop).

These scaling patterns tell a story about the limiting component. When the frame rate drops by roughly 40% from 1080p to 4K regardless of settings, it indicates the GPU is the primary constraint. A CPU-bound system would show smaller percentage drops at higher resolutions because the CPU workload remains constant while the GPU workload increases. The fact that the scaling is consistent across all settings suggests the RX 6600 is saturated at every quality level, and the Ryzen 7 5800XT has headroom to spare.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers playable frame rates across all settings. Low settings yield 92.1 FPS, which is smooth for a flight simulator. Medium settings produce 73.8 FPS, still well above the 60 FPS threshold. High settings drop to 54.7 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for fast-paced scenarios. Ultra settings fall to 49 FPS, which is marginal for smooth gameplay but acceptable for a simulation genre where precision matters more than twitch reflexes.

At 2560x1440, the performance becomes more constrained. Low settings maintain 71.8 FPS, which remains smooth. Medium settings produce 56.4 FPS, hovering near the 60 FPS target. High settings drop to 45.3 FPS, which is noticeably less fluid. Ultra settings produce 43 FPS, which is borderline for comfortable gameplay. The 1440p results show a system that can handle the resolution at lower quality presets but struggles to maintain high frame rates at higher settings.

At 3840x2160, the system's limitations become apparent. Low settings produce 56.3 FPS, which is playable but far from the 92.1 FPS seen at 1080p. Medium settings drop to 42 FPS, which is marginal. High settings yield 31.1 FPS, which is below the threshold for smooth gameplay. Ultra settings produce 29.4 FPS, which is stuttery and difficult to play. The 4K results clearly show that the RX 6600 is not capable of delivering a consistent experience at this resolution for Microsoft Flight Simulator.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal experience balances visual quality with frame rate stability. At 1080p, Medium settings at 73.8 FPS provide the best combination of smoothness and visual fidelity. High settings at 54.7 FPS are also viable, but the 19 FPS difference between Medium and High is substantial, making Medium the better choice for most users. Ultra at 49 FPS is only 5.7 FPS slower than High, so users who prioritize visual quality might consider Ultra, but the frame rate is borderline.

At 1440p, Low settings at 71.8 FPS are the only preset that maintains a smooth experience. Medium at 56.4 FPS is playable but not ideal, and the 15.4 FPS gap between Low and Medium is significant. High at 45.3 FPS and Ultra at 43 FPS are both below the 60 FPS threshold and may cause noticeable stuttering in dense urban areas or during weather changes. For 1440p users, Low settings are recommended for the best experience, with Medium as a compromise for those who prioritize visuals.

At 4K, no setting provides a truly smooth experience. Low at 56.3 FPS is the only preset above 30 FPS, but even this is marginal. Medium at 42 FPS, High at 31.1 FPS, and Ultra at 29.4 FPS all fall below comfortable playability thresholds. The data suggests that 4K gaming with this combination is not recommended for Microsoft Flight Simulator unless users accept significant compromises in visual quality and frame rate. The strongest recommendation is to run the game at 1080p with Medium settings, which delivers the best balance of performance and visual fidelity.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this CPU and GPU combination in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The data shows 1920x1080 as the optimal resolution. At 1080p, even Ultra settings produce 49 FPS, while at 1440p, only Low settings exceed 60 FPS (71.8 FPS). At 4K, even Low settings only reach 56.3 FPS.

Q: How does the RX 6600 compare to its nearest GPU rivals in terms of benchmark scores?

A: The RX 6600 scores 25235 on average, matching the AMD Radeon 890M (0% delta), trailing the RX 580 2048SP by 0.2%, the RX 6700M by 0.2%, and the RTX 3060 Ti by 0.5%. All four rivals are within a 0.7% performance band.

Q: Is the Ryzen 7 5800XT a bottleneck for the RX 6600 in this game?

A: The benchmark data indicates the GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU ranks in the 86th percentile (score 29774) while the GPU ranks in the 69th percentile (score 25235). The 40% frame rate drops from 1080p to 4K across all settings also point to GPU saturation.

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 1440p with High settings?

A: The measured data shows 45.3 FPS at 2560x1440 with High settings. This is below the 60 FPS threshold and may result in noticeable stuttering during complex scenes.

Q: Does the RX 6600's 8 GB VRAM cause issues at 4K?

A: The data shows significant performance degradation at 3840x2160, with even Low settings dropping to 56.3 FPS. The 8 GB VRAM and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for lower resolutions, but the GPU's compute throughput of 8.928 TFLOPS appears to be the primary constraint at 4K.

Q: How does this combination rank among all tested configurations?

A: The combo ranks 1451 out of 1795 tested combinations, placing it in the 19th percentile for Microsoft Flight Simulator performance. This ranking reflects the GPU being a mid-range part while the CPU is a high-end desktop processor.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT is a desktop processor with 8 cores and 16 threads, built on the Zen 3 architecture (codenamed Vermeer) using a 7 nm process at TSMC. It has a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz, with a 105 W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a 32 MB L3 cache. This is a processor designed for high-performance desktop workloads, and its benchmark scores reflect that positioning.

The CPU's multi-threaded performance is strong: Cinebench R23 multicore scores 23794, while the single-core score is 3359. Passmark multithread scores 27988, and the 3DMark 16-thread test produces 7683. These numbers put the 5800XT in the 86th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 29774. Its nearest rivals include the Ryzen 7 PRO 57555GE (0.1% slower), the Ryzen 7 6800HS (0.3% faster), the Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 (0.3% slower), and the Ryzen 7 7840H (0.3% faster) — all essentially statistical ties.

In the context of Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is to handle the simulation logic, physics, and AI traffic. The 8-core, 16-thread configuration with a 4.80 GHz boost clock provides substantial headroom for these tasks. The data suggests the CPU is not the bottleneck in this system: at 1080p Ultra, the system produces 49 FPS, and at 4K Ultra, it drops to 29.4 FPS. This 40% reduction points to the GPU being the limiting factor. If the CPU were the constraint, the frame rates would remain similar across resolutions. The CPU's strong single-thread performance (3359 in Cinebench R23) is particularly relevant for flight simulators, which often rely heavily on single-threaded performance for core simulation loops. The Ryzen 7 5800XT's 3.80 GHz base clock and 4.80 GHz boost clock provide the frequency headroom needed for these workloads, but the RX 6600's compute capabilities prevent the system from fully utilizing this CPU strength at higher resolutions.