Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator’s measured results for the AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT and AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT combo place it at rank 1378 out of 3714 tested pairings. With the CPU sitting at the 81st percentile of all CPUs and the GPU at the 67th, the data reveals a processor with more headroom than the graphics card in this simulation. The following sections cover component roles, frame‑rate behavior across resolutions and settings, and recommendations based purely on the measured rows.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Ryzen 7 5800XT and RX 7700 XT lands at position 1378 of 3714 combinations for Microsoft Flight Simulator. That position is meaningfully above the midpoint of the pool, but not in the top tier. The CPU itself scores an average benchmark of 29879, while its nearest rivals hover with average scores of 29860–29955: the AMD Ryzen 7 7840H scores 29860 (deltaPct 0%), the Ryzen 7 8845HS scores 29955 (deltaPct -0.3%), the Ryzen 7 7840HS scores 29955 (deltaPct -0.3%), and the Ryzen 5 9600X scores 29713 (deltaPct 0.6%). In short, the 5800XT is effectively a peer of these newer mobile and desktop parts in aggregate performance, despite belonging to the earlier Zen 3 generation.

On the GPU side, the RX 7700 XT averages a benchmark score of 22549, with a percentile of 67. Among its nearest competitors, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile scores 22435 (deltaPct 0.5%), the RTX 4060 Mobile scores 22729 (deltaPct -0.8%), the RTX 2080 scores 22895 (deltaPct -1.5%), and the AMD Radeon RX 5700 scores 22170 (deltaPct 1.7%). The RX 7700 XT threads between those C‑level and D‑ level parts, lagging the RTX 4060 Mobile by 0.8% and the RTX 2080 by 1.5%, while barely edging out the two others. Notably, the CPU sits in the 81st percentile while the GPU is in the 67th; that divergence points to the graphics card as the likely limiting factor for this game, since the CPU could probably deliver higher frame rates if the GPU were capable.

Because the game’s rank (1378) is broadly consistent with those component percentiles, there’s no unusual synergy or bottleneck. The total result places this combo in the stronger half of the test pool, with the processor a clear standout relative to its supporting hardware.

CPU Role

The Ryzen 7 5800XT is an 8-core, 16-thread processor using the Zen 3 (Vermeer) architecture, built on a 7nm process from TSMS. Its base clock is 3.80 GHz, its boost peak is 4.80 GHz. The 32 MB shared L3 cache works with 12 L2 cache, while the memory path is dual‑channel DDR4. All those specifications help push the CPU’s average benchmark score to 29879.

The motherboard's raw compute scores—Cinebench R20 multicore 9993, single‑core 1410; R23 multicore 23794, single‑core 3359; PassMark physics 1355 and integer math 93942—show a part that is at its best in multi‑threaded productivity, but still strong in single‑thread performance. For flight simulation, the single‑thread score of 3359 in R23 indicates there is enough throughput to handle simulation logic and AI updates, and the eight cores provide headroom for background tasks.

The measured FPS explains how this CPU perform in practice. At 1080p Low (which puts minimal load on the GPU), the average frame rate reaches 139 FPS. That is the highest recorded row in this data set. Dropping to 1080p Ultra yields 77 FPS, meaning the CPU can sustain well over 100 FPS at Low if the GPU allows it. At 4K Low the average is 82 FPS, which shows the CPU is not tipping over when resolution goes higher; the GPU, not the processor, begins to cap throughput. Comparing the 1080p Low score (139) to the 1080p Medium (108) and 1080p High (81) importantly ties the CPU’s level to the load the graphics engine places on it.

The Ryzen 7 5800X has a Cinebench R23 single‑core of 3359, which is above many parts in its segment. That contributes to the speed at lower resolution where you expect a simulation to be CPU‑heavy.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 2560x1440 with High settings?

A: The average frame rate at that resolution and preset is 65 FPS.

Q: How does the Ryzen 7 5800XT compare to its nearest rival in benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 7840H has a raw average score of 29810 and a deltaPct of 0% versus the 5800XT, which makes them statistically tied. The Ryzen 7 8845HS and 7840HS score 29955 with a deltaPct of -0.3%, meaning the 5800XT is virtually identical.

Q: What is the maximum average FPS recorded for this combination?

A: 139 FPS in the 1920x1080 Low preset. That is the highest measured average across all rows.

Q: What are the minimum and maximum FPS recorded at 3840x2160 Medium?

A: The min was 55 FPS and the max was 74 FPS, with an average of 64 FPS.

Q: What is the GPU memory configuration of the RX 7700 XT?

A: It carries 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192‑bit bus, with bandwidth of 432.0 GB/s.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the CPU and GPU?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT has a launch MSRP of $249, and the AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT has a launch MSRP of $449.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The table below lists every reported average frame rate (Avg FPS) from the data set, arranged by resolution and presets. For the Medium preset, min and max values are included where they were provided.

| Resolution | Preset | Avg FPS | Min FPS | Max FPS |

|-----------|--------|---------|---------|---------|

| 1920x1080 | Low | 139 | – | – |

| | Medium | 47 | 92 | 124 |

| | High | 81 | – | – |

| | Ultra | 77 | – | – |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 112 | – | – |

| | Medium | 67 | 55 | 100 |

| | High | 65 | – | – |

| | Ultra | 62 | – | – |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 82 | – | – |

| | Medium | 64 | 48 | 74 |

| | High | 48 | – | – |

| | Ultra | 46 | – | – |

The pattern shows a rapid breakdown of margin at higher resolutions. At 1080p, even the Ultra preset still averages 77 FPS, while the lowest average is at 4K Ultra at 46 FPS. The Low preset stands out—it is the only one that never falls below 82 FPS, even in 4K.

Resolution Scaling

Read the key numbers for each preset across the three resolutions:

• Low: 1080p 139 → 1440p 112 → 4K 82.
• Medium: 1080p 108 → 1440p 87 → 4K 64 (min 55, max 74).
• High: 1080p 81 → 1440p 65 → 4K 48.
• Ultra: 1080p 77 → 1440p 62 → 4K 46.

These rows show an almost consistent delta between 1080p and 1440p, and then a further hit when moving to 4K. For example, High 1520⁸ drops from 81 to 65 when going to 1440p, and then to 48 at 4K. The Low preset shows a larger absolute loss—from 139 to 82—but it keeps a 82 FPS average even at 4K, which is noticeably higher than the 60-ish other presets at that resolution.

The data strongly points to the GPU as the primary limiter as the resolution climbs. Even the fastest preset at 1080p (Low) yields 139 FPS, and with all settings, the frame rate slips progressively. The CPU's high single‑thread rating presumably continues to keep a floor at each stage, but the scale of the drop—especially between High and Ultra where the only difference is settings, not resolution—confirms that graphical load is what decides the final number. On the other hand, the 1080p Low result of 139 and 4K Low of 82 indicates the CPU can still push well above 100 FPS at Low, so its role is not a frequent choke point.

No row shows a rise with resolution, and every preset sees an absolute drop in average frame from 1080p to 2160p. This is typical for a GPU‑bound title; the RX 7700 XT loses more performance per pixel than its shader count would suggest, with the 12 GB memory pool not being the issue because the delta is continuous across resolutions.

Settings Recommendations

Recommendations rely strictly on the measured average frames, without weighing subjective visual quality any further than the preset names imply.

1920x1080: Any setting is playable from a frame-rate stance. Low 139 ensures an extremely high refresh‑capable experience. Medium 108 and High 81 are both above what’s required for smooth motion. Ultra at 77 is still quite high, so if visual detail is a priority, Ultra yields the best measured balance of image quality and fluidity at this resolution.

2560x1440: Medium and Low deliver 87 and 112 frames, respectively. High at 65 is acceptable but not as fluid; 62 at Ultra and 65 at Ultra? Actually Ultra is 62. So at 1440, Medium is the sweet spot. Low gives the highest headroom, but the 87 average of Medium is entirely playable, and the visual uplift is meaningful. For monitor screens at 120–144 Hz, Low (112) might be necessary; High/Ultra are only good for 60‑Hz displays.

3840x2160: Only Low (82) and Medium (64) produce average frames above 60, and Medium has a min of 55, meaning occasional dips below 60 but still high. High (48) and Ultra (46) fall into a range that streaks lower on a 60‑Hz monitor. The combination of detail and performance that best works at 4K is Medium, since it keeps the average at 64 while retaining some extra visual features over Low. Ultra is not advised for a smooth flight experience.

If one must choose a single preset across all three resolutions, Medium consistently sits in the upper range: 108, 87, 64. It is never the fastest but it maintains a comfortable margin over High and Ultra, and its three resolution averages (108→87→64) are always above 60. The data therefore suggests Medium as the most broadly usable setting for this CPU+GPU pairing, especially if the player cares about consistent frame pacing rather than raw FPS