Microsoft Flight Simulator

# FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Ryzen 7 7700 compare to its nearest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The Ryzen 7 7700 posts an average benchmark score of 40081, placing it 0.1% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 (40048) and 0.2% behind the Intel Core 5 221E (40144). It trails the AMD Ryzen 9 270 by 0.4% and the Intel Core i9-13905H by 0.6%, indicating a tightly clustered performance band among these four processors.

Q: What is the GPU’s percentile ranking among all GPUs, and what does that mean for this combo?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9060 sits in the 59th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 16014. Its closest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, scores 16129 (0.7% higher), while the AMD Radeon R9 370X and RX 7700 both score slightly lower at 15862 and 15852 respectively — a 1% gap in both cases.

Q: What is the best average FPS achievable at 1080p with this hardware?

A: At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo reaches 111 FPS average — the highest measured result across all resolutions and settings. Medium settings deliver 86 FPS, High 65 FPS, and Ultra 62 FPS, showing a steep drop from Low to Medium and a more gradual decline at higher presets.

Q: How does the CPU’s single-thread performance compare to its multi-thread performance?

A: The Ryzen 7 7700 scores 1930 in Cinebench R23 single-core and 18760 in multi-core, a roughly 9.7x scaling from single to multi-thread. In Geekbench, the gap is 2525 single-core versus 15371 multi-core, while PassMark shows 4063 single-thread versus 34470 multithread — consistent with its 8-core/16-thread design.

Q: What memory bandwidth does the CPU support, and how might it affect this flight simulator?

A: The Ryzen 7 7700 supports dual-channel DDR5 with a memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. In a simulation title that streams terrain and scenery data, this bandwidth is a potential factor in maintaining consistent frame delivery, particularly at higher resolutions where data throughput demands increase.

Q: What is the combo’s rank among all tested combinations for this game?

A: The Ryzen 7 7700 + RX 9060 combination ranks 1712 out of 2996 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the lower-middle tier of the overall distribution — roughly the 43rd percentile of all tested hardware pairings.

# Settings Recommendations

The measured data for this combo shows a clear trade-off between visual fidelity and frame rate. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves 111 FPS average, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth simulation. However, the Medium preset still delivers 86 FPS average with a minimum of 73 FPS, meaning it holds above 60 FPS even in demanding scenes. The High preset drops to 65 FPS average, while Ultra falls to 62 FPS — both still nominally playable but with less headroom.

Given that Microsoft Flight Simulator is a simulation where consistent frame delivery matters more than raw peak performance, the Medium preset at 1080p offers the best balance: it maintains a minimum of 73 FPS, which provides a comfortable cushion above the 60 FPS target. The jump from Low to Medium costs 25 FPS on average but presumably adds substantial visual detail. The step from Medium to High costs another 21 FPS, and the final step to Ultra costs only 3 FPS more, suggesting diminishing returns at the top end.

At 2560x1440, Medium delivers 69 FPS average with a minimum of 59 FPS — just under the 60 FPS mark but still usable. The High preset at 52 FPS average is borderline, while Ultra at 50 FPS may feel sluggish for a flight sim where smooth camera panning is essential. At 3840x2160, even Medium only manages 51 FPS average (44 FPS minimum), which is below the ideal threshold. Low settings at 1440p hit 89 FPS, and at 4K Low reaches 66 FPS, making it the only 4K preset that clears 60 FPS.

For the best overall experience, the data suggests Medium at 1440p as the sweet spot: it delivers 69 FPS average while still being 17 FPS ahead of High at the same resolution. If the user prioritizes frame rate over visuals, Low at 1440p (89 FPS) or Low at 4K (66 FPS) are acceptable fallbacks. Ultra at any resolution should be avoided — the 37-62 FPS range does not provide the stability this genre demands.

# How This Combo Ranks

The Ryzen 7 7700 + RX 9060 pairing ranks 1712 out of 2996 tested combinations for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the lower half of the tested pool — specifically around the 57th percentile from the bottom, meaning roughly 57% of tested combos outperform it. This is a notable result for a CPU that sits in the 87th percentile among all processors and a GPU in the 59th percentile among all GPUs.

The discrepancy between the CPU’s strong percentile (87) and the GPU’s middling percentile (59) suggests that the graphics card is the limiting factor in this pairing. The CPU has ample headroom — its multi-thread score of 18760 in Cinebench R23 and 34470 in PassMark indicate strong processing capability. The GPU, by contrast, sits just above the median of all GPUs, with a PassMark G3D score of 17631 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3322.

The combo’s rank of 1712 out of 2996 is consistent with what the individual component percentiles would predict: a high-end CPU paired with a mid-range GPU tends to land in the lower-middle tier of gaming performance, particularly in a visually demanding title like Microsoft Flight Simulator. The GPU’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti (0.7% higher average score), would likely produce similar in-game results, while the 1% faster Radeon RX 7700 and 1% slower R9 370X bracket this GPU within a narrow performance band.

# Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its strongest results. Low settings produce 111 FPS average, Medium 86 FPS (minimum 73, maximum 99), High 65 FPS, and Ultra 62 FPS. The progression from Low to Medium represents the largest single drop — 25 FPS — while the Medium-to-High step costs 21 FPS and High-to-Ultra only 3 FPS. This pattern indicates that the GPU handles the additional load of Medium well but struggles more with the jump to High, after which Ultra adds relatively little overhead.

At 2560x1440, the same settings hierarchy holds but with reduced margins. Low achieves 89 FPS, Medium 69 FPS (minimum 59, maximum 80), High 52 FPS, and Ultra 50 FPS. The Low-to-Medium drop is 20 FPS, Medium-to-High is 17 FPS, and High-to-Ultra is only 2 FPS. The minimum FPS at Medium (59) is just below the 60 FPS threshold, suggesting occasional dips during complex scenery loading.

At 3840x2160, performance compresses further. Low manages 66 FPS, Medium 51 FPS (minimum 44, maximum 59), High 39 FPS, and Ultra 37 FPS. The Low-to-Medium drop is 15 FPS, Medium-to-High is 12 FPS, and High-to-Ultra is 2 FPS. Notably, the 4K Medium minimum of 44 FPS is significantly below the average, indicating frame time spikes that could cause perceptible stutter in a flight simulator.

Across all resolutions, the Ultra preset’s delta over High is consistently small (2-3 FPS), which suggests that Ultra’s additional settings impose minimal incremental cost on this hardware. The major performance cliff occurs between Low and Medium at 1080p, and between Medium and High at higher resolutions.

# GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture with a Navi 44 chip, manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It packs 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs, with 28 RT cores for ray tracing work. The GPU’s boost clock reaches 2990 MHz, with a game clock of 2400 MHz and a base clock of 1700 MHz. Memory consists of 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

The 8 GB VRAM capacity is a critical constraint in Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known for loading large texture packs and detailed terrain data. At 4K Ultra, the 37 FPS average suggests the GPU is both fill-rate and bandwidth limited. The 288.0 GB/s bandwidth is modest by current standards, and the 128-bit bus width limits how quickly texture data can be streamed to the shading units. The 21.43 TFLOPS FP32 compute rate provides reasonable raw processing power, but the memory subsystem appears to be the bottleneck at higher resolutions.

The GPU’s PassMark G3D score of 17631 and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3322 place it in the 59th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the RTX 3060 Ti, scores 0.7% higher on average, yet the RX 9060’s 8 GB VRAM and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth are both lower than what that rival typically offers. In this game, where texture streaming is dominant, the memory configuration likely explains why 4K Ultra only achieves 37 FPS — the GPU cannot sustain the data throughput required at that resolution with maxed settings.

The pixel rate of 191.4 GPixel/s and texture rate of 334.9 GTexel/s provide the raw throughput for 1080p and 1440p gaming, where the measured FPS is more reasonable. At 1080p Ultra (62 FPS) and 1440p Ultra (50 FPS), the GPU is still delivering playable results, but the steep drop to 4K indicates that resolution scaling is not this card’s strength.

# CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700 is an 8-core, 16-thread processor based on Zen 4 architecture (Raphael), manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It runs at a base clock of 3.80 GHz with a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, and its 65 W TDP is notably efficient for a desktop part. The CPU supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with 83.2 GB/s bandwidth and features 32 MB of shared L3 cache plus 1 MB L2 per core.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU’s role is substantial — the simulation engine handles physics, AI traffic, weather, and flight model calculations, which can stress multiple threads. The Ryzen 7 7700’s multi-thread performance is strong: Cinebench R23 multi-core reaches 18760, Geekbench multi-core 15371, and PassMark multithread 34470. These scores place it in the 87th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 40081.

The single-thread performance is equally important for the game’s main rendering thread. The CPU scores 1930 in Cinebench R23 single-core, 2525 in Geekbench single-core, and 4063 in PassMark single-thread. These results are competitive, but the game’s frame pacing at higher resolutions is more likely limited by the GPU. Evidence for this comes from the FPS scaling: at 1080p Low, the combo hits 111 FPS, but at 1080p Ultra it drops to 62 FPS — a 44% reduction that is too large to be CPU-bound. If the CPU were the primary limiter, we would expect smaller differences between settings at the same resolution.

The CPU’s nearest rivals — the Ryzen AI 9 365, Core 5 221E, Ryzen 9 270, and Core i9-13905H — all score within 0.6% of the 7700’s average, indicating that no single CPU in this class has a decisive advantage. In a game where the GPU is the bottleneck at higher settings, the CPU choice matters less for absolute FPS and more for maintaining minimum frame rates during complex simulation phases.

# Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of resolution scaling. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 111 at 1080p to 89 at 1440p and 66 at 4K — a reduction of approximately 20% from 1080p to 1440p and another 26% from 1440p to 4K. At Medium settings, the progression is 86 (1080p) to 69 (1440p) to 51 (4K), with the 1440p-to-4K drop being 26% again. The High preset shows 65, 52, and 39 FPS across the three resolutions, while Ultra shows 62, 50, and 37.

The consistency of these relative drops — roughly 20-25% from 1080p to 1440p and another 25-30% from 1440p to 4K — is telling. If the CPU were the primary bottleneck, we would expect the FPS to remain relatively flat across resolutions, since the CPU workload is largely resolution-independent. Instead, the FPS scales inversely with pixel count, which is a classic GPU-bound signature.

However, the magnitude of the drop is not as steep as a purely fill-rate-limited scenario would suggest. Going from 1080p to 1440p increases pixel count by about 78%, yet the FPS drops by only 20-25%. This suggests that the game’s draw call and simulation overhead on the CPU is still significant enough to smooth out the scaling curve. Similarly, the 1440p-to-4K increase of about 125% in pixels results in a 25-30% FPS drop, again indicating that the CPU is contributing to the frame time at lower resolutions.

The Ultra preset’s small delta over High at every resolution (2-3 FPS) reinforces that the GPU is not especially taxed by the additional Ultra features. Instead, the dominant scaling factor is resolution itself — the 8 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory bus become progressively more strained as resolution increases. At 4K, even Low settings only reach 66 FPS, which is barely above the 60 FPS target, while Medium at 4K falls to 51 FPS. This combination of CPU strong enough to feed the GPU at all resolutions and a GPU whose memory subsystem is modest means that users should expect 1080p to be the resolution where this combo shines, with 1440p as a viable alternative at Medium settings, and 4K reserved for Low settings if frame rate is the priority.