Microsoft Flight Simulator

FAQ

Q: What is the combo rank of the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: This combo ranks 107th out of 1795 tested combinations, placing it in the top 6% of all systems evaluated for this game.

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

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER posts an average benchmark score of 53610, which is 0.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT (53489) and 2.9% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti (52086).

Q: What is the CPU's average benchmark score and how does it stack against the Intel Core i5-13500?

A: The Ryzen 7 7700X achieves an average benchmark score of 34313, which is 0.4% higher than the Intel Core i5-13500's 34175, indicating near-identical synthetic performance.

Q: What memory bandwidth does the Ryzen 7 7700X support, and what type of memory does it use?

A: The CPU supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s, and it has 32 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Does the RTX 4080 SUPER have enough VRAM for high-resolution flight simulation?

A: With 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus delivering 736.3 GB/s of bandwidth, the data indicates ample capacity for the 4K Ultra settings tested in this game.

Q: What is the GPU's percentile ranking among all GPUs, and what does that imply?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER sits at the 88th percentile among all GPUs, while the CPU is at the 89th percentile among all CPUs, showing both components are in the upper echelon of their respective markets.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER brings substantial graphics horsepower to Microsoft Flight Simulator, a title known for its demanding rendering of terrain, weather, and aircraft detail. The GPU's 16 GB of GDDR6X VRAM is a critical asset here, as flight simulators often load large texture sets for photogrammetry and high-resolution scenery. The 256-bit memory bus delivers 736.3 GB/s of bandwidth, which directly supports the data throughput needed when streaming detailed landscapes at high resolutions.

Clock behavior plays a notable role in sustained performance. The GPU's base clock of 2295 MHz boosts to 2550 MHz, and the memory runs at an effective 23 Gbps. These frequencies, combined with the Ada Lovelace architecture's 10240 shading units and 320 tensor cores, allow the card to handle the game's complex shader work and any DLSS-based enhancements. The 80 RT cores also provide headroom for ray-traced effects, though the measured data here does not isolate that specific workload.

The GPU's raw compute capabilities are substantial: 52.22 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and a pixel rate of 285.6 GPixel/s. These figures translate into the high frame rates observed across all measured settings. The card's 88th percentile ranking among all GPUs, coupled with an average benchmark score of 53610, shows it outperforms the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT by 0.2% and the Radeon RX 7700S by 2.1%. Notably, it also leads the newer RTX 5070 Ti by 2.9%, suggesting that raw architectural efficiency still matters more than generational recency in this particular benchmark suite.

The VRAM capacity becomes especially relevant at 4K Ultra settings, where the measured average FPS of 67.3 suggests the GPU is managing a heavy texture load without hitting memory limits. If VRAM were insufficient, the frame rate would likely collapse rather than degrade gradually, and the data shows a smooth progression from Low to Ultra settings at every resolution.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of GPU-bound scaling as resolution increases. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo reaches 207.2 FPS, but this drops to 170.1 FPS at 1440p and 121 FPS at 4K. This represents a 41.6% reduction from 1080p to 4K at Low settings, indicating that even at the lowest quality preset, the resolution increase still demands significantly more pixel throughput.

The scaling becomes more pronounced at higher quality settings. At Ultra settings, the frame rate falls from 114.8 FPS at 1080p to 90.4 FPS at 1440p, then to 67.3 FPS at 4K — a 41.4% drop from 1080p to 4K. This similarity in percentage decline across all settings suggests that the GPU is the limiting factor consistently, regardless of quality preset. The CPU appears to have sufficient headroom to feed the GPU at all resolutions, as the frame rate reductions track closely with the increase in pixel count.

The data also shows that moving from 1080p to 1440p at High settings costs 20.6% performance (124.7 to 99 FPS), while moving from 1440p to 4K costs 25.9% (99 to 73.4 FPS). This slight acceleration in the performance penalty at higher resolutions reinforces the GPU-bound nature of the workload. The RTX 4080 SUPER's 16 GB VRAM and 736.3 GB/s bandwidth are being exercised progressively harder as resolution climbs, but the frame rates remain playable even at 4K Ultra.

Interestingly, the gap between Low and Ultra settings narrows at higher resolutions. At 1080p, the difference between Low (207.2 FPS) and Ultra (114.8 FPS) is 80.5%. At 4K, the difference between Low (121 FPS) and Ultra (67.3 FPS) is 79.8%. This consistency indicates that the GPU's compute resources scale linearly with both resolution and quality settings, without hitting any architectural bottleneck.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers 207.2 FPS on Low settings, 165.1 FPS on Medium, 124.7 FPS on High, and 114.8 FPS on Ultra. The jump from Low to Medium costs 20.3% performance, while Medium to High costs 24.5%, and High to Ultra costs 7.9%. The relatively small penalty from High to Ultra suggests that the Ultra preset adds visual features that are less GPU-intensive than the step from Medium to High.

Moving to 2560x1440, the numbers are 170.1 FPS on Low, 130.7 FPS on Medium, 99 FPS on High, and 90.4 FPS on Ultra. The drop from 1080p to 1440p at each respective setting is 17.9% for Low (207.2 to 170.1), 20.8% for Medium (165.1 to 130.7), 20.6% for High (124.7 to 99), and 21.3% for Ultra (114.8 to 90.4). The consistency of these percentage drops across settings reinforces that the GPU is the primary scaling factor.

At 3840x2160, the results are 121 FPS on Low, 92.9 FPS on Medium, 73.4 FPS on High, and 67.3 FPS on Ultra. The 1440p to 4K transition costs 28.9% for Low (170.1 to 121), 28.9% for Medium (130.7 to 92.9), 25.9% for High (99 to 73.4), and 25.6% for Ultra (90.4 to 67.3). The slightly smaller percentage drops at High and Ultra suggest that at these settings, the CPU begins to contribute slightly more to the overall frame time, though the GPU remains dominant.

The highest measured frame rate is 207.2 FPS at 1080p Low, while the lowest is 67.3 FPS at 4K Ultra. This range of 139.9 FPS across the tested configurations demonstrates the wide performance envelope of this combo, from extremely high refresh rate gaming at lower resolutions to solid 4K playability at maximum settings.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700X is an 8-core, 16-thread processor based on the Zen 4 Raphael architecture, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. Its base clock of 4.50 GHz boosts up to 5.40 GHz, and it carries 32 MB of shared L3 cache alongside 1 MB of L2 per core. These specifications position it well for flight simulation, which often involves complex physics calculations, AI traffic, and dynamic weather systems that can load multiple threads.

The CPU's benchmark scores show strong single-thread and multi-thread performance. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 30325 and single-core score of 4281 indicate robust capability for both lightly-threaded and heavily-threaded workloads. The 3DMark single-thread score of 1090 and 16-thread score of 8859 further confirm that the processor maintains high per-core efficiency while scaling well across its 16 threads.

Comparing to nearest rivals, the Ryzen 7 7700X's average benchmark score of 34313 places it 0.4% above the Intel Core i5-13500 (34175) and 0.5% above the Intel Core i7-12800HX (34136). However, it trails the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H by 0.8% (34584) and the AMD EPYC 4244P by 0.8% (34599). These differences are minimal, suggesting that within this performance tier, the specific CPU choice matters little for synthetic benchmarks.

In the context of Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role appears secondary to the GPU based on the resolution scaling data. The consistent frame rate drops across resolutions indicate that the GPU is the bottleneck at all settings tested. However, the CPU's 89th percentile ranking among all CPUs ensures it does not hold back the RTX 4080 SUPER. The 83.2 GB/s memory bandwidth and dual-channel DDR5 support provide sufficient data throughput to keep the GPU fed with geometry and draw calls.

The processor's 105 W TDP and unlocked multiplier suggest it can sustain high boost clocks during extended gaming sessions. The measured FPS at 1080p Low (207.2 FPS) demonstrates that the CPU can drive frame rates well above 200 FPS in less demanding scenarios, which implies it has significant headroom for future game updates or more CPU-intensive mods.

Settings Recommendations

For players targeting 4K resolution, the Ultra preset delivers 67.3 FPS, which is playable for a flight simulator where frame rates above 60 are generally acceptable. The High preset at 73.4 FPS provides a small performance boost while retaining most visual quality, making it the better choice for smoother camera panning. Medium at 92.9 FPS is the sweet spot for those who prioritize frame rate stability over maximum visual fidelity.

At 1440p, the High preset at 99 FPS offers an excellent balance, while Ultra at 90.4 FPS is still very smooth. The Medium preset at 130.7 FPS is ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors, and Low at 170.1 FPS suits competitive or fast-paced flying where input latency matters most. The data suggests that at 1440p, even Ultra remains comfortably above 90 FPS, so visual quality can be maximized without concern.

For 1080p users, all settings exceed 114 FPS, meaning the Ultra preset at 114.8 FPS is the recommended choice for the best visual experience. The High preset at 124.7 FPS adds a small margin, while Medium at 165.1 FPS and Low at 207.2 FPS are overkill for most displays. The 1080p Ultra result of 114.8 FPS indicates that the combo can handle the most demanding preset at the lowest resolution without dropping below triple-digit frame rates.

The data indicates that the Ultra preset is viable at all three resolutions, with the lowest result being 67.3 FPS at 4K. Given that flight simulators often involve slower camera movements and less twitchy gameplay than first-person shooters, even 67 FPS is acceptable for most users. However, the High preset at 4K (73.4 FPS) offers a meaningful 9% improvement over Ultra with a minimal visual penalty, making it the recommended choice for players who want a safety margin above 60 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700X plus NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER combination ranks 107th out of 1795 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the top 6% of all systems evaluated. This top-tier ranking is consistent with the individual component percentiles: the CPU at 89th percentile and the GPU at 88th percentile. The combination of two high-percentile parts yields a system that outperforms the vast majority of alternatives.

The ranking position suggests that while this combo is excellent, there are 106 other configurations that achieve higher frame rates in this specific game. These likely include combos with even more powerful GPUs or CPUs with higher thread counts, as flight simulators can scale with additional cores for AI and physics simulations. The measured FPS data shows that this combo already delivers 67.3 FPS at 4K Ultra, so the higher-ranked systems likely push beyond 70 FPS at that resolution.

Comparing to the nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks, the RTX 4080 SUPER leads the RTX 5070 Ti by 2.9%, yet the 5070 Ti might appear in higher-ranked combos due to pairing with faster CPUs. Similarly, the Ryzen 7 7700X trails the EPYC 4244P by 0.8% in CPU benchmarks, but the EPYC's server-oriented design might offer more consistent performance in multi-threaded workloads. The data does not show how these rival components perform specifically in Microsoft Flight Simulator, so the ranking position of 107th reflects the combined effect of both parts working together.

The 1795 total combos include a wide variety of hardware, from budget systems to extreme enthusiast builds. Ranking 107th means this combo outperforms roughly 94% of all tested configurations, which is a strong result for a mainstream desktop CPU paired with a high-end consumer GPU. The measured FPS data confirms that this ranking is earned through actual gameplay performance rather than just synthetic scores.