Microsoft Flight Simulator

# Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured frame rates for Microsoft Flight Simulator with the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F and AMD Radeon RX 580 reveal a steep and consistent performance decline as resolution increases, a pattern that points squarely at the GPU as the primary bottleneck. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo averages 54 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops that to 43 FPS, a reduction of roughly 20%. At 4K Low, the average falls to 32 FPS, which is about 41% below the 1080p Low figure. This scaling behavior is characteristic of a graphics-card-limited scenario: as pixel count rises, the RX 580's shading units and memory bandwidth are increasingly saturated, and the CPU's headroom becomes irrelevant.

The trend holds across every settings tier. For Medium settings, 1080p yields 42 FPS, 1440p yields 34 FPS, and 4K yields 25 FPS. The proportional drop from 1080p to 1440p is roughly 19%, while the drop from 1440p to 4K is about 26%. High settings show a similar pattern: 31 FPS at 1080p, 25 FPS at 1440p, and 19 FPS at 4K. Ultra settings, the most demanding preset measured, produce 30 FPS at 1080p, 24 FPS at 1440p, and 18 FPS at 4K. The 4K Ultra result is the lowest in the entire dataset, sitting at 18 FPS average, which is below the threshold for comfortable playability in a simulation genre where smooth camera panning is essential.

The fact that the FPS deltas between resolutions are relatively uniform across settings tiers reinforces the GPU-bound diagnosis. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect the performance gap between 1080p and 4K to narrow at higher settings, because the GPU would be doing more work per frame, giving the CPU more time to feed it. Instead, the gap remains proportionally similar, suggesting the RX 580's rendering throughput is the wall. The 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth is adequate for 1080p and 1440p in this title, but at 4K the combination of fill-rate demands and memory pressure from high-resolution textures pushes the GPU to its limits. The data shows that 4K Ultra is effectively unplayable, and even 4K Low at 32 FPS is marginal for a flight simulator where smooth visuals aid situational awareness.

# CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F is a Zen 5 part built on TSMC's 4 nm process, with 8 cores and 16 threads. Its base clock is 3.80 GHz and boost clock reaches 5.50 GHz. In benchmark terms, this CPU sits in the 94th percentile of all processors tested, with an average benchmark score of 69,996. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX (0.2% higher score), Intel Core i7-14700KF (0.2% lower), AMD Ryzen 9 7950X (0.7% higher), and Intel Core i7-14700K (0.9% higher). These deltas are tiny, meaning the 9700F is effectively on par with some of the fastest desktop and mobile CPUs available.

For Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is significant but not dominant in this pairing. The game is known for heavy single-threaded simulation logic, and the 9700F's high boost clock of 5.50 GHz and strong single-thread score of 4,691 in PassMark should provide ample headroom. The 8-core, 16-thread configuration also handles background tasks and the game's multithreaded rendering pipeline, with a PassMark multithread score of 36,470. However, the measured FPS data shows that even with this capable processor, frame rates are low at high resolutions, which means the CPU is not the limiting factor. At 1080p Low, where CPU load is relatively higher compared to GPU load, the combo reaches 54 FPS — a respectable figure that suggests the CPU can push well beyond that if the GPU allowed.

The CPU's L3 cache is 32 MB shared, and each core has 1 MB of L2 and 80 KB of L1. This cache hierarchy is well-suited for flight simulation, which often involves large streaming datasets for terrain and airport scenery. The memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s over dual-channel DDR5 is also a positive factor, as the game frequently loads new tiles. Yet the benchmark results indicate that in this specific combo, the GPU's 6.175 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 193.0 GTexel/s texture rate are the ceiling. The CPU is effectively waiting on the GPU at most settings, which is why the FPS numbers do not improve dramatically as settings are lowered — the RX 580 simply cannot render frames fast enough to utilize the 9700F's full potential.

# FAQ

Q: What is the best average FPS this combo achieves in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The highest measured average FPS is 54, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The next best is 43 FPS at 2560x1440 Low, and 32 FPS at 3840x2160 Low.

Q: How does the Ryzen 7 9700F compare to its nearest CPU rivals?

A: The 9700F has an average benchmark score of 69,996. The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX scores 69,875 (0.2% higher), the Intel Core i7-14700KF scores 70,163 (0.2% lower), the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X scores 69,515 (0.7% higher), and the Intel Core i7-14700K scores 69,355 (0.9% higher). All are within 1% of each other.

Q: Is the RX 580 or the Ryzen 7 9700F the bottleneck in this game?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the primary bottleneck. As resolution increases from 1080p to 4K, average FPS drops by roughly 41% at Low settings and 40% at Ultra settings, a pattern typical of GPU-limited performance. The CPU's high single-thread score of 4,691 and multithread score of 36,470 suggest it has ample headroom.

Q: What is the combo's rank among all tested combinations in this game?

A: The combo ranks 2,733 out of 2,996 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 9% of all tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator.

Q: Does the RX 580 support modern graphics APIs needed for this game?

A: Yes, the RX 580 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. Its DirectX 12 PassMark score is 43, and its Vulkan Geekbench score is 45,173.

Q: What are the minimum and maximum FPS recorded at 4K Medium settings?

A: At 3840x2160 with Medium settings, the combo records a minimum FPS of 21 and a maximum of 29, with an average of 25 FPS.

# How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 580 ranks 2,733 out of 2,996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. That places this configuration in the bottom 9% of all tested combinations, a poor showing that reflects the GPU's age and limited compute resources. The RX 580, released in 2017, is an end-of-life product with a PassMark G3D score of 8,813, which puts it in the 53rd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest GPU rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (0.1% higher score), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER (0.4% higher), AMD Radeon 740M (0.5% lower), and AMD FirePro W5100 (0.6% lower). These are all relatively modest performers, and none would be considered a high-end card today.

The CPU, by contrast, is a top-tier part. The Ryzen 7 9700F sits in the 94th percentile of all CPUs, and its nearest rivals are all high-end desktop or laptop processors. The mismatch between CPU and GPU performance is stark: the 9700F is capable of far higher frame rates than the RX 580 can deliver. In a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known for heavy CPU simulation loads, the GPU bottleneck becomes even more pronounced because the CPU is rarely the limiting factor. The low combo rank is almost entirely attributable to the GPU's inability to keep up with the CPU's output.

The data shows that even at 1080p Low, the combo only reaches 54 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target that many users consider smooth. At higher settings or resolutions, the frame rate drops further, making the experience increasingly sluggish. For a flight simulator, where users often fly over dense urban areas or complex terrain, this level of performance would likely result in noticeable stutter and reduced immersion. The combo rank of 2,733 out of 2,996 indicates that most other tested configurations deliver better results, and users looking for a smoother experience would need to consider a more powerful GPU.

# Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS values are as follows: Low settings produce 54 FPS, Medium settings produce 42 FPS with a minimum of 36 and maximum of 48, High settings produce 31 FPS, and Ultra settings produce 30 FPS. The jump from Low to Medium is a 12 FPS drop (22%), while the drop from Medium to High is 11 FPS (26%), and High to Ultra is only 1 FPS (3%). This suggests that the High to Ultra transition is not particularly demanding on the GPU, likely due to the RX 580's memory bandwidth ceiling.

At 2560x1440, the average FPS values are: Low at 43 FPS, Medium at 34 FPS with a minimum of 29 and maximum of 39, High at 25 FPS, and Ultra at 24 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 9 FPS (21%), Medium to High is 9 FPS (26%), and High to Ultra is 1 FPS (4%). The 1440p results are roughly 20-25% lower than their 1080p counterparts, which aligns with the increased pixel count (about 78% more pixels) but is less than the pixel increase, indicating that the GPU is not purely fill-rate limited at these settings.

At 3840x2160, the average FPS values are: Low at 32 FPS, Medium at 25 FPS with a minimum of 21 and maximum of 29, High at 19 FPS, and Ultra at 18 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 7 FPS (22%), Medium to High is 6 FPS (24%), and High to Ultra is 1 FPS (5%). The 4K results show a more severe drop from 1440p, with Low falling by 11 FPS (26%), Medium by 9 FPS (26%), High by 6 FPS (24%), and Ultra by 6 FPS (25%). This indicates that at 4K, the GPU is thoroughly saturated, and even the lower settings cannot provide playable frame rates.

The data shows a clear hierarchy: 1080p Low is the only configuration that exceeds 50 FPS, while 4K Ultra is the only one that drops below 20 FPS. The minimum FPS values, where recorded, show that 4K Medium can dip to 21 FPS, while 1440p Medium dips to 29 FPS and 1080p Medium dips to 36 FPS. These minimums are important for flight simulators, where sudden drops can cause visual stutter during critical maneuvers.

# Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the best experience for this combo is at 1920x1080 with Low settings, which yields an average of 54 FPS. This is the only measured configuration that approaches the 60 FPS threshold, and it provides the smoothest gameplay. The next option, 1440p Low at 43 FPS, is playable but not as fluid, and 1080p Medium at 42 FPS offers similar performance. For users who prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate, 1080p Medium at 42 FPS (with a minimum of 36 FPS) is a reasonable trade-off, as it provides higher-quality textures and effects without dropping below 30 FPS.

At 1440p, the Low setting at 43 FPS is the best choice, as Medium drops to 34 FPS and High falls to 25 FPS. The 34 FPS at Medium might be acceptable for some users, but the 29 FPS minimum could cause noticeable stutter in busy scenes. At 4K, all settings are below 32 FPS, making this resolution impractical for smooth gameplay. The 4K Low setting at 32 FPS is the only 4K option that stays above 30 FPS, but the minimum FPS is not recorded for that setting, so it may dip lower.

The data suggests that users should avoid Ultra settings at all resolutions. The difference between High and Ultra is only 1 FPS at every resolution (30 vs 31 at 1080p, 24 vs 25 at 1440p, 18 vs 19 at 4K), meaning the Ultra preset adds visual complexity without a meaningful performance penalty, but it also does not improve the experience enough to be worth the extra load on the GPU. For the best balance of performance and quality, 1080p Medium is recommended, as it provides 42 FPS average with a 36 FPS minimum, which is above the 30 FPS playability threshold. Users with a tolerance for lower frame rates could try 1440p Medium at 34 FPS, but 1080p Low remains the safest bet for consistent performance.

# GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Radeon RX 580 is a Polaris 20 chip built on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process, with 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die. Its base clock is 1257 MHz and boost clock is 1340 MHz, with memory running at 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective). The GPU has 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This memory configuration is a double-edged sword in Microsoft Flight Simulator: 8 GB is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p textures, but the bandwidth is modest by modern standards, and at 4K the game's high-resolution texture streaming can saturate the bus.

The GPU's compute resources are limited: 2304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, yielding 6.175 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and a texture rate of 193.0 GTexel/s. The pixel rate is 42.88 GPixel/s. These numbers are low compared to modern GPUs, and the measured FPS data reflects this. At 1080p Low, the GPU manages 54 FPS, which is close to its practical limit for this game. The fact that High settings only drop to 31 FPS (a 43% reduction from Low) indicates that the GPU's shading units are the bottleneck, not the memory system, as higher settings increase shader load but not necessarily memory pressure.

The RX 580's nearest rivals in benchmark scores include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (0.1% higher), GTX 1660 SUPER (0.4% higher), AMD Radeon 740M (0.5% lower), and AMD FirePro W5100 (0.6% lower). All of these are similarly positioned in the mid-range to lower-mid-range segment, which explains why the combo ranks so low. The GPU's PassMark G3D score of 8,813 places it in the 53rd percentile, meaning it is slightly above average but far from high-end. In a game as demanding as Microsoft Flight Simulator, which pushes both CPU and GPU heavily, the RX 580's age and limited compute power are the primary reasons for the poor frame rates.

The GPU's TDP is 185 W, with a suggested PSU of 450 W, and it uses a single 8-pin power connector. It supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, which are all required for modern game engines. However, the DirectX 12 PassMark score of 43 indicates that the GPU's DX12 performance is relatively weak, which could impact the game's rendering efficiency. The 8 GB VRAM is adequate for 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K, the combination of high-resolution textures and the game's streaming world may exceed the memory capacity, causing additional slowdowns beyond raw compute limits. The data shows that 4K performance is uniformly poor across all settings, suggesting that the GPU is overwhelmed by both compute and memory demands at that resolution.