Microsoft Flight Simulator

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F and AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT combination delivers a playable, though not exceptional, experience in Microsoft Flight Simulator. Benchmark results show a system that scales predictably with resolution and settings, with the GPU acting as the primary constraint at higher graphical loads. Across the measured configurations, average frame rates range from 33 FPS at 4K Ultra to 101 FPS at 1080p Low, indicating that this combo is best suited for medium-to-high settings at 1440p or high settings at 1080p for a smooth experience.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At High settings, the average frame rate drops from 59 FPS at 1080p to 47 FPS at 1440p, a reduction of 12 FPS, and then further to 35 FPS at 4K, another 12 FPS decline. This steady, near-linear drop suggests that the rendering load scales consistently with pixel count, and the system’s frame rate is heavily influenced by the GPU’s ability to fill those pixels.

At Low settings, the scaling is more dramatic in percentage terms. The average FPS at 1080p is 101, which falls to 81 at 1440p (a 20 FPS drop) and then to 60 at 4K (a 21 FPS drop). The fact that Low settings at 4K still achieve 60 FPS average indicates that even when the GPU workload is reduced, the resolution increase still imposes a significant cost. This suggests that at Low settings, the GPU is still the limiting factor, but the CPU is providing enough headroom to maintain higher frame rates at lower resolutions.

Medium settings show a similar trend, with average FPS of 78 at 1080p, 63 at 1440p, and 47 at 4K. The minimum FPS values for Medium settings also decline with resolution: 66 at 1080p, 54 at 1440p, and 40 at 4K. These minimums are important because they indicate the worst-case frame pacing, and the drop from 66 to 40 FPS shows that 4K Medium can produce noticeable stutter in demanding scenes.

Ultra settings exhibit the steepest absolute decline. At 1080p, the average FPS is 56; at 1440p, it drops to 45; and at 4K, it falls to 33. This 23 FPS difference between 1080p and 4K Ultra is the largest of any setting tier, highlighting that the highest graphical preset amplifies the resolution penalty. The data indicates that the RX 6600 XT’s 8 GB of VRAM and 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth are likely being saturated at 4K Ultra, causing the frame rate to dip below 35 FPS.

Overall, the resolution scaling data points to the GPU as the dominant limiting component. The CPU, with its 8 cores and 16 threads, is capable of feeding the GPU at 1080p Low (101 FPS) but cannot compensate for the increased pixel workload at higher resolutions. The frame rate drops are consistent with a GPU-bound scenario, as the CPU’s performance would not degrade so uniformly with resolution if it were the bottleneck. For users targeting 4K, this combo will require Low settings to maintain 60 FPS, while 1440p offers a more balanced trade-off between visual fidelity and performance.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 1440p with High settings?

A: The measured average FPS at 2560x1440 with High settings is 47 FPS. This is identical to the average FPS at 4K with Medium settings, showing that the resolution and settings trade-off can yield similar performance.

Q: How does the combo perform at 1080p with Ultra settings?

A: At 1920x1080 with Ultra settings, the average FPS is 56. This is the highest frame rate achievable with the Ultra preset across all tested resolutions, but it is still below the 60 FPS threshold often considered ideal for smooth gameplay.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this game?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the primary bottleneck, especially at higher resolutions. For instance, at 4K Low the average FPS is 60, while at 4K Ultra it drops to 33. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the frame rate would not vary as much with graphical settings. The CPU’s high single-thread score of 4691 on Passmark supports its ability to handle the game’s simulation logic.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to achieve 60 FPS or higher?

A: Based on the measured data, 1080p is the only resolution where 60 FPS or higher is achieved across multiple settings. At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 101; at 1080p Medium, it is 78; and at 1080p High, it is 59. At 1440p, only Low settings reach 81 FPS, while Medium and High fall below 63 FPS.

Q: What are the minimum FPS values for Medium settings at each resolution?

A: The minimum FPS for Medium settings are 66 FPS at 1080p, 54 FPS at 1440p, and 40 FPS at 4K. These values indicate that even at Medium settings, 4K can experience frame drops below 45 FPS, which could be noticeable during intensive flight scenes.

Q: How does the RX 6600 XT’s VRAM capacity affect performance?

A: The GPU has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory with a 128-bit bus and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The benchmark results show that at 4K Ultra, the average FPS drops to 33, likely because the VRAM capacity and bandwidth are insufficient for the highest texture and detail settings at that resolution. Lowering settings to Medium or Low at 4K improves performance to 47 and 60 FPS, respectively, indicating that reducing memory pressure helps.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F is an 8-core, 16-thread processor based on the Zen 5 architecture, with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. Its Passmark single-thread score is 4691, and its multithread score is 36470, placing it in the 94th percentile of all CPUs. This high single-thread performance is critical for Microsoft Flight Simulator, which relies heavily on simulation and physics calculations that are not easily parallelized across many cores.

The nearest rivals for the CPU include the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX with a deltaPct of 0.2, the Intel Core i7-14700KF with a deltaPct of -0.2, the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X with a deltaPct of 0.7, and the Intel Core i7-14700K with a deltaPct of 0.9. These deltas are all within 1% of the Ryzen 7 9700F’s average benchmark score of 69996, indicating that this CPU performs on par with several high-end desktop and mobile processors. In the context of this game, the CPU’s ability to maintain high frame rates at 1080p Low (101 FPS) suggests that it is not a limiting factor at lower resolutions.

However, the CPU’s role becomes more nuanced at higher resolutions. At 4K Low, the average FPS is 60, which is significantly lower than the 101 FPS at 1080p Low. This drop is not due to the CPU, as its workload remains largely unchanged across resolutions; instead, it reflects the GPU’s increased pixel processing burden. The CPU has enough headroom to deliver over 100 FPS in less demanding scenarios, but the RX 6600 XT cannot keep up with the same frame rate at 4K. This is characteristic of a GPU-bound system, where the CPU is waiting on the GPU to finish rendering frames.

The 32 MB of shared L3 cache and 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth (DDR5 dual-channel) provide adequate data throughput for the CPU’s tasks. The processor’s 65 W TDP and 4 nm process node from TSMC contribute to efficient operation, though these attributes do not directly translate to higher FPS in this game. The benchmark results show that the CPU is not the bottleneck, as evidenced by the fact that lowering graphical settings from Ultra to Low at 1080p increases FPS from 56 to 101, a change that is driven by GPU load rather than CPU capability.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations, the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F with the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT ranks 2058 out of 2996 combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places the combo in the lower third of all tested systems, with a percentile rank of approximately 31%. This ranking reflects the GPU’s mid-range status (70th percentile among all GPUs) and the CPU’s high-end status (94th percentile among all CPUs), with the combination’s overall performance limited by the GPU.

The combo’s rank is influenced by the fact that many other tested systems feature more powerful GPUs, which are better suited for a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator that stresses graphical fidelity heavily. The RX 6600 XT’s nearest rivals in the GPU benchmarks include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 (deltaPct 0.7), Intel Arc A350M (deltaPct -0.8), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti (deltaPct 0.8), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER (deltaPct 1.1). These deltas are all within 1.1% of the RX 6600 XT’s average benchmark score of 24442, showing that the GPU performs similarly to a range of older and newer cards, but none of these are top-tier for 4K gaming.

The CPU’s high rank (94th percentile) does not compensate for the GPU’s lower rank (70th percentile) in this game. At 1080p, the combo can achieve over 100 FPS on Low settings, but at 4K, it struggles to maintain 60 FPS even on Low. The rank of 2058 out of 2996 suggests that users with this combo will need to adjust their expectations for high-resolution gaming, as the system is more suited to 1080p or 1440p with moderate settings. Compared to combos with higher-ranking GPUs, this system will lag behind in terms of maximum FPS at high resolutions, but it remains functional for the game’s core experience.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT is based on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with the Navi 23 chip, manufactured on a 7 nm process. It features 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, with a boost clock of 2589 MHz and a game clock of 2359 MHz. The GPU has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its Passmark G3D score is 16461, and it ranks in the 70th percentile of all GPUs, indicating a mid-range performance level.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU’s role is to render the detailed terrain, aircraft models, and weather effects. The measured FPS data shows that the GPU is the primary constraint at higher resolutions and settings. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 33, which is below the playable threshold for many users. At 4K High, it improves to 35 FPS, and at 4K Medium, it reaches 47 FPS. Only by dropping to 4K Low does the GPU achieve 60 FPS, which is acceptable but requires significant graphical compromises.

The GPU’s 8 GB VRAM is a notable limitation for this game, as Microsoft Flight Simulator is known for using large textures and high-resolution assets. At 4K Ultra, the VRAM capacity may be insufficient, leading to texture swapping and reduced performance. The drop from 47 FPS at 4K Medium to 33 FPS at 4K Ultra suggests that the Ultra preset’s additional memory and compute demands push the GPU beyond its comfortable operating range. The 256.0 GB/s bandwidth is also modest, which can bottleneck the transfer of texture data at high resolutions.

At 1080p, the GPU performs more adequately. The average FPS at High settings is 59, which is close to 60 FPS, and at Medium it is 78 FPS. The maximum FPS at 1080p Medium is 90, indicating that the GPU can handle less demanding scenes with ease. However, at 1080p Ultra, the average drops to 56 FPS, showing that even at the lowest resolution, the highest preset strains the GPU. The data suggests that the RX 6600 XT is best utilized at 1080p with High settings or 1440p with Medium settings, where it can maintain frame rates in the 47-63 FPS range.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of performance across three resolutions and four settings tiers. At 1920x1080, the average FPS ranges from 101 at Low to 56 at Ultra. Low settings produce the highest frame rate, with Medium at 78 FPS, High at 59 FPS, and Ultra at 56 FPS. The Medium settings also have a minimum FPS of 66 and a maximum of 90, indicating a relatively stable frame pacing. High and Ultra settings do not have reported minimum or maximum values, but their averages are close, suggesting that the GPU is nearing its limits at these presets.

At 2560x1440, the average FPS drops noticeably. Low settings achieve 81 FPS, Medium 63 FPS, High 47 FPS, and Ultra 45 FPS. The Medium settings have a minimum of 54 FPS and a maximum of 73 FPS, which shows a wider variance compared to 1080p. The gap between High and Ultra at 1440p is only 2 FPS (47 vs 45), indicating that the Ultra preset does not add much additional load over High, or that the GPU is already bottlenecked. The drop from 81 FPS at Low to 45 FPS at Ultra represents a 44% reduction, highlighting the GPU’s sensitivity to settings at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the average FPS is the lowest across all configurations. Low settings achieve 60 FPS, Medium 47 FPS, High 35 FPS, and Ultra 33 FPS. The Medium settings have a minimum of 40 FPS and a maximum of 54 FPS, showing that frame times can vary significantly. The difference between High and Ultra at 4K is only 2 FPS (35 vs 33), which is within the margin of error and suggests that both presets are severely GPU-limited. The 4K Low result of 60 FPS is the only configurable at this resolution that meets the 60 FPS target, and it does so with minimal graphical fidelity.

Comparing across resolutions, the data shows that 1080p offers the most headroom for settings adjustments, with a 45 FPS difference between Low and Ultra (101 vs 56). At 1440p, the difference is 36 FPS (81 vs 45), and at 4K, it is 27 FPS (60 vs 33). This narrowing gap indicates that as resolution increases, the GPU becomes more saturated, and the impact of settings diminishes. For users who prioritize frame rate, 1080p Low provides the best experience, while those who value visuals should consider 1440p Medium as a balanced option.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the target resolution and desired frame rate. At 1920x1080, the High preset delivers an average of 59 FPS, which is just below the 60 FPS target. Users seeking a smoother experience should consider Medium settings, which achieve 78 FPS on average with a minimum of 66 FPS, ensuring consistent performance. Ultra at 1080p yields 56 FPS, which is only marginally lower than High, so the visual benefits of Ultra may outweigh the small FPS cost for some users. Low settings at 1080p provide the highest frame rate at 101 FPS, but the graphical quality is significantly reduced, making it suitable only for competitive play or extreme frame rate priorities.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset is the recommended choice, as it produces an average of 63 FPS with a minimum of 54 FPS. This provides a good balance between visual fidelity and performance, allowing for a playable experience without major stutters. High settings at 1440p drop to 47 FPS, which may be acceptable for slower-paced flight simulation, but the lower minimum FPS could lead to noticeable dips during complex scenes. Ultra at 1440p is not recommended, as it offers only 45 FPS, a marginal improvement over High but with additional graphical load. Low settings at 1440p achieve 81 FPS, which is excellent for a smooth experience, but the reduced detail may detract from the game’s immersive visuals.

At 3840x2160, the options are limited. Low settings are the only preset that reaches 60 FPS, making it the only viable choice for a consistent frame rate. Medium settings at 4K provide 47 FPS, which is playable but may have frame drops to 40 FPS, as indicated by the minimum value. High and Ultra at 4K are not recommended, as they deliver 35 and 33 FPS respectively, which is below the threshold for comfortable gameplay. For users with 4K displays, the recommendation is to use Low settings to maintain 60 FPS, or to lower the resolution to 1440p for better visual quality.

Overall, the best experience per the measured rows is achieved at 1440p with Medium settings, which offers a 63 FPS average and reasonable minimums. For 1080p users, High settings at 59 FPS provide a good balance, while those with 4K displays should accept Low settings for playability. This combo is not suited for high-settings gaming at 4K, but it can handle the game adequately at lower resolutions and moderate presets.